Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It is 6:00. So, we will go ahead and call to order the meeting of the planning commission and we will start the meeting with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And thank you everyone for attending. Let's start our meeting. We have a new member to the plan commission, Brian Smith. And Ivonne, would you please administer the oath of office? Iith

Iith solemnly swear do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution solemn Say that again. I will do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution. I do solemnly swear thou will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Indiana and the Constitution of the State of Indiana. And that I will faithfully execute I will faithfully execute and impartially discharge and impartially discharge all of my duties as a member all of my duties as member of the town of New Palestine Planning Commission of the Town of New Palestine Planning Commission. according to law. According to law,

the best of my ability to best my ability. So help me God. So help me God. Thank you and congratulations and welcome. Okay. But now it is official. You are a member of the planning commission. Uh the next item, let's do a roll call. Bill Neyer here. Ryan Hartley here. Eric Crop here. Chad Mullander here. Chris Wernermont here, Brian Smith here, and Nancy Owens is not here.

Okay, thank you. We do have a quorum, so we'll proceed. And the next item on our agenda is consideration of the minutes from our meeting of July 16th as presented in our backup materials. Is there a motion regarding the minutes? I make a motion that we accept the planning commission minutes from July 16th. I'll second. It has been moved and seconded, which means now it's open for discussion. Are there any comments, recommended revisions, any discussion regarding the minutes? Hearing none. All those in favor of approving the minutes as presented, please indicate by saying I.

I.

Opposed? Motion carries and the minutes are approved. The next item on our agenda is to conduct a public hearing for the purpose of considering amending the town's zoning ordinance. So, at this time, I will call to order a public hearing for those purposes. So, we are now in a public hearing. And if there are any members of the public who would like to come to the podium, please give us your name and address and share with us any comments that you may have regarding the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance. Okay. See no public input, I'm going to ask for a motion to adjourn the public hearing. Yeah, you can just go ahead and close it um without any motion.

Without a motion. Okay. And just just for the record, let's state the time that it was open and closed. Open at 604 and we'll call it close at 604 as well.

Nope. I'm going to drag it out. For the record, the public hearing was convened and opened at 6:04 and was adjourned at 6:05. So we did have a one minute public hearing which if nothing else there was an opportunity for anybody who had any input to provide it. So, uh, we'll now formally close the public hearing. And having held the public hearing, the next item of business before the planning commission is to consider and pass the resolution that was submitted in our backup materials. And I'll do my best to try to summarize what the resolution is doing. By statute, procedurally, the plan commission has to first vote and pass the resolution recommending to the town council that the town council then amend the zoning ordinance. The purpose of the amendment to the zoning ordinance is to create an architectural review committee. That's something that we've discussed, the town council has discussed. Many municipalities have an architectural review committee which once it is constituted appointed the members will then adopt whatever criteria that they want um so that when a developer comes to the town with a proposed development they'll start with at least these are the requirements that we want to see. So it's just a a way to give information to people in advance. so that when they do come in and make a presentation, the chances are that it will be received

better. And whatever the criteria is, they can always ask for a variance or an amendment um or an exception to that criteria, but at least it sets a beginning of the discussion. So um that's the purpose of the resolution as I understand. And Zach, I'll just ask you, is that accurate or anything else?

That's a that's a great summarization of it. Um, this is basically anytime the zoning ordinance is amended, if it's initiate, if the request is initiated by the legislative body, in this case the town council, they have to basically ask permission from the planning commission to amend that zoning ordinance. So, what they've done is said, "Hey, planning commission, do you mind if we if we amend this zoning ordinance to create the architectural review committee?" You guys basically saying, "Go ahead. You can do that." And then tonight at the town council meeting, they can choose to uh uh pass it on first reading or amend it further or um uh take it up on second reading in the coming weeks.

Okay. Thank you. So again, it's the first step in the formal creation of an architectural review committee. So uh having said that, first we need to start with the motion and then that will open the matter up for discussion. Is there a motion regarding the proposed resolution? I make a motion that we support the resolution 080625 C as present our back materials. I'll second.

Okay. It has been moved and second and thank you for that because now procedurally the matter is open for any discussion. Um any thoughts from planning commission members? Just have a point of clarification. So this there there are there's an exhibit A here that has a few minor language items I'd like to discuss particularly. So I don't know if that's this is the right time for that. I'd say now's the time.

Okay. So if we look at exhibit A the second page the purpose and intent there's a reference to um purpose of the architectural review committee is to provide written recommendations pertaining to technical aspects of building elevations for the purpose of providing for orderly and harmonious appearance through the town. So I think we and I think we talked about this a little bit before but the term elevations is a bit constraining to me. I think we should replace that term with building structures or something other than uh merely elevations because elevation is a certain particular

Chris let me ask you this. If after the word building, if the words specifications, comma, materials and elevations, if Yeah. Would that Yes, that that'd be perfect. Okay.

Yeah. Um, I will make a motion to amend the prior motion to include revising exhibit A, page two, the second line after the word building, adding the words specifications, comma, materials, and and those additions are immediately before the word elevations. So, I'll make that motion. I'll second that motion. Is there any discussion regarding the motion? The submotion. It's a fantastic submotion. Well, all those in favor of the submotion, please indicate by saying I. I.

I. Okay. So, the submotion carries. Now, let's go back to any other conversation regarding the resolution or the exhibit. Anything else, Chris?

Yeah, the other things that I have is subpart D here on the second page also. um roles and responsibilities. The architectural review committee shall limit its attention and recommendations to the architectural design standards of this chapter. Um that prepositional phrase of this chapter is confusing to me. I think we either delete that prepositional phrase, just say period after architectural design standards, uh, or we elaborate what the intent of that phrase is for, which escapes me.

Chris, I'm going to try to read your mind. How about this? If after the word standards delete of this chapter and instead put established by the architectural review committee to the Yeah. Establish. Yeah. Is that I agree. I will make a motion a submotion that we amend exhibit A page two the first I'm sorry the second line under subp part D as in David and delete the words of this chapter and in their place insert established by the architectural review committee.

I will second that motion. Okay. Are there any comments or discussion regarding the submotion? I think it's a great submotion. All those in favor of the submotion, please indicate by saying I. I. I. Okay. So, we have that. Chris, anything else? Yes. Talk to me. This will be real easy one. So, don't make a don't don't make don't make a motion on this one yet, Bill. So if you go under subp part D subsection five that really should be four

should be four. Um and then on the next page, subsection F, authority, uh the architectural review committee shall have the authority to request that a docket be continued by the advisory plan commission or board of zoning appeals until the committee has reviewed revised plans plans submitted by the petitioner. just it's a bit of legal ease to me that I probably I'm sure that makes total sense to you, Bill, but to the rest of us, I guess I would be interested in

Zach. Did you put that in English for us? I think what it's trying to say is um if they if if a petitioner comes to the planning commission or the BZA and the architectural review committee doesn't believe that the plan uh fits the established standards of the town that they can request that that the plan commission or the BCA can um continue that hearing until the until the architectural review committee can can um review those plans. Yeah, it says

I believe what it's trying to say is we can request or the ARC can request that that docket or that motion be pushed so that they can review it.

Right. Th this sounds like if the developer is trying to circumn the the ark and go directly to the plan commission then the the the authority of the architectural review committee is such that they can request so it's not really authority I guess it's still the the ability to request that no that has to go through us to re to to to review it which is the whole intent of this whole thing. So I don't can't imagine anyone on the plan commission would not make that happen anyway. Correct. Yeah. It I guess it's kind of a belt and suspenders so to speak of you know just kind of a backup.

I think it's probably I'm sure we're not going to sit in these seats forever. So it provides if somebody would we want but the next people may say well that's a pain. We don't need it anymore. Yeah. I guess puts the legal ease in there that they can say we're requesting to push that. Right. Well, and I'll chime in and just say it may be perhaps stating the obvious, but without that statement, you could have a petitioner who could say, "Well, there's nothing that gives you that authority." Yeah. So, why you why you kicking this can down the road just to delay?

We don't even want to listen to your input. So, with that, it it gives a little bit more authority to the architectural review committee's u ability to make recommendations. And if they're not ready and and you come before the R, you meet with the ARC and they suggest changes. If those changes aren't submitted back to the ARC, it goes straight to the plan commission. I think the ARC wants the ability to say, "Well, wait a minute. We haven't seen because they may or may not meet the criteria just because you made amendments." So, I think that's the intent there. So, I don't think that we need a submotion on that. But before we go any further, I do want to make a submotion that subp part D5 be changed to four. Just

I'll second that motion. Any discussion regarding that submotion? It's a great submotion. All those in favor of that submotion, please indicate by saying I. I. I. If nothing else, it just makes it formal that we fix that. Anything else? I like it. All right, let's go back to the main motion and and that is a recommendation to approve the resolution as presented in the backup materials. Unless there's any further discussion regarding the main motion,

we actually need to have a new motion to approve with the amendments. Thank you. I will make a motion to approve resolution 080625 C as in Charlie with the sub motion opposed three submotions and amendments. I'll second that motion. Uh is there any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying I. I. I.

The motion is carried and thank you. That was worthwhile. The next item on our agenda is review of the plan commission suggestions and in the backup materials there is a page that at the very top said sidewalks and I'll defer to Ryan. So this is something I presented to the planning commission a while back and didn't save it on my typewriter and I apologize for that. I have amended some of that language in the first draft that I I gave to you guys a long time ago. I cleaned up some of that uh language uh because Ethan and I had had a discussion um in the original language in basketball goals. Uh I put that you couldn't have them on your garage and I realized that was a little um

too much heavyhanded heavy-handed. So, I went through state law as a hooer.

Yeah, I went I went through there and changed changed a little bit of the the language in there, but um I'm pretty happy with where it's at. So, again, the the main purpose of this was right now the town's on or responsible for all the maintenance of the sidewalk within towns. Moving forward, uh what I would like to do is shift some of that responsibility to the developers and homeowners. um developers as being when the plat's submitted on the covenants portion of their plat to include some language in there which Chris actually pointed out we can marry some of the language we already have with the language that I have here because in our standards we already have some language and uh in there regarding some of the sidewalk stuff. So, what what I think we need to do is look at what we already have in the books. Look at what I've added here and see if we can make this a cohesive uh fit. But anything any new subdivision or any new build. Uh I think it'd be good for the developer initially to put the sidewalk in and after the first year uh it would go back to the homeowner. That way it takes some of the pressure and responsibility off the town for maintaining the sidewalk in the future. Because as the county grows, what we don't need to do is is spend money out of the budget to maintain sidewalk. We need to put that towards infrastructure like roads and stuff like that. So in my opinions,

so um that was the language on the sidewalk basketball goals. It's just basically stating that you can't have them in the rightway. We don't care if you have them, but you need to maintain this stuff. It's it's pretty straightforward. And irrigation systems, I know that there's some irrigation systems people have put in within the rightway or in the drainage easement. These create problems for us moving moving forward. Uh, anytime that there's work that needs done in the rightway, if we hit the irrigation system, um, most of the time the homeowner is going to come out probably demand that we repair what we hit. Well, if it's in the rightway, it doesn't it shouldn't be there anyway. Uh, you're not supposed to build or or put anything in the rightway. So, it's just some common sense language, but these are things that I just proposed that maybe we add into language, language that we either already have, we can marry that language together with this or add new language. Just something I wanted to get in front of you guys. Let me ask on your irrigation systems.

From what you just stated, would it be helpful if we added something to the effect of if an irrigation system is located in the public right away, it shall be the homeowner's responsibility, not the municipality to relocate or repair. Is that helpful?

Um, I don't I don't really know that we need that. If it's in the rightway now, it shouldn't be in the rightway. Again, if if if it's in the rightway now, they put it there and and uh they shouldn't have done that anyway. So, when utilities come out to locate, when when work goes on, either when we're digging or they're digging, if they get a permit, anytime you dig, you you need to call it when one utilities are located. This isn't this is something that they wouldn't locate. So, the homeowner is going to be responsible for the repair and removal and replacement anyways. Okay. Um, I just didn't know if that would be helpful to say that or not. The town's not going to be on the hook for for hitting something that's in the rightway if the homeowner put it there.

That's that's not going to happen. So, I don't know that we need that, but yeah, I would agree with you too, Ryan. That's a redundancy. There's there's there's got to be covered covered somewhere else in the law that that's understood or codified. In instead of saying that it's the homeowner's responsibility, do we want to put a sentence that says it is not the town's responsibility to relocate or repair? We can.

I mean that I'm looking at a situation where somebody says you damaged my system and I didn't know it was the right of way. I don't I mean we're going to take that position no matter what. But if somewhere we can say, "Oh, and by the way, here's where that's been adopted." Zach, is that any help at all if we have something that says that? Yeah. I mean, doesn't hurt. Doesn't hurt. Exactly. Totally fine with that. Let's add that. Y Okay. Okay. But this is something I just

sprinkle systems just that we're not the D's not responsible for anything that's in the right away. Y yeah. Yeah. If if you pull up to a job and and you see that there's a sprinkler system there, you have the option of going up. Obviously in in good faith, we're going to go up and say, "Hey, we're going to be doing some work here. We're going to have to cut your irrigation system. It shouldn't be here anyway." Um, just letting you know kind of kind of like it's it's no different if somebody builds a fence. Uh, Cedar Creek, perfect example, right? The fences were built over the rideway lines. We had to come in and do some storm work. We went through there, the town removed the fence, laid it to the side. We're not responsible for putting it back. Same same situation. Um,

because I've run into it with curb ramps. just, you know, when we're replacing curb ramps, 88 curb ramps, pull them up and the bottom of the pipe is literally in the concrete and cut it and, you know, and the contractor took care of it and was out there honing and griping and, you know, shouldn't have been there. Yeah. Well, and this is why in the in the sideway language, technically, you're supposed to place that sideway sidewalk a foot within the rideway line. So you have a foot from the back of the sidewalk to the edge of the rideway line. So realistically that gives you a little buffer, right?

So we're going beyond a foot beyond into the into the yard with the rightway the back of the sidewalk. Yeah. I mean in in an ideal world, the side the back of the sidewalk wouldn't be right where the rideway line is, which is most of what we have right now,

right? the the back of the sidewalk would be placed one foot or 12 inches within somewhere in that area. Right? That way if somebody wants to put their irrigation system all the way up next to the sidewalk, if you put a foot within that rightway line, then most people aren't going to know that when they put their irrigation system in or the irrigation system or company comes out to put it in, they're going to put that thing right up against the sidewalk, right? But it's not our responsibility to tell them where you should know where that's at. And if you don't, then you can call the T figure out. They're between the sidewalk and the curb. That's a problem. Yeah. Because that's in the rightway.

And I just I like clarifying so that there's no argument later or less argument later. We're not responsible. Less argument. Yeah. less argument is we're not responsible for because technically if they're putting that in between the sidewalk and the street they should have a permit if they do any digging there what's that um well anytime you dig within the rightway you should have a permit I believe that's on our they should they should they should Most companies. Yeah. Yeah.

We work with fence companies all the time. Now, every county has different right um permit application pro. The application process is different in every county

generally, but for a company from and I run into this all the time. You'll have a company from Marian County come in and say, "Oh, we didn't know we had to have a permit." Yeah, you did. You just didn't. You were hoping to do it on a Saturday when nobody was working. But thanks for putting your sign out there so I could call you and catch you. But anybody who does work, a contractor, they they know they have to have permits. To say that they don't know they have permit have to have permits is irresponsible. So it's it's just kind of common practice. Yeah. Just to help.

Okay. Well, and and the reason for this discussion is so that we can make some progress and try to make sure that this language is consistent with what's already there. And so, and today is just for discussion purposes. Yeah. just just let you guys soak it in and look at what we currently have on the books. See how we can change what I have here. See if there's anything we can add and marry together to make a little more consistent um and better language moving forward. That's the purpose of this.

Yeah. And just just for reference, so Ryan, I talked about this before the meeting. The chapter 93 of our town ordinances design standards and specifications manual is the title. Um this is section on land use. So 93.01 there's a number of references part two 211 2.11 sidewalks. So there's about half a page here on sidewalks. So Okay. Is that on standards and specifications as to how they'll be built?

Yeah. Yeah. It's in Well, it's in design standards and specs section. Yeah. Okay. And a lot of that language is the same language I have here. 5 foot wide wall, 4 in thick. So, we can just take what we have on the books and if there's any information missing from there, take what I have and if you guys deem that we need to add anything else to it. Well, I will volunteer between now and the next meeting to take these three sections, harmonize them, circulate it. That way, it's in the backup materials and at our next meeting we can move. Yeah, I would reference this too, Bill. Absolutely. and I'll circulate it to everybody so that you have time to look at it and say, yeah,

hey, do the same thing somewhere else too if need be. Yeah. Another interesting thing about this section is there's a number of references to landscaping for example and there's we're not enforcing these landscaping requirements as of right now. So that's something else that we can talk about.

Start doing Sure. Right. Okay. Well, thank you, uh, Ryan. That's helpful. Next item is under the heading of new business, and I think it's also the last order of business for the planning commission this evening. With the resignation of Ron Wallally, who is the president of the planning commission, we need to reorganize. And do we need Zach? I think that we currently may already have a vice president and secretary or should we just reorganize all three positions, president, vice president, and secretary?

Um, I think it's that's free for you guys to choose. Um, I think typically the reorganization it takes place in January. Um, at this time I think you probably should just fill the position of president. I guess I guess it's a bit of a domino effect, right? If the FE So I'll make a motion. I I I think all three if if you foresee the vice president so forth changing then we can go ahead and do all three.

Yeah, I think I mean right now we only have one more meeting on the schedule, right? Well, this is as good a time as any for me to mention that the plan commission will be having additional meetings that aren't currently on the calendar. And there may also be the necessity of special meetings. Um, and I think I'm at liberty to share the reason or the purpose of those meetings is we have been approached by Kroger for the purpose of building a very large grocery store near the wellness center. And in order to meet the timeline that Kroger is requesting, the plan commission, the BCA, the town council, all three entities are going to be required to have meetings that might not have otherwise been anticipated or planned. But I just want to throw that. We don't have specific dates right now. We're waiting for the bond council to provide a definitive timeline and when that timeline is provided there's not going to be a lot of flexibility. So there will be additional meetings and with any meeting not it it won't not necessarily needs to be limited to that particular project. Anytime that we have a meeting, we are at liberty to address anything whether it's on the agenda or not. So, throw that out there. There'll be plenty of opportunities between now and the end of the year. And it's my understanding that Kroger is looking for final approval of everything before the end of the year. So, again, that's a little bit of an aggressive timeline. And so, I'll just throw that out there. So uh don't be

surprised if we are given notice that we need to do something and once we have the timeline we'll share that um you know with as much advanced notice as possible. So all that to say we should probably reorg identify um the next plan commission president. That being said, I nominate Bill Neim as the planning commission president. I'll second that. Are there any other nominations? Yes. I nominate Ryan Hartley, president.

I will second that. Ryan, you want to be the president? I think you're doing a fine job, Bill. Are there any other nominations? We're doing this right. Yeah. Yeah. Nominations closed then. Okay. Nomination's closed. Now we right. Yep. Okay. All those in favor of Bill Neim as a commission president say I. I. I. All those in favor of Ryan Hartley as plan commissioner present. I. Please say I. I. Okay, thank you.

All right. Uh that also I will now make a motion that we appoint a new vice president because currently I am the vice president and so we need a vice president because if I'm not at a meeting, we certainly do not want to be in a position we can't move forward. So I'll open the floor for nominations for the position of vice president of the planning commission. I nominate Ryan vice president. I second that motion. Are there any additional nominations for vice president? I'll nominate Chad. I'll second it.

I'll been second. Okay. Any other nominations for vice president? Let's take them one at a time. All those in fa Well, first before we even do that, I think it's fair to say Brian, are you willing to serve as the vice president? I am. Chad, are you ready to s Okay, let's start with that. Uh, all those in favor of appointing Ryan Hartley as the vice president to the planning commission, please indicate by saying I. I. All those in favor of appointing Chad Mullinger to the position of vice president of the planning commission, please indicate by saying I. I.

Congratulations. Ryan Hartley is now the vice president of the planning commission and Nancy Owens is she is the secretary. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay, sweet. So, let me ask this if I understand correctly. Well, we just Zach, do we need to sign a resolution or does the secretary need to sign something this evening? Secretary needs to sign the certification to send the amendment to the zoning ordinance to the town council as president and and her absence you can sign on her behalf. Okay. So we don't have to fill the position for purposes of doing that.

Correct. Okay. I would recommend that we not reappoint a different secretary. I don't know what everybody else thinks. Agree. I concur. Okay, looks like if I'm reading the agenda correctly, the only thing left is a motion to agender. I I would like to say something before we do that. So, so on the record, um I wanted to the reason I nominated Ryan is Bill, you are still the uh employed by Tharp

Reality, correct? Um there's a perception not just by me by others in community that there is a conflict of interest in some of the situations that come up in front of this board. So my ask is that you consider recusing yourself when those items come up. If there were any item that involved FARP realy, I absolutely will refuse myself. Fair enough.

And fortunately on our property, there's only room for one more building. So I don't think that there will be a situation, but I will pledge to you, Chris, that if there's any items that my employer is involved with either directly or indirectly, I will absolutely abstain. The only item that I know of during my term on the town council or the plan commission is in December of several years ago, Tharp came and requested that an TIFF allocation area be created for the entire corner where the Taco Bell is located. And unlike any other developer ever, when Tharp Investments came in and asked for that tiff, they specifically asked for zero allocation, not one penny. And what that meant was when the allocation area was created, 100% of the taxes paid for any improvements on that land goes to the redevelopment commission to be used to the benefit of this community. Not one penny of benefit went to my employer. And on that motion, I voted in favor of it, not because it favored my employer, but because it greatly favored the community. And I challenge you or anyone else to ever show any example of anything that I have ever done on this town council plan commission or anywhere that benefited me personally or my employer for one penny because it

doesn't exist. So I want to state that for the record as well. And I will say that the perception of of a conflict of interest is an important thing that we should all consider. Do we noted? Thank you. This has been noted. With that, I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second, Chris second. All those in favor of journeying, please indicate by saying I. I. I. We are adjourned. Thank you.