Hey.
» Good evening. First of all, I apologize
to everybody for the slight tardiness.
Entirely my fault. So, you're happy to
stick pins in the zombie voodoo dolls
shaped like me if you want to. Thank
you.
Welcome to the Town of Avon Advisory
Plan Commission meeting. If you are
interested in having a copy of the
agenda, they are available on the tables
to the right of the audience. We will be
conducting business as outlined on the
agenda. From time to time, the board may
deviate from the agenda and as president
of this body, I will inform those in
attendance of any deviations.
This meeting is being recorded for the
public record. Because of this, we
request that personal conversations are
kept to a minimum and that all cell
phones are set to vibrate. All phone
calls must be taken outside of the
chambers.
If you are interested in commenting
during the public hearing portion of the
commission's deliberations, please sign
up on the sheets located on the tables
to the right of the audience, right over
there.
When your name is called, please step
forward to the podium and state your
name and address for the record. Please
address your comments to the board and
not to staff or to the petitioner.
Your comments should relate directly to
the case at hand.
During the comment During the conduct of
the public hearing portion of the
commission's deliberations, the
petitioner will have 10 minutes to
present their case to the commission.
Remonstrators will have 10 minutes to
present objections to the commission.
And persons in support of the petition,
other than the petitioner, will have 10
minutes to present support for the
petition. Finally, the petitioner will
close the public hearing portion of the
presentation with a 5-minute rebuttal
period.
Once the public hearing is closed, no
additional testimony will be heard
unless it is solicited by the members of
the commission during the question and
answer phase of the commission's
deliberations.
Subdivision plat and development plan
petitions are ministerial requests,
meaning that if the proposal meets the
requirements set forth in the town's
development ordinances, the plan
commission must approve the request by
state law.
In the interest of transparency, state
law requires that a plan commission hold
a public hearing even if the development
proposal must be approved.
Responses to public comments and
questions may be given once the public
hearing portion is closed.
We understand there may be several
persons, excuse me, who wish to speak.
In order to keep the meeting running in
a timely fashion, we would request that
you not repeat not repeat previous
comments.
Thank you for your assistance in
facilitating a respectful, fair, and
timely meeting, and again, welcome to
our meeting. Please stand for the
pledge.
» 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 we will now do a roll call.
» Andrew Rockabrand.
>> Here.
>> Bill Reed.
>> Here.
>> Dave Kaufman.
>> Here.
>> Katherine Ransburg.
>> Here.
>> Paul Guggenberger is absent. Greg Zuzan,
absent.
And Jennifer Spencer, absent.
» So, we do have a quorum. However, I
would let anyone who is here tonight to
make a presentation know that if you
would prefer to have your hearing or
your proposal heard by the entire
commission, you do have the ability to
ask for a continuance. We have
four of the seven commissioners here
tonight. So, that's something that you
might want to think about.
Okay.
Approval of the meeting minutes. I
understand that everyone has received a
copy of the revised meeting minutes. Is
that correct? It has both all the pages
on it.
And does anybody have any
edits, corrections, drafts, anything
like that?
If not, we'll take a motion to approve.
» I will go ahead and make a motion to
approve the June 22nd, 2026 meeting
minutes as presented.
>> Okay, do we hear a second?
>> I'll second.
>> Having had a motion and a second, all in
favor say I.
>> I.
>> Meeting minutes from May 26th are
approved.
>> That's actually the the June minutes.
>> Oh, the June minutes. I apologize.
Yep, June minutes. Thank you.
Um, we now come to the public comment
portion of the meeting. This is the
opportunity for anybody who is present
to speak about anything else that is
going on that you'd like the commission
to hear other than what's on the agenda.
If you want to speak about what's on the
agenda, then just wait till that
portion, but if there's something else
you'd like to talk about, um,
marching band is too good, anything like
that, uh, this is your time to come
forward and speak to the commission. Is
there anybody who'd like to step forward
or is anybody signed up to come speak?
In the public public comment, anybody
who'd like to speak about something
other than what's on the agenda?
If not, then the public comment portion
is closed.
We now move on to the request for
continuances or agenda modifications.
Have they been
>> Ransburg. Um
staff will draw your attention to the
item listed under old business
DPR 2609
Nirvana Sports.
Um just Excuse me, the petitioners
requesting a continuance to your
September 28th hearing.
Um as you may recall, you heard this
at your June hearing and after hearing
the case and having some concerns
the petitioner um requested a
continuance to your July hearing
and then you didn't meet in July, but
staff administratively continued it to
um to this date.
And one of the concerns was regarding
shared parking that this property would
um
would rely upon on adjacent properties
and
after the June hearing, there was
additional information submitted which
called into question whether or not they
had any existing um
right to use adjacent properties for
parking.
At this time, they're continuing the
petitioner is continuing to negotiate
with uh adjacent property owners to try
to
um
secure a shared parking agreement that
would satisfy the parking requirement of
the UDO.
And so, staff has no objection to this
continuance request to September 28th
and we would suggest that that would
likely be with additional legal notice
required depending upon how they revise
their request, but likely they will have
um
a revised waiver request that would
require additional notice.
>> So, we heard this in
June.
>> Correct.
>> And it was agreed that we would go ahead
and continue this. Was that a Was that a
request from the petitioner?
>> Yes.
>> Okay, so that was their first
automatic request and now this is an a
request for continuance subject to
approval by the commission, correct?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. And staff has no objection to
this?
>> Correct.
>> Okay.
Are there any questions for staff
regarding this request for continuance?
This would be the second continuance
then.
>> Second continuance request from the
petitioner.
>> From the petitioner, okay.
>> And just to
before you take a vote, I know there's a
interested party here that wants to make
some comment even though it's a
continuance request. So.
>> Okay.
Um
I Does anybody object to the interested
party speaking?
>> I did have a question regards the uh
moving on to September 28th. How much
time is considered customary for the
legal notice?
>> Uh legal notice needs to be
both published and mailed 10 days prior
to that hearing.
>> So, there's you know, there's still be
able to Yeah. Thank you.
>> You're welcome.
>> Okay.
Um let's go ahead and take care of the
continuance and then we'll hear from the interested party. Is that if that
works for everybody?
We like Do you think we should do that?
>> I think if you continue with it then
it's done.
>> For tonight?
>> Yes.
>> Yeah. Okay, that's works for me. I have
no feeling one way or the other.
Okay, could the person who signed up to
speak about
Nirvana Sports please step forward.
>> Just make sure you push the button so
it's green there.
>> Perfect. Hi. My name is Michael Sandy. I
am uh general manager at Regal Cinemas,
uh which our parcel butts up to Nirvana
Sports
and we were the ones that discovered
and I just wanted to state that we are
in negotiations with them.
However,
we haven't heard back from them since
August.
So,
I just wanted to make sure you guys were
aware that we have been talking with
them. Um, and it's a three-way
conversation with us, our landlord who
owns the property
and Nirvana.
And that's it.
>> It's cuz they were celebrating my
birthday, so that's why they did it.
>> There you go.
>> I apologize.
>> I'll remember that next year.
>> I'm kidding. I'm kidding.
Court of Appeals, I'm kidding.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
thank you Thank you very much.
Appreciate that input.
Okay,
any further discussion or questions
about the motion to continue?
>> No.
>> Not for me.
>> If not, we'll hear a motion.
To approve them grant the request for a
continuance.
>> Yes, I move that we continue DPR 2609
at Nirvana Sports to the September 28
2026 Plan Commission meeting with
additional legal notice likely required
to be determined by staff.
>> I'll second.
>> Having heard a motion and a second,
we'll now take a roll call vote.
>> Rockenbaugh.
>> Aye.
>> Reed.
>> For.
>> Compton.
>> For.
>> Ransburg.
>> For.
>> Motion carries and DPR 2609 is now
continued to the September 28 Plan
Commission meeting.
We now move on to new business beginning
with DPR 2611, Misty Eyes Parking Lot
Expansion.
>> Cars for Kitties.
>> Thank you, President Ransburg, members
of the Commission.
This is DPR 2611.
Uh, the location is 616
South County Road 800 East, which is
also known as Dan Jones Road, um but
they use a mailing address of of 800
East.
The parcel is 3.1 acres in size. It's
zoned R2.
And the use of the lot as an animal
center was approved as a use variance,
and that's why it's still zoned
residentially.
That use variance was granted in 2015.
Uh was the variance was to have
an animal center with adoption and
education facility with no more than 50
cats and 50 dogs to be housed on site.
Then in 2018
um I'll I'll show the the DPR, which is
at the bottom there.
Um
was approved for three buildings, and
I'll show you those on a site plan in a
minute.
Uh they were uh Kitty City, Canine
Country, and then an education center.
Uh one of those buildings has been
built, but not the other two.
And then the special exception and also
in 2018
was to allow for a gravel parking lot
for a period of 3 years.
Um that was modified in 2021
to allow for the gravel to remain until
6 months after the completion of the Dan
Jones widening project.
» How long has um
Misty Eyes been on that location?
>> I'm sorry. Well, how long have they
>> Have they been on that location?
>> Well, they yes, they
obtained their uh development plan
review in 2018.
>> 2018, okay.
» So, this is a general location of the
site. Um at the bottom is 100 South, and
then the railroad is is to the north.
And then this is Dan Jones or 800, and
so it's outlined here in white.
This is a zoomed-in
um shot of the same property um
with the eastern portion of the site as
developed, and then the western portion
of the site is still undeveloped.
This is I already went over this with
the the three buildings were approved,
only one has been built, which is Kitty
City. And then I talked about the gravel
parking lot
um that it was
with the last modification was to allow
the gravel for 6 months following the
completion of the Dan Jones widening
project, which was completed in 2023.
This is a little hard to see, but this
is the DPR site plan approved, which is
in your packet, but it's might be a
little bit hard to
see here, but up in this area is the
original home for the site, which was
converted for the animal shelter use.
Then this building here is Kitty City,
which has been constructed.
Then the long building would been Canine
Country, has not been constructed, still
in their future plans.
And then the back of the site plan here
is cut off, and then
started again down here, which was going
to be an education center.
This is the site plan that's in your
packet. This is what is proposed. So,
again, Kitty City is here, original
building's here.
The gravel that's out there right now is
not as large as what's seen here. It's simply on the the south side of the
original building in Kitty City. They
are planning on paving that
and then extending it further to the
west and then north around the back
of the Kitty City building.
Uh
we've reviewed this in relation to the
2015 variance as well as the 2018
um
development plan review.
The development plan review doesn't The
site plan's not exactly what this is and
that's why it's coming back to you, but
we still believe it is
um generally consistent with what was
approved through the variance as well as
the original development plan.
And this would be satisfying the
condition of the special exception that
it be paved.
Um
additionally, it is zoned R2, but most
of the development standards that we
look at such as parking,
lighting, bicycle parking still apply
even though it's a residential district
and those have all been reviewed and it
is uh compliant with those regulations.
And so, we are recommending approval
with our standard three conditions and
I'd be happy to answer any questions you
have.
» So, at what point do we consider this
commercial property on residential
land?
>> So, it's commercial property in how it's
used
with a use variance, but it's still
zoned residentially and the zoning will
not change until
they ask for a change in zoning.
>> So, all of this is within the
residential zoning code to do
50 space sparking a lot, multiple
buildings.
>> So the residential zoning doesn't permit
by right a commercial building with
commercial parking. That's what the use
variance allowed for.
So it's essentially saying it's zoned
R2, but you have permission to do this
one additional commercial use. We added
that in.
If they wanted to do
>> how big the use is.
>> It has to be generally consistent with
the original proposal that came in
and then the DPR from 2018 and that's as
administrator
what I determined that this is
consistent enough with what was
originally proposed
that it doesn't need a new use variance
to expand.
>> Okay.
>> So if they wanted to put a
hair salon on the property, that would
not be consistent with the original
intent.
>> Correct. That variance applies to this
use and this use only. So any different
use would have to come before or would
they would have to rezone or
um attempt for another use variance.
>> Okay.
» This has been expected for a while now
because we had the gravel parking lot
and then there was the extension of that
because of the Dan Jones
construction.
>> Mhm.
>> Um
so this has been
on our radar for quite some time.
Anybody else have any more questions for
staff?
If not, we'll have the petitioner come
forward.
» Dale, do you need the pointer?
>> Um yeah, probably.
Yep.
Hey, good evening. I'm Dale Cruz, Cruz
Consulting, 7384 Business Center Drive
in Avon.
You can see me on behalf of Misty's
Animal Shelter.
And to your point on the the timing of
this,
so Misty's came to me
years ago and asked me if I could help
them with this project and I
had no capacity. I didn't have time.
There was not enough hours in the day.
They hired
another engineering company to to do
this project for them.
Whatever reason they were not able to
get this project to the finish line.
So they hired another engineering
company.
Same situation. They were not able to
get the project to the finish line. So
they came back to me and I told them the
same thing. I don't have capacity for
you guys right now. They said, "I don't
care. We got to get this done. You're
here in Avon. We just need you to get
this done."
So the timing of this that
yes, the project was done the drainage
widening project was done in 2023, but
there have been they have been through
the ringer on
engineer, engineer, engineer and then
waiting on me to get us
to this point. So we're happy to be to
this point and happy to have a plan in
front of you that we feel like is in
compliance with
substantial client compliance with the
original development plan. I think
really the only difference between this
plan and the one that was up there
before is this parking lot right here.
Originally the idea or the intent was
for there for this parking lot right
here to have parking spaces and a drive
aisle and then parking spaces on the
other side of the drive aisle, which
would have
made us not need to have these parking
spaces right here to have our parking
count be in compliance.
But there isn't enough room there on the
property to have the parking spaces on
both sides of the drive aisle. So we
only have parking spaces on one side of
the drive aisle, which means we only get
half the number of parking spaces along
the east-west portion of the of the
parking lot, which means we added this
to the west end of the building to get our parking spaces to comply with
the development standards.
So that's really the reason what's different and that's really the
reason why it's different and uh
that's really all I have. This This
petition tonight is really just asked
for approval of the actual building
construction.
That's all I have. I'll be happy to
answer questions if you have any.
>> So, there This is still showing a gravel
part portion. Is that going to stay
gravel or is it going to all be paved?
>> All going to be paved.
>> Okay.
» That's probably what you're seeing is
our plan that shows what is currently
gravel and what what is not, but the
intent is for the
whole thing to be paved.
» And all of the parking is on the side.
There's no parking out front. Correct?
>> There The only The only part in the
front is is they would use this
occasionally to get people in and out of
the building, but there's not parking
spaces up there. The parking spaces are
here.
>> So, it's a drop-off kind of drop-in.
Okay.
Any other questions for the petitioner?
No.
Okay.
Go ahead. Sit. Have a seat.
>> Thank you.
>> Is there anybody here who would like to
speak out
uh to remonstrate against this proposal?
No. Is there anybody who would like to
go ahead and come and speak in support
of this proposal?
I'm assuming you don't want to rebut the
>> the loss of it.
>> the non the lack of interest.
Okay, very good.
Um discussion.
I I think this is
I was looking at the two of this also
isn't in con- it's contrary to the
comprehensive plan as well, but this has
been in place for quite some time. I
don't think anybody after 8 years thinks
this is any but anything but a
um
positive thing for the community. And
having a paved parking lot, obviously,
is much better than having a gravel
parking lot, so.
» Yeah, it seems in line with
what was originally proposed from the
DPR in the variance, so.
>> Right.
>> I generally agree with you. The variance
was is quite old.
>> Mhm.
>> And
I don't know if I can vote against this
because it is compliant.
I just think this is essentially a
commercial property now.
>> I don't disagree with
>> lot and the more buildings you have
>> I don't disagree with you on that,
either. Um
But so far, Misty Eyes has never
approached
anybody asking for them to be allowed to
do anything other than what their
mission is. And
I I mean, I I agree with you.
Technically, this is now commercial
property.
>> Yes.
>> And I don't know if at some point that
needs to be addressed in the zoning or
maybe it doesn't. Do you have any
thoughts on that, Mr. Taylor?
>> Yeah, when they when they obtained their
use variance, you said what what you
said or the BZA said is it can be used
for that purpose. That's now permitted
by right.
This particular use is permitted by
right. So, even though it's zoned
residential, they have a
they've been granted the right to
operate the business that they have.
That's that's all they can do there,
though. The nature of their business is
commercial, but they have a specific
grant from the town to do so.
uh it essentially, when that
happens, it is it operates exactly like
it has been rezoned for that that
specific purpose.
And so, use variances are very rare,
but once they have it, then they they
this owner can use that and run with it
as long as they can. So, it does kind of
change the nature of the use of the
property
without the formal rezoning, but it has
the same effect. Except that it only
applies to this owner.
>> Well, and
is it still bound by 50 cats 50 dogs?
>> I'm sorry.
>> Is it still bound by no more than 50
cats and 50 dogs?
>> The conditions of the approval remain
permanent
unless they are changed and and they
haven't been. So, yeah, those are origi-
there were many conditions put on it
as again, use variances are rare, so
it's not unusual to see those and there
were some very specific conditions put
upon the scope of the business, size of
the business, the parking lot
development and all of that. So, in our in our eyes, when we look at a
DPR,
the use is really not the issue
at all.
You know, the use is if the use were not
legal, then staff would come and tell
us.
But we look at the DPR, we're merely
looking at whether or not the parking
lot that Dale has submitted here on
behalf of his client meets our
development standards and any other
requirements.
There is a factor that it be
consistent with the goals and purposes
of the comp plan, but remember
because the use is already been
approved,
it's really difficult to argue that's
not true. We of course want the parking
lot to be paved. You know, we want that.
That's consistent, but so that's why
DPRs are ministerial in nature. If they
can show they've designed it to meet our
standards and and the standards of any
applicable ordinance um
other than our zoning ordinance and
subdivision control ordinance, then it
becomes a ministerial approval, which is
what I think we have here.
>> And the use variance stays with the
property, not the owner, correct?
>> Well, it's Yeah, but it's only this use.
>> Correct. Yes. Yes.
>> Yeah, only this use.
>> sold it, it could still only be for this
use.
>> Yeah, again, not really our concern.
>> Right. Right.
>> We're the planning commission.
>> I was just clarifying kind of the
restrictions of a of a um
a variance use of variance that I'm not
as familiar with. So, that's that was my
discussion today.
>> Yeah. Yeah, it's not really what you
guys do. It's what's the BZA does and
then they uh you're stuck with it. But
yeah, I just I just never want the
planning commission to run too far
afield on use because that issue's
already been decided.
» Any further discussion on this
particular proposal?
If not, we'll entertain a motion.
>> I move that we approve DPR 2611 Misty
Ice Parking Lot Expansion Development
Plan Review to allow for a parking lot
expansion
subject to the conditions listed in the
staff report since it has satisfied all
the requirements for a development plan
review under state law and subject to
the approved findings of fact.
>> And I'll second.
>> Having heard a motion and a second,
we'll now take a roll call vote.
>> Kaufman.
>> For.
>> Reed.
>> For.
>> Rockerbrand.
>> For.
>> Ransburg.
>> For.
And DPR 2611
is approved.
>> Thank you.
And
we now move to the last item on our
agenda, which is MIP 2613 Radiant Bible
Church.
» Thank you.
This is a minor plot that you're
reviewing today for the Radiant Bible
Church,
which is located at 9870
East US Highway 36 and 420 Gable
Crossing Drive. The actual church
building is at the Gable Crossing Drive
address.
The subject site consists of two
previously platted lots in separate
plats, and they are both lot one in each
of those plats.
Currently zoned C2, which is the
southern portion,
R1, which is the northern portion, and
there's a small sliver of not really
developable R5
also on the site.
And it does, because of the size of the
property, it lies within all three tiers
of US 36 overlay.
It does have some history to it.
Um
the church itself was developed in
2012, and it was done along with a minor
plat to create the lot for the church.
And then
uh there was a parking lot expansion in
'16, and then in '18 there was another
plat, which I'll show you, an
administrative plat to combine two lots
for the lower portion of this plat.
So, here's the subject site.
US 36 here, Gable Crossing Drive here.
The church is located up here on the
larger portion of the site.
Um this is Walmart here. At Home is at
this end of the shopping center.
So, the larger
part was platted as one lot, lot one,
for the development of the church. And
then there were two residential lots
located on this portion.
So, another lot or another plat was
created later to combine those two lots
into one lot.
So, now we have what lot one up here for
one plat, and lot one down here for
another plat.
And the purpose of this plat is to
combine these two parcels into one lot.
The church is
desirous of combining all of the land
that they own into one parcel.
They've also indicated there's no
development proposed at this time.
And
any new
I want to note that any new development
in the future would be required to use
the Gable Drive frontage and they would
not have access to US 36, although there
are remaining remnant residential drives
there.
I want to touch on the trail that goes
through this property.
Um the Avon Bicycle Pedestrian Plan
notes that a multi-use trail should go
through this portion of town following
the Avon drain.
I hope I showed this map well enough.
This is the northern portion of the
property here.
Already constructed trail are shown in
red. So there's a red the trail going
through this property around their
parking lot.
And then there's a trail up here in the
Brookstone subdivision that comes to
this point here.
The plat that's already been approved
and recorded showed a
the future easement of this trail in
white.
And it only just dead end dead ended
into these condo units over here.
So we would prefer to connect the red
and the red. So they are adding an
easement here.
And what's shown in green for future
connection of this trail.
So we have a full connection.
And that is shown
on page one of your
uh handout.
Uh I do want to note that we have had
conversations with
the property owner adjacent to this
who lives um in this area in this corner
that's kind of tucked in here.
And they have some concerns about uh
survey stakes that they're
seeing out in the field. They're
concerned that they are accurately
located.
They were unable to be here tonight.
Um and we've asked for clarification
from the surveyor that that those get
rechecked and remarked if necessary.
We've done the measurements on the plat.
related to adjacent
property lines and adjacent plats, and
we believe this plat is accurate.
Um but what the adjacent property owner
showed me in the field was the property
line corner, which is specifically the
this one right here,
look like it may have been off, but we
don't know for sure until we get
more details from
a qualified surveyor to verify that with
us.
Um so
on my conditions um here that I want
this to get verified um prior to the
plat being recorded. So I've added in
addition to the three standard
conditions that I usually recommend and
that are in your staff report, I've
added a fourth condition here
that it's that the approval will be
subject to verification of those survey
markers
to the satisfaction of the administrator
prior to
plat recording.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions
you have.
>> Linda, can you go back to the slide that
showed the trails?
>> Uh-huh.
» It's been a minute since So, that So,
Gable Crossing
What is it called? Gable Crossing
>> Drive.
Basically kind of empties into
>> ends right here.
>> into the parking lot. Yeah.
>> And the the red trail is installed.
The white would remain and then now
connect to the green instead of going
due west and dead end.
>> So, the white is also pre-existing
trail?
>> There is that is not constructed yet.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> But that easement would remain and then
the green would be added.
>> Okay.
>> So, we can get the connection through to
Brookstone.
>> And would
I mean, they already own that it I guess
this really doesn't have anything to do
with the connecting combining of the
plats. This has to do with the trails.
Um
Okay.
» I'm sorry if I missed it. So, the the
white portion there's already easement
that's not developed. Is that what you
said?
>> So, the original plat Well, if you go
way far back, there there was a an
easement that they just generically put
along the
Avon ditch.
Um but when the refinement of the
building and where the trail was going
to be, um it got relocated up through
here where the the lower red portion is
and then a a generic easement was just
sent over due west and dead ended.
None of this up here was developed yet.
We didn't know where it was going to go.
We were still thinking along the ditch
somehow.
Um getting
through this area along the ditch in the
flood plain and this is also county land
here
was
not going to be the best route,
especially when Brookstone came through
and we were able to get this connection
here. So,
we're thankful that this plat has come
along and it's able to we were able to
make a good connection here for that
trail system.
» On on the conditions, you said you were
adding one for the survey.
>> Mhm.
>> Is it
>> It's number four here on the screen.
>> than our packet. That's that's what I
was missing.
I was like, I see three.
» Is there any
So, where where Gable Crossing Drive
connects to the drive going into the
parking lot,
does that that
goes from being a public street to a
private road?
>> The motor vehicle portion, yes.
>> Okay.
>> The
trail the multi-use trail has an access
easement on it already.
>> Okay.
» I wish I could
>> So, the plat would cross
part of the public road
if we made it one plat.
>> No.
>> One parcel, rather.
>> I guess if you look behind you,
it's a clearer than that one. Where this
little strip here comes down,
>> Right.
>> would be added to this tree lot.
>> Right.
>> Essentially just eliminating that little
property line right there.
>> Okay, got you.
Yeah, this is easier to see.
>> Yeah.
>> Just harder on my neck.
Okay.
» Are there any further questions for
staff?
If not, we'll have the petitioner come
forward.
» Um I don't My name's Morgan Reese with
Innovative Engineering Consulting, 3961
Whitestown or Perry Boulevard,
Whitestown, Indiana. Um I don't have
much more to add this um if you'll see
on the plat, it was previously named
Harvest.
And so that's why there's the two names
on there. Um now it's called Radiant
Bible Church and
uh yeah, just an administrative
combining of the two just for
bookkeeping on the church's end and
yeah, I'm any questions?
>> Okay.
Is there anybody present who'd like to
come forward in remonstration against
this proposal?
Is there anybody who'd like to come
forward to support this proposal?
I'm assuming that that means no.
Rebuttal?
Public comment is now closed. Uh
discussion.
I don't
see why this I mean this seems like very
it's just
I was you answered my question. It it's
like what is the purpose? Bookkeeping.
And the less bookkeeping anybody can do
the better.
I would like less bookkeeping.
But this seems pretty straightforward
and as long as the
I mean this doesn't seem like it'll
impact
anything else we have with regards to
trails and easements and anything else.
I don't know that there's any legitimate
reason why we would not approve this.
Unless somebody else would like to
speak.
>> All those zoning remains the same. No
changes to any of that.
>> Correct. Nothing changes with the
zoning.
>> Okay.
>> Nothing we can do right now.
>> All right.
» Any further discussion?
If not, we'll
take a motion.
>> I move that we approve MIP 26-03
Radiant Bible Church a replat of Harvest
Bible Indy West Section 1 into
a request to combine two lots totaling
30.55
acres into one lot subject to the
conditions listed in the staff report
including the additional uh number four
subject to verification of the survey
markers as presented this evening.
Since it has satisfied all the
requirements for preliminary approval of
a minor plat under state law and subject
to the approved findings of fact.
» I'll second.
>> Having heard a motion and a second,
we'll now take a vote.
>> Rockabrand.
>> For.
>> Reed.
>> For.
>> Kaufman.
>> For.
>> Ransburg.
>> For.
MIP 2603 is approved.
We'll now move on to
other business if there is any other
business.
Any business for the good of the order?
Uh committee reports.
» Redevelopment from July and August
approval of invoices in addition to
that.
We've also had a 2027 budget
introduction, Avon logistics phase two
bond discussion,
uh
structure point uh fee amendment, and uh
TIF pledging for hope two bonds, and
also um
discussion regarding Avon logistics TIF
bond number two.
» PZ A
I know we had a meeting.
» You did have a meeting.
And you had one case on your agenda.
And I believe it was approved if I
recall correctly.
>> It was.
>> It's a special exception for the
drive-through the new 7 Brews that'll be
located at Shiloh Crossing.
>> Thank you very much. And this is why I
love staff.
We also had Nirvana Sports on there and
that got continued. Nirvana Sports, I
believe, on the PZ agenda, and that got
continued.
>> No, that was just here.
>> Okay.
Um any other reports?
Updates? Anything? Okay. In that case,
we are adjourned.