TOWN OF PLAINFIELD
PLAN COMMISION

May 4, 2009

The Plainfield Plan Commission met on Monday, May 4, 2009. In attendance were Mr. McPhail, Mr. Brandgard, Mr. Dunkin, Mr. Kirchoff and Mr. Gibbs.

ROLL CALL/DETERMINATION OF QUORIUM

Mr. Carlucci administered the Roll Call.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 9, 2009 Plainfield Plan Commission meeting as submitted. Second by Mr. Brandgard. Motion carried.

OATH OF TESTIMONY

Mr. Daniel administered the Oath of Testimony.

(Podium mic is extremely low or inaudible).

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Mr. Gibbs reviewed the Guidelines Governing the Conduct of Public Hearings. The first case this evening is RZ-09-002.

Mr. James said we have three petitions tonight for one proposal. (Inaudible). The first request, RZ-09-002 is a request to rezone approximately 23.942 acres from I-2 to R-6 for a proposed 258 unit apartment complex to be called the Sheffield Flats at Metropolis.

The second request, DP-09-004/05 will be for Architecture and Site Design Review for the proposed apartment complex for compliance with the R-6 development standards, requirements and incentives to allow a maximum density of 12 units per acre, reduction and overlap of interior yards and a maximum building height of 50' with three stories.

Here is the site. The 23 acres is zoned I-2 and is surrounded by two zonings to the north and south. To the east is the (inaudible). To the west is the Plainfield Commons. It is all zoned General Commercial (inaudible) down here is the old Galyan's headquarters, which is now occupied (inaudible). (Inaudible) I-2 zoning. Transition was made to (inaudible) Regional Commercial. The Comprehensive Plan (inaudible) for this area. But again it is (inaudible). The only question tonight (inaudible) good transitional use from the Light Industrial to the Commercial? Would this location be appropriate to allow residents to live closer to the warehouse/industrial district and to the (inaudible)? The proposed site is located west of Airtech Parkway. Once Metropolis Parkway is extended from Perry Road to Airtech Parkway it would be at the northwest corner of the intersection. There would be about 56 units south of the site and the clubhouse and all of the amenities would be north of the Metropolis Parkway. The site is surrounded on three sides by I-2 zoning and to get the desired density use of the yards for three stories they have to comply with 18 to 21 development incentives.

The plans comply with the development incentives but a waiver is needed to allow all brick (inaudible) building. They did provide for alternative elevations at the DRC; they complied with architectural design standards but the DRC didn't care much for those elevations. They liked the all brick better so they thought the waiver was justified to allow for a better design.

Here is the concept plan through the Metropolis Parkway extensions. This is Airtech Parkway and you have 56 units to the south and the rest would be to the north. Here is the clubhouse and there is a 180 foot power line easement that dissects the property. You can look at that as another development constraint along with the (inaudible).

Here is the site plan; here's the 180 foot easement so you can't have any structures in the easement but you can have parking and open space. You have to make sure everything is right. There is landscaping is over here also. They have added a sidewalk on the north side of the Metropolis Parkway. The Town will be able to install a sidewalk on the south side with the Metropolis Parkway extension. There should be three lanes so the excel/decel lanes are not required. At the DRC they added two exit lanes. (Inaudible) has requested a traffic impact study. They are using existing trees on the west perimeter for buffering.

Here are the elevations. They have five apartment styles. All the apartment styles comply with the standards. Here is a colored rendering and here is the two-story model and they will have a three-story model. All the elevations comply with the required brick and have a 60% and 100% brick on the first floor. All elevations comply with that part.

(Inaudible) clubhouse. It complies. We considered this a (inaudible) use structure because they are going to have an office in here and it is (inaudible) to the overall development. So, the tower complies with the height. (Inaudible).

This is the maintenance building. It is also going to be an auto wash area, which will be centrally located. DRC asked that they do all brick on the columns.

On the garages they have asked for a waiver to allow all brick for all elevations. This elevation doesn't have two materials of brick and the hardi-plank. I forgot to mention that to you. The secondary material (inaudible) apartments will be the hardi-plank; that is not vinyl.

The trash enclosure complies; the gate complies.

The landscaping plan; this is another development incentive. They are going to double the required perimeter and foundation landscaping using existing trees on the north and west. They have to have at least a Level 2 on all the other perimeters. The landscaping complies. The foundation landscaping; that is another development incentive. They have to do a Level 2 and all of the landscaping around the foundations comply.

There is a sign at the entrance of the clubhouse. They are only allowed one sign and that complies. Landscaping, trash enclosure and (inaudible) also.

The lighting complies. They are using decorative street lights and they can switch them to pole (inaudible) metal halide (inaudible). (Inaudible).

The entrance sign complies as far as size. They can have incidental signs throughout the development to direct traffic. Sign permit fees we will make sure that they comply with the (inaudible).

Staff Comments, Questions and Concerns; the Plainfield School Corporation has provided a letter expressing their opposition to this request. They feel that Plainfield already has more than enough rental properties. They did provide a school impact study, which indicates that this proposal could produce an additional 36 students. They compared that to Central Park, which is supposed to be the same standard or lower than Central Park. As far as the percentage of owner occupied units in Plainfield the Chamber just did a study and they estimated that the percentage is now about 26% verses 31.2% in the 2000 census. If the apartments are approved, the percentage would increase to 27.5% if we match the single-family (inaudible) for 2008.

The Comprehensive Plan took a look at the housing element with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on population growth estimates at the time the plan was updated it was projected the Plainfield population could be 47,600 by 2025. This means that we have to add about 125 units per year. In the census of 2000 we have averaged 337 per year, which includes single-family, two-family and (inaudible). Based on the desired housing mix in the Comprehensive Plan the steering committee thought the zoning mix of 22% in the high-density zoning would be appropriate by 2025. This would put our renter occupied units at about 27%.

The proposed site is contrary to what is recommended in the Comprehensive Plan for land use. While the plan recommends Light Industrial use it is on the fringe of the I-2 warehouse district. With the above considerations aside, is this justification for modification to the Comprehensive Plan?

If zoned R-6, it would impact undeveloped property to the north and west by creating required bufferyards of 50' for the I-2 and 20' for the General Commercial. When the property to the north was rezoned to I-2, a concept plan was submitted without a 50' bufferyard. To reduce potential impacts to these adjacent properties, the commitment should be made that the subject property shall be treated like I-2 zoning when adjacent properties are developed.

Also, the owner of the property to the north had concerns about this rezone on how it would impact (inaudible). (Inaudible) surrounding properties would get noticed so they would have the opportunity to remonstrate against any I-2 development. So, we feel like another commitment is needed stating that the petitioner/owner (inaudible) remonstrate against any I-2 or General Commercial building.

The Comprehensive Plan recommends high-density residential near the Metropolis and Plainfield Commons. You need that density to help support the commercial uses. So, (inaudible) is this site appropriate?

We feel like there will be no transportation impacts to the site. It will be at the corner of two collectors but the Metropolis Parkway with the line of sight is a concern. We feel like truck traffic would be a minimum on this site. In the surrounding warehouses probably it is much less noise than if this was located next to I-465.

To allow the density and the other incentives they had to comply with 21 development incentives. They did comply with all of the incentives but the waiver is needed for the garages and the maintenance building. This was plated as an incremental subdivision so it does not require a (inaudible) will be added. They provided a potential impact analysis but if this were zoned and developed as apartments. (Inaudible) tax abatements so you would see immediate revenue. Three million property taxes over 10 years would be compared to maybe a million from the warehouses. As far as other fees that would be generated it would include a park impact fee. That would be another almost a million dollars compared to $55,000.00 from the warehouses. I thought that was pretty significant (inaudible) fiscal impact of any development on the property.

I think the two important questions that need to be answered tonight are how is this proposed plan impact the housing element of the Comprehensive Plan at the edge of the I-2 district and the (inaudible) shopping? Is this an appropriate site given the (inaudible)? With that I will have a seat and Mr. Scimia is here and he has a Power Point that he would like to show you.

Mr. Joe Scimia said (inaudible). Joe has done a very good job of outlining our petition for this evening for this project. I apologize (inaudible). I will try to (inaudible). The project is called the Sheffield Flats at Metropolis. It is located (inaudible) located in Airtech Parkway. The developer of this project (inaudible) two groups, one of which you are very familiar with and that would be Brian Investments, which have developed numerous properties here in Plainfield as well as a developer that would be new to the community, (Inaudible) Construction (inaudible). I'm going to ask Mr. John Hirschman with Browning to address briefly as well as Mr. Curtis from (Inaudible) Development to give you their prospective on why they are excited to provide this presentation to you this evening. First I would like to introduce Mr. John Hirschman.

Mr. John Hirschman said thank you for the opportunity to be in front of you tonight. I'm Mr. John Hirschman; I'm somewhat a familiar face here. I'm with Browning Investments (inaudible) 50% developer of this project. Real quickly (inaudible) through some of the things what I really wanted to do in highlighting this slide was to share with you Browning's perception of how we do business in Plainfield. Hopefully, (inaudible) but we view our development projects in Plainfield and our relationship to Plainfield (inaudible). We have been doing successful projects here in Plainfield since the early 1990s. We developed or are in the process of developing 1,500 acres in Plainfield alone and that includes All Points Midwest, which is our new development (inaudible) and Airtech Park, which is a project of which this parcel (inaudible). We developed six and a half million square feet in Plainfield (inaudible) Logistics but not the building that caught on fire, (Inaudible) Distribution Services, Quaker (inaudible). I'm sort of amazed myself with the addition that we have invested (inaudible). I'm on the board of the Hendricks County Economic Development Corporation. (Inaudible) project recently. Again, the reason that I bring this up is to emphasize how long we have been doing business here and how meaningful and how successful (inaudible) as a Town to our company. It truly is. Our projects in Plainfield are our bread and butter and it is important to us and we wouldn't bring a project before the Plan Commission if we didn't think it was going to be not only a great financial successful project for our company but it would have to be good for Plainfield as well. The last thing that we want to do is bring a project in front of you at Airtech Park where we have another 150 acres to develop (inaudible) Airtech Park and I truly believe that it is. I think as we go through the slides (inaudible). Anyway I wanted to thank you and let you know that this is an important project to us. (Inaudible). Thank you.

Mr. Scimia said I would also like to introduce to you Mr. James Curtis. As many of you know Browning Investments is primarily an industrial development (inaudible). (Inaudible) they decided they wanted to partner with someone who had a longstanding tradition to do a quality project (inaudible) shared a lot of the same goals as Browning as far as not only having a successful development but also a quality development that everyone in the community would be proud of. So, in that regard I would like to introduce (Inaudible) Construction (inaudible) is Jim Curtis so you can get a little bit of feel for their background and their approach to the development and why is it such (inaudible).

Mr. Jimmy Curtis said I'm president of Sheehan Construction Company and we reside at 6930 Atrium Boardwalk S., Indianapolis. Sheehan Construction is a family owned business incorporated in 1904. Over the years we have developed over 400 million dollars of construction and over 8,200 apartment units. We are very excited about this (inaudible). We have put our heart and soul into every project. Just like our family we treat our employees and contractors and our partners and our professional relationships like family. That formula has worked and we again invest for the long-term. Over the years we have upgraded our products from vinyl siding to brick to more brick and (inaudible) so we have more than a 50 year product. We continue to put money into our properties over the years. Just this week we went out to bid on a project that we are putting a million dollars into property that we (inaudible) developed in '85 and '86. So, we continue to pour money into our projects rather than (inaudible).

This is a photo type that we have developed in Westfield in Columbus, Indiana and (inaudible) better and better and given the opportunity you will be able to see and feel and know a very successful project. We have known Browning over the years and we look forward to putting something together that we could be partners with. This is really a unique opportunity and (inaudible) excited about it.

Mr. Scimia said to look at a project like this, and I know that there were some concerns when this was brought into the committee, (inaudible) that you understand the developer their history and their commitment to the area and more importantly their longevity to the project. Obviously, this is something which they want to be very proud of but they are going to be here for a long time (inaudible). So, they really look at this as a long-term relationship so it requires something to be really proud about and something that they can consider to be a true asset to the community. Likewise we try to (inaudible) service to you, professionals that you are very familiar with, that understand the type of development and quality standards, which this community dictates and requires as well as people that quite honestly are creative and innovative in their approach to these types of projects. Banning Engineering is engineering and the site design service provider, Sebree Architects is providing architectural design for the product, H.J. Umbaugh and Associates provided (inaudible) impact study as well as the traffic impact study by Travel Engineering, Inc. Again, we tried to put together a team that would do justice (inaudible) exciting and very high quality development.

As Joe mentioned, we really have two petitions before you and I would like to kind of present all the petitions at once if that would be okay with the commission (inaudible). The second commission, the site design, really has two components also in connection (inaudible) design incentives as well as the approval of the actual site design itself. Joe spoke with you about the buffer zoning, which is 23 – 24 acres of I-2 and R-6. Again, (inaudible). One thing that I would like to point out is that one of the things that he mentioned was the impact of this project on surrounding development. We have had meetings and actual discussions with the Stout family, which the owner of (inaudible), Huntington Bank, which is the owner of the parcel on the west side, the Prologis development, which is the developer of the projects that will be to the south. Actually (inaudible) not the current owner but we contemplate that they will soon acquire (inaudible). I'm kind of proud to say that after meeting with (inaudible) project we received no objections and actually letters of support from most of the adjoining neighbors supporting this proposed development at this location.

One of the things that Joe mentioned is why this location? We would say to you that this is not your typical location for this type of project and it is not by happenchance. This (inaudible) chosen because I used to say this is not your father's Oldsmobile but unfortunately there is not (inaudible) but it is fitting in this presentation to talk about (inaudible). Many people (inaudible) the last five or 10 years. I would say there has been a dramatic change in the last 18 months with the impact of the economy has on all of us. One of the things that we have seen in this industry is the fact that people are affected by travel time. Obviously congestion and the time they have to travel to get to places impact their day. Everyone is very busy (inaudible). Another thing that we see is people quite honestly want to work, eat and play in the same area where they live. So, it is important for us to have a location where we can provide all of the opportunities within close proximity to the development and cut down on the travel time and provide people with a high quality place to go to dinner and also a short drive to their workplace. So, from the standpoint of the consumer we think that quite honestly things have changed and they need an option to meet the needs. I will also tell you as a developer of the new special (inaudible) we are very concerned that we have appropriate options for people to live (inaudible).

It was pointed out by Joe that there is a significant amount of industrial development located to the south and east of this project. I will tell you that everyone knows that a major component of that industrial development is a very high quality office. In that high quality office are professionals, managers and executives that sometimes comes for long periods of time and sometimes may come for a short period of time. They are looking for a significant and well thought out housing options in order to live near their place of work. We think we will meet that need. Obviously, the proximity of the Metropolis Mall and nearby retail we see is a very positive thing from that regard. We also (inaudible) proximity from the Plainfield business base and office buildings (inaudible).

The other thing is this provides (inaudible) access (inaudible) to both international airport as well as to the interstate interchange system. We also believe, and as Joe pointed out, there may be a question whether or not this is a good transitional use and we would tell you that it is. Obviously, the neighbors of the (inaudible) chose not to oppose our petition (inaudible) and felt that it is appropriate. We also see some (inaudible) and convenient use (inaudible) for this property given its site constraints. As Joe mentioned, the Metropolis Parkway will bisect this property as well as there is a significant easement, which limits the types of uses that we can use (inaudible). So, from our standpoint the project was designed and was intended to provide a housing alternative for this community.

Joe mentioned the site plan. One of the things that is very important in this market, which distinguishes from some of the other projects we market, is that it does consist of 16 buildings and 215 units. But if you look at the amenities provided on site, I'm not so sure that existing development provides all of these amenities in one place. There are several newer ones but not all of them. Obviously, there is the large (inaudible) space in Plainfield but we are talking about a very large clubhouse that is going to have a number of amenities geared towards quite honestly what current users are demanding. We will have a full service business center, fitness center, a wi-fi (inaudible), multi-purpose great room, an outdoor fire pit, resort style pool, a separate car wash (inaudible) and a gated dog park. The point of those types of development you have kind of seen in some (inaudible) you can see the pool is a very nice amenity. You can see a very homey feeling in the clubhouse (inaudible) meeting space but also state-of-the-art fitness center.

We did have a traffic impact study conducted on the property and as Joe informed you, all of the recommendations of the traffic study were implemented. It included the design for the Metropolis Parkway, turn lanes into the project as well as basically existing lanes recommended (inaudible).

One of the big issues that have been raised is the school impact and I know that you have a letter in your packet from the school addressing their opposition to basically having any additional multi-family. We have met with the school district and obviously the education of our young is something very important to everyone of us (inaudible). We certainly do not want to do anything that would affect either of those and provide a hardship for the school. It may not surprise you to find out that we do disagree with some of their concerns or potential; particularly the first one concerning economics. We had a school impact study conducted by (Inaudible) Associates (inaudible) to answer any questions if you have them. But the findings I think are very important. The school impact study determined based upon a market study that approximately 36 students total would be estimated to live in the total 258 units. I want to give you a feel for that because we think that is probably a very high number based upon what has actually happened in the community. If you are familiar with Stafford Pointe, which is 370 units, they currently have 25 school aged children in the development. Central Park, which is 304 units has 20 school aged children (inaudible) and Saratoga, which is very similar size of 240 units has 15 school aged children. All those are various stages of obviously vacancy development but I think they show the type of impact we are talking about. Also, I think if you think about most of those projects and where they are located they are close to very significant residential components of larger developments. You will see that there is something different from our project to those projects; primarily our location. Although we would welcome families we are really geared and designed for attracting more of the executive, empty nester, professional to this product. I think the location is designed and amenities kind of dictates and is more attractive to those types of individuals. But having said that you would also know that our project (inaudible) 36 students has a fallen affect on the school corporation based upon current estimates and that is basically the cost of those students (inaudible) maybe roughly $185,000.00. But the projected funding under the current State's funding mechanism is $192,000.00 per (inaudible). So, based upon the taxes generated by our project we will be able to cover the direct cost of educating those students (inaudible). I might add again 36 students is a very high estimate. More importantly the additional financial impact on the school system would be an additional $34,500.00 of additional money for capital projects and $117,000.00 to the miscellaneous funds, which provides over $150,000.00 of additional funds or positive cash flow to the school corporation. So, the key point is we do not think we are going to create any kind of a financial burden on the school system by adding these students but also understand that there is current capacity for (inaudible) for these students so we wouldn't be creating overcrowding because of the project. Another ancillary result based solely upon this project would be a property tax reduction for the community from (inaudible).

Now a couple of things I would like to say; you received in that letter a couple of statements that I would like to talk about. Basically, it talked about one of the concerns of the school corporation is that it creates a transient student population, which may not be in the best interest of the community in the long run. I would suggest to you that many years ago that is very true but I think as we have all seen with builders going under (inaudible), people losing jobs, increased mortgage foreclosures we have a transient base in certain single-family homes too. Although we all try to manage that (inaudible) this type of situation in our economy means in all aspects of basically living relationships are being affected. We believe that there is as much affected in single-family homes today with people losing their homes as you may see in multi-families. In fact, we are providing housing options for people who may lose their jobs and lose their homes that may still want to remain in the community. Obviously, it is a much less investment in an apartment unit, a one year commitment, than in a housing commitment, which (inaudible) 30 years. So, we are not so sure that actually living in an apartment situation results in a transient population. Remember we are talking about a maximum of 36 students compared to the benefits of providing a housing option, which we don't believe currently exists. So, I think we can argue quite honestly that it is not clear that it is really a negative. I'm not so sure that this development will actually impact that concern. Again, I think it is a broad brush to say that apartments will bring transient children to the community. I'm not so sure that is true (inaudible).

The second one is the fact that although the projects are very nice in the beginning that over time (inaudible). We have all seen that but I would suggest to you that this project is not that type of a project for this reason. As Mr. Curtis said (inaudible) the project is being developed with the use of materials which have a very long economical life, typically 50 years or more. We are talking about brick, stone and cement. I will also tell you that we have a developer that has a long history of ownership (inaudible) projects at a level that is quite honestly you would be very proud of; I know they are. I would suggest to you that the history of the developer is probably the most indicative of their future. They have been around since 1904. They are an example of projects that we have had 20-30 years, which quite honestly have not suffered any sort of economic or physical decline.

We also believe that if you look at the design, it is somewhat timeless in a sense that today is what you are going to see in 20 years. The brick structure is going to last a very long time. There is a very small amount of cement (inaudible) and even that has a very lone (inaudible). So, we would suggest to you that although we don't disagree that (inaudible) those are legitimate concerns. We don't really think that those are significant concerns with this particular project.

The next thing I would like to talk to you about is the overall economic impact of this project. As Joe pointed out, this project has right now at least this undeveloped land, which garners basically about $8,000.00 a year in tax revenues for the community. If developed under the existing I-2 with 110,000 square foot of industrial space, which we have laid out, the economic impact from the permit impact fee is on the board. Basically, the industrial project would provide roughly $60,000.00 worth of permit fees. But due (inaudible) tax abatement (inaudible) project on this site (inaudible). Compared to the overall benefit of permit fees together with the park impact fees (inaudible) roughly (inaudible), which we believe is a significant benefit to the community. Property taxes alone (inaudible) overall this project would assist in lowering the tax rate for the community but also you can see over a 10 year period it would provide an additional, over two million dollars, worth of tax revenue over a 10 year period. I will be honest with you; those are pretty conservative numbers based upon numbers that we have had (inaudible).

I have talked about the rezoning. I would like to talk about our request for development incentives as part of our development plan. As Joe has pointed out, we are seeking incentives to basically alter three specific areas of our development. One is the density to go from eight dwelling units per acre to 11.69 dwelling units, which requires eight site design features incorporated into the design. Yards basically to provide for (inaudible) interior perimeter yard. As you know, there are seven interior perimeter yard requirements that once they overlap they will require a larger yard. We have reduced them providing additional landscaping and also provide (inaudible) appropriate setback (inaudible) 20 foot interior yard around buildings, which requires two additional site design features.

And then the building height quite honestly we have had to alter (inaudible) 35 feet to the maximum of roughly 46 feet but it is still three stories. It is just the pitches on our roof as well as the type of building materials we use and the height of the interior ceiling. The three stories will go a little bit higher than 35 feet (inaudible).

So, we have a total of 12 (inaudible) features, which are always incorporated in. I wanted to briefly go over what those are. We have increased the area of open space of the development. We have already discussed the clubhouse and numerous amenities (inaudible) trash collection and trash compactor obviously enclosed. We have increased perimeter foundation landscaping, almost doubling it and we have one at a Level 2. We have a pet (inaudible) run, on sight car parking, on sight car wash, a pedestrian and bikeway system, additional (inaudible) and the entire complex is (inaudible). So, as pointed out we meet a required number of incentives.

There are a couple of things that I wanted to mention is the landscape plan, which we have provided meets all of the requirements of your ordinance but in addition to that we are maintaining the existing tree line on our lower and west property line to provide additional buffering in those two areas. So, we actually exceed your requirements of the landscape requirements.

And then we do have building elevations that require waivers for two basic areas. It is the brick facades on end of the garages and (inaudible). We did provide compliant facades for those areas to DRC but quite honestly they liked the design that was on brick with respect to the particular accessory buildings, which we obviously are willing to comply with.

Basically, the site plan was depicted in Joe's presentation. It does provide for units on both sides of the Metropolis Parkway. In the landscape plans you can see it is rather dense and elaborate. I wanted to show you what we are talking about as far as the coverage of brick and the types of materials incorporated into the development (inaudible). Actually, Joe did really discuss the types of materials but it is awful hard in this two dimensional look to look at the actual extent of the architecture as well as some of the things that were incorporated so I asked Ken Sebree if he could talk about really what the detail and architecture is. (Inaudible).

Mr. Ken Sebree with Sebree and Associates Architects at 97 Dover Street, Avon, Indiana said (inaudible). Let me say first that the developers didn't call me in just because I'm (inaudible). I actually have been working for the Sheehan organization in projects (inaudible). (Inaudible) for about 14 years. We've done numerous projects together. Jimmy kind of glossed over some of the important (inaudible). I think of him as the second generation because I know his dad, Jim Sr. also. It's more than just the second generation; two of his siblings are also working (inaudible) so basically they are a family owned business (inaudible) developing and constructing properties for a long time. That being the case (inaudible) long time doing it so I think (inaudible) what they have accomplished and I think it is a good thing for our community too. I know that many of you know the Sebree's as being people that designed the recreation facility and churches or office buildings, some of the things that you have seen in the community. (Inaudible).

This is the “A” building, the two-story building, the smallest building. We already talked about the 60% brick and the hardi-plank and the siding. You can see the top elevation up there (inaudible). There are a lot of in house, what I call in house, garages in this design. Some of them you could actually walk from your garage right through the door into your apartment (inaudible). Others (inaudible) access the garages that way. (Inaudible) material on there (inaudible) results with that on other projects (inaudible) siding and that is (inaudible) prefer that not on her home so consequently (inaudible) apartment building either. Cement siding after you get it painted basically looks exactly like wood. It even has (inaudible) grain in it (inaudible).

Here is the “B” building. (Inaudible) actually the one-story section on the end of it we just needed that in order to get our correct number of unit counts that the design will support. So, I think the combination of the materials, raising the roof lines, roof pitches, we have a six foot pitch on most of the roof elements. (Inaudible) you see the end elevation here, the brick goes up past the second story line or actually it goes up to the third story line so (inaudible). Again, you see the top through there. There are some garages across the door level (inaudible). I particularly like this elevation. It is a combination of the two and three story elements and in my eye the higher section in the center is stepping down. The two story section on each end is a very attractive way to (inaudible) building line. This scales it down so that it doesn't visually look like such a big building, which when you get all three units like this, it is always good to visually scale it down (inaudible).

Here is the (inaudible) building and it is the same thing. It is a three story element in the center. It steps down to the two story element on each end. It is mostly brick. You saw the landscape plan and we are providing plenty of landscaping on this project. It is totally within the ordinance (inaudible) incentives we are adding much more landscaping. You will see foundation plants up next to the building and various ornamental trees closer to the building and then across the parking lot (inaudible) shade type trees all compatible with the ordinance. I will say also every single living unit on this design has its own outdoor space. It has a patio and the upper units have their own private balcony. So, all the residents have the ability to enjoy some outdoor space and outdoor time when they are home (inaudible) other things. I think that is something that we struggled with the market once. (Inaudible) like Sheehan who has developed and owned as many properties as they have they get the comments on their other properties from potential residents that come in to look at their apartments. So, they basically know what the market is looking to and those people are impressed with having their own living space. They know people like the idea of having their own garage. (Inaudible) Fishers is, of course, very competitive (inaudible) so developers are going to do the best they can to determine exactly what the potential residents are looking for and provide those (inaudible). I failed to mention when I started out that I'm also the architect for the (inaudible) Metropolis project, which (inaudible) by another developer here in Plainfield (inaudible). (Inaudible) exterior materials they are using on this property are very similar to what we used on that except it is totally a different design. (Inaudible).

I think I have pretty well covered the things as far as the architectural design and the other things I wanted to mention about the developer (inaudible). I will certainly be happy to be part of this project (inaudible) so thank you very much.

Mr. Scimia said in summary just let me say thank you for allowing me more than five minutes; I appreciate that. Second is one thing that Ken didn't mentioned was you probably noticed that there were not a large number of (inaudible) units. You might have also noticed on the site plan there (inaudible) mainly because we don't believe that this property (inaudible) parking in regards to that (inaudible) it's location quite honestly (inaudible). We don't necessarily (inaudible) families wanting to live in this area. One other reason (inaudible) possibly the impact on the school is a minimum so in summary obviously we are seeing a favorable recommendation for the zoning. We are also asking approval of development incentives for the depth of the yards and (inaudible) as part of our site plan approval. (Inaudible) architectural site design with the waiver of all brick (inaudible) as depicted and approval of the alternative landscape plan (inaudible) tree preservation. I guess the last thing that I could say is we believe (inaudible) with a development team (inaudible) quality commitment and be here in the long run and program with the community, which I think makes (inaudible). (Inaudible) product that we believe serves a market that may not be adequately served now by providing opportunities to provide consumers to shop at the adjacent retail and restaurants and provide workers for the consumer base. I think for the business base it surrounds the project. It's in close proximity to the types of things that people in that market are seeking. It has quick access to the interstate and to the airport as well as also providing a high class amenity package for them to be able to live, work, play and eat all in the same environment. So, I guess also studies have shown the affect of the economic impact of the development. We hope to favorably impress you and we will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.

Mr. Brandgard said (inaudible).

Mr. James said it complies with the airport air service overlay. As far as the airport (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said Mr. Scimia could you refer to your notes and give us the student count out of those apartment complexes?

Mr. Scimia said our market study, which I believe was updated today shows that at Stafford Pointe there are 378 units and 25 school age students. At Central Park there are 304 units with 20 school age students. At Saratoga there are 240 units with 15 students. Our study was based on (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said the Stafford Pointe count sounds a little low for me just driving through. I have no way of questioning that but it just seemed very low.

Mr. Gibbs asked, is there anyone in the audience who would care to speak in favor of this matter?

Mr. Mike Cook said I'm an attorney with offices at One Indiana Square, Suite 1800. I represent Irwin Collateral. Irwin is allowed to succeed to ownership with foreclosure proceedings for the 21 acres located to the south of this site. We believe that a multi-family project can be a good neighbor to industrial development. As Joe pointed out in the staff comments we don't think the industrial development on the adjacent site zoned I-2 respectfully should suffer however as a result of a rezoning such as this. We would agree that comments made in the Staff Report take it seriously and that is that you would not be required (inaudible) for development for usage for which it is currently zoned be required to have additional buffering requirements in the event that this is approved or additional landscaping requirement. We also have been in discussions with developers and we have agreed in principal regarding Seven Points, which we also think the compatibility of this project to have (inaudible) development in the I-2 areas currently zoned (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said at this time I will open it up for anyone in the audience with concerns or opposing this petition.

Mr. Scott Flood said (inaudible) I'm the president of the Plainfield School Board. I'm here on behalf of the school board this evening to express our concerns. I appreciate (inaudible). I also appreciate the reputation of those (inaudible). I wished that we had a crystal ball where we could see a lot of benefits and projections of the project but we all know we don't have a crystal ball. One of the things that we have to look at is in terms of history. (Inaudible). Another point that I would mention with the crystal ball is it is good to see companies that are longstanding (inaudible) but we have all seen in the last year and a half some things that we all took for granted (inaudible) including locally we had a ton of agreements with sub-developers. We saw some things not turn out quite (inaudible). Regardless when you look long-term, (inaudible) the Town will still be in existence and it is pretty safe to say that the school will still be in existence. When we built our new high school, we looked at (inaudible) we can't just look at how a project may affect our student population. We can't just look at how it may affect our financial situation (inaudible). Of course, we are all not sure (inaudible) especially (inaudible).

I do promise to keep these comments brief. I just want to restate our concerns. Again, we don't have a particular concern (inaudible) with that aspect. It is with the increase of the number of properties (inaudible). Once again we believe that rental units make up a disproportionate share of Plainfield's housing (inaudible) as compared to the balance of the Town. We believe adding more may increase it. We have seen the 2000 census numbers and I know the Chamber looked at those numbers too and it is still very high and that is a concern for us. From our experience, and I will draw on experience, our teachers and our administrators know that rental properties contribute to student mobility beyond what we have come to expect in single-family homes. Society as a whole is more mobile but what we have seen (inaudible). (Inaudible). That creates more challenges for teachers because they have to promote more time to students (inaudible). In the era that we are facing (inaudible) federal level we become very concerned about each child's achievement. So, that is a concern for us. Also too I think it is widely excepted that parents who make the commitment to live in a community for long-term, homeowners, tend to be more dedicated and more involved with the school system and the (inaudible) so that is a concern also.

As was touched on earlier, and again we look from history, existing rental properties we see a decline over time in terms of economics in terms of quality. We are just concerned that a project that looks great today may look great five years from now (inaudible) 20 or 30 years (inaudible). We know that there are benefits (inaudible) economic benefits we haven't had a chance to look at those numbers in great detail. But we believe that the short term economic (inaudible). Once again our objection is not to any specific aspect of this project or any of the participants. All of them are fine business people and do a good job but it is simply the fact that we are concerned (inaudible) and we don't want to see it increased. For that reason we ask that you would consider denying this project (inaudible). Thank you very much.

Mr. Daniel administered the Oath of Testimony to Mr. Scott Olinger.

Mr. Scott Olinger Superintendent of the Plainfield Schools said not to repeat what Mr. Flood said but I just wanted to let you know from our point this is not a financial objective because we know that the financial (inaudible) possibly help the corporation (inaudible). I think I'm here basically to advocate for 250 plus teachers and the job they do. I think everybody here on the commission would agree that we provide excellent education for our students. We do have to educate every student that walks into our door and I think if you ask our teachers what the greatest challenge they face today, it is mobility and accountability and how to deal with that. We have kids that enroll all throughout the year at different times and with the accountability pressures of “no child left behind” and State Bill 221 it just becomes increasingly difficult for them to get kids caught up. I think the students that come to our community and live here and go to school and stay in our system we do a great job. The ones that we struggle with are the ones who are in and out every year into the school districts and sometimes that is caused by the number of rental units that we have.

As an educator we always say we want to deal with the facts so I just want to give you a couple of facts tonight. We are looking at this year and early first in the semester I did some research because we do a lot of ISTEP and scores and this is not to say that students who live in rental units or have rental homes do any worse than anybody else but I wanted to state some facts to give you some facts from previous years. I went back and I looked at the number of students who entered our school system in 2005 and 2006 because they took the ISTEP for the first time last year as third graders. The numbers that I'm going to give you are probably not accurate because it is hard to go back and look at how many of those students actually came from rental units without looking at an apartment number or lot number. We have many students who are probably not counted in these numbers but I think it just gives you an idea. Of the 51 students who entered our school system 42 of those students have withdrawn. Let me back up; 51 students who entered our school corporation who had an apartment or lot number 42 of those students had withdrawn by the end of 2007/2008. So, (inaudible) three years. The total percent of students enrolling and then withdrawing over the course of three years with an apartment number in our school district is right now at 35%. Again, that does not include all renters; just those with an apartment number or lot number.

This year it was interesting; the Indiana Department of Education put an index of our incoming freshman students all over the State of Indiana. For the first time they did a study of students that risked not graduating based on (inaudible). That included test scores from the Middle School, attendance rate of the Middle School and then the number of moves that students have. Of the students most at risk of our current freshman with a score of six to nine on a scale of zero to nine with nine being the greatest 55% of those students came from apartments or lot numbers and again this does not account for those houses without those numbers on them. Of these students 67% of those had at least one move during the school year. So, of those students that we are struggling the most with it is the students that are in and out. Also, during the 2007/2008 school year of 240 students entering our corporation 30% of them lived in a known apartment or lot address, higher than the percentage actually that we heard of the number of units.

So, again I just want to state as Mr. Flood did that we are opposed to this not from a financial standpoint or anything like that. We will educate any student that walk in our doors and our teachers will continue to do a great job but we hope to look at this as the community that we live in is now the highest in the County that I have been told when looking at that study of the number of rental units. Is that something that we want to be known for? We want to be able to educate those kids here and educate them and get them to where they need to be. Thank you.

Mr. Gibbs said with no one else coming forward I'm going to close the public portion of this meeting and ask if the petitioner would like to make any final comments.

Mr. Scimia said thank you for your time this evening; I know that it has been very long but hopefully I think (inaudible). I would like to address Mr. Flood's comments. Obviously I have the greatest respect (inaudible) our educators are certainly very important and I certainly (inaudible) runs deep with me. They are doing a really tough job and doing a good job at it. I cautioned before of (inaudible). I would argue that the facts and the statements that Joe made are all quite honestly a better reason for why you should approve our project because our type of project is not going to have those problems. Obviously, the current (inaudible) not doing what it needs to do but I don't have a crystal ball but I will say this. This project has a design to minimize many of those impacts; not intentionally but just because of the nature of its location. It is not located in a large residential area. It will not be (inaudible). It's not Airpark. (Inaudible) natural things that we go looking for in a residential setting. It is geared for a particular type of housing, which is peculiar to this area. There are probably (inaudible) areas that have the type of the retail component as this particular location. So, I do think it is unique and justifies quite honestly (inaudible) Comprehensive Plan.

I will also tell you that we go to great lengths to bring a good project with the developer as (inaudible) commitment to the project over the long run. I don't have a crystal ball either but I would tell you that history is a pretty good indication of the future. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that we all haven't been burned by a developer who has made promises and have not lived up to their bargain. Quite honestly that is going to continue to happen but I'm lucky enough to be here tonight with people who are the best in the community and have a long history of not providing those types of negative (inaudible) to the community in which they develop.

The other thing I want to tell you is I understand from the Chamber's study that there is a lot of rental houses in this community but I would tell you that a lot of that housing is single-family homes which have been converted. There are some trailer parks there. There are developments that don't have garages; they have carports. They do have vinyl. They have (inaudible) so (inaudible) have done a good job of distinguishing us from the typical type of rental (inaudible) that exists.

I guess in closing I would say that whatever negatives (inaudible) the school board I think they have been tremendously outweighed by the number of positives which occur. We know the challenging times to have a project come with an opportunity for a project of this magnitude (inaudible) it is not (inaudible). We are prepared to go forward as soon as we are able to (inaudible). So, I would ask that you look at the totality of the circumstances and look at what we presented tonight and hopefully you will give us a favorable recommendation and approval of the petition that we have presented this evening. Thank you.

Mr. Gibbs said at this time I will open it up for the board members for their comments and questions.

Mr. McPhail said I have a question for Joe. I'm still a little bit confused when we talk about the adjoining properties and the buffers and that type thing. Your report says that if we rezone this, it affects the adjoining properties to increase their buffer zone. I believe I have heard that the commitment is that there is something that we could do if we approve this, that it would not affect the adjoining properties; do I understand that correctly?

Mr. James said correct based on the way the commitment was written the property would be treated like it is zoned I-2. Therefore, the surrounding properties, I believe this is the Irwin property to the north, this would be developed like this property was I-2. Therefore, we wouldn't have the bufferyard and you wouldn't have to increase the landscaping.

Mr. McPhail said we have the same situation on the south side.

Mr. James said this is already developed but yes the same situation to the east. It would be different for the General Commercial because they don't have as big of a bufferyard as the I-2 does. But it would impact any development west, north and east.

Mr. Carlucci said these properties that are adjacent to it, do they get the protection?

Mr. James said yes. It is like the Williams rezoning that we did earlier. We said that their property would be treated like it was General Commercial zoning. Therefore, we would not require the bufferyards in the surrounding properties.

Mr. Brandgard said I would think this would be something like what we have done with the farmland when somebody comes in and wants to develop and had them recognize the fact that farming is an (inaudible). I wouldn't think (inaudible) we would look at it since this is going to go to an area tied to that and they shouldn't have to deal with that with increased buffering (inaudible) neighbor (inaudible) treated as an I-2.

Mr. James said that is the intent.

Mr. Brandgard said with anybody around it.

Mr. James said this was I-2 so they rezoned it and created a concept plan like this was I-2.

Mr. Daniel said they would be required to sign a certification that they made that commitment if the project is approved; this developer would be required.

Mr. Carlucci said the fact is that the I-2 property on the north and the east on wherever they are located is a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance that if they are up against residential property, that they have to create a buffer. These people are making that commitment that they won't enforce that on the I-2. Is that what you are saying?

Mr. James said if I can find the site plan. The R-6 does not have bufferyards. It has a standard (inaudible) setback (inaudible). So, for any development that is adjacent to any development it is still a 30 foot (inaudible).

Mr. Scimia said it is our commitment (inaudible). (Inaudible) side yards, perimeter yards basically (inaudible) I-2 so that (inaudible) that we increased the Level 2 all the way around the perimeter and (inaudible) existing landscaping. That would be something (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said Joe can you help me understand, I don't know whose slide it was, but it talked about density. Can you give me a sense of what some of the other projects are from (inaudible)?

Mr. James said this is 11.7 units per acre. (Inaudible). Central Park I believe it was more than (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff asked, have we (inaudible)?

Mr. McPhail said just Saratoga and Crown Plaza are the two newest besides Central Park. I would guess that they are both equal density. I don't know what they are.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, what is our standard for R-6?

Mr. James said that is why they are using the development incentives to go up to the maximum of 12 units per acre. The Chamber's study if you look in there, it has the (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. James said yes it just gives the number of units. Gladden Farms is 220, Saratoga is 240, Stafford is two something.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, do we know what the occupancy rate is on some of these apartments?

Mr. James said Central Park was at 90%.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said you know it has been awhile since particularly Saratoga I haven't checked with but Central Park; I don't know about Stafford Pointe, Crown Plaza is about 80% a couple of weeks ago but I can't tell you.

Mr. James said the 2000 census said that the vacancy rate was at nine percent.

Mr. Kirchoff said that is (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said I would think that overall it is probably not any higher than that; more than 10% vacancy overall.

Mr. Kirchoff said a couple of questions I would have for the petitioner is how can you help us understand the kind of cliental that you are going after and that leads up to the follow-up question. And that is my concern is the three bedroom units will attract more likely families than a one-bedroom and two-bedroom unit. What (inaudible)?

Mr. Scimia said number one we have with us our personal (inaudible). She tells me that Saratoga is at 92% occupancy and their density is 12 units per acre. Crown Plaza is (inaudible). Stafford is 96% occupancy and Central Park still has units (inaudible) and they are at (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said we have had a work session to talk about the school's concern, which I'm very sensitive to and one of the things that we talked about was that I commented when my daughter got out of school, she went up on the north side and there are a number of complexes up there that cater to singles and non-professionals. So, the conversation we had was there some way for us to shape or mold any future projects that really cater to that and reduce that projected number (inaudible)?

Mr. Scimia said the original (inaudible) amenities that we provide (inaudible). Just looking through my notes and we only have one building, which is building “B” that has (inaudible) bedroom. Building type “A” has no (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. Scimia said (inaudible).

(Inaudible) said I just want to make a point. I don't have it exactly with me today but we do have a lot of roommate situations with the three bedrooms as well. We had three folks that were together and they will take the three bedroom to cut down on cost. This project I think we have nine percent of three bedrooms. So, I need to do some research on that but I would say typically half of those would go to a roommate situation verses a (inaudible) situation.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, (inaudible). How do they market? It's just young professionals. My daughter is just out of college and, of course, that is where she wants to go. How can we make that happen?

Mr. Scimia asked, help as far as?

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. Scimia said to make sure that we are marketing to young professionals? I think the location says it all.

Mr. Kirchoff said then, of course, the flip side it is my sense that why would a young professional want to live next door to a warehouse?

Mr. Scimia said well I think this site offers much more than just a warehouse. I mean this is an amazing site. There are tons of amenities around. You have the Metropolis Mall.

Mr. Kirchoff said you are right in the middle of the (inaudible). If I were a professional, why would I want to live next to a warehouse?

Mr. Scimia said (inaudible). The bottom line is that families that have kids don't want to (inaudible). Again, they also don't have the need because they eat at home more than probably not. They are not going to be going out to the restaurants and retailers. The other thing is that young people want to meet where the action is and that is where their jobs are and where the retail is and where they can get in and out pretty quickly. We don't see any of the amenities that this package (inaudible). We need to get this thing financed quite honestly (inaudible) so 10% is about the smallest that you can get (inaudible). So, the answer is we have to strip down to the bare minimum (inaudible). I don't know that you could ever guarantee it but I think you can do things like not having amenities (inaudible) but put it in the location where children don't want to be or (inaudible). You know being close to a warehouse you call them warehouses but when you look at the Rolls Royce building, those are warehouses in I-2 areas and what they have done (inaudible) square feet of office (inaudible) 100,000 square feet of (inaudible). So, these are big office situations too and people want to be close to the office. You know I live and work in an apartment quite honestly and a lot of our secretaries are paralegals and live in those apartments just across the street (inaudible). Why? Because they can walk right (inaudible) to get home. So, I can't guarantee it but (inaudible). The other thing is the rents are such in this project that will be the most expensive project (inaudible). Our market study this morning showed that no one was over a dollar square foot. We are probably going to be a dollar square foot (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said one bedroom is cheaper than Central Park.

Mr. Scimia said Central Park is a $1.21 per square foot. We don't have anything under a dollar. Their range is 18 cents a square foot to a $1.21 where we are at a dollar (inaudible). But everybody else; Stafford Pointe is (inaudible) per square foot; Saratoga is seventy cents (inaudible) and we are at a dollar (inaudible). You are right Central Park does have some (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible). Help me understand how far west from Ronald Reagan you will be constructing?

Mr. Scimia said (inaudible)?

Mr. Kirchoff said no how far west from the Ronald Reagan Parkway will you be constructing the Metropolis Parkway?

Mr. Scimia said actually we won't be (inaudible). Don McGillem can probably answer that better than I can. (Inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said to Airtech.

Mr. Scimia said to Airtech.

Mr. McPhail said just to Airtech.

Mr. Scimia said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said not yet but someday it will. This site is on the west side of Airtech.

Mr. Scimia said basically it will run the entire length of our (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible) extending to Airtech (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said pardon?

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said it has been on our books to move forward with it and it has been part of the decision process in locating the fire station on Airtech.

Mr. Gibbs said the one thing that I haven't seen on any of these plans is this is a split location and now you are telling me that basically you are catering to executives and to seniors. What public safety has been taken into consideration for crossing a three lane road to get over to the amenities?

Mr. Scimia said there has been a lot of discussion on that. We understand that there would be a pedestrian walkway here. Quite honestly our belief is that these will fill up quickly because they are more isolated. They won't be in the (inaudible) part of the development. (Inaudible) close to the amenities but there are sidewalks on both sides quite honestly and the pedestrian walkway we are not expecting that much foot traffic. Our experience is that most people will (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said I have another question and this question should probably be answered by Sheehan. You have modeled this project after a couple of other projects I think you said one in Westfield and one in some other location.

Mr. Curtis said Columbus, Indiana.

Mr. Gibbs asked, do you currently still own those properties?

Mr. Curtis said (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said and how long have they been in existence?

Mr. Curtis said we completed the one at Westfield in March and we will be completing Columbus at the end of the (inaudible).

Mr. Brandgard said just as a comment to Bill's question to the location of this. My initial reaction (inaudible) in that area but after going to Indianapolis and paying some attention to apartments (inaudible) there are a surprisingly number of them that are located right next to the restaurants for the exact same reason that you talked about. It surprises you, in fact, I have (inaudible). It seems to work and I kind of looked at this from a couple of different ways. When you look at the shopping that we have (inaudible) part of the reason that we don't have more restaurants is because we don't have people to support them. From what I have seen when you have a higher level and a lot of restaurants, you have a lot of apartments to support them because they go out and eat. Those who have homes go out and eat occasionally but not all of the time like apartments. From a location standpoint the Metropolis and the shopping area around there it kind of makes sense not only for enhancing that but also (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff asked, where are we on the master plan? Weren't there more multi-family planned around the (inaudible)?

Mr. James said that is correct. (Inaudible). Yeah, we have some area right about in right here that was planned for more apartments.

Mr. McPhail said and, of course, we saw some concept plans within the mall itself to have retail on the first floor (inaudible) second level.

Mr. Kirchoff said surely that wouldn't generate any (inaudible) with the second floor.

Mr. McPhail said I have tried to look at this thing in depth and study it. My only concern is the concern of the school corporation on the transient students. I have tried to identify that and focus a little more on where that is happening. I know I have spoken to Mr. Olinger a couple of times. Because of some of the privacy rules he can't give me the addresses of where these students are coming from and whatnot. I find it difficult to believe that the number of students that we have in these larger complexes that they would be making a significant impact on the students coming in and out. But I can't focus on that. I'm a little surprised at the number of Stafford Pointe because I thought it would be a little higher than that when I drive through there. Central Park and Saratoga I believe are pretty accurate numbers without a question. But you know we heard a presentation several months ago from the Hendricks College Network where they are projecting the graduating high school students today will have up to 15 jobs by the time that they are 35 years old. If that is even close to being an accurate forecast or projection, we are going to become a more transient society than we are today. That is a little frightening to me for me to think about not only being transient but how are we going to have a trained workforce if they are going to be changing jobs that often? I have heard that twice in the last couple of years from studies. Certainly Mr. Scimia alluded to the current financial crisis and the turnover on mortgage foreclosures and that type of thing. I would hate to see the numbers this year; they are probably higher. You probably don't have that data yet do you in what has happened this year. Would this type of complex contribute to that transient student problem? I really believe it has a minimal impact if it maintains this type of structure over the next several years. And certainly if the Stafford Pointe number is accurate, that complex has been around for a long time and it has been maintained well.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, what is the number they gave us?

Mr. McPhail said 25. I feel like that is low but I don't know. Do you know who was able to get that number?

(Inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said I find that hard to believe at Stafford Pointe. I would guess that it is closer to 75. I hate to disagree with that number but I just really don't think it is accurate.

Mr. Scimia said all we can do is what they have provided us. Because I knew this was going to be a discussion point we did ask (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said Central Park and Saratoga is pretty much in line with what we heard several months ago but I do believe that is probably not a good number.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, what else have you considered for this site?

Mr. Scimia said the site is zoned I-2.

Mr. Kirchoff said I understand that but from a transition standpoint have you considered other uses?

Mr. Scimia said sure. Nothing is really market usable (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible) from the office space that we have now.

Mr. Scimia said right.

Mr. Carlucci said it seems to me that Staff and the Plan Commission and Town Council seem to be getting away from the fog here on some of this. Part of it is we can't seem to get our hands around this issue. We seem to have one hand that realizes there is an impact on the schools with the transient kids. Then you know we do want to have more Staples in Town so we go back and forth on these kinds of issues. We have the Chamber report and we have the census report of the percentages just for the rental properties in Town.

The issue that I look at more from being the Town Manager is what do first rank suburban communities look like 10-15 more years? What is that going to be? I don't quite know the answer. If we keep some of these numbers climbing, I may have a better idea of what (inaudible) but again we seem to be in this balancing act and struggling through the right decision because every time I look at a lot of your faces here and nobody for certain is going to say that if this is approved or not approved what the future will be. I don't know what the school's finances are going to be for this because nobody has gotten that yet. So, we are in 2009 in May but the governor announces today a big drop in income tax and sales tax. It is going to have more an affect on the school's budget than ours. Just when we thought we were sailing along, there is a huge drop in those revenues. I'm not going to be able to predict in the next year but that is the struggle that we are facing. It is a difficult task. If anybody can follow “no child left behind” I know the school people can. You only have one group of kids in a certain category that does not meet that criteria and the whole school system gets dinged. There is only one school in this County from my understanding, no three, that made that requirement. The school people can correct me if I'm wrong. It just takes one group out of 15 kids in a category and then you don't meet the annual improvement requirements. It dings the whole high school. There are some great high schools in the State that didn't make it and ours is one but people look at that when they make a decision to move somewhere so that is my two cents. But again those are the things that I look at. I look at more of what we are going to look like in 15 years as the first chair suburb outside the main city. We don't have any chair beyond that yet but we will.

Mr. McPhail said I spent about three or four hours yesterday at the Village West Clay, which is probably overall the most upscale community, developed community, and they have a tremendous amount of apartments, townhouses, as a percentage of that development. I don't know what it is but it is huge. Bill you alluded to being adjacent to an industrial area and I had an open house in one of the townhouses and I believe I would much rather look at an industrial building than what those folks were looking at. I looked at this proposal. The decks were a straight line that crossed the back of the building. You had absolutely no privacy when you walked out on that deck. You look over and you have the same thing on the other side and all of that. I didn't ask the price but I saw the price of the single-family home I went through and it was way out of my budget but I did go and tried to look at the mix and see what they were doing there because that is obviously one of the things that we have on our plate long-term is scale housing properties. I was really surprised at the high percentage of apartment townhouses. I don't know how many of them were rental and how many were owner occupied but there are a lot of townhouses and apartments in that complex.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, is Central Park maxed out as far as building?

Mr. James said yes; they completed phase 2 last year adding 50 more units.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said they just actually finished construction in the last 30 days. I'm not sure all of the apartments are ready for final occupancy, do you know Ed?

Mr. Rudolphi said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said everything is done now? It has not been too long since they finished it.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said I spent about 30 minutes over there one day last week just hanging around in the clubhouse to see what was going on. There were about four people in that wi-fi café with their laptops out working away. It was ten o'clock in the morning so I didn't notice any kids around and they should have been in school but I didn't see a lot of activity with people outside. Most of the people at that time of the day were inside. They were busy; they had people lined up. I suspect they will be pretty full shortly.

Mr. Brandgard said relative to the (inaudible) I think the Town has worked with the school a lot over the years to address the concerns that the school has had in various areas (inaudible). If the school is having problems with the students, the Town is usually having trouble with the same area (inaudible) police activity and the fire activity. The Town didn't have anything to do with moving the trailers out here; that was before (inaudible) and a lot of that has gone away (inaudible). The Town has dealt with that and we have had problems in the same areas and we have dealt with it (inaudible) increases the value of the houses (inaudible) going on. I would venture to guess, as Kent mentioned, the school can't tell us where the problem is but I could guess where it is at; two places at least. One in the Town, which was a mistake and the Town has admitted the mistake that we made and not to let it happen again. Hopefully, (inaudible) tax credits ran out. The other area is outside of Town (inaudible) so we can't deal with that issue (inaudible).

But I think overall my concern with rental is the rental houses that we have. That gives me more concern than the apartments because they are all over Town and you can just about pick them out because they are not kept up as you would like to see in the neighborhoods kept up (inaudible). You have the same problem there. A lot of people have told me that they can't get the rents that they used to have and they have dropped. Therefore, you have people qualified to have in there that you didn't before. A lot of those people can't afford them to begin with so they are in and out.

We are concerned with the number of units and I think if you went back in the history of this Town, as least as far as I know, I have lived here 50 some years, this Town has always had a lot of rental property. It's due to the location of where we are. We used to have U.S. 40 going to town and now you have I-70 so you have two reasons why people come here. If they can live here and work elsewhere (inaudible). But I think if we were to stick our head in the ground and say no more apartments, pretty soon you are going to have no more houses because people aren't going to come here.

I moved out of my house and I moved into an apartment (inaudible). If I had gone to an apartment somewhere else, I probably would be wherever that apartment was and not here. I think the key is we always want to have our kids come back to Plainfield to work and live. You don't have the housing vehicle to get them back in here and start up their new lives outside of mom and dad's house (inaudible). I think (inaudible) you have to understand what it is what we are trying to do (inaudible) high level of apartments. There is always a chance it's going to go bad. I think that has to do with (inaudible) also. There are areas in Indianapolis where they had apartments that are now rundown areas but from my experience those areas were somewhat rundown when the development came in there. They weren't high end apartments; they were low end apartments. That is just my feeling. We will continue to work with the school on the problems. I understand the situation (inaudible) and see what we can do to help with the problem (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said there was a comment made earlier too about around I-465. These people must spend most of their time inside because that has to be worse than the airport noise being along that freeway with the constant hum. I would have to believe that most apartment dwellers spend most of their time inside.

Mr. James said (inaudible) you can see how the garages will be accessed internally on the site so the elevations you are going to see these elevations (inaudible) Metropolis Parkway. (Inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said it is a pretty high percentage of garages too. In fact, I really believe that is a desired amenity. All of the latest development in the Central Park has all been this type of building with garages. I think it is a safety feature particularly single people can drive in their garage and go in the house and get out of the car and not get out in the parking lot. I did provide everyone with a copy of the police and fire runs to the apartment complexes. I couldn't really find any negative comments from the police and fire department as far as activity with the exception of a couple of places. They didn't seem to think the fire and police runs were anymore than single-family homes overall. There were police runs there for loud noise and you get that in the single-family too when a neighbor doesn't respect the other.

Mr. Gibbs said the chair is ready for a motion.

Mr. James said (inaudible)

Mr. Gibbs asked, is anyone prepared to make a motion?

Mr. McPhail said if we continued this hearing, I don't think we would be prepared any better 30 days from now. I thought about that. I thought is there any way to gain more information? I do believe the only negative that stands out in this whole situation are the transient students. I just have a real difficult time believing that this type of project contributes significantly to that problem. So, based on that I would move that the Plan Commission certify zone map amendment request RZ-09-002 as filed by Wellington Park Partners, LLC requesting rezoning of approximately 23.942 acres located west of Airtech Parkway from I-2 to R-6 with a favorable recommendation subject to the following commitments being submitted on Exhibit “A” form prior to certification to the Town Council:

1. All right-of-way needed for the Metropolis Parkway extension is dedicated to the Town once final construction plans are approved.
2. The subject property shall be treated like I-2 zoning when adjacent properties are developed.

I will ask counsel if that is significant for our protection?

Mr. Daniel said I think we probably ought to add the following if you would be willing to add it:

3. The property owner cannot remonstrate against any I-2 development adjacent to the property.

Mr. McPhail said I would add that as condition number three.

Second by Mr. Brandgard. Roll call vote called.

• Mr. Satterfield – absent
• Mr. McPhail – yes
• Mr. Brandgard – yes
• Mr. Dunkin – yes
• Mr. Kirchoff – no
• Mr. Gibbs – no

3-ayes, 2-opposed, 1-absent.

Mr. Carlucci said the motion is approved three to two with one member absent.

Mr. Daniel said it is a seven member board, which I think it takes an affirmative vote of four members to take any action on a petition this evening.

(Inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said the board is what it is.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said right with the absentee. We are one member short.

Mr. Carlucci said so we have a none decision.

Mr. Daniel said right. It is no action is what that amounts to.

Mr. McPhail asked, where does that leave us?

Mr. Daniel said it leaves us with the petitioner to come back before the board to present the petition again.

(Inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said I've been here 21 years and we have never done that.

Mr. Daniel said that is correct.

Mr. Carlucci said it wasn't approved and it wasn't denied.

Mr. Daniel said that is correct.

Mr. Carlucci asked, does it make any sense to continue this until the next meeting hoping that we have a full board? Can we do that? The problem is you have one member that has to hear the whole thing again.

Mr. Daniel said right.

(Inaudible).

Mr. Brandgard said we have (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said and that is the problem. Maybe we can take a five minute break (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said at this time we will take a five minute recess. (After recess) I will bring the meeting to order again.

Mr. Daniel said during our break we had some conversations and confirmed that the vote that was taken constitutes “no action”. Obviously, a couple of things can be done. Obviously, the petitioner can bring this petition back before the Plan Commission again and I think the principal question for the parties here tonight is whether or not they want to wait until we have a seven member board and get a vacancy solved or they will come back with Mr. Satterfield here and we have our six sitting members here. I don't know what the petitioner would like to do as far as that is concerned. We will let them speak.

Mr. Scimia said we understand that this is an unusual situation. We certainly appreciate (inaudible). I talked with my client (inaudible). If it were up to us, (inaudible) no recommendation (inaudible). We would certainly understand if you chose not to do that. Our reason for that is the fact that we realize that when Mr. Satterfield comes back and we end up (inaudible). We could also end up (inaudible). We will obviously confer to your members. We do have some time (inaudible). Our desire would be to (inaudible). Having said that I know (inaudible). We understand that (inaudible). Having said that we do respect your right to (inaudible) and hopefully I could entertain (inaudible) no recommendation (inaudible) and have us come back (inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said since this hasn't occurred before let me help the board a little bit here. Should you consider doing what the petitioner has asked to do you will need to make a record by having a Council member make a motion to reconsider the vote that has been taken tonight and you have to give approval to have it reconsidered. And then take another vote as far as whether or not the Plan Commission would vote favorable or unfavorable to no recommendation. That would give you the opportunity then to vote no recommendation and pass it to the Town Council. You start with a motion to reconsider the petition after the vote has been taken.

Mr. Carlucci said I'm trying to understand but the motion is to again they have asked to be reconsidered tonight.

Mr. Daniel said yes.

Mr. Carlucci said the petition?

Mr. Daniel said yes.

Mr. Carlucci said whatever vote it turns out to be?

Mr. Daniel said right.

Mr. Carlucci said so that is the first step you would do.

Mr. Daniel said if you want to reconsider it. If you don't want to reconsider it, then it's done.

Mr. McPhail said I certainly don't feel comfortable addressing a development plan with the rezoning in limbo. It puts you in an awkward position. If you try to move the rezoning forward, then you have to take a look at the development plan I assume at some point. I don't feel comfortable addressing that issue with the zoning in limbo. I don't know how anybody else feels.

Mr. Brandgard said (inaudible). I'm not prepared to make a no recommendation on rezoning and then deal with (inaudible).

Mr. James said we can go ahead and continue the development plan for two months (inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said on the rezoning issue.

(Inaudible).

Mr. James said another option would be adding a condition (inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said right.

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail made a motion to continue both of these hearings to the June meeting. Second by Mr. Brandgard. Roll call vote called.

• Mr. McPhail – yes
• Mr. Brandgard – yes
• Mr. Kirchoff – yes
• Mr. Satterfield – absent
• Mr. Gibbs – yes
• Mr. Dunkin – yes

5-ayes, 0-opposed, 1-absent. Motion carried.

OLD BUSINESS/NEW BUSINESS


Mr. James said (inaudible) wayfinding signs. I will skip ahead to the Plain Commission invites. (Inaudible). Is Mr. Thompson present? Is Mr. Williamson present? It looks like neither one is here. This is Mr. Thompson's property at 3425 Hunt St. I sent a letter for outdoor storage, junk, tash and debris. I took this photograph after I sent him the zoning violation notice. I never heard from Mr. Thompson so I went back and re-inspected the property. Nothing had been done to correct the violation so I invited him to the Plan Commission. He e-mailed me today and asked why he was being singled out from the neighbors across the street? I told him that I did send letters to his neighbors across the street. This is around the Maple Grove area. We are trying to get the area cleaned up a little bit. We worked on Smith Street last month.

Mr. Kirchoff asked, (inaudible).

Mr. James said this is north of the mobile home park. After I received the e-mail today I will look at the property again tomorrow and see if he got the message and if he has made any improvements.

Mr. McPhail said I would give him 30 days to clean it up and if they don't, start the fining process.

Mr. James said the second one is Joel Williamson north of CR700S. We inherited this issue when we annexed the property. This is CR1050E and all of this is annexed and given the AG zoning. The violations are storage of autos, inoperable vehicles and junk and trash and debris in an AG district. Mr. Williamson is claiming a legal nonconforming status. He is saying that he is expanding the legal nonconforming activities.

Mr. Carlucci asked, will you check with Hendricks County on this because I think they had prior issues with him.

Mr. James said this goes back 30 years. He has been in court, two court orders. I don't know if he has complied with the last court order that was issued back in the 90s. Our contention is that he is expanding the legal nonconforming uses out here. The autos that he has stored (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci asked, is that the day that we were out there?

Mr. James said yes. Two other sites; this is the (inaudible) property. This is the house (inaudible). I'm sure there are illegal uses going on here, storage and the same with this site. Hopefully, (inaudible) come tonight so that we can find out what he is doing on the property if it has been expanded. One of the court orders was the hazardous materials have to be removed from the properties (inaudible). Mr. Williamson elected to not show up today so I'm not sure what to do from here.

Mr. Carlucci said he is never going to show up. You might consider starting the fines right away.

Mr. Daniel said the options are to invite him back again. Like Rich said he probably won't show up or to send him a letter and tell him that we are going to start the fining process with the assumption that these things are nonconforming; there is hazardous materials on the property and that we can't know anything different unless he comes forward and tells us.

Mr. James asked, can we seek a court order to go on the site to see what is on the site?

Mr. Daniel said it would be worthwhile. Do you have any of the court documents?

Mr. James said yes. Hendricks County dropped off the file and I made several copies of what documents there were.

Mr. Daniel said if the commission would like, we can take a look at those and see if the Town can go forward and enforce those rather than starting something new.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. Daniel said I don't know; we need to look at them and see what the court said and what grounds they had and that sort of thing. We can take a look at that if you would like.

Mr. McPhail said it seems to me we ought to start the fining process while you are reviewing that.

(Inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said I have a feeling that he is not going to respond to you (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said it sounds like you have consensus on that.

Mr. James said (inaudible).

Our next item is “adopt-a-median” and sign program. I provided you with a cost analysis for the “adopt-a-median” signs. My main question was I provided you with three alternatives for the number of signs and the proposed costs for participation. The question was do we want to move forward with this and which alternative would you prefer? Number one (inaudible) signs at 42 whereas number two was using the 500 foot distance for (inaudible) Metropolis Parkway and a 1,000 feet for Ronald Reagan (inaudible) 1,000 feet for all streets. (Inaudible) 800 the first year (inaudible) three years. Over years that would be $1,800.00. It wouldn't quite cover the cost of the 42 signs. A three year average would be $837.00. So, we might have to look at other funding sources to move forward with this.

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible) as you go towards (inaudible) down that way. I always thought that the group that wanted the sign there was required to do so much work in the medians during the year and then the town or the city would provide the sign in recognition of that. We seem to be doing it the other way. We will put up the sign and charge you for the sign. Are we charging them for the sign?

Mr. James said yes we are charging them for the sign and the (inaudible). In talking to Jason we thought it would be best if we could get it done professionally using the economies of scale. Get the plants and get it installed at once. We would maintain the landscaping.

Mr. Gibbs asked, are there other communities that do it that way?

Mr. James said I haven't come across any so far.

Mr. McGillem said our concern was with areas that we are looking at out there we have (inaudible). (Inaudible) associated with a long length of landscaping. (Inaudible) it's another thing (inaudible) Joe on the situation is going this way. That didn't (inaudible) maintenance and then we would maintain it (inaudible) rather than (inaudible) next week doing this section and essentially you have a bunch of sections out there that is disproportionate.

Mr. Brandgard asked, have you run this concept by (inaudible). (Inaudible) maintenance program is some organization (inaudible) will come in and wants to maintain cleaning up what is there and get a little plaque saying we maintain this and not paying for the privilege of doing it. I'm not sure we are going to get a lot of takers on this.

Mr. James said (inaudible) “adopt the street” (inaudible). I told her about this program and I have had a lot of companies that were interested in getting signs in medians.

Mr. McPhail said when we were dealing with the Metropolis before all of this fell apart, they have landscaped the Metropolis Parkway and they would maintain it. They were funding that maintaining by billing their tenants and they wanted to get signs, remember when we met with Steve Meadors, the tenants wanted to get their signs in there as recognition for the fact that they were doing that. Am I right Joe?

Mr. James said yes.

Mr. McGillem said this is how they came up with the concept (inaudible). You are absolutely right. There were several entities within the Metropolis Mall that were very interested from the standpoint of paying their share for keeping it maintained appropriately and professionally and having recognition of the sign. Given the Central Park Apartments (inaudible) Metropolis Mall along the south side of the apartment complex. Even though the Metropolis went ahead and put that landscaping in as I understand it under an agreement with them the apartments would maintain that section and they did have a small sign that they put in that we had required them to remove because at the time we had no provision for them to do this. But this is the reason that if we felt like they were willing to do it, there are others out there also willing to do it and we can again get the professional job of not only installing the landscaping and helping to compensate for the landscaping but also assisting in a consistent and uniformed method of maintaining the landscaping.

The other thing you don't want kids or someone out there in the medians (inaudible). What we need if we are going to do this, is something more than clean-up and that is to help with the maintenance of the landscaping.

Mr. Carlucci asked, didn't we have an agreement with Premier Properties for what went on with Perry Road and that landscaping? Didn't we enter into an agreement? Did we do the same thing at the Metropolis Parkway?

Mr. McGillem said it was the same agreement.

Mr. Carlucci said I noticed one thing that Perry Road is looking pretty nice and the Metropolis Parkway has never (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said all that agreement was with the Metropolis Mall essentially (inaudible) he was doing what Joe was saying. He was (inaudible) on all of it but it was getting split amongst (inaudible) Metropolis Mall but also Plainfield Commons on the east side. Essentially last year we had sidewalk development that had Plainfield Commons agree to take over and do Perry Road and they continued to do Perry Road and they came out this year and they have also been doing it this year. They have not only been doing the mowing this year but they have added mulch and landscaping (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said it doesn't look like the Metropolis Parkway.

Mr. McGillem said with the Metropolis Mall we have been trying to get (inaudible) back. In fact, I just talked with Lance from the Metropolis Mall last week associated with the Metropolis Parkway and he is going to try to get them to move forward. I talked to Kent because Lance indicated that they will try to get their (inaudible). Whoever has the Metropolis Mall right now he is going to try to (inaudible) landscaping and maintenance (inaudible) Metropolis Parkway and try to get it updated. They would still like to sit down with us and go over and probably work on an overall plan for all of the areas up there to see if we (inaudible). That is kind of where we are.

Mr. McPhail said I talked to Lance today and he has some kind of suggestion about having some kind of recorded document forcible through the courts to make the property owners share the cost. I don't know if we could ever get that done.

Mr. Kirchoff said it was our agreement with Premier.

Mr. Daniel said that is right.

Mr. Kirchoff said when we built the Metropolis, we were just going to (inaudible) like every other owner and they wanted something different and they committed to not only installing it but maintaining (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said see our agreement was written with the Metropolis Mall. The Metropolis Mall right now as I understand it from the way the ownerships were split out for the financing to work you have a very small percentage, a very small area that is still referred to as the Metropolis Mall. They say that is the only thing left of the Metropolis Mall. So, consequently the rest of the ownerships that are out there say we don't have an agreement with you. That is the way that it has been interpreted form the standpoint of the banks and the other reason (inaudible) right now.

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said well I think to be very honest with you if we were going to spend money to do that, it is cheaper to maintain (inaudible) landscaping out there rather (inaudible). We could possibly get mulch landscaping (inaudible) landscaping and plant shrubs and so forth in there. It would be much easier for us (inaudible) than (inaudible). That is one of the reasons that Jason and me have been looking at this program. If we can get that type of landscaping on Perry Road and Stafford Road and on Ronald Reagan, our cost associated with maintaining will go down compared to having to mow especially this time of year when we are trying to get the (inaudible). We feel (inaudible) landscaping in (inaudible) our cost associated plus it enhances the roadways itself.

Mr. Carlucci said since this is a free for all if we are going to do what Joe and Don are suggesting, would an idea be to take sections of the roadway and show them what the (inaudible) is going to look like and market those to each company at a certain dollar amount? They are going to want to see what is going in there and what they are paying for. So, if you could do that on any section of the road, you would probably have to prioritize because you can't do it all at once but you can pick up, for example, maybe Perry Road all the way down to Stafford. And then say okay we are going to do some of these sections and get the businesses next to it if you want your nice sign on the property and this is what you pay a month. At least we would have something to market but right now we have a whole bunch of trees down Ronald Reagan Parkway but I'm not sure that is all that we want to do on Ronald Reagan.

Mr. McGillem said essentially what Rich is saying is what we (inaudible) proposed landscaping four sections of the median and they were going to take 500 or whatever the distance is. They would have to take (inaudible) as a full section and we do have a landscaping standard that we proposed based on (inaudible) mulch and so forth.

Mr. Carlucci asked, do you have colored renderings of those?

Mr. McGillem said I'm not sure if we have colored renderings but we have a landscaping proposal.

Mr. James said we just (inaudible).

Mr. Kirchoff said (inaudible).

Mr. James said this is just based on (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible). We looked at what Indianapolis does and what (inaudible) and so forth and (inaudible) and what we could see is what we ended up doing when essentially we adopted the intersection of U.S. 40 and SR267 and they put in the landscaping and we ended up taking it all out this year (inaudible). Our concern is just going out and (inaudible) “adopt-a-median”. We have somewhat of the same situation at the I-70 interchange where a few years ago (inaudible) landscaping that interchange down there and you go down (inaudible) situation I'm not sure (inaudible) put in. If we were going to do Ronald Reagan and Stafford Road, what we want (inaudible) INDOT was looking like what we have on Perry Road (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbs said I might make a suggestion coming from my background and that being you may want to look at creating something else to create a value for those vendors in our community to participate in this. Just one thing that comes to mind would be to also offer them to create a seal or logo that they could use and we could make it on an annual basis that they could use in their other marketing material that shows that they are partnering with the Town of Plainfield.

Mr. McPhail said I know the Metropolis was billing their tenants as part of their common maintenance. That entity is gone. It is a small entity now but they were spreading that over to Plainfield Commons and all of the open ground but now we have two or three banks that want to common ground the whole thing. Lance thinks he can get all people to carry their share at the Metropolis Mall but he said he couldn't carry all this open ground and all of this other and do the whole thing. He had some kind of covenants that he said that they used in other places but it seems to me that it would be a situation if somebody didn't take care of that, then we are going to be spending our money going back to court to enforce it and all of that kind of stuff. It just didn't seem right to me. Did you discuss that with him Don?

Mr. McGillem said yes; not into any details (inaudible) overall concept and essentially we talked about first of all he needs to get (inaudible) because we are still looking at the mall being committed on the Metropolis Parkway, landscaping (inaudible) Perry Road. At least to take care of Metropolis Parkway (inaudible) and not let it get ahead of itself like he did last year. (Inaudible) if you are not going to get out there and do it, we are going to get someone (inaudible). (Inaudible). We were not going to let that Metropolis Parkway get out of hand as we did last year and (inaudible). (Inaudible). In the meantime we still have the concept that we would like to try to come up with some overall thing (inaudible) get all of the amenities in there (inaudible) sign-off on (inaudible).

Mr. McPhail said he also told me that the day the sign-off is no longer Plainfield Commons.

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible). Plainfield Commons (inaudible) all that landscaping in there is also (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said that is north where Jimmy John's is at and go north to U.S. 40. Everything on the right down that corner in front of Chick-Fil-A has not been (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said that was the area that you were talking about and I just figured that some of the businesses would get mad enough to call somebody.

Mr. McGillem said that is a private street there (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said I don't know who is doing it. I assume that is businesses there (inaudible) the whole strip center there. They seem to be taking pretty good care from the area along U.S. 40. (Inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said that is the only one that I have noticed. I don't know if there are more.

Mr. McGillem said it is pretty much all the way down along Plainfield Commons (inaudible).

Mr. James said there is one out at J.C. Penney.

(Inaudible).

Mr. McGillem said I guess our position is (inaudible). Regardless (inaudible) we are not going to let it get out of hand (inaudible).

Mr. Carlucci said (inaudible). When that trail comes through there, that area you are going to see more of it. It's not real bad right now but if it goes another two weeks, it is going to be real bad.

Mr. McGillem said (inaudible) if they are not out there this week doing something, we are going to do something.

Mr. McPhail said I think he is going to get it initially but he is wanting to get some help to maintain it as you go forward and I think he has a valid point. It is serving a lot of property that he is not in control of and it is hard for him and all he has is a managing contract.

Mr. Brandgard said I'm coming back to what we were asked (inaudible). I don't know if the program will work like this but if it does, it is good.

Mr. James said at Fishers (inaudible).

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at this point and time.