Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Zionsville’s plan to set development standards south of the town’s quaint, historic downtown is on hold for now.
Members of the Zionsville Town Council on Monday night voted 7-0 to reject an ordinance for the South Village Planned Unit Development, days after Mayor John Stehr said he wanted to withdraw the plan from consideration because he did not believe there was enough consensus among council members.
The council could not simply withdraw the ordinance because the South Village PUD received a favorable recommendation on July 15 from the Zionsville Plan Commission, so councilors needed to vote down the plan to halt it. Had councilors not taken any action, the PUD would have gone into effect 90 days after the plan commission’s recommendation.
A PUD is a zoning tool that defines and regulates proposed development and guides developers on permitted uses and design standards.
“I think this was an interesting moment because I’m kind of in a surreal position here of asking that this PUD be turned down,” Stehr told council members. “But, at the same time, I don’t want to obscure the hours of hard work that so many people put into this process.”
At his first State of the Town address in March, Stehr unveiled the masterplan for the 120-acre South Village that would have been developed on both sides of Zionsville Road/South Main Street. Under the plan, South Village would have been bordered by Sycamore Street to the north, Creekside Corporate Park to the east, Old 106th Street to the south and Eagle Creek to the west.
Stehr said the conditions that led to the discussion of the South Village PUD have not changed and that Zionsville will remain under pressure from landowners who want to develop their properties. Last week, he told IBJ that 70% of the property in the proposed South Village PUD area is owned by private landowners who want to develop their properties.
Stehr has held 35 “South Village chats” to discuss his plan for the South Village with residents, stakeholders and town staff. Some Zionsville residents opposed the plan and spoke out at town meetings and signed a Change.org petition against the South Village PUD.
“It’s hard to balance property rights with the desires of the community, and that is true everywhere, not just in Zionsville,” Stehr told council members. “It doesn’t make Zionsville unique. However, Zionsville is unique because of the intense public interest that becomes part of any discussion like this. I think we’ve seen it leads to a lot of emotion. And, unfortunately, at times, I think it’s led to a lot of misinformation.”
He told council members the goal of the ordinance was to take the zoning that is already in place, make it more restrictive and add extra layers of regulation through the town council and the Architectural Review Committee to consider any projects, especially those that include multifamily housing.
“I still think that a masterplan for this entire area seems like a goal that we should all strive to achieve,” Stehr said.
Council member Sarah Esterline Sampson, who represents Zionsville’s Village, said at Monday’s meeting that the major concern for residents was worry over the effect of apartments on the town. However, she added that she thinks there will be an opportunity to continue working on a plan for the area.
“I do think we as a town have to define who we are and who we want to be because I do drive through the South Village all the time, and I do see the empty lots and the crumbling old parking lots, and I would like to see some improvements,” she said.
Councilor Craig Melton said the pressure on Zionsville to grow will continue due to the amount of undeveloped land in Perry and Union townships on the west and north sides of town. That means the town will need to get to work on drafting a new comprehensive plan to guide development, he said.
“I believe firmly in the next 10 years we’re going see the largest growth in Zionsville that Zionsville has ever seen because of things like the South Village pressures,” Melton said.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
The less Zionsville develops, the less their land will be worth.
No one is saying Zionsville shouldn’t develop. That is a mis-understanding. The push back is on developing just at the entrance to the village of Zionsville where the traffic congestions is already a mess. Shoving more people and cars into this area will have the opposite effect desired. People will begin to avoid it. That is what will reduce property values.
Sounds like Lions Park is your problem, not South Village….too bad theres a crappy golf course on the northside of the village too.
Relocate those to other areas (or make the golf course Lions Park instead) and you’ll have a really nice answer to your problem….of course it’s not that easy but the way this is all coming about, you’d think there has to be a better solution than trying to convince 35 private landowners to sell.
Development is beneficial when it is smart and focuses on sustainable economic growth. However, the current proposal is unreasonable. Zionsville is unique and should not be treated like the surrounding suburbs. Maintaining its charm as a bedroom community is more desirable.
There are better ways to develop Zionsville. Instead of commercial development, consider creating a destination area that truly represents the community and supports our small business owners. Ideas like a Ravinia-style park, botanical gardens, or an Independence Grove-like facility would be ideal.
Look at the North Shore suburbs and towns of Chicago for clear examples of successful, community-focused development. Their apartment to ownership ratio is less than 10%.
Why not follow their lead?
If affordability is a concern, townhomes should be proposed instead of apartments.