The Area Plan Commission opened public comment on a proposed second amendment to the West Lafayette downtown plan, with commenters concentrating on proposed height increases at the north edge of downtown and on an apparent mislabeling of one building as historic.

City staff introduced the amendment as an expansion of the downtown study area and described it as the opening of a public-review process. The amendment would add a southwest “expansion area” and update the street grid and some land‑use categories; staff emphasized that the document is an opening draft, not a final plan.

Multiple speakers from the New Chauncey neighborhood urged the commission to preserve a low-rise buffer between downtown and the single‑family neighborhood. Zachary Bridal (124 Connolly Street) asked the committee to “remove the proposals of densification along Fowler, Wiggins, And North Streets returning to the original 2 to 4 story class classification” and said the amendment as written “was not appropriately sized given the single family homes in this area.” Jay McCann, a member of New Chauncey’s 2013 land‑use steering committee, echoed the call to “retain the downtown edge buffer between Fowler and North Street.”

Residents also raised technical and mapping concerns. Don Teeter (2106 S. Seventh St.) pointed out that the draft identifies 250 Sheet Street as a contributing historic property; he said county records show the building was constructed after the plan’s pre‑1940 historic cutoff and asked staff to remove it from the overlay. A staff representative said the city’s database “needs to be updated” and agreed to verify and correct the record if it is an error.

Other public comments focused on land‑use priorities along the Wabash riverfront. Andrew Lane (127 Westwood Drive) urged the commission to consider converting riverfront surface parking to housing and said the properties along Wabash Landing “would probably be our most valuable property to have, and to leverage, for housing.” Another resident raised construction‑phasing concerns and asked the city to consider staggering projects to reduce traffic and business impacts during buildout.

Staff described the procedural path ahead: gather public comments, revise the draft, post subsequent drafts for public review, and then proceed through the comp‑plan amendment process (Ordinance Committee → APC → West Lafayette City Council) with additional public hearings. Staff said they will compile comments, work with city planning staff (development director Jen Mann Skyver was named as a point of contact), and return with an updated draft for further public and committee review.

No formal action was taken; the meeting served as a public forum to collect comments and to clarify next steps.