Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transit Station New Carlisle topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Redevelopment commission backs Site B for New Carlisle South Shore station; approves follow-up site work

5775118 · September 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Redevelopment Commission approved a phased professional-services change order to advance predevelopment work for a proposed South Shore train station in New Carlisle, identifying Site B as the preferred location and securing survey access across several parcels.

The Redevelopment Commission on Sept. 6 approved a $169,950 change order to advance predevelopment work for a proposed South Shore rail station in the New Carlisle Economic Development Area, moving Site B forward as the preferred location. Commission staff told the panel the South Shore proposal calls for Hudson Lake station to remain open until the New Carlisle station is built, and that Site B best balances proximity to downtown, passenger access and land control by the commission. Commission staff said the contract will be performed in phases and includes geotechnical work, concept planning and additional site design so the project can be eligible for federal or state transit-related grants. Staff said some previously planned work for a separate Timothy Road housing project will be reallocated to the station work after that housing deal fell through and no funds were expended on that contract. Commissioners also approved a right‑of‑entry agreement so JPR can survey parcels owned by the American Legion, Vales Mechanical and NIPSCO; staff asked that Dennis be authorized to sign the agreement. The commission approved the professional‑services change order and the entry agreement by unanimous votes. Staff outlined development constraints for alternative sites A, C and D, saying Site A would require acquiring four to five houses and one business in addition to a parcel the commission already purchased, while Site C lacked proximity to downtown and required large property acquisition. Presenters said Site B is farther from a sharp curve, would allow safer vehicle circulation for a parking lot and is largely on land the commission or county already own. The commission was told the team is studying pedestrian connectivity across the tracks, including the feasibility of a pedestrian tunnel, and will continue surveying to inform design. Staff said the change‑order work will be paused between phases if the commission decides not to proceed to later steps. Public comment on the station in this meeting was limited to general support recorded during the session; no formal permit, funding award or final design was adopted at this meeting.