The Boone County Area Planning Commission on May 21 voted to send petition 25W-23-044 — the proposed 47 Commons planned unit development (PUD) at the State Road 47‒I‑65 interchange — to the county commissioners with a favorable recommendation after the petitioner revised the list of permitted uses and agreed to written voluntary commitments.

Deborah Luzier, interim area plan commission director, summarized changes the petitioner submitted since the last draft, saying several heavy and industrial uses were removed and certain uses would require public water and sewer before they could be developed. "Some footnotes to the use table have been added noting that certain uses must be on sewer and water utilities," Luzier said during the presentation.

The petitioners also promised site-specific limits and operational requirements. Jake Merritt, representing the petitioner, said one ready‑mix concrete plant will be permitted and "no asphalt plants will be permitted on the property." Merritt and staff described other commitments: a maximum of eight functioning water wells on the property until public water is available; an obligation to abandon on‑site wells within 18 months after public water becomes available; and a commitment that if the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) determines in writing that activities on the property materially and adversely impact neighboring wells, the petitioner will bear the cost of remedying those impacts.

Why it matters: neighbors pressed the commission on water and traffic, and commissioners said they wanted enforceable conditions before sending the PUD on to the county commissioners. Several nearby residents warned that uncontrolled well drilling could harm private water supplies and urged stronger limits and monitoring. The APC incorporated several of those concerns into its recommendation and required that the petition include the petitioner’s written commitments and a traffic‑impact study before the county commissioners act.

Most important facts first: the PUD as amended (1) removes multiple industrial and transportation uses that had been in earlier drafts (including distribution centers, rail freight and truck driving schools), (2) reduces the number of gasoline dispensers allowed at a station from 24 to 16, (3) designates fabricated‑metal product manufacturing as a special exception (so a specific tenant would return to the county for approval), (4) requires the ready‑mix facility to be paved in concrete for all driving/parking/outdoor storage areas, (5) limits the site to one ready‑mix plant and forbids asphalt plants, and (6) limits functioning on‑site wells to eight until public water is available and requires abandonment of wells within 18 months after connection to public water.

Public comment and technical concerns shaped the discussion. Multiple residents asked how "available" water is defined and how long it would take for utilities to extend to the site. A public speaker who identified himself as Keith Ogden, an adjacent property owner, said local contractors need reliable local concrete supply and supported a ready‑mix facility; other residents and a commenter who described hydrogeologic data urged caution and pointed to records showing variable well yields in the county. One commenter read DNR complaint and investigation steps aloud and cited the statute the DNR can use to enforce actions related to significant groundwater withdrawals (cited in the meeting as IC 14‑25‑5‑4).

Board action and next steps: the APC moved to forward petition 25W‑23‑044 to the Boone County commissioners with a favorable recommendation, amended to incorporate the petitioner’s final edits and the written voluntary commitments, to strike self‑storage from the use table, and to add a traffic‑impact study as an addendum to the PUD. The commission voted to send the petition with the requested amendments; the petition and the APC’s recommendation will be considered by the county commissioners, who have final land‑use authority.

What the recommendation does not do: the APC recommendation does not itself change zoning or authorize construction. It sends an advisory recommendation and the revised PUD text and commitments to the Boone County commissioners, who may approve, modify, or reject the request. The APC repeatedly noted that some implementation points (for example, the timing and route for public water extensions) will depend on utility companies and on future engineering and funding decisions beyond the APC’s control.

Context and unresolved items: commissioners and residents pressed for clarity on how utilities would be provided across State Road 47 and I‑65 and who would pay for bridge and road improvements identified by the county highway department; the APC required a traffic‑impact study but did not decide funding for future road upgrades. Residents also asked for more detail about how well impacts would be monitored and remediated; the petitioner agreed to follow the DNR complaint/investigation process and to pay for remedies if DNR finds a causal link. The county health department and the DNR were cited as the enforcing authorities for well abandonment and septic‑system requirements.

Tapering note: the petition will now move to the Boone County commissioners with the APC’s favorable recommendation and the attached voluntary commitments and study requirement; the commissioners are scheduled to consider the PUD at a future public meeting where additional evidence, testimony and legal review will be part of their deliberations.