Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use UDO topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Whitestown planning commission recommends UDO text amendments for public districts
Summary
The Whitestown Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a favorable recommendation to the Town Council on proposed Unified Development Ordinance text amendments that create separate public districts for institutional uses and parks and recreation and set standards such as minimum institutional lot size and lot coverage.
The Whitestown Planning Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the Town Council on PC 25-054-TA, proposed Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text amendments that create and refine standards for institutional and parks-and-recreation districts.
The measure, presented by planning staff member Noah, would add development-standard requirements and use-table clarifications for a new institutional district (intended for uses such as town hall and places of worship) and a parks-and-recreation district. The commission opened and immediately closed a public hearing after confirming that no members of the public had signed up to speak.
Staff described the key changes as minimum lot size for the institutional district, modified building placement and setback rules, height and ground-floor-area standards, and updated lot-coverage limits. Staff noted a new subsection (section 2.9) and said GIS analysis showed the proposed lot-coverage numbers are consistent with existing development: Whitestown Municipal Center was cited at about 62 percent lot coverage and Main Street Park at about 33 percent.
The draft UDO text also distinguishes permitted uses between institutional and parks-and-recreation districts (for example, limited retail and certain public market uses are allowed in parks settings but primary residential uses remain not permitted in these public districts). The draft includes specific notes and carve-outs, including an exemption for the Big 4 Trail parcel so existing trail acreage would not be eliminated by strict lot-coverage calculations. Staff said some illustrative diagrams and consultant drawings remain incomplete.
A motion for a favorable recommendation was made, seconded, and approved by voice vote. Roll call at the start of the meeting had six commissioners present (Miss Foley; Mister Thomas; Mister Gibson; Mister Snowberger; Mister McGee; Mister Harris) and one absent (Miss Hancock). The commissioners present voted in favor; the commission recorded the motion as passing and will forward the recommendation to the Town Council for final action.
The commission did not take additional formal action on amendment details at the meeting; staff said they will prepare the formal text and graphics and bring them forward as part of the council submittal.
What happens next: the Planning Commission’s favorable recommendation will be transmitted to the Town Council, which will consider the ordinance text and hold any required hearings before adopting or modifying the UDO amendments.
