Planning and Zoning Commission recommends site plan for Pickard Commerce Park to City Council
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up FreeSummary
The Indianola Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of a site plan for Pickard Commerce Park Plat 1, Lots 4 and 5, a proposed three‑building industrial/contractor warehouse development, subject to remaining staff comments.
At its July 22, 2025 meeting, the Indianola Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval to the City Council of a site plan for Pickard Commerce Park, Plat 1, Lots 4 and 5, a proposed three‑building industrial/contractor warehouse development at 404 South 20 First Street, subject to remaining staff comments.
The recommendation came after a staff presentation describing the proposal by the owner, Itown Investment Group LLC, represented by Jason Ludden of Snyder and Associates. The two combined lots total about 2.4 acres and are located south of Highway 92 and east of South Fifteenth Street. The plan calls for three buildings: two 60 by 180 foot buildings (10,800 square feet each) and one 60 by 120 foot building (7,200 square feet), each about 23 feet high. The lots will be tied together with a lot‑tie agreement to be recorded following council action.
A city planning staff member said the site is zoned M‑2, with adjacent northern lots zoned C‑2, and that all public utilities have already been installed as part of plat improvements. Stormwater detention will be handled in an outlot basin at the southwest corner of the development; a traffic generation memo is to be submitted prior to the council meeting. Pedestrian infrastructure includes a five‑foot sidewalk along both parcels and two or three pedestrian access points from the public way. The staff presentation concluded, “Staff recommends approval of the site plan for Pickard Commerce Park, Plat 1, Lots 4 And 5, subject to remaining staff comments.”
The plan calls for 16 parking spaces based on the code calculation; staff said the applicant is providing 23 spaces (an inconsistency in plan notes led one commissioner to count 22). Commissioners asked how the parking requirement was calculated. The staff member explained the code allows either one space per 10,000 square feet of gross floor area or one per employee at maximum shift; the applicant used a one‑per‑unit/employee approach because units are expected to be occupied by sole proprietors or very small businesses rather than full‑time staffed operations. Commissioners noted the potential for overflow to on‑street parking if tenant staffing exceeded expectations.
Landscaping, a landscape buffer, and building elevations were presented; staff said the elevations — white ribbed metal panels, dark metal wainscot, stone veneer and windows — meet the city’s material requirements for M‑2 industrial buildings. Open space on the project was reported at 47.7 percent, exceeding the 15 percent minimum.
During the motion to forward the recommendation to council, a commissioner moved and another seconded. The vote was recorded as aye from Commissioners Harris, Ruderman, Darling, Zucker and Piper; the motion to recommend approval passed. The staff member reiterated that remaining staff comments must be addressed before the item goes to council.
The commission’s action is a recommendation to the City Council; the council will take the final decision at a future meeting after staff and applicant follow‑up, including submission of the traffic memo and resolution of any outstanding staff comments.
