Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers seek rezoning of two large Hobart parcels; planning board tables requests after residents press for studies
Summary
Wiley Capital asked to rezone about 168 acres from R-2 to M-1 to attract industrial users and jobs. Neighbors raised traffic, pipeline-safety, wetlands and tax concerns; the board tabled both rezoning petitions pending traffic, infrastructure and environmental clarifications.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jason Simon, founder of Wiley Capital, asked the Hobart City Redevelopment Authority to rezone two adjoining parcels from R-2 (residential) to M-1 (industrial), saying the change would align with the city’s comprehensive plan and make the sites marketable for industrial and logistics users.
“This evening, we are requesting a rezoning change from R-2 to M-1,” Simon said, outlining conceptual site plans and noting the property’s proximity to the I-65/Route 30 interchange and existing utilities. He said wetlands, setbacks and a natural-gas pipeline running across one property would limit building coverage and that design measures would protect nearby homes.
Neighbors urged caution. Robert Wright, who said he has lived on Clay Street for nearly 60 years, told the board he feared “traffic, noise, pollution” and higher property taxes if the sites were developed. Other residents asked for a traffic study, expressed concern about dewatering wetlands and wells during construction, and warned the parcels could become a data center rather than warehouses.
Planning staff and several board members said studies and infrastructure commitments are standard for projects of this size. Marco Rodriguez of economic development recommended allowing more time for city planning reviews; one board member urged a planned-unit development (PUD) or a development agreement that would lock in who pays for road widening and sewer or water extensions.
After extended public comment and staff discussion, the board voted to table both rezoning petitions to require additional traffic and infrastructure analysis and clearer commitments on how road and utility improvements — and any impacts on nearby homeowners — would be addressed. No rezoning decision was made.
The petitions will return to the board after the requested studies and negotiated infrastructure commitments are complete.
