Planning board tables two large rezoning requests after residents raise traffic, pipeline and infrastructure concerns

The Hobart City planning authority on Wednesday tabled two related rezoning petitions from Wiley Capital that sought to change more than 100 acres of land from residential (R-2) to industrial (M-1), after residents and commissioners urged more detailed traffic and infrastructure commitments.

Jason Simon, founder of Wiley Capital, told the board the parcels near the US-30/I-65 corridor are positioned to attract industrial and logistics investment and that the developer’s conceptual plans show low site coverage and extensive buffers. "We're seeking to establish the appropriate zoning to allow for development of the sites given the increased demand for industrial land," Simon said during his presentation.

Multiple nearby homeowners asked the board to delay action until studies and binding commitments are in place. Robert Wright, who said he has lived on Clay Street for nearly 60 years, said he fears "traffic, noise, pollution" and that his property value and yard could be harmed. "I have to deal with possibly my property taxes going up now," Wright said, urging protections for adjacent homes.

Other speakers raised technical and practical concerns. Patricia Corey told commissioners the neighborhood already suffers truck problems and asked about air and odor impacts witnessed near other industrial sites. Resident Mark Popel and several others asked the board to require a traffic study and to forbid data-center uses unless clearly authorized; some residents highlighted the presence of wetlands and wells and worried about dewatering, as well as a high-pressure pipeline that runs through or near the parcels.

Commissioners debated process and protections. One commissioner said a planned-unit development (PUD) would allow a single development agreement that ties road widening, sewer and water extensions, acquisition of right-of-way and other infrastructure commitments to the rezoning. Another emphasized that, if the board were to permit M-1 now, it should require explicit developer commitments to fund construction of a four-lane roadway with curb, gutter and sidewalks and to extend sanitary sewer to the north end of the properties.

Citing the need for additional technical information and binding infrastructure agreements, a commissioner moved to table the petitions. The board voted to table petition 26-02 (west parcel) and petition 26-03 (east parcel) to allow further study, negotiation of developer obligations and review of traffic and drainage plans.

Next steps: the applicant may return with a PUD or amended petition that includes specific infrastructure financing and traffic-study results; the planning board indicated it expects detailed engineering and commitments before forwarding any recommendation to city council.