Developers' rezoning bid for US 30-Clay Street parcels met with resident pushback; planning board tables requests

Jason Simon, founder of Wiley Capital, presented rezoning petitions to change two parcels totaling about 168 acres from R‑2 to M‑1 near the U.S. 30 and Clay Street intersection, saying the change would align with Hobart’s 2040 comprehensive plan and help attract industrial investment.

Simon told the Hobart City Redevelopment Authority the sites offer logistics advantages — proximity to I‑65 and Route 30, existing utilities nearby and large natural buffers — and that conceptual renderings show modest site coverage because of wetlands and a gas‑pipeline easement. He said the developer had discussed wetland, pipeline and utility constraints with engineers and that the firm would work to mitigate noise, light and dust in site design.

Why it matters: The rezoning would open the sites to a broad set of industrial uses, which supporters say will create construction jobs, permanent employment and increased tax revenue. Neighbors countered that changes to heavy industrial zoning could bring truck traffic, noise, lights, and infrastructure burdens that would affect their properties.

Residents and nearby property owners voiced repeated concerns during a public hearing. Robert Wright, who said he has lived on Clay Street for nearly 60 years, said he feared increased traffic, noise, lighting and a loss in property value. Patricia Corey, who identified herself from Colorado Street, opposed more industrial development and raised health concerns tied to truck traffic and air quality. Other residents asked whether the sites might become data centers rather than warehouses and urged a traffic study and limits on certain uses.

Simon and his team answered questions from the public and the board. He said a traffic study would be required by the city for a project of the scale under consideration, that pipeline owners set strict conditions for development over or near pipelines, and that civil engineers would manage dewatering and any construction impacts to wells. He also said the developer would cover the cost to connect properties to city water and sewer where owners requested hookups.

Several board members recommended more binding commitments before a rezoning. Commissioners argued a planned unit development (PUD) or a development agreement that specifies who pays for road widening, sewer extension and right‑of‑way acquisitions would better protect residents and ensure infrastructure needs are met rather than rezoning first and negotiating later.

Facing those concerns, the board moved and voted to table Petition 26‑02 (the west parcel) to allow time for required traffic and infrastructure studies and for clearer commitments about who would fund road and utility improvements. The board subsequently held the public hearing on Petition 26‑03 (the adjacent east parcel) and similarly voted to table that petition.

What’s next: The petitions are tabled; the developer may return after providing traffic studies and proposed infrastructure agreements (for example, a PUD or development agreement) that show how road widening, sewer and water extension and other improvements will be funded and sequenced.

Representative quotes: “Traffic studies required by the city of Hobart … will ultimately dictate how much road widening needs to be done,” Jason Simon said in response to neighbor concerns about truck traffic and Clay Street.

“I have to deal with possibly my property taxes going up now,” resident Robert Wright said, summarizing neighbors’ anxieties about traffic, noise and property impacts.

The board made no final rezoning decision; they explicitly tabled both petitions pending the additional studies and infrastructure commitments.