HomeMy WebLinkAboutJULY 25, 2017 MINUTES OF THE JEFFERSONVILLE PLAN COMMISSION
July 25, 2017
• Call to Order
A meeting of the Jeffersonville Plan Commission was held on July 25, 2017 at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, First Floor, Jeffersonville City Hall, 500
Quartermaster Court, Jeffersonville, Indiana. Chairperson Dustin White called the
meeting to order.
• Roll Call
The roll was called and those members present were: Duard Avery, Kathy Bupp, Rita
Fleming, Lisa Gill, Dustin White, Ed Zastawny and Mike McCutcheon. Those
members not present: None. Also present were Linda Mills, Secretary, Shawn Dade,
Planning & Zoning Coordinator, Nathan Pruitt, Planning & Zoning Director, Les
Merkley, Planning & Zoning Attorney.
(SECRETARY'S NOTE: ALL PLAT MAPS, PHOTOS, ETC.
PRESENTED BEFORE THE PLAN COMMISSION ON THIS DATE
CAN BE FOUND IN THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT.)
i
j • Approval of Minutes
l The minutes of the June 27, 2017 meeting were approved as written on a motion
made by Mike McCutcheon and seconded by Rita Fleming. Motion passed on a vote
of 5-0 with Lisa Gill abstain from the vote due to being absent for the June meeting.
• Approval of Docket
Nathan Pruitt stated that they worked with B & B Truck Sales they had waiver
initially but they submitted two revisions that actually cleared out all the waivers,
they are not in the Commercial Corridor Overlay District. PC-17-46 will be removed
from the docket. Lisa Gill made a motion to remove PC-17-46 from the docket,
seconded by Mike McCutcheon. Motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Lisa Gill and seconded by Mike McCutcheon to
approve the docket as amended. Motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
Kathy Bupp came into the meeting.
• Old Business
1) PC-17-23
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Jeremie Reed
Builders, LLC requesting approval of a preliminary plat for property at the southwest
Page 1 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
corner of Charlestown Pike and Woehrle Road. The plat creates 12 lots and will be
named Rock Springs Subdivision.
I
' John Kraft appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• We are here this evening on a Preliminary Plat approval;
• The staff report that has been presented on this does reflect that my client has
met the requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• The Subdivision Control Ordinance outlines to the Plan Commission to find
that the proposed preliminary plat is coordinated with the Jeffersonville
Comprehensive Plan and its provisions;
• We are dealing with a M1 Zoning as it relates to this property;
• The plat now meets all the requirements under the Subdivision Control
Ordinance in respect to issue of lot standards, size, depth,width and frontage as
it is required under the Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• The properties to the west and to the south are zoned R1 (Low Density
Residential), the property to the northwest is zoned M1 (Low Density Multi-
family);
• The property northeast of the subdivision is zoned C 1 which would allow small
to medium scale general commercial;
• The property to the east is zoned R2 (Medium Density Residential);
• This property is not surrounded by single-family residential;
• The subdivision consists of 12 lots;
• Under the terms of the Subdivision Control Ordinance I believe that the status
of the Indiana Law that your requirements on what you are to do today are
ministerial in nature;
• Submitted two cases that went to court and both cases is similar to what we are
doing here tonight;
• One of these cases was decided in 2001 and then the other one in 2002;
• Both of these cases outline the procedures of a preliminary plat approval;
• Under the terms of the preliminary plat if it meets the concrete standards that
are set out in your ordinance and in that instance your duties this evening is
ministerial and cannot exercise discretion;
• On the 2001 case states that the developer's application requesting preliminary
plat approval for the proposed subdivision was governed by the Subdivision
Control provisions found in Indiana Code 36-7-4-700 seq. Pursuant to this
statute, the local legislative body must adopt an ordinance which regulates the
subdivision of land in its zoning districts and which provides "concrete
standards";
• The purpose of these standards is to provide protection to both the developers
and land owners giving a fair warning as to what the local plan commission
would consider when reviewing a preliminary plat;
• In deciding whether to grant an application for primary plat approval under this
scheme, the commission is required to determine if the plat or subdivision
Page 2 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
qualifies for primary approval under the standards prescribed by the
i Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• Moreover, it was the Plan Commission's duty, at the first reasonable
opportunity to furnish the developers with all the specific and concrete reasons
for disapproval so that the developers could amend their plat to comply with
the applicable ordinance;
• I point this out to you primarily because Aulbach was in a similar situation as
this applicant;
• Aulbach was tabled for nine months;
• A law suit was filed before the approval and went to a trail court, where it was
found that the Plan Commission was acting outside the scope of the Subdivision
Control Ordinance;
• In Floyd County the Klein case dealt with the very same issue with the Floyd
County Plan Commission;
• The decision with Klein likewise indicates that the decision of the plan
commission on a preliminary plat is whether or not it meets those concrete
standards of the ordinance;
• In this particular instance we looked at the ordinance and the staff report and
met those concrete standards under the terms of the ordinance;
• In summary, the plan commission's only role in evaluating Klein's application
for primary approval was to determine whether Klein's proposed plat complied
with the specific and concrete standards set forth in the county Subdivision
Control Ordinance;
• If the plan commission concluded that Klein's application did not comply with
the ordinance, the commission was obligated to provide Klein with a
comprehensive list of reasons Klein's plat was defective, so the Klein could
amend his application consistent with the ordinance;
• While the plan commission enter findings explaining the reasons for its denial
of Klein's application, these findings, as noted above, were either unrelated to
the concrete standards set out in the Subdivision Control Ordinance, were too
vague and indefinite to give Klein notice as to the nature of the alleged
violation, or were unsupported by the evidence;
• In the absence of any proper findings that Klein's proposed plat violated the
specific and concrete standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance,the plan
commission's rejection of Klein's application for primary approval was
erroneous,and the trail court did not err in reversing the commission's decision;
and
• In align with Indiana Code the Plan Commission is obligated to adopt findings
with the issue of approval of a subdivision, I have proposed findings that I
would hand out to each of the members that specifically address those items set
out in the staff report indicating that we have complied with those requirements
for a preliminary plat.
Jason Copperwaite appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
Page 3 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
i- • The preliminary plat for Rock Springs Subdivision has changed considerably
since it was first submitted;
• Construction on two cul-de-sac roads, 12 lots on the 10.8 acres;
• It does include a 30' right-of-way dedication on Charlestown Pike;
• This is a M1 zone, the adjacent zone to the southwest is R;
• Your zoning ordinance would require a buffer yard along that side with an
additional 10' buffer yard setback;
• The buffer yard as required in the ordinance consists of 6' evergreen trees 12'
on center and the ordinance also requires plantings every 20 feet along
Charlestown Pike; and
• The ordinance requires 32' roadway and that is what we are proposing with
sidewalks on both sides.
Alan Applegate appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• Represent a group of property owners in Golfview Estates;
• The preliminary plat was filed in February;
• The application was tabled in March pending review of the Drainage Board;
• Following six Drainage Board Meetings and a$15,000 for a drainage study the
Jeffersonville Drainage Board voted not to approve the applicants drainage
plans due to flooding problems within this water shed;
• As Mr. Kraft stated this evening, meetings involved in this application satisfy
the City ordinances and therefore your decision making becomes ministerial;
• He also referred to the two cases that mandated that the Commission approve
the preliminary plat, however there are dozen cases in Indiana dealing with
approval of preliminary plats;
• Those cases involved where the applicant repeatedly come to the Commission
who found reasons not to approve the plat, those reason were corrected at the
next meeting, Plan Commission failed to approve the plat, created new reasons
and so on;
• We have the ministerial standards that have to be considered;
• First Mr. Kraft stated at the prior meeting that the plat met the standards of the
Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• However, the original plat covered 19 lots and then through the six drainage
board meetings ultimately those 19 lots were reduced down to 12 lots because
of statues, ordinance, etc.;
• We have heard that it meets the concrete standards or your ordinance before
and through public meetings we shown that not all those standards were met;
• The second point I would like to make is that I believe that the plat still fails to
meet several of technical standards in your ordinance;
• The plat does not appear to show any public space, which is required by M1
development standards;
• We have not been provided with private restrictions as required by your
subdivision ordinance to indicate how this property is supposed to be
_J managed;
Page 4 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• Who is pay for the detention facilities;
• Is this going to be singular owned or will be subdivided and sold out in
parcels;
• The plat does not indicate the parking of additional two parking spaces
because this is zoned MI;
• The M 1 zone requires a development plan and the neighbors in the area would
like to see a development plan because they want to see what is going on the
property and a plat does not indicate that;
• Initially this property was supposed to be duplexes then at the last board
meeting an quad-plexes were mentioned;
• We have been advised that if this property is platted into twelve lots that the
development plan can be reviewed ministerial by the Plan Director and not the
Plan Commission;
• Your zoning ordinances provides in M 1 if there is not more than three
structures on a particular lot than the Plan Director can review the
Development Plan;
• Even if the plan was corrected to provide for the technical shortcomings I
mentioned I would direct you to the 1994 case of Burrell vs the Lake County
Plan Commission;
• This is where the Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the
Plan Commission of a preliminary plat because of drainage and flooding and
the negative effect on health, safety and welfare;
• It acknowledges the general comments made by Mr. Kraft, however they site
those cases but they went and still denied approval of plat under appropriate
circumstances not withstanding compliances with technical requirements;
• One of those appropriate circumstances is if it would have an adverse effect on
health, safety and welfare is drainage issues;
• The court stated that health, safety and welfare in and of itself is too general
but if the ordinances sufficiently identifies what the adverse effects can be
related to health, safety or welfare then the ordinance will survive and the Plan
Commission can deny the plat;
• The Burrell court noted a particular section in the Lake County Subdivision
Control Ordinance and the sections states that no land shall be subdivided
which is unsuitable for use by reason of flooding, bad drainage, soil or rock
formation with serve limitations for development, serve erosion potential or
unfavorable topography, or any other feature likely to be harmful to the health,
safety or welfare of the future residents of the subdivision or of the
community;
• The court held that language was sufficiently clear to put a developer on notice
on what standards will be used in interpreting whether the plat meets the
development standards associated with the Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• This case was decided in 1993 and Jeffersonville Subdivision Control
Ordinance was amended in 1996;
• The first paragraph of the drainage ordinance states that Whereas, the existing
City of Jeffersonville Subdivision Control Ordinance is in need of clarification
Page 5 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
and alteration to most effectively protect the public health, safety and general
welfare, it then went on to adopt this new ordinance;
• Section 155.12 from your Ordinance states that the Plan Commission hereby
reserve the right to deny a development if the land is considered by the Plan
Commission unsuitable for use by reason of flooding or improper drainage,
objectionable earth and rock formation, topography, or any other feature likely
to be harmful to health, safety or welfare of possible residents and community
as a whole;
• Mr. Kraft is correct in his reference to the two cases but I feel that the Burrell
case is almost directly on point;
• I believe that your ordinance was adopted in response to give you the authority
to consider things outside the check list items of your ordinance; and
• I do think that it is important that you understand that your goal in reviewing
plats is to look for technical requirements and to also take into account the
health, safety and welfare of the community.
Dustin White asked if Mr. Applegate was stating that this plat is unsuitable.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• I'm saying that the development of this ground is unsuitable due to flooding
and topography;
• The ground upon which is being considered, yes; and
• Just like the plat in the Burrell case.
Dustin White asked why this plat is unsuitable.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• Because of the water that streams off of it and goes into an already flooded
area;
• The drainage plans submitted do provide for a detention basins;
• Your Drainage Board has considered an adoption of a new drainage ordinance
to take into account the short falls of the existing drainage ordinance;
• I'm not an engineer but I stayed during the presentation and one of the issues
that is trying to be addressed is the re-calculation and using more current and
applicable rainfall statistics;
• The other issue is that they are trying to address the events that are not two ten
or hundred year flood events;
• What the engineer indicated at the last Drainage Board Meeting was that
detention basin do contained water in the two ten or fifty year surge;
• But in a normal rainfall detention basin does not really detain water;
I " • Really talking about adding 50%more rooftop, concrete impervious surface to
I a dirt field that detention basins that does not detain water from at least in
normal rains;
Page 6 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• Giving the flooding aspects and the fact that the property in the immediate
I vicinity floods downstream and no culverts are large enough to handle and
existing drainage we believe that this property is unsuitable for development.
Dustin White asked if the dirt field floods.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• The drainage ditch that runs through it goes outside of its drainage banks
periodically as it backs up from going under the St. Andrews culvert;
• We have submitted photos that will show the drainage area that goes through
this property;
• The storm water management plan requiring a 25' no disturbance buffer in that
ditch as well as a 25'beyond that no build area and I think that is because the
drafters of that ordinance understand that drainages ditches don't always
contain water within their banks;
• That drainage ditch is not being modified by the drainage plans or by this
developer, it's being left completely alone; and
• As a result those houses abutting those duplexes are going to shed from their
roof top right into this ditch.
Dustin White asked if he has reviewed the drainage plans for this application.
Alan Applegate stated that he was at the six drainage meetings.
Dustin White stated that it is your opinion that there is no reduction in water going
west.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• If it were my opinion it would not be a commentate opinion;
• I'm not an engineer; and
• I do know that they have gone extra lengths to create detention basins that are
larger than what is required by your drainage ordinance.
Dustin White stated that you sited a case that this ground is unsuitable based on
flooding and I'm trying to figure out if the drainage plan that is being proposed
reduces by any stretch of the imagination the amount of runoff. Does it not reduce the
amount of flooding that already takes place.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• I don't believe it ever reduces the amount of runoff but only the speed;
• The same volume of water in fact a much larger amount of water because right
now its field of 10 acres as oppose to twelve roof tops, twelve parking lots and
two additional parking spaces that the development plan requires;
Page 7 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• All of that has got to go somewhere and it will go into the detention basins and
maybe not shred out of those basins into the ditch and road;
• There will be more water coming off of that property; and
• You are adding 50% impervious surfaces that does not accept water and it has
to go somewhere.
Dustin White stated that they are planning for a place to go in the application is that
not correct.
Alan Applegate stated that they are planning on a place for it to go and that is in the
detention basin to slow it down and then go to the area that floods.
Dustin White stated that the area that floods is due to inadequate pipe width.
Alan Applegate stated that he believes inadequate pipe width from the reports that are
in the record initially, but ultimately that water goes downhill and stays and starts
ponding on the other side of Hamburg Pike. The pipes themselves in St. Andrews and
Golfview Estates they are actually acting like a detention basin.
Dustin White stated that the reason for the flooding is the speed and the lack of
capacity to handle the speed, is that right.
Alan Applegate stated that is his understanding.
Duard Avery stated the following:
• The drainage to the Elks is really inadequate and further on down;
• The Elks wasn't really too thought out;
• The City is in the process of improving the pipes and the top ground in that
area does drain in different directions;
• We have a broad area and topography that is going to flood so this does have
natural consequences that are going to be foreseen by any type of
development;
• The parcel itself at some point would have a detention basin added to it; and
• The detention basin that is being proposed in your comparing to other things is
the detention basin adequate or inadequate.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• During my participation in the meetings I think that the Drainage Board
determined that the detention basin that have been prepared by Mr.
Copperwaite exceed the minimum guidelines of your drainage ordinance.
Duard Avery stated that the detention basin could be more efficient to hold more
water potentially to make the site more developable.
Page 8 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
Dustin White stated that if the Drainage Plan reduces the amount of runoff or slows it
as the assisted living facility that everyone was in favor of then it will not be danger to
health safety and welfare of the community.
Alan Applegate stated that detention basin was on the property.
Dustin White stated with that isn't the real solutions for the City is to work with
Golfview neighborhood, Elks Golf Course and the folks at Waverly Place to device a
property water mitigation plan for that area so that it doesn't flood anymore.
Wouldn't that be a solution instead of stopping and holding up development.
Alan Applegate stated that the answer to that is up to the City's Leaders, I think that it
is an answer but the flooding had been a problem here for twenty years.
Dustin White stated that flooding will happen whether this development happens or
not, is this not correct.
Alan Applegate stated that at some point the City needs to do something and it appears
that the Drainage Board has indicated that this is where they plant their flag in the
ground and stated its time.
Dustin White stated that there is an expansion of Buttonwood, is this correct.
'f Alan Applegate stated that he does not know.
Dustin White stated that Buttonwood is expanding and that water from Buttonwood
would also contribute to this issue.
Alan Applegate stated that this was correct.
Dustin White stated that if we should stop this plat should we not also stop the
expansion of Buttonwood.
Alan Applegate stated the following:
• That it is up to this Plan Commission;
• The Drainage Board has suggested a moratorium that may be going to the City
Council; and
• I don't have a problem with that.
Dustin White asked in Mr. Applegate opinion if the water coming from the expansion
of Buttonwood threatens that health safety and welfare of his clients.
Alan Applegate stated that anything up stream is effecting the health, safety and
J welfare of my clients and Golfview area.
Page 9 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
Rita Fleming asked if the neighbors he represent are they required to have flood
insurance.
i
Alan Applegate stated that they are not required to have flood insurance.
Les Merkley stated the following:
• It was brought to my attention prior to the meeting that Commissioner
Zastawny spoke out against this matter at the Drainage Board meeting,
therefore I consulted with him and pursuant with state statute he has elected
not to participate in this hearing nor participate in the vote of this matter;
• My office and Nathan office as well, there is a letter from Keith Mull on behalf
of his client Ms. Prentice which is the developer for Buttonwood objecting to
this application; and
• Mr. Applegate and Mr. Kraft has offered exhibits to the Commission and for
the record I request that they be accepted and placed into the record.
Rita Fleming asked if there has been any actions by the Drainage Board since the July
5th meeting. My understanding is that it was denied at the July 5th meeting.
Les Merkley stated that is correct.
I, Rita Fleming asked if there has been any actions since then.
( Les Merkley stated not that he is aware of.
Alan Applegate stated that since Mr. Zastawny has been accuse has there been an
alternate voter for the Plan Commission.
Les Merkley stated that they were not aware of the accusal until moments before the
meeting and that is not a requirement of the Commission but an option of the statute to
have alternative member. We do not have a standing alternative.
Alan Applegate stated is this an e-mail from Ed to the group or what happened.
Les Merkley stated that it is his understanding that he spoke at the Drainage Board
oppose to this and pursuant to the state statute the Plan Commission member cannot
be bias or prejudice on an issue before them. It was my advice that he not participate
and accuse himself from the vote.
Alan Applegate stated that this seems a lot different from Clark County Auto when
there was a web site and web page by the City against the project.
Les Merkley stated that there is a difference, there was no Plan Commission Members
speaking out for or against Clark County Auto Auction prior to the application being
considered.
Page 10 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
Rita Fleming stated that she has been on the Plan Commission for many years and has
never been asked to approve something that was denied by the Drainage Board.
Dustin White stated that the Drainage Board is an advisory board.
John Kraft stated the following:
• Mr. Applegate mentioned the 1994 case cited my clients cases in 2001 and
2002 that could not have occurred;
• The Burrell case was decided in 1994, Klein and Aulbach cases was decided in
2001 and 2002;
• Dealing with real estate in this instance, it is a subdivision, it is a subdivision
plat;
• Under the terms of the Subdivision Control Ordinance it meets those
requirements;
• When we look at the general provisions it's not a matter that this real estate is
unsuitable, it's a matter that the surrounding properties by virtue of drainage
issues that are elsewhere and outside the control of this property;
• The issue is not what happens downstream;
• The issue is not specifically elsewhere;
• I do think that it is important that when we look at this property, this is
happening to this property as a result of this subdivision and as a result of your
j Subdivision Control Ordinance and your drainage ordinance;
i • The water is slowly coming off this property, this is improving the runoff to
the adjacent properties;
• The Drainage Board did not make a finding as Mr. Applegate tried to indicate,
they did not make a finding that this property is unsuitable;
• They chose without findings to make a decision;
• They are advisory in nature;
• While they are advisory in nature it is a portion of the final plat requirements
under your Subdivision Control Ordinance that the drainage board receives
that;
• It was only this matter in this instance, first time in thirty-four years that I see
the process to be reversed;
• That is not in your Subdivision Control Ordinance that in the preliminary plat
approval it then goes to the Drainage Board;
• We have been here since the filing of the application in February and again we
have met the requirements and the only rational reason or otherwise that the
plat has been reviewed in the stand point of drainage ordinances not
Subdivision Control Ordinance, every one of them has met the Subdivision
Control Ordinance;
• You can look back to the first staff report issued by Mr. Pruitt in March of
2017 that indicates that we met those requirements under the terms of the
L Subdivision Control Ordinance; and
1
Page 11 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• The person that design the drainage plan and the person who has the education,
expertise and the license to address this issue.
Jason Copperwarte stated the following:
• I did not present any of the drainage aspects earlier because that is something
that we do not typically do at this meeting;
• This site has two drainage areas;
• There is an drainage area which drains from Buttonwood;
• There is also a ditch that drains from the mobile home park;
• There are two detention basin proposed;
• One is the north basin and the south basin;
• Through the various meetings with the Drainage Board and through the
various ordinance that was discovered along the way, which have never been
enforced against any project in Jeffersonville;
• It was Mr. Reed instructions to me to increase the detention basin as much as
we could;
• Your drainage ordinance requires us to compare the pre-development rate for
the two, ten and one hundred year storm with the post-development and to
reduce the post-development rate to the pre-development levels;
• For the total project for a two year is a 20.9%reduction, ten year is a 43%
reduction and the one hundred year is a 54.6% reduction;
• Each basin is slightly different the north basin is 63.3%reduction in the one
hundred year storm;
• The assisted living project that was mentioned earlier I have not studied but
my understanding that is was about 100% reduction;
• FEMA can modified the maps at any time; and
• The drainage plans meet all the requirements of your ordinance.
Dustin White stated that this was presented to the Drainage Board and even though
you met all the requirements the Drainage Board decided to say no.
Jason Copperwaite stated that this was correct.
Mayor Mike Moore appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• Of the six Drainage Board meetings I attended four of them;
• 1 assure you that every question that should have been asked was asked and
more;
• 1 appreciated that the Commission tabled this application so that the Drainage
Board could review this application;
• 1 think that they spent $15,000 to have a analysis done;
• We asked individuals in our community, non-elected officials to set on the
Drainage Board and give us an unbiased opinion on what they think;
Page 12 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• They hired an expert, that expert came back with findings and that Board
overwhelmingly said no;
• You did the right thing to ask the Drainage Board to gather some information,
they did it and held six meetings;
• I never seen another issue take that many meetings and go through that much
detail;
• We have a problem out there;
• Dustin I appreciate your questions and you sit on the fiscal board of the City, if
you would like to be a part of the solution you have an opportunity;
• I love questions but I love solutions more;
• We only have so much green space, let's take advantage of the green space we
have and fix some of these problems; and
• I do respect all the questions that came before this Commission but I do ask
you to take the advice of an advisory board that you tasked with this job.
Louis Evans, 2505 St. Andrews Road appeared before the Commission and stated the
following:
• Several months ago you tabled this request until the Drainage Board had a
chance to review the application;
• After an exhausted study which include members walking this area and having
a hydrology study done, they voted against approving the drainage for that
property;
• The hydrology study showed that most of the channels and culverts are
inadequate and could not handle a 10 or 100 year storm;
• I'm not sure it could handle a one year storm;
• I think this is a safety issue, I have a ten year old boy living in my house and
the people next door have a ten year old boy, if you turn your head they would
be in that;
• That water running through this area at the height of the rain looks like the
Colorado River;
• There is a flooding problem in our area and it poses a threat to our property
and people who live there;
• We don't need more development until all these drainage issues are addressed;
• There is going to be a day when you have to consider widen Charlestown Pike
how much more run off are we going to get off that road;
• Are we going to develop this area and let this go and keep getting more runoff
up stream;
• I think that the Drainage Board got it right and you can get it right tonight; and
• The Mayor stated that we are not against growth but if we don't protect the
ones that are here now then the growth will stop and Jeffersonville will fail.
Christopher Morgan, 1716 Augusta Drive appeared before the Commission and stated
s the following:
Page 13 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• Lived at this address for about ten years and my home was built in 1988;
• I would feel a lot different tonight if I understood specifically what the
resolution would be for the golf course; and
• I fully expect that this property would be developed eventually but it seems
that the development would occur when we know what would fix the
downstream issues.
Karen Ellmers, 2304 St. Andrews Road appeared before the Commission and stated
the following:
• I been asked to speak for our neighbors, which many are here tonight;
• These people have come to all the Drainage Board meetings, all the meeting
we had on our own, we don't take this lightly;
• If we did not have a serious problem we would not have been to these
meetings we wouldn't have hired an attorney;
• In the time that I have lived in my home, the last ten years have been the
worse;
• In the past several years we have had serve flooding;
• This does affect our primary investment which is our homes;
• It affects the safety as Mr. Evans has mentioned;
• We are asking for responsible development;
• The Commission had sent this to the Drainage Board;
• They hired an impartial engineer firm and that's the Lochmueller Group, we
did not pick them, the developer did not pick them, the City hired them;
• There number one recommendation was to prohibited development until the
problems are fixed;
• You have that study in front of you;
• The Drainage Board may be an advisory board but they are an advisory board
for a reason;
• They have spent three and half months looking at this;
• They spent our tax payer dollars and your tax payer dollars looking at this;
• To completely ignore their findings I think would be very remiss;
• We have been told over and over at Drainage Board meetings that the
proposals that were presented met the requirements;
• We have proved that they weren't, we are kind of that point where hesitate to
believe that anything meets requirements;
• The Drainage Board has the right to deny a proposal;
• Everybody recognized there is a problem;
• If there was not a problem they wouldn't be looking at changing the Drainage
Ordinances, they wouldn't have gone through three and half months of torture
for us and the developer;
• From the very first meeting with the developer we voiced drainage concerns;
• Someone brought up the issue of the development in Buttonwood, we weren't
aware that it coming up before you;
• Now it's a done deal;
Page 14 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• We do know about this one and this is one that we can voice our opinions
about;
j • We are looking to you to protect our safety, health and welfare;
• Another issue was brought up about the assisted living facility, yes we did
support that;
• We did voice drainage concerns and they made modifications to assist that;
• But that was before the pictures of flooding that was presented to you tonight;
• It's not just this project, it's any project;
• It doesn't really matter if water comes from one development or another kind
of development, it is still water, it still floods, it still causes damages, it still
drowns people and it still destroys our property value; and
• We humbly ask you to protect us, protect our property, protect our welfare, to
follow the advice of the Drainage Board and do what Mr. Applegate clearly
show what you are capable to do by turning down this project and fix a
problem.
Carol Huff, 2603 St. Andrews Road appeared before the Commission and stated the
following:
• When I first moved in not too many years ago to my parents' home, they were
having some issues with the flooding;
• At that time they did not know what to do;
• The City did come in and enlarged that encasement under the driveway and it
did not help;
• The enlarge pipe was not enough;
• You are welcome to come to my backyard and time and we can look at what
happens behind my property;
• Bryan Wallace is amazing unbiased expert in storm water and he was a part of
that study; and
• I really felt confident that this would be honest and accurate.
Glynn Glad, 2307 St. Andrews Road appeared before the Commission and stated the
following:
• That April rain that we had, my neighbors have a two year old daughter,the
rain come down between my house and hers;
• The baby fell into our grass, if the grandfathered didn't catch her she was
going to drown right in my front yard;
• I beg you please as a father, grandfathered, a retire school administrator to
please take the responsibility that you took think of the welfare of human
people.
Duard Avery stated the following:
Page 15 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• One of things I like to point out that after the two rain events that everyone is
talking about;
• I lived in this area for a long time, we saw flooding that was un-precedent;
• An Engineer from Purdue told me that they were actually 500 year flood
events that are very rare;
• What we are seeing in our runoff is that we obviously have higher level
property runs to lower level property;
• The one thing we all have to remember each of our properties are pretty much
within the size and each property contributes to run off, impervious surfaces;
• House on lot A, house on lot B, one might be higher than the other or it may be
equal but each person's property has a contributory effect on the run off.
Les Merkley stated the following:
• When it comes to this bodies duty, when it comes to consideration of plat
approval, application for preliminary plat we look to the Subdivision Control
Ordinance;
• The Subdivision Control Ordinance is the controlling factor;
• The issue before this Commission is whether or not the proposed plat complies
with the set terms in our Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• Drainage is an issue to be considered in the Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• It is mentioned 27 times in the Subdivision Control Ordinance;
• The issue before the Commission is whether or not the concerns or issues
regarding drainage have been satisfied;
• Section 155.12 of the Subdivision Control Ordinance clearly says that drainage
is an issue that is to be considered;
• It also establishes that any other issue as to health and safety of the residence
and again drainage is one of the factors to be considered;
• It is true that the Drainage Board in the City of Jeffersonville is an advisory
board, however again back to our Subdivision Control Ordinance, there is an
entire section starting at Section 155.46 that discusses storm drainage;
• It does not mentioned the Drainage Board it does mentioned that there should
be a plan for drainage that is approved by the City Engineer;
• The procedure in the City of Jeffersonville is that drainage matters first go to
the Drainage Board to be considered before the City Engineer signed off on
any plans for drainage;
• My understanding that neither the Drainage Board or the City Engineer has
signed off on any drainage plan for this project;
• The questions was asked earlier to Mr. Copperwaite rather or not their
drainage plan satisfy the drainage ordinance and his response was yes;
• I would assume he would say yes because his client is sitting right next to him;
• I'm sure we could bring in an engineer on the side to say the same thing;
• What I would point the Commission to is the study that was performed by the
Lochmueller Group when considering whether or not to approve this plat;
Page 16 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• I do believe that the Burrell case, Burrell vs Lake County is on point, it's good
j law in fact it was cited in June of 2007 in another case;
• That case doesn't say you are to reject this without approval and it doesn't say
you are to approve this plat;
• What that case says is that its within your desecration whether or not to
approve this plat and that you may consider drainage;
• Because again drainage is an issue to be considered under our Subdivision
Control Ordinance:
• The two cases that have been offered by Mr. Kraft, they are good law but those
cases interrupted the Floyd County Subdivision Control Ordinance, we are not
in Floyd County;
• It is completely within your desecration whether or not this plat complies with
the terms of our Subdivision Control Ordinance specifically whether or not it
has dealt with the drainage issue and whether or not that relates to the health
safety and welfare of the community;
• To say that this is strictly ministerial and that you have to approve this just
because a application has been made when the Subdivision Control Ordinance
designates drainage factor to be considered;
• The Drainage Board has not approved the drainage plan after six meetings and
an independent report from the Lochmueller Group, the City Engineer has not
signed off on the drainage plans, which is required under our Subdivision
Control Ordinance; and
• The standards state that the approval of the plat is just ministerial does not
comply with the standards set forth of the Burrell case.
Lisa Gill stated the following:
• I have listen to both sides but it comes down to this, The Subdivision Control
Ordinance and Mr. Merkley you are our attorney and I just heard everything
that you said I have rights as a Plan Commission, correct under 155.12 section
in this ordinance, correct.
Les Merkley stated that was correct.
Lisa Gill stated the following:
• That the Plan Commission hereby reserve the right to, so I do have the rights
to stand on refusing to change the natural water shed, water course, and ravines
etc.,passed in 5/20/89 is that correct.
Les Merkley stated that was correct.
Lisa Gill stated the following:
V
• We have already established that there was a water shed study done;
Page 17 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• The water shed study was done by an expert and it was backed up by an
advisory board but I get a little defensive of our Drainage Board;
• I sat on the Drainage Board for a couple of years and I attend the Drainage
i Board Meetings so in my opinion going with the water shed study and
standing on the refusal changing the water shed;
• We have the right to deny this application because the land is unsuitable for
use due to flooding and improper drainage; and
• So if I stand on that, it is my right, correct.
Les Merkley stated that was correct if you are basing your decision on the Subdivision
Control Ordinance.
Duard Avery stated the following:
• It is nice to see everyone here considering this;
• The reason I asked Mr. Applegate about these areas because they are miniature
drainage areas;
• One thing to considered and it is nothing someone should be mad about, is
each person's developed property impacts drainage;
• All of your properties do have a contributory affect upon someone drainage;
• It's not that a parcel exist in a vacuum or that a parcel has a 100%contributory
affect;
• Parcels that were fortunate to be there earlier they still have the same
responsibility as the newer parcels that are added; and
• Each parcel does have a contributory effect on drainage.
Dustin White stated the following:
• I drove this area after our last meeting as well as Waverly Road;
• This is outside my district and I didn't realize we have people living in flood
plains;
• But I do sit on the council that makes decisions for the entire City;
• What I find appalling is that we spent three months on this and we don't have a
plan to solve your problems;
• We spent $15,000 and we still don't have a plan to solve your problems;
• I am more than ready and enthusiastic to find the necessary funds to pay for
plans and design that needs to work with the golf course, work with the
neighborhood, to work with the folks across Hamburg Pike, where we can
devise a plan to solve your flooding problems;
• The focus should be on not stopping the development, the focus should have
been on solving your problems;
• We have a project application that is a preliminary plat that reduces the amount
of runoff by 53%as oppose by doing nothing and you have the same situation
that you always had;
Page 18 of 27
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• To me if you have a project that reduces some of your potential flooding issues
that makes sense to do;
• I fully support this project;
• I hope that whoever is developing the Buttonwood Subdivision is going to re-
evaluate their drainage plans;
• I believe that the people on Waverly should receive a visit by the City
Engineer so that they can start devising a plan to solve their drainage
problems;
• Then I believe that the City Council should and the Drainage Board should pay
for solving your problems;
• This is unacceptable and I feel ashamed that I'm on City Council for a City
where you have to experience those things;
• 1 will do my part to make sure your problems are solved at the same time I'm
going to support the development were it reduces the amount of run off you
receive; and
• 1 appreciate the Mayor speaking and will support the funding to resolve this
issue.
Kathy Bupp stated the following:
• I would think that if I was going to develop a property for a subdivision, before
I bought the property I would take it before the Drainage Board;
• We are getting a lot of information and it is out of order, the Drainage Board
i should be able to put a stamp of approval on an area that is intended to be
developed it can receive approval for anything to be built on it;
• If I bought this piece of property and met all the codes I would probably be
very upset, however we are in a position here to decide whether or not this is
responsible development;
• My questions comes down to is this responsible development, I don't see any
way this can be considered responsible development but this still does not help
your drainage problem; and
• There was a neighborhood that we approved down the street from this one and
it had 7 lots and we had a lot of conversation about the drainage there, what
happen there.
Lisa Gill stated that only one house was built and I don't know if there are plans for
other houses.
Kathy Bupp asked why that was stopped.
Lisa Gill stated that it was not stopped they just built the one house on it.
Nathan Pruitt stated that they have only applied for a building permit for one home
and I don't believe that it has went through final plat.
Jeff Roach, 2306 Augusta Drive appeared before the Commission and stated the
Page 19 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
following:
• They have only built one house right now but the reduce it where there is only
going to be six house built;
• The City came and put a pipe under the road that drains into the golf course;
• There is retention basin at the bottom of the property and another pipe going
under the road to the golf course.
Dustin White stated for the purpose of when you say it's not responsible development
what factors of the development do you find not responsible.
Kathy Bupp stated the following:
• Drainage,the drainage for every new development in that area; and
• That is the only reason I think it's not responsible
Rita Fleming stated the following:
• I think that the math is a little bit fuzzy when we talk about 50%reduction in
water; and
• If you look at the existing field the detention basin would reduce what is there
now by 50%but once you add impervious surfaces you are not at 50%now.
Jason Copperwaite stated the following:
• The detention basins are there to hold additional water that would otherwise
come from the site;
• The design reduces 50%more than otherwise required by the ordinance;
• Because of impervious surface there is more volume of runoff but the amount
that we let out of the detention basin is decrease by 50%;
• It's the peak runoff that causes downstream structures to be overwhelmed;
• When we design any drainage structure we look at the peak flow determines
the size of the facility;
• What the study said is that there are inadequate facilities downstream that are
existing and never addressed when any of the other developments was
developed without detention basins; and
• We are reducing that rate less than what runs off now once the development is
in place with the detention basins.
Kathy Bupp asked why did the Drainage Board voted against this application if the
runoff will be reduced by 50%.
Jason Copperwaite stated that he would not answer that in a public meeting but based
on their plans we are going above and beyond what the ordinance requires. It is my
opinion and it was concurred by the City Engineer as well but the Board did not
approve the plans.
Page 20 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
Kathy Bupp asked if you believe there was some bias.
Lisa Gill stated wait.
I
Dustin White stated that she has the right to ask a question.
Kathy Bupp stated that she does.
Lisa Gill stated it's because the question is going your way.
Dustin White stated that it's not going anybody way, she is a commissioner.
Kathy Bupp stated that she just wanted to know that a study that would be interesting
to a developer and as an engineer you would have some opinion about it.
Les Merkley asked if the drainage plan was approved by the City Engineer or
Drainage Board.
Jason Copperwaite stated that the City Engineer cannot approve a drainage plan but
the Drainage Board did not approve the plans.
Dustin White asked if they approved the Preliminary Plat before the Drainage Board
approves the plan, there is still enough time for the Drainage Board to approve before
it goes to Final Plat.
Jason Copperwaite stated that is correct.
Lisa Gill stated the following:
• The Drainage Board took this very seriously;
• They did not approve this drainage and the basically put the flag in the sand;
• They stated that there is a problem;
• The Drainage Board is asking for a moratorium for any new development
because there are severe issues in this water shed; and
• As far as responsible development and as far as having a right as a
commissioner, these twelve lots, when you say reduces the amount but the
people are still flooding.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Rita Fleming and seconded by Lisa Gill to
deny the preliminary plat. Motion passed on a vote of 4-1. A roll call vote was
requested:
Duard Avery— Abstained
Kathy Bupp - Yes
Rita Fleming - Yes
Lisa Gill - Yes
Page 21 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
Dustin White - No
Mike McCutcheon - Yes
I
2) PC-17-40, PC-17-47 & PC-17-48
The Commission elected to hear all three application simultaneously
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Camphire
Properties, LLC requesting a rezoning for approximately .14 acres of property located
at 206 Fairview Avenue. The current zoning is R3 (Old City Residential), and the
proposed zoning is NI (Neighborhood Industrial). The applicants own contiguous real
estate in the area, operating Munich Welding at that location. The parcel to be
rezoned is for expansion of the existing business (as parking or an extension of the
building).
John Kraft appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• He has the next three items on the agenda for the same applicant;
• This is advisory in nature by taking the request and making a recommendation
to City Council;
• Camphire Properties is the owner of the real estate that is Munich Welding;
• Munich Welding has been in business for over forty-five years;
• Most recently Camphire has acquired properties located at 210, 206 and 212
Fairview Avenue;
• It is the desire of Camphire to expand its zoning request include those three
parcels;
• The reason to re-zoned these parcels is to bring those parcels in the business;
• There will be a request file with the City Council a petition to vacate a portion
of Fairview Avenue that runs in front of 210 and 206;
• The portion that runs in front of 212 Fairview is an easement;
• The property surrounding this with the exception of the current residential
property are continues with the property owned by Camphire; and
• It has not been decided if it will be totally parking or an expansion of the
building.
Joe Papalia appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• We are looking to grow our business and we are out of space;
• We do large tanks, we do steel fabrication;
• We have two other businesses on the property, one is Nicholson Printing and
the other is DTI Technologies;
• Nicholson Printing has a long-term lease;
r
• DTI is a technology business and we are going to grow that business 100% this
year;
Page 22 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• It has been a good year; and
• We need more space and looking forward to staying in the area.
Nathan Pruitt stated the following:
• The future land use plan has designated everything to the west side as
commercial;
• This is a neighborhood in transition; and
• It is adjacent to being compliant with the future land use map.
Lisa Gill asked if the dead in street will remain.
John Kraft stated that it would.
Joseph Mattingly, 204 Fairview Avenue appeared before the Commission and stated
the following:
• One of the reason we moved there was because of the dead in street;
• Just as the previous application there is flooding in this area;
• Their employees run the stop sign all the time I had to speak with one of the
managers there about this; and
• This is a residential neighborhood.
Sharon Poindexter, Realtor for the transaction of the home on Fairview appeared
before the Commission and stated the following:
• Had the property for several months and because of the nature of the dead end
street and everything around had a hard time getting people to look at it;
• There is only one house in this block everything else is vacant; and
• This area is too industrial for Mr. Bennett to sell his house as residential and
doesn't have a lot of value as residential.
Joseph Mattingly stated the following:
• Mr. Bennett has been renting the house for some time; and
• To say there is no value to the homes is wrong.
James Bennett, 201 Fairview Avenue appeared before the Commission and stated the
following:
• I have no problem with Munich Welding expanding their business.
Lill, John Kraft stated the following:
Page 23 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• As this use has expanded part of what you see is that there has been a number
of vacations done over the time period that Munich has been in business;
• It is a growing business and a business that would like to stay in Jeffersonville;
• It was brought to our attention when we applied for 206 Fairview that 210 and
212 Fairview Avenue was also zoned residential; and
• This is a land use and issue rather it's a parking lot or building still has to
come to you for development plan approval.
Therefore,upon a motion made by Mike McCutcheon and seconded by Duard Avery
to make a favorable recommendation to City Council to rezone property located at 206
Fairview Avenue from R3 (Old City Residential) to NI(Neighborhood Industrial) as
presented. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
• New Business
3) PC-17-47
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Camphire
Properties, LLC requesting a rezoning for approximately .17 acres of property located
at 210 Fairview Avenue. The current zoning is R3 (Old City Residential), and the
proposed zoning is NI (Neighborhood Industrial). The applicants own contiguous
real estate in the area, operating Munich Welding at that location. The parcel to be
rezoned is for expansion of the existing business (as parking or an extension of the
building).
Therefore, upon a motion made by Mike McCutcheon and seconded by Kathy Bupp
to make a favorable recommendation to City Council to rezone property located at 210
Fairview Avenue from R3 (Old City Residential)to NI (Neighborhood Industrial) as
presented. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
4) PC-17-48
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Camphire
Properties, LLC requesting a rezoning for approximately .22 acres of property located
at 212 Fairview Avenue. The current zoning is C2 (Medium to Large Scale General
Commercial),and the proposed zoning is N1 (Neighborhood Industrial). The applicants
own contiguous real estate in the area, operating Munich Welding at that location. The
parcel to be rezoned is for expansion of the existing business(as parking or an extension
of the building).
Therefore, upon a motion made by Mike McCutcheon and seconded by Ed Zastawny
to send a favorable recommendation to City Council to rezone property located at 212
Fairview Avenue from C2 (Medium to Large Scale General Commercial)to NI
(Neighborhood Industrial) as presented. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
5) PC-17-49
Page 24 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
i
i The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Jayr Robinson
(for Voss Clark)requesting development plan approval for property at 701 Loop Road.
The proposed development is an approximately 9,000 square foot expansion of the
existing business
Joe Rhodea appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• Looking to adding an addition just under 10,000 square feet;
• Started construction in 1992 and started operation in 1993;
• At that point and time we had 50,000 square foot under roof,
• Today we have 550,000 square feet under roof,
• We need a little bit more for storage of steel;
• We started with about twenty employees in 1993 and we have 141 employees
right now;
• We have met the requirements for shrubbery and trees; and
• We have lots of landscaping.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Ed Zastawny and seconded by Kathy Bupp to
approve the development plan as presented. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
6) PC-17-50
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Brandon
Kramer requesting to vacate a setback that was platted in the Silver Creek Industrial
Park. The platted setback was a 60 foot setback abutting Hamburg Pike. The applicant
is requesting to vacate this setback, and adhere to the city standard of a 35 foot front
setback for an arterial in an I1 district.
Nathan Pruitt stated the following:
• When the industrial park was platted they included some setback requirements
within that plat;
• They go above and beyond what is currently required; and
• What they are asking for is that setback to be vacated down to the City's
standard.
Greg Kramer appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• My wife and I started this business that has been in operation for 23 years; and
• Happy to be part of this community.
Gary Brinkworth appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
1
i
• Recently done a similar site in New Albany;
• They had their own building size and layout that they wanted to do;
Page 25 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• 60' off of Hamburg Pike but reduce to 35';
• A water line went through the site; and
• If they have to go with 60' they would lose a row of units.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Rita Fleming and seconded by Kathy Bupp to
approve the vacate the 60 foot setback as platted to 35 foot front setback for an arterial
road. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
7) PC-17-51
The next item to come before the Commission is an application filed by Mark Kidwell
requesting waivers for property located at 1220 Missouri Avenue. The waiver is being
request from the signage regulations. The applicant is wanting to advertise and increase
pubic awareness for the hospital's new NICU unit. The proposed temporary sign is 24
x 44 (1,056 sq. ft.) and the applicant is proposes to hang the banner for 60 days. The
current standards allow for temporary signs to be 32 sq. ft. and be displayed for 30 days.
Mark Kidwell appeared before the Commission and stated the following:
• Waiver to install banner;
• Banner to be temporary for 60 days;
• Design is a heavy outdoor mesh;
• The banner will be on the fagade of the building and it lets light pass through;
and
• Will take down after 60 days.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Lisa Gill and seconded by Rita Fleming to approve
the two waivers as requested. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
8) ZO-17-06
The next item to come before the Commission is an proposed changes to the
Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance. The Planning & Zoning Department has
recommended the following amendment to the City of Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance.
The update includes:
1. To amend the Permitted/Special Exception Uses for the DC (Downtown
Commercial) Zoning District in Article 4; and
2. To amend the Gas Station Standards in Article 7.
Nathan Pruitt stated the following:
• We had some attorneys try to make a case and poke holes in a newly adopted
ordinances that resulted in Gas Station regulations;
• They wanted to make a point to say that clusters mean multiple;
• One does not mean a cluster;
Page 26 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
• We have tighten that language to include that a cluster of gas stations may
include only one (1) single station;
• We have made an update to the diagrams;
• The intent of the original ordinance was to say that a cluster is defined as soon
as one gas station is permitted;
• The intent of the ordinance was to stop three or four gas stations at an
intersection;
• What this would permit is up to two gas stations per intersections with the
additional requirements of distance;
• When we look at our downtown we have a lot of new businesses coming in;
• We went through and tighten up and added some uses;
• We added things like coffee shop, grocery store; and
• Its making a vibrant downtown and allowing uses that we want in downtown.
Therefore, upon a motion made by Mike McCutcheon and seconded by Ed Zastawny to
send a favorable recommendation to City Council to adopt the changes in ZO-17-06 as
presented. Motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
• Reports from Officers, Committees and Staff
Nathan Pruitt stated the following:
• A new subdivision is being proposed;
• It's called Ellingsworth Commons that includes 512 lots on 178 acres in the Port
Road and Middle Road area; and
• Will be having public meetings on August 16th at the Clark County
Administration Office at 7:00 p.m.
Lisa Gill stated the following:
• We are doing great things in the Downtown with the overlays;
• A lot of development out in the sixth district; and
• Don't forget the donut hole in the middle.
• Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Plan Commission the meeting was
adjourned at 8:46 p.m.
a ,,,&
Dustin White, Chairperson
Submitted by
Page 27 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017
i
I
nd ills, Secre ry
Page 28 of 28
Jeffersonville Plan Commission Meeting—July 25, 2017