Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-OR-142015-0R- / 4 STATE OF INDIANA PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO JEFFERSONVILLE COMMON COUNCIL TO AMEND ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 2015 -OR -8 PORTIONS OF THE JEFFERSONVILL ZONING ORDINANCE 2000-0R-61 WHEREAS, the Jeffersonville Plan Commission has reviewed proposed changes to the- Jeffersonville "Lorzing Ordinance as it pertains to amending the Lorring Ordinance by revising the District Intent and Miscellaneous Standards c>f the Utica pike Overlay District (1_JP-OL) as recommended by the plan Commission in the staff report (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director has recommended such changes; and W HEREAS, the changes arc more consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the. Plan Coinrrrission has held a public hearing on 1'ebruary 24, 2015 in accordance with LC. 36-7-4-604; and W HEREAS, notice was properly given to the public prior to the public hearing being held; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission by a majority vote of its entire membership believes that the proposed changes should be made and that the proposed changes are in the interests of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, morals, and general welfare; N OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED by the ,Jeffersonville plan Commission m the Common Council of the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana, that the amcnclrnents and changes be. amending the 'L.onirng C>relinance by revising the District Intent and Miscellaneous Standards of the Utica Pike C>verlay District (1.11'-C>1,) made to the_ Jeffersonville :"Toning C>rdirrariee 2000-C>12-61 as 17 CC' by the plan Commission in the staff report (a copy of which is attached as 1?xhibit "A"). 1 This recommendation is being made upon a majority vote of its entire membership of the Jeffersonville Plan Commission by vote taken at its regularly scheduled meeting on the 24th day of February, 2015. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its adoption. SO ORDAINED this day of March, 2015. COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA By: ATTEST: Igh/En. Vicki Conlin Clerk, City of Jeffersonville Lisa Gill President Presented by me as Clerk to the Mayor of said City of Jeffersonville this 3 day of March, 2015. Vicki Conlin Cler , City of Jeffersonville This Ordinance approved and signed by me thi day of ch, 2015. Mike oore, Mayor 2 STATE OF INDIANA BEFORE THE JEFFERSONVILLE PLAN COMMISSION IN RE THE APPLICATION OF Jeffersonville Department of Planning & Zoning TO AMEND THE JEFFERSONVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE CERTIFICATION OF FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE Whereas, the Jeffersonville Department of Planning & Zoning filed a petition before the Jeffersonville Plan Commission to amend the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance (2000 -OR -61) by revising the District Intent and Miscellaneous Standards of the Utica Pike Overlay District (UP -OL) as recommended in the staff report (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A"); and, Whereas, after proper notice by publication, the Jeffersonville Plan Commission held a public hearing on the petition on February 24, 2015; and, Whereas, at the conclusion of the hearing the Jeffersonville Plan Commission voted by a majority vote of its entire membership to favorably recommend the proposed amendment to the Jeffersonville Common Council. IT IS THEREFORE CERTIFIED that on February 24, 2015, the Jeffersonville Plan Commission favorably recommends that the Jeffersonville Common Council enact by ordinance the proposed Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance Amendment as requested in the petition of Jeffersonville Department of Planning & Zoning. So certified this 24th day of February, 2015. 1°)k,f-ati.,-- Brent Roberts Chairman STAFF REPORT Department of Planning & Zoning — Plan Commission Petitioner: Request: Hearing Date: City of Jeffersonville, Planning & Zoning Department Amend the Utica Pike Overlay District Intent & Miscellaneous Standards (Article 5.2) February 24, 2015 Request The Planning & Zoning Department is proposing an amendment to the Utica Pike Overlay District in Article 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance that will clarify the standards and intent of the district. This overlay district was amended in 2005, but the text in the ordinance that was approved by the City Council does not match the text in the revised Zoning Ordinance. Timeline January 2001: The Utica Pike Overlay District (UP -OL) was defined by the Zoning Ordinance that was adopted in December 2000 and took effect in January 2001. The standards are shown on page 4. February 2005: The Plan Commission considered amendments to the UP - OL at a meeting held on February 22, 2005. March 2005: The City Council approved 2005 -OR -16 (page 7) at a meeting held on March 21, 2005. This ordinance included the recommendations of the Planning Director and those of the remonstrators (a group of residents along Utica Pike that were represented by David Lewis). At some time after the Council approved the amendment the Zoning Ordinance document was updated. The language in the current ordinance (page 5) does not match the recommendations of the Planning Director or the remonstrators. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment The Intent of the UP -OL district has not changed since 2001, but in the ordinance that was passed in 2005 an amendment was proposed by the remonstrators and the planning director. The current intent reads as follows: The Utica Pike Overlay District (UP -OL) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural and historic character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. The general intent is to promote appropriate and sensitive designs that contribute to the special characteristics of Utica Pike. The Plan Commission should strive to encourage appropriate landscaping, setbacks and Page 1 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District other characteristics that contribute to an enhanced quality of life and that are in the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The revisions to the miscellaneous standards that are proposed by the Planning & Zoning Department are compared with the existing standards in the following table. Standard Title Current Standard Proposed Standard District Standards All district standards as per the Base Zone District. Lots with a Base Zone District of R1 and lots that do not adjoin the Ohio River are subject to the standards of the R1 District except as follows: All district standards as per the Base Zone District except for the following standards. The most restrictive standard shall control. Lots in a planned development district should not be included when a standard refers to an average value of adjacent lots. Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet or the average of adjacent lots facing Utica Pike 10,000 square feet or the average of adjacent lots facing Utica Pike, whichever is greater. Minimum Lot Area For Planned Developments 10 acres 10 acres Minimum Lot Width 70 feet or the average of the adjacent lots 70 feet or the average of the adjacent Tots facing Utica Pike, whichever is greater. Minimum Lot Frontage The average of the adjacent lots The average of adjacent lots facing Utica Pike. Minimum Side Setback 10% of the lot width per side for primary and accessory structures or the average of adjacent lots 10% of the lot width per side for primary and accessory structures or the average of adjacent lots facing Utica Pike, whichever is greater. Minimum Front Setback 75 feet or the average of the adjacent lots 75 feet or the average of the adjacent lots facing Utica Pike, whichever is greater Page 2 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Minimum Rear Setback 20 feet or the average of 20 feet or the average of the adjacent lots for the adjacent lots facing primary structures Utica Pike for primary structures, whichever is 5 feet or the average of the adjacent lots for greater. accessory structures 5 feet or the average of the adjacent Tots facing Utica Pike for accessory structures, whichever is greater. Maximum Lot Coverage 35% 35% Minimum Main Floor None - the standard of 1,500 square feet or the Area the base zone applies. average of the adjacent lots facing Utica Pike, whichever is greater. Page 3 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District UPOL District - Zoning Ordinance in 2000 "UP -OL" District 5.2 District Intent Permitted Uses, and Miscellaneous Standards t.�.� The Uti 'ce Overlay D:,rot' - OL) harden created to frorftote and preserve the'scenic. `natcral and historic character of theVialPike eorri or U ca Pike`is un re irk marc ' s but ort s ifical1y it is_part of the Ohio River So rc Route. istrjc# u The generelintent is to promote appropr1e ranti seif`siive,esi that oii rt ute'to a weal' chat*acteristics of Ufica Pike fi The PVT Commission should . rive to,trcourage appropn fancep - inp setbacks and othjr chs clefts tit% that cb Thbute to ri e f�sin quality 4fl fe and that arr th s�'pir and,intent of the -comer+ Phan. Page 4 of 20 Miscellaneous tamdards Utica Pike Overlay District Bounda_r es •The boundaries for the Utica Pike Overlay District a e shown on the Official Zoning Map. The Utica Pike Overlay District is marked with a hatch pattern' as designated on the OfifclarZoriing `iii'lapslegend. Process..." •All proptssed developmepts in this District: require _development plan review as de 1nedin Aiticle Nine ofi this Ordiname_; ' " Dlstrp.t;Standards •A1lttisfr t stands r per1he $ase Zone District e7 c±ept as follows: Minimum Front Yard Setback • 75 feet. ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Current UP -OL Standards "UP -OL" District 5.2 District Intent Permitted Uses, District Intent The Utica Pk* Overlay District (UP -OL) has been crested to promote and pre- serve the scenic, natural and historic character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. The general intent is to promote ap- propriate and sensitive designs that contribute to the special characteristics of Utica Pke. The Plan Commission should strive to encourage appropriate labspirp, setbacks and other characteristics that contribute t0 an enhanced gWMIY of Mie and that ars In the spirit and Intent 0f the Comprehentpve Plan. and Miscellaneous Standards Permitted Uses All uses permitted in the Base Zone District. Special Exceptions AM uses permitted as special excep- tions in the Base Zone District. Miscellaneous Standards Utica Pike Overlay District Boundaries • The boundaries for the Utica Pike Over- lay District are shown on the Official Zoning Map. The Ube& Pike Overlay District is nuked with a hatch pattem as designated on the Official Zoning Map's kgend. Process • AM proposed developments in this Dis- trict require development plan review as defined in Article Nine of this Ordinance. District Standards AN district standards as per the Base Zone District. Lots with a Bae Zone District of R1 and lots that do not adjoin the Ohio River ere subject to the standards of the R1 District except as *Mows: Minimum Lot Area • 10,000 square feet or the average of the adjacent lots faring Utica Pile Minimum tot Area fa Planned Unit Dowilepments •10 saes Minimum Lot Width • 70 fest or the average of the adjacent lots Minimum lot frontage •The average of the adjacent lots Minimum Side Yard l stack • 10% of the lot width par side for primary and accessory structures or the aver- age of the adjacent lots Minimum front Yard Setback • 75 fast or the average of the adjacent lots Miinkmum Roar Yard Setback • 20 feet or the average of the adjacent lots for primary structures • 5 feet or the average of the adjacent lots for accessory structures Maximum tot Coverage .35% Article Five: Aesthetic Review Overlay District Page 5 of 20 5-3 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Staff Report from 2005 Plan Commission Meeting STAFF REPORT Department of Planning and Development City of Jeffersonville Robert L. Waiz, Jr. Mayor Chester Hicks Director To: Plan Commission From: Chester Hicks, Director of Planning and Development Date: 02/14105 RE: PC -05-09 - Petition to amend Zoning Code for the Utica Pike Overlay District Description This petition proposes to add the definition of Overlay Districts to Article 14 of the Zoning Code. It also proposes to add setback, lot area and width, lot frontage, lot coverage, and minimum main floor area standards for the Utica Pike Overlay District. In addition, the petition proposes to add language to the District Intent portion of Section 5.2 of Article Five of the Zoning Code. Miscellaneous Standards - Currently Utica Pike Overlay District Boundaries •The boundaries for the Utica Pike Overlay District are shown on the Official Zoning Map. The Utica Pike Overlay District is marked with a hatch pattern as designated on the Official Zoning Map's legend. Process •AII proposed developments in this District require development plan review as defined in Article Nine of this Ordinance. Miscellaneous Standards Current Proposed Minimum Lot Area The standards as per Base Zone. 10,000 sq. ft. for R1 The greater 10,000 sq. ft. or of the avg. lot area on either side of neighboring lots facing Utica Pike Minimum Lot Width The standards as per Base Zone. 70 feet for R1 The greater of 70 ft. or avg. of lot widths on either side of neighboring lots facing Utica Page 6 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District District Intent - Current The Utica Pike Overlay District (UPOL) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural and historic character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. The general intent is to promote appropriate and sensitive designs that contribute to the special characteristics of Utica Pike. Page 7 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Pike Minimum Lot Frontage The standards as per Base Zone. 50 feet for R1 The avg. of lot frontage on either side of neighboring lots facing Utica Pike Maximum Lot Depth The standards as per Base Zone. 23 times the Lot Width for R1 None Minimum Front Setback 75 feet The greater of 75 ft. or avg. of setbacks on either side of neighboring lots facing Utica Pike Minimum Rear Setback The standards as per Base Zone. 20 feet — Primary 5 feet — Accessory in R1 The greater of 20 ft. or avg of neighboring lots for Primary The greater of 5 ft. or avg of neighboring lots for Accessory Minimum Side Setbacks (each side) The standards as per Base Zone. 10% of Lot Width in R1 The greater of 10% of Lot Width or the avg. of setbacks on either side of neighboring lots for Primary & Accessory Structures Maximum Lot Coverage The standards as per Base Zone. 35% of Lot Area in R1 35% of Lot Area Maximum Height of Structure The standards as per Base Zone. 35 feet — Primary 18 feet — Accessory in R1 None Minimum Main Floor Area The standards as per Base Zone. 1500 sq ft — One Story 1100 sq ft - Main Floor if total finished area is 1500 sgftinR1 The standards as per Base Zone. 3,000 sq ft — One Story 2,000 sq ft - Main Floor if total finished area is 3,000 sq ft None Off -Street Parking District Intent - Current The Utica Pike Overlay District (UPOL) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural and historic character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. The general intent is to promote appropriate and sensitive designs that contribute to the special characteristics of Utica Pike. Page 7 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District The Plan Commission should strive to encourage appropriate landscaping, setbacks and other characteristics that contribute to an enhanced quality of life and that are in the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. District Intent — Proposed The Utica Pike Overlay District (UPOL) has been created to conserve the special features of the District such that the rural residential character and Ohio River views and overlooks within the District should be preserved. Dense housing developments such as patio homes, condominiums, apartments, and high rise buildings shall not be permitted in the UPOL. Variances and special exceptions shall not be granted to allow such uses in the UPOL. Planned unit developments shall not be approved in the UPOL if same would circumvent the provisions and prohibitions of the overlay district. Considerations In accordance with the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance, the following should be considered when reviewing a rezoning application: 1. The Comprehensive Plan; 2. Current conditions and character of structures and uses in each district; 3. The most desirable use for which the land in each district is adapted; 4. The conservation of area values throughout the jurisdiction; and 5. Responsible development and growth. u The Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identifies the Utica Pike (Market Street) corridor as a major transportation thoroughfare; ❑ The Comprehensive Plan mentioned the need for signature entrances near the city boundaries for other thoroughfares including Utica Pike; u There are several undeveloped tracts within the UPOL that are zoned M1; u There are several homes within the UPOL that would not meet the minimum floor area standards that petitioners propose; u Any such home destroyed as a result of fire or natural hazard would have to meet the new floor area standards. according to the proposal; and u There are other non-residential zones that are located within the UPOL ❑ Variances are allowed by state law. Recommendation Alternative Proposal: District Standards Include language that says: The following District Standards apply to lots with a Base Zone of R1 and lots that do not adjoin the Ohio River Page 8 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Minimum Main Floor Area should reflect the standards of the Base Zone District Because different nonresidential, as well as residential zones are within the UPOL (See attached Chart), the Maximum Lot Coverage should simply reflect the standards within the base zone. Emphasize requirements regarding buffer yard and landscape requirements as stated in Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. District Intent The Utica Pike Overlay District (UPOL) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. Variances and special exceptions shall not be granted to allow Planned unit developments on tracts totaling fewer than 10 acres. Higher density residential developments should consider the open space and scenic view requirements as stated in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4 Page 9 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Minutes from Plan Commission Meeting in 2005 l'he next item of business to come before the Commission was an application filed by Wilson and Doris Prentice requesting approval of the Secondary Plat of Buttonwood Subdivision, Section 4. The proposed eighteen -lot residential development is situated on 10.378 acres. The property is zoned RI: Low Density Residential. Keith Mull, Attorney, 131 E. Court Avenue, and David Blankcnbckcr, 422 Meigs Avenue appeared before the Commission on behalf of Wilson and Doris Prentice. Mr. Mull explained that they are requesting approval of the Secondary Plat of Buttonwood Subdivision, Section 4, 8.9, and 10. Ile told the Commission that the 90 -lot residential development is located on Charlestown Pike, itnmediately north of Buttonwood Subdivision, Unit 3 and northwest of Buttonwood Subdivision, Units 6 and 7. Mr. Mull explained that this plan is a result of the labor of cooperation between the developer and neighbors of the project. Mr. Mull explained that they have agreed to the same subdivision restrictions as the other units in Buttonwood Subdivision. Mrs. Ellingsworth commented that she continues to experience drainage problems and asked about the drainage plans for Section 4 of Buttonwood Subdivision. Mr. Blankenbeker explained to the Commission that they are changing the contour of the land so that the water would run into the detention basins. tie told the Commission that this would improve the drainage for the entire project. No letters or phone calls were received in opposition to the application. Thereafter, on a motion of Mr. Fetz and a second by Mr. Dicrking, the Commission voted to approve the Secondary Plat of Buttonwood Subdivision, Section 4. The next item of business to come before the Commission was a request to consider certain amendments to the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance whereby provisions of thcIierPihr liliterkyal.lisuitmt be revised. David Lewis, Attorney at Law, 425 Watt Street, appeared before the Commission and explained that the Remonstrator's arc requesting certain changes be made to the Zoning Ordinance that would better protect the Utica -Pike Overlay )istriet4rom multi -family' developments. He told the Commission that they request that a definition of "Overlay District" he added to Article 14 of the "Zoning Ordinance that states: .-1 special resomre or derr/opment arra whidi i.. snpenmpored upon and placed orr the tiouing merpr,general young di.rinit designations widen Mal area designated as an overlay distnrl. The propose Ore arrr/ay district is to roruenr natural resources or rra/itie drrrlopmenl ob/ertins without unduly disturbing the experlatiau ,rralyd iq the honing o dinance and general toning districts within the ordinance. The arrlay dirtri,i es-tab/it-hes land use regulations that must be en/orad by local authorities under the spe,ia/ terra of each sod overlay district. An n o erlay di -stria operates under additional `oning requirements plated on ageogrrp/nc arra pithead changing dee underlying toning distria rlaciifiralion. Page 10 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Mr. Lewis emphasized that no section of the Ordinance would be deleted but that they are requesting that this definition be added together with various setbacks that would be used to preserve and protect the character oldie Utica Pike Overlay District. These various setbacks would be added to Article 5. Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. This section lists the Miscellaneous Standards of the Utica Pike Overlay District. The following items would be added: (1) Minimum Side Yard Setback: 10° o of the lot width per side yard or the average of the side yards on either side of the house, whichever is greater, for Primary and Accessory Structures; (2) Minimum Front Yard Setback: 75' or the average existing setback of each house on either side of the setback being measured, whichever is greater; (3) Minimum Rear Yard Setback: "I'he greater of 20' or the average rear yard setback of the lots on either side for the Primas' Structure and the greater of 5' or the average of the rear card set back of the lots on either side for Accessory Structure; (4) Minimum Lot Area: The greater of 10,000 square feet or the average of the lot area of the lots facing Utica Pike on each side of the lot being measured for minimum lot arca; (5) Minimum Lot Width: The greater of 70' or the average of the lot widths on each side of the lot being measured for minimum lot width; (6) Minimum 1.ot Frontage: The average of the existing lot frontage for each lot on either side of the lot being measured for minimum lot frontage; (7) Maximum Lot (:overage: The square footage of all Primary and Accessory Structures, and impervious surfaces cannot exceed 35'O of the Lot Area; and (8) Minimum Main Floor Area: 3,000 sq. 0. for one story Primary Structures, or 2,000 square feet for the first floor of the Primary Structure, provided that the total Finished Floor Area is 3,000 square feet or more. Mfr. Lewis explained that they had one additional amendment to Article 5, Section 5.2. Ile said they are requesting that the following language be added to the District Intent portion of Section 5.2 of Article live: The 1T Ma Pike Orrrlay Distract ("1 'PUL ") has been created to <onoenr the spe ia//calsus of The District such, that the rural nsidentwl character and Ohio Rhee views and on'rlooks within the Dicta,' should be preservd. Dense housing detrloprnents such ac patio homes, condominiums, apartments, and high -tire buildings shall not be permuted in the I'tha Pike (her/ay District. Variances and special exceptions shall not be granted to allow inch uses in the 11PO1_ Planned Unit Drtrlopmaenls shall not be appeared in the 1 vPOL if sante would eiroment the prot'isios and prohibitions of for overlap cdt tri, t. Mr. flicks also explained to the Commission that these atnendments do try to preserve the setting of Utica Pike and prevent dense housing developments in the middle of the district. I le told the Commission that no section of the Zotung Ordinance would be deleted. Mr. Flicks said that if the amendments were adopted they would prevent multifamily housing from being built in the Utica Pike Overlay District. Mr. flicks explained to the Commission that he had several revisions to the recommendation made by the Remonstrators. These include: District Standards: Include language that says: Thrfol/os'm Disler 13landarrli apply to /ors with <a 13ase /one of 10 and lots that do not adjoin the Ohio IL7rr: The Minimum .Vain Hoot .grea rhar/d reflex the standards of the Base Zone Di atria. Mr. I licks also explained that because different residential, as well as nun -residential zones arc within the 1'P01., the Maximum Lot Coverage should simply reflect the standards within 4 Page 11 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District the base zone. I le told the Commission that requirements regarding buffer yard and landscape requirements as stated in Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance should be emphasized. Mr. !licks told the Commission that in Article 5, Section 5.2, that the recommended the following revisions: The Utica Pike Overlay District (1! P01.) has been prated to footnote and pn renw the sceni,, nabira/ character of the Utica Pike Corridor Mica Pike i.r unique in irony mage, Ind most "pec fall}' it it part of Ibe Ohio River Scenic Roule. I 'animas and special r.oeptions shall not be granted to allow Planned ['nit Development on tracts Iolalin lever than 10 a zi:I. Higher densit) residential developments should consider the open "pare and scenic tier nrgniremenl.r ae staled in ,4rIide 9 of lbe Zoning Ordinance. Mr. !licks reminded the Commission that in accordance with the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance, the following should be considered when reviewing a rezoning application: (1) The Comprehensive Plan; (2) current conditions and character of structures and uses in each district; (3) the most desirable use for which the land in each district is adapted; (4) the conservation of area values throughout the jurisdiction; and (5) responsible development and growth. I le further noted that: (1) the Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identifies the Utica Pike (Market Street) corridor as a major transportation thoroughfare; (2) The Comprehensive Plan mentioned the need for signature entrances near the City boundaries or other thoroughfares including Utica Pike; (3) There are several undeveloped tracts within the UPON that are zoned Nil: (4) There are several homes within the UPOI, that would not meet the minimum floor arca standards that petitioners propose; (5) Any such home destroyed as a result of fire or natural hazard would have to meet the new floor area standards, according to the proposal; and (6) ']here are other non-residential zones that arc located within the UPOL; and (7) Variances arc allowed by State Law. SIr. lucks presented the following alternative proposal: District Standards 1 le recommended that language be included that states: The following District Standards apply to lots with a Base Zone of 121 and Tots that do not adjoin the Ohio River; and Minimum Main floor Arca should reflect the standards of the Base Zone District. Mr. Hicks said that because different nonresidential, as well as residential zones are within the UPO1., (see attached Chart), the Maximum lot Coverage should simply reflect the standards within the base zone. I le told the Commission that etnphasis should be placed on requirements regarding buffer yard and landscape requirements as stated in Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. District Intent Mr. Hicks recommended that language be included that states: The Utica Pike Overlay District (PP01) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural character of the linea Pike Corridor. Utica Pike is unique in man ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. Variances and Special Exceptions shall not be granted to alloy" Planed !'nit Developments on tracts totaling fewer than 10 acres. Higher density 5 Page 12 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District residential developments should consider the open space and scenic view requirements as stated in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Hicks told the Commission that the area is appropriate for the R1: Low Density Residential Zoning District -Thereafter, Mr. Fetz made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the City Council that includes the {imposed recommendations by Mr. Hicks and includes a recommendation to maintain the statuton' requirements. The motion was seconded by Mrs. 1?Ilingsworth and carried unanimously. The next item to conte before the Commission was a request to consider an amendment to the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance whereby it is proposed that the IR: INAAP Redevelopment District be included as a newly established General Zoning District in Article Two, Section 2.1, Page 2-2 and 2-3. Chester Hicks, Director of Planning and Development, explained to the Commission that this petition proposes to add a new Zoning District- IR-INAAP Redevelopment District to Article 2 (General Zoning Districts) and Article 4 (Institutional and Commercial Zoning Districts) of the Zoning Ordinance. District Intent Mr. Hicks explained that the "IR" (1NAAP Redevelopment) District is intended to provide a land use category for a mixture of most office, retail, wholesale, and moderate to heavy industrial facilities/uses. Ile said this District should be limited to the geographic area within the City that was formerly known as the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant (1NAAP) and is currently controlled by the River Ridge Development Authority. I le told the Commission that they should strive to assist the INAAP Reuse authority in their effort to redevelop this District as a commerce center that will benefit the community, state, and region. Mr. 1 licks also said that the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals should strive to minimize lighting, parking lots fronting major streets, excessive use of signs, and traffic conflicts in the "IR" District. He told the Commission that buffer yards should be strictly upheld and outdoor storage discouraged. Development Standards Mr. flicks explained that the Development Standards were developed from reviewing the standards of other industrial parks in Jeffersonville including North Port, Clark Maritime, and Bridgeport. See the attached summary of review for the "IR" District. Mr. hicks said that in accordance with the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance, the following should be considered when reviewing a rezoning application: (1) The Comprehensive Plan; (2) current conditions and character of structures and uses in each District; (3) the most desirable use for which the land in each District is adapted; (4) the conservation of arca values throughout the jurisdiction; and (5) responsible development and growth. He noted that (1) the Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identified the INAAP Page 13 of 20 6 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Minutes from City Council Meeting in 2005 Council President Grooms explained the Council is not trying to slow down the progress. With a 67 million dollar sewer project and a 3 million dollar city hall project, the Council is doing their job to evaluate the best way possible. Ile pledges to do what can be done to keep progress moving. Mayor Wai/. said as a member of the sewer board he will make sure the process continues. Planning and Zoning Director Chester Hicks presented and reviewed sections of Ordinance No. 2005 -OR -16, State Of Indiana Plan Commission Recommendations To Jeffersonville Common Council To Amend Portions Of The Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance 2000 -OR -61 (Utica Pike Overlay District). The Plan Commission voted to pass this. Mr. David Lewis, Attorney representing a number of neighbors, said the Ordinance is lacking in definition of overlay district. Ile proposes adding definition. Council Attorney Morris feels this must go back to the Plan Commission. Attorney Lewis agrees. Following all discussion, Councilperson Zastawny made the notion to table, second by Councilperson Perkins. Councilperson McCauley feels it should be passed now and amended Later. Councilperson Perkins withdrew his second and Councilperson Zastawny withdrew his motion. Public comment was called for. There was no public comment. Councilperson Zastawny made the motion to pass Ordinance No. 2005 -OR -I 6 as proposed by Dimetor Hicks, second by Councilperson Sellers. Mayor Waiz asked for public comment. As there was no comment the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Page 14 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Ordinance Pass by the City Council Amending the UP -OL STATE OF INDIANA PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO JEFFERSONVIJ.I.E COMMON COUNCIL TO AMEND PORTIONS OF THE JEFFERSONVILL ZONING ORDINANCE 2000 -OR -61 2005 -OR- 1Lc WHEREAS, the Jeffersonville Plan Commission has reviewed proposed changes to the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to the Utica Pike Overlay District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has recommended such changes; and WHEREAS, the changes are more consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission has held a public hearing in accordance with I.C. 36-7-4-604; and WHEREAS, notice was properly given to the public prior to the public hearing being held; and WHEREAS, a majority of the Plan Commission believes that the proposed changes should be made and that the proposed changes are in the interests of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, morals, and general welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED by the Jeffersonville Plan Commission to the Common Council of the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana, that the following amendments and changes be made to the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance 2000 -OR -61: Page 15 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District PROPOSED BY REMONSTRATORS 1. Definition Added to Article Fourteen: The following definition shall be added to Article Fourteen of the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance: Overlay District: A special resource or development area which is superimposed upon and placed over the zoning map's general zoning district designations within that area designated as an Overlay District. The purpose of the Overlay District is to conserve natural resources or realize development objectives without unduly disturbing the expectations created by the zoning ordinance and general zoning districts within the ordinance. The Overlay District establishes land use regulations that must be enforced by local authorities under the special terms of each such Overlay District. An Overlay District operates under additional zoning requirements placed on a geographic area without changing the underlying zoning district guidelines. Provisions Added to Article Five: Section 5.2 of Article Five of the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance list the Miscellaneous Standards of the Utica Pike Overlay District. The following items shall be added to those Miscellaneous Standards: a. Minimum Side Yard Setback: 10% of the lot width per side yard or the average of the side yards on either side of the house, whichever is greater, for Primary and Accessory Structures. b. Minimum Front Yard Setback: 75 feet or the average existing setback of each house on either side of the setback being measured, whichever is greater. c. Minimum Rear Yard Setback: The greater of 20 feet or the average rear yard setback of the lots on either side for the Primary Structure and the greater of 5 feet or the average of the rear yard set back of the lots on either side for Accessory Structures. Page 16 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District d. Minimum Lot Area: The greater of 10,000 square feet or the average of the lot area of the lots facing Utica Pike on each side of the lot being measured for minimum lot area. e. Minimum Lot Width: The greater of 70 feet or the average of the lot widths on each side of the lot being measured for minimum lot width. f. Minimum Lot Frontage: The average of the existing lot frontage of the lot width on each side of the lot being measured for minimum lot frontage. g. Maximum Lot Coverage: The square footage of all Primary and Accessory Structures, and impervious surfaces cannot exceed 35% of the Lot Area. h. Minimum Main Floor Area: 3,000 square feet for one story Primary Structures, or 2,000 square feet for the first floor of the Primary Structure, provided that the total Finished Floor Area is 3,000 square feet or more. PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR In accordance with the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance, the following should be considered when reviewing a rezoning application: a. The Comprehensive Plan b. Current conditions and character of structures and uses in each district; c. The most desirable use for which the land in each district is adapted; d. The conservation of area values throughout the jurisdiction; and e. Responsible development and growth. f. The Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identifies the Utica Pike (Market Street) corridor as a major transportation thoroughfare; g. The Comprehensive Plan mentioned the need for signature entrances near the city boundaries for other thoroughfares including Utica Pike; h. There are several undeveloped tracts within the UPOL that are zoned Ml; Page 17 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District i. There are several homes within the UPOL that would not meet the minimum floor area standards that petitioners propose; j. Any such home destroyed as a result of fire or natural hazard would have to meet the new floor area standards, according to the proposal; and k. There are other non-residential zones that are located within the UPOL; and 1. Variances are allowed by State Law. DISTRICT STANDARDS: Include language that says: The following District Standards apply to lots with a Base Zone of RI and lots that do not adjoin the Ohio River. Minimum Main Floor Area should reflect the standards of the Base Zone District. Because different nonresidential, as well as residential zones are within the UPOL, the Minimum Lot Coverage should simply reflect the standards within the base zone. Emphasize requirements regarding buffer yard and landscape requirements as stated in Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. PROPOSED BY REMONSTRATORS Additional Amendment to Article Five: Section 5.2 of Article Five of the Zoning Ordinance declares the District Intent of the Utica Pike Overlay District. 'The following language shall be added to the District Intent portion of Section 5.2 of Article Five: The Utica Pike Overlay District ("UPOL") has been created to conserve the special features of the District such that the rural residential character and Ohio River views and overlooks within the District should be preserved. Dense housing developments such as patio homes, condominiums, apartments, and high rise buildings shall not be permitted in the Utica Pike Overlay District, Variances and Special Exceptions shall not be granted to allow such uses in the UPOL. Planned Unit Developments shall not be approved in the UPOL if sarne would circumvent the provisions and prohibitions of the Overlay District. Page 18 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR The Utica Pike Overlay District (UPOL) has been created to promote and preserve the scenic, natural character of the Utica Pike corridor. Utica Pike is unique in many ways, but most specifically it is part of the Ohio River Scenic Route. Variances and Special Exceptions shall not be granted to allow Planned Unit Developments on tracts totaling fewer than 10 acres. Higher density residential developments should consider the open space and scenic view requirements as stated in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. This recommendation is being made upon a vote of a majority of the members of the Jeffersonville Plan Commission by vote taken at its regularly scheduled meeting on the 22" day of February, 2005. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption. SO ORDAINED this p2 % day of C G11, !IL) 2005. COMMON CO THE CITY OF INDIANA By: ATTEST: Peggy W. :e Clerk -Treasurer EFFERS LLE, Rob . Waiz, Presiding Office Presented by s Clerk -Treasurer to the Mayor of said City of Jeffersonville this day of 2005. Page 19 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District 0 Peggy Clerk -Treasurer This Ordinance approved and signed by me th. Robert �''aiz, Jr. ayor 2005. 6 Page 20 of 20 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District STAFF GUIDANCE Utica Pike Overlay District Amendment Department of Planning & Zoning Calculating Development Standard Averages The following guidance illustrates how the text in the proposed development standards for the Utica Pike Overlay District (Article 5.2) could be applied when new lots or structures are proposed. The proposed standards include language that requires the numerical standard stated (70 feet for instance) or the average of existing adjacent lots (excluding planned development districts), whichever is greater, to be used when determining the development standards for new lots and structures. Definition of Average Setback in the Zoning Ordinance Average Setback: An average of the front yard setbacks of structures on either side of the subject property. If the average setback encroaches into the right-of-way, permission is not required from the Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals. If the subject property is a corner lot, the average of the front yard setback of structures adjacent to the subject property, along with the front yard setback of structures directly across the street of the subject property must be used. Page 1 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Front Setback - Average Front Setback 150 feet 100 feet average Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum front setback of 100 feet. (150+80)/2=115. This is larger than the numerical standard stated (75 feet), the greater will apply. Minimum Front Setback - Average Front Setback with PUD Adjacent Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum front setback of 100 feet. (150+80)/2=115. The lots in the PUD ("8") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 2 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District PUD -R1 B 100feet average s y�� �, 30 eet 150 feet 80 feet Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum front setback of 100 feet. (150+80)/2=115. The lots in the PUD ("8") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 2 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Lot Area - Average Lot Area B 24,000 feet Proposed Lot A 17,000 feet C 10,000 feet Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum lot area of 17,000 square feet (24,000 + 10,000)/2= 17,000. This is larger than the numerical standard stated (10,000 square feet), the greater will apply. Minimum Lot Area - Average Lot Area with PUD Adjacent ir D 15,000 feet PUD -R1 B 10 Acres Proposed Lot A 12,500 feet C 10,000 feet Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum lot area of 12,500 square feet. (25,000 + 10,000)/2= 12,500. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 3 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Lot Width - Average Lot Width BA 130 feet PUD -R1 300 feet Proposed Lot 100 feet C 70 feet C 70 feet ►4 ► 4 ► Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum lot width of 100 feet. (130 + 70)/2= 100. This is larger than the numerical standard stated (70 feet), the greater will apply. Minimum Lot Width - Average Lot Width with PUD Adjacent i—..... DB 130 feet PUD -R1 300 feet Proposed Lot A 100 feet C 70 feet Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum lot width of 100 feet. (130 + 70)/2= 100. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the minimum lot area. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 4 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District 60 feet Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Rear Setback - Average Rear Setback Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum rear setback of 60 feet (20 + 100)/2= 60. This is larger than the numerical standard stated (20 feet), the greater will apply. Minimum Front Setback - Average Rear Setback with PUD Adjacent Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum rear setback of 60 feet (20 + 100)/2= 60. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 5 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District 20 feet 60 feet 100 feet PUD -R1 B Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum rear setback of 60 feet (20 + 100)/2= 60. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 5 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Lot Frontage - Average Lot Frontage Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum frontage of 100 feet. (130 + 70)/2= 100. Minimum Lot Frontage - Average Lot Frontage with PUD Adjacent or DB 130 feet PUD -R1 300 feet Proposed Lot A 100 feet Proposed Lot BA 4 ►1 1_____. C 130 feet 100 feet 70 feet I4 ► 4 ► 4----I Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum frontage of 100 feet. (130 + 70)/2= 100. Minimum Lot Frontage - Average Lot Frontage with PUD Adjacent or DB 130 feet PUD -R1 300 feet Proposed Lot A 100 feet C 70 feet �-00. 4 ►1 1_____. Proposed Lot "A" would require a minimum frontage of 100 feet (130 + 70)/2= 100. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate minimum frontage. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 6 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District Illustrations Not to Scale. Minimum Side Setback - Average Side Setback 25 f H Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum side setback of 100 feet. (75+25)/2=50. 2 Minimum Side Setback - Average Side Setback with PUD Adjacent Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum side setback of 50 feet. (25+75)/2=50. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 7 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District PUD -R1 B . 0 fee i�t4 k\ r feet 5 c Proposed structure "A" would require a minimum side setback of 50 feet. (25+75)/2=50. The lots in the PUD ("B") would not be used to calculate the setback. Lot "D" would be used instead. Page 7 of 7 ZO-15-01: Utica Pike Overlay District CITY OF JEFFERSONVILLE DEPARTMENT OF LAW Les Merkley, Corporation Counsel/Director of Legal Affairs 812-285-6493 office 812-285-6403 fax www.cityotjef£net Jeffersonville City Hall 500 Quartermaster Court, Suite 250 Jeffersonville, Indiana 47130 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA IN THE MATTER OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (2000 -OR -61) BY REVISING THE DISTRICT INTENT AND MISCELLANEOUS STANDARDS OF THE UTICA PIKE OVERLAY DISTRICT (UP -OL) AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLAN COMMISSION IN THE STAFF REPORT (A COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A") NOTICE OF HEARING ON ORDINANCE AMENDING JEFFERSONVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE (2000 -OR -61) BY REVISING THE DISTRICT INTENT AND MISCELLANEOUS STANDARDS OF THE UTICA PIKE OVERLAY DISTRICT (UP -OL) AS RECOMMENDED BY PLAN COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that the Jeffersonville Plan Commission has filed Ordinance with the Jeffersonville City Council, Jeffersonville, Indiana asking for an Amendment of the Jeffersonville Zoning Ordinance (2000 -OR -61) by revising the district intent and miscellaneous standards of the Utica Pike Overlay District (UP -OL) as recommended by the Plan Commission in the staff report (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A". A public hearing will be held on March 2, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 1" floor, City Hall, 500 Quartermaster Court, Room 101, Jeffersonville, Indiana at which time and place all interested persons will be heard in reference to the matters set out in said ordinance. An equal opportunity employer. Les Merkley City Attorney Jeffersonville City Hall 500 Quartermaster Court Jeffersonville, IN 47130 (812) 285-6423