HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA APRIL 30, 2019 MINUTES OF THE JEFFERSONVILLE
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
April 30, 2019
Call to Order
Chairperson, Mike McCutcheon called the meeting of the Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals to order
at 7:54 p.m. in Council Chambers, City Hall 500 Quartermaster Court,Jeffersonville, Indiana.
Roll Call
The roll call was requested by Mr. McCutcheon, those members present were: Christopher Fox, Mike
McCutcheon, David Stinson, Rodger Clarke and Duard Avery. Members absent: none. Also present - Nathan
Pruitt Planning & Zoning Director, Les Merkley Planning & Zoning Attorney, Ashley Woolsey Planning & Zoning
Coordinator and Peggy Hardaway, Secretary.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Fox made the motion to approve the February 26, 2019 Minutes (no meeting was held in March),
seconded by Mr. Stinson and motion passes 5-0.
Approval of Findings of Fact
Oath
Les Merkley, City Attorney for the City of Jeffersonville administered the oath to all those intending to
provide testimony before the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Secretary's note: all plat maps, photos, and etcetera presented before the board of zoning appeals on this date
can be found in the office of Planning and Development.
Old Business
BZA-19-10 Development Standards Variance
Linck Built Homes LLC filed a development standards variance for property located in the 1500 block of
Charlestown Pike.The property is zoned R1. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 3.47 acres of property into
22 single family lots.The lots do not meet the standards of the R1 (Low Density Single Family Residential) zoning
district.
Representation: Ron Culler, Culler Law Office 2123 Veterans Parkway Jeffersonville; with David
Blankenbeker, Blankenbeker& Sons Surveyors
• Minimum lot size: 4,000—8,149 sq ft; predominately 4,000
• Minimum lot width: 40-65'; predominately at 40'
• Minimum lot frontage: approximately 40-65'; predominately at 40'
• Maximum lot depth: two lots (1112 & 113) in back over maximum at 3.5 times
• Minimum front setback: 20'
• Minimum side setbacks: 10%on one side and 0' on other side, except lot 112 & 113 with 10%on 2
sides and 0' setback on two sides
• Maximum lot coverage: 70% (changed per Director request during meeting)
• Front yard fence: 4' required (changed during meeting to meet standard)
Mr. Blankenbeker—items discussed at the earlier meeting where we received a favorable approval.
Several residents had a variety of question and I will review now. Drainage—we will have a new dentition basin;
the existing ponding will go away. When the area is developed it will drain into basin and be detained in
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 1 of 8
accordance with City requirements and released at a slow rate. We do not have drainage plans here tonight; we
will do that next at the Drainage Board. In the event we need more space for drainage we could go up into the
next lot or across the street. We do have plans that we will execute in the near future. There is a drain pipe that
runs along the property line according to testimony from neighbors and it is on our side of the line by as much as
10-12'that being the case that drainage pipe is attached to Suburban Acres and we don't plan to use that, but
according to neighbors it is failing and is creating sinkholes. Our next step is to meet with City Engineer to figure
out what needs to be done from the City's perspective in terms of repairs, but this is outside of the scope of
what we are going to be doing. I did have a short discussion with a City Council member after the earlier
meeting if we would consider increasing the storage capacity beyond the minimum, I indicated we would look
into that. I also told him it might be possible to do what we did at Williams Crossing where we worked with the
City and the City drainage Board to jointly come up with a way to alleviate some existing problems otherwise my
client does not have the means to be able to solve any problem with the city that exists. But we do not want
exacerbate that problem. Traffic—there is 22 lots planned; there is 100+ lots that come out of Country Club
Estates, 30+/- in Golfview East and a multitude of lots and my points is that 22 more housing units and more
traffic; you always have more traffic no matter what you do short of leaving the property vacant. It is a very
small factor, increasing a fraction of a percent. Condominiums-these will not be, these are single family free
standing structures on one side of the property line, patio style homes so that that is a larger side yard, keeping
in the same as other neighborhoods in the area. Main entrance with visitor parking near the back center of the
development with green space and a small amount of additional visitor parking in the back for neighborhood
buffering.
Mr. Clarke—smaller lots that are 40x100 are you still going to be able to put 1500 sq ft home there? Mr.
Blankenbeker—yes
Letters? yes one (passed around regarding drainage)
Public Comment: support—none
Public Comment: against: Rusty Bruner, I did take the oath; 3012 Callaway Drive Jeffersonville. I am
directly across from the entrance; it will be dangerous to me to back out of my driveway. It is already tuff on
Charlestown Pike. How many houses do we need in there; do we need to shrink it down so that they can put in
more houses, that's more water runoff, less green space for water to soak in. We already have drainage issues.
He is telling you there is a drainage basin there, it may not be City, but it is a huge drainage basin that all this
upstream drains to and is contained there. It overflows on regular bases. The City Engineer will tell you that
there is too much water to go straight through. What they are proposing is to let this water go on through and
just contain what they have; which I do not know that that is going to work. 22 houses is over kill, I do not know
why we need to downsize for this. All these other properties he mentioned that is the reason we have too much
traffic on Charlestown Pike now. 14 would be a better number for that property. But even then I am not in
favor of that.
Ralph Weaver, I took the oath, 1501 Charlestown Pike Jeffersonville. The catch basin is adjacent to my
back yard; how is this going to drain if it has to go down lower than the catch basin. Their catch basin has to be
above ground in order for Suburban Acres water to drain. I do not see where this will be good. 22 houses, I did
not like 14. If I bought the property I would have turned it into a park and give it to the City. If it has standing
water then I have a mosquitoes problem, I don't have that now. Water flows thru pretty good, the metal frame
is rusting out and why the City came through and fixed mine. There is a catch basin here right now and when I
moved in August 15, 13 years ago, I talked to Hazel Bales, she said she donated that portion of the of property to
the City years ago, for that purpose because it flows from Country Club Estates and all that drainage that comes
down thru there comes through that section. I would like to know how deep this catch basin will be?
Mr. McCutcheon—I know you have concerns;this is not the drainage board. We make no decision
based upon the drainage. We know that is a tremendous concern and I think the builder will address it.
Alan Dorsey, I took the oath, 3018 Callaway Drive Jeffersonville. My concern in addition to all the
drainage and traffic is the quality of life for the neighborhood. It is destroying the character of the
neighborhood. I don't see that we need that. Adding more of what we have lots of on that road. The 30 years I
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 2 of 8
have lived here they have done nothing but add, creating more traffic and congestion, noise, pollution on
Charlestown Pike. This is nothing more than replacing what green spaces are left for you to be able to save.
Close Public Comment
Mr. Blankenbeker—we are talking about a detention basin; this is not a catch basin. Detention basins
are intended to be dry about 99%of the time. When a rainstorm occurs they hold water fora period of time;
typically hours and then slowly drain out as the water is allowed to go out and they are dry again. Mosquitoes
associated with standing water is not going to happen. We would all like that field behind our house to be a
field forever. Reality is Mr. Linck purchased this property, spent a lot of money to buy it with the intent to
develop it. At one time Suburban Acres was a field, so was Golfview East, and Country Club Estates. Things
happen over time. Mr. Linck does have a right to develop this property and we hope that the Board sees that
this development is a favorable; small lots today are a common for people who want to downsize. I have
downsized once and now my children are grown and I can see myself doing that again because I don't need a big
yard. I do understand that some of the people want to have a large yard their entire life and that is their choice
but this is a product that there is a demand for and I think it is a good for the City.
Mr. Culler—I appreciate the Chairperson's comments regarding drainage. We had discussions in the
hallway between meeting and Mr. Blankenbeker has plans to work with City Engineers on the development of a
drainage plan which will adequately detain and properly release the water from this site. In terms of the
variances it is my understanding that this group must consider where the variances of development standards
will be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. We say it is not,
because Willow Ridge is planned and the homes will be designed similar to homes found in Abbey Chase and
Mallard Run. Willow Ridge will meet the needs of a growing group of home purchasers who desire small
community style development with a home of minimal exterior maintenance. The association of home owners
will be responsible for the maintenance of the yard and landscape or most of the landscape. Willow Ridge has a
separate entrance, there will be no through street to other subdivision, it is not connected to any adjacent
subdivisions. Homes are anticipated to sell in the $225-275,000 price range. Adjacent properties, except for the
track across Charlestown Pike, which is part of the quarry, as mention are all single family residential just as
these will be and because of these factors the variances from development standards will not substantially
adversely affect the use and value of adjacent properties. As to the strict application of the terms of the selling
code we believe that Willow Ridge is designed to meet a lower price point home for a growing number of
people, who desire minimum maintenance of the exterior of their homes and the small community feel to a
development. The variances sought are intended to meet the desires of these people while providing a quality
product. It is proposed that the association shall maintenance the landscaping, cut the grass and we do not
believe there would be a significant impact to the individual homeowner and create a practical difficulty.
Board questions: Mr. Fox—tonight we have been presented with numerous frustrations about the
drainage situation. I know you talked to a council member, as well as Mr. Blankenbeker,getting reassurances
that Mr. Linck will meet with staff and the Drainage Board to see what can be done to help with the drainage
around that project. I know there is a concern about 22 home there, as a real estate broker in the area it is only
going to do nothing but improve the property values around the adjacent area and there is potential to widen
that area which will eliminate some safety concerns. So if we get assurances tonight that your client will work
with staff and Drainage Board I will make a favorable recommendation.
Mr. Culler—We will be working with the City and development plan of drainage. Mr. Blankenbeker—I
would add that we would like to do a public/private partnership deal with the City where the City might be able
to help with additional drainage improvements beyond our job because Mr. Linck cannot fund extras, but if we
work with the City we can potentially decrease the flooding risk.
Mr. Pruitt—67%for lot coverage is a strange number; could you tell me how you calculated that?
Mr. Blankenbeker—we took the impervious area of the house, garage, driveway, sidewalk, back patio
and divided it by the total area on the smallest lot—which equals 67%.
Mr. Pruitt—as a procedural standpoint, 1-2 percent points sounds like it does not matter, but when it
comes to view it does matter, we would like to recommend you bump it up to 70 so that if there is any miss you
do not have to come back before the Board. Are you allowing accessory structures? No
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 3 of 8
Mr. Culler—I don't believe that the proposed covenant conditions and restrictions that were provided
allow for any accessory structures. If I missed that I will correct that. There will be no accessory structures.
Mr. Pruitt—the reason I ask, is because obviously small lots, setbacks matter and then also your
coverage would change.
Mr. Clarke—Mr. Pruitt-why wasn't a change requested to a zoning that would be more in compliance?
Mr. Pruitt—we had conversations about pursuing that; the issue would have been with the zone change
they would still have some cleanup to do and they would need three applications most likely. Yes,theoretically
from a planning stand point it would have been better to rezone,just to keep it in keeping with the standard as
close as possible but its fulfills the intent of residential. There are 3 or 4 of these literally within a stone's throw.
Mr. Clarke—I went and looked;those are bigger. These matched the zone of a trailer park.
Mr. Pruitt—I do not know.
Mr. Clarke—these lots are .091 acres
Mr. Pruitt—I would say that Edgewood Village is probably similar.
Mr. Clarke—you will have over 10 units per acre, and zoning regulations promote 2-3 dwellings for R1.
Mr. Pruitt—it is a zoning mismatch. They would have 3 applications or 2 and the intent I think is fine.
Mr. Clark—we are throwing the zoning out the window.
Mr. Pruitt—I have mentioned several times, in several situations there are amendments to the R code
that are needed. We had a commission on it, worked through most of it, but we did not finalize those changes
and it is just part of the process. This code was written in 2000-01, two decades out and there is a different
market and we are trying to stratify what we have as an option. Instead one housing option you have five.
Mr. Clarke—I lot of people here said they did not want to see condo, condo isn't a building it is a
governmental organization. They are worried about townhouses being there. These places are close to
townhouse density. This development with that many dwelling on an acre that small is just
Mr. Fox—there will not be any challenges selling these properties.
Mr. Clarke—I'm sure there will not be. Is this going to impact the people around them?
Mr. Fox—it will improve values around them, there are multiple brokers in the room.
Mr. Clarke—there is multiple owners that express that problem.
Mr. McCutcheon—are we ready to go to the findings?
Mr. Fox—I would like to see an attachment to stipulation that the Developer work with the Drainage
Board and City staff to address any current drainage issues.
McCutcheon—are we amending the 67 to 70%?
Fox—I'll make the motion to amend it to 70%on the maximum lot coverage.
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1)The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community.
Agreed 4-1 (Clarke)
2)The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a
substantially adverse manner. Agreed 4-1 (Clarke)
3) The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a Practical Difficulty. This situation shall not
be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Agreed 4-1 (Clarke)
Based on the findings stated above the Board does hereby approve this application.
New Business
BZA-19-11 Development Standard Variance Application
Eric Luckett for America Place filed an application requesting variances from the development standards
for property located at 101 Lewman Way.The property is zoned IR. The proposed development is a 150,000 sq
ft industrial building.The variance requests are regarding off street parking.
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 4 of 8
Representation: Camille Hesen Heritage Engineering 603 North Shore Drive Jeffersonville, I took the
oath.
• Parking—project more than 25% into front yard setback
• Parking exceed maximum 30%allowed in front
• Entrance/drive exceed 26'width
• Approved by River Ridge
Public comment: support—none; against—none
Letters/calls: none
Mr. McCutcheon—note you received a corrected map of the location
Mr. Clarke—I tried to find the property, were signs put up? Ms. Woosley—yes
Board comments: none
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1) The variance of the development standards will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals,
and general welfare of the community. Agree 5-0
2) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in
a substantially adverse manner. Agree 5-0
3)The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a Practical Difficulty.This situation
shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Agree 5-0
Based on the finding described above the Board approves this application.
BZA-19-12 Development Standards Variance Request
Jason Sams, ARC filed an application requesting a variance from the development standards for property
located at 228 Spring Street and 103 Market Street. The property is zoned DC; downtown commercial. The
proposed development is mixed use with retail space, restaurant and multifamily residential. The variance
request include parking, DROD standards, and entrances. The applicant also requested waivers regarding
setbacks and landscaping from the Plan Commission.
Representation: Jason Sams ARC 1517 Fabricon Boulevard Jeffersonville
• Approval from Planning Commission for several waivers
• 673 sq ft-one bedroom units (stated 973, applications written as 673; standard 850)
• minimum parking spaces for commercial use to 15 which include 11 on street spaces (12 spaces
probably needed for retail/restaurant workers).
• 39 spaces behind the building; 29 for residential; 0 in garage
• variance to allow two residential units to be located on Spring Str first floor for ADA
• variance to allow for a one story along Market Street for the restaurant with roof top equipment
• Entrance into our building on Market Str to be within 124 ft of Spring and Market
Public Comments: support — none; against — Peggy Hardaway, I did take the oath, 228 East Market
Street, and I am a Board Member of the Jeffersonville Urban Enterprise Zone. I love it that the property is going
to be developed; I think this is a prime piece of property for Jeffersonville to have a showcase building. I am not
concerned about the historical look, it has been to that Board and passed. My concern is the size of the units. I
think going down to 673 sq ft is very small. This is supposed to be for millennials. I read that 1 in 4 millennials
still live at home, I am not sure a millennials could afford to live in these at a starting price of$850 —what UEZ
was told. The UEZ did have a couple of people opposed to this concept, I was one of those. The other problem I
see with this project is parking. The retail/restaurant should have parking spaces, and the 11 on the street will
be used/absorbed by other businesses in the area. Every week there is an event the parking stretches well
beyond my block. I'm not sure what we can do about it other than ask the builders to come up with a better
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 5 of 8
plan. This is probably going to be a 100 year old building, do we want to see it not rented. I'm not sure what
would happen if these units couldn't rent. It is three stories without an elevator that was one of the items in my
research — unfavorable things of why you can't rent your apartment: 1. if three floors— people do not want to
climb all those stairs; 2. is the size; and 3. no washer/dryer. Will they be down the hall; or carry laundry up and
down stairs every week? Those are some of my concerns. Thank you.
Deborah Henderson, I took the oath, 222 Meigs Avenue Jeffersonville — I agree with everything
previously said. I don't understand how many commercial parking spaces will be available according to what is
in the amendment — exhibit C article 9 commercial buildings multi-use building. How many parking spaces are
to be allowed? What about the garage—attached or detached has not been answered? Thank you
Alan Muncy 1517 Fabricon Boulevard Jeffersonville, ARC Owner and developer of this project. The
square footage of the units—we have developed all over the country and are familiar with the size of the units
that people in downtown urban area look for. What we are finding is the younger generation isn't fond of
acquiring things as we have been over the years and they are satisfied with smaller space. We will have washers
and dryers in all of the units. I currently own a 60 unit development on Grant Line Road that is 3 stories with no
elevator. Constructed in 2016 and have a waiting list. We find up to three storied there is no issue with
elevators. Elevators are not put in three story buildings and below because of the cost. Thank you
Close Public Comment
Mr. Sams — there was variance to not require the 15 covered spaces because there is nothing in
downtown that has covered parking and with covered parking spaces we would lose space in the rear of the
structure. In 2015 Jeffersonville Commission Study—results was 38%of the parking in downtown is being used.
24% is used on the weekends. So again, I don't feel there is parking issues in downtown, there is events like
RiverStage, but that is anywhere when you have a large event that is happening in downtown; similar to the
Yum Center when there is a basketball game, a concert.
Mr. Fox — 1/3 of the seating capacity for the restaurant at 60 spaces; how many full/part time
employees are you projecting; how many will require parking spaces? Mr. Muncy 8-10. Mr. Fox - the retail
space how employees will require parking spaces? Mr. Muncy 1-2 for bank; coffee shop — maybe 2. Mr. Fox—
so we can project 12-15 parking spaces for employees. Mr. Muncy—yes.
Mr. Fox —your Grant Line project by Indiana University Southeast; what is the ratio of student housing
vs regular tenants? Mr. Muncy—we have 4 to 5 student housing; we are not student housing project.
Mr. Fox—back to the minimum floor area per unit; my concern is the amount that we heard $850 rental
for a 673 square foot. That might leave spaces un-rentable. Are there studies that have shown comparable
units that would justify that cost. Mr. Muncy—comparable to square foot prices here we are at $1 to $1.30 sq
ft. We are prepared to take that risk based on our knowledge of downtown with our previous projects as well.
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1) The variance of the development standards will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals,
and general welfare of the community. Agree 5-0
2)The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in
a substantially adverse manner. Agree 5-0
3)The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a pactical difficulty.This situation
shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Agree 5-0
Based on the finding described above the Board approves this application
BZA-19-13 Development Standard Variance Application
Tim Pudwell for Hilton Land II LLC filed a Development Standard Variance application for property at
101 Jacobs Way. The property is zoned IR. The proposed development is a 563,032-square-foot industrial
building. The variance request include lighting height and entrance drive width. The applicant also requested
waivers regarding landscaping from the Plan Commission.
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 6 of 8
Representation: Justin Olashah American Structure Point 7260 Shadeland Station Indianapolis, yes I did
take the Oath
• Entrance drive with to 30' for industrial use traffic
• Lighting—industrial use to adequately light for industrial use
Public Comment: support—none; against—none
Letters/calls: none
Mr. Clarke—what will this facility be used for? Mr. Olashah—warehouse type use
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1. The variance of the development standards will not be injurious to the public health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the community. Agree 5-0
2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be
affected in a substantially adverse manner. Agree 5-0
3. The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a Practical Difficulty. This situation
shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic
gain. Agree 5-0
Based on the finding described above the Board approves this application.
BZA-19-14 Development Standard Variance Application
Iron Street Partners LLC filed an application requesting variances from the development standards for
property located at the corner of Highway 62 & Gottbrath Pkwy.The property is zoned C2-PD. The proposed
development is a multi-tenant building with retail and restaurant space.The variance requests are regarding off
street parking.
Representation: Camille Hesen Heritage Engineering 603 North Shore Drive Jeffersonville, I've taken the
Oath
• Allow material on front building facade—51.8%
• Allow material on rear building façade—53%
• Allow material on side/North building facade—56.4%
• Allow material on side/South building façade—56.4%
• drive thru with Heine Brothers Coffee Shop
Public Comment: support—none; against—none
Letters/calls: none
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1. The variance of the development standards will not be injurious to the public health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the community. Agree 5-0
2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be
affected in a substantially adverse manner. Agree 5-0
3. The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a Practical Difficulty. This situation
shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic
gain. Agree 5-0
Based on the finding described above the Board approves this application
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 7 of 8
BZA-19-15 Development Standard Variance Application
Jack Koetter Jeffersonville Town Center LLC filed an application requesting variances from the
development standards for property located at the corner of Veterans Pkwy and Town Center Blvd.The
property is zoned C2-PD. The proposed development is a multi-tenant building with retail and restaurant space.
The applicant is requesting variances for lot area coverage and lighting. The applicant also requested waivers as
regarding setbacks and landscaping as part of the Development Plan application through the Plan Commission.
Representation: Josh Hillman Jacobi Toombs Lanz 1829 East Spring Street with Jason Emly of Koetter
• Plan Commission approval of development plan
• Impervious lot area 88%
• Lighting requirement to 30'
Public Comment: support—none; against—none
Letters/calls: none
The Board of Zoning Appeals in the City of Jeffersonville having heard the application for variance
described above and all opposition from parties claim to be adversely affected there by does now enter the
findings:
1. The variance of the development standards will not be injurious to the public health, safety,
morals, and general welfare of the community. Agree 5-0
2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be
affected in a substantially adverse manner. Agree 5-0
3. The strict application of the terms of the Ordinance will result in a Practical Difficulty. This
situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction
of economic gain. Agree 5-0
Based on the finding described above the Board approves this application
Reports from Director and Staff
None
Board comments:
Next meeting on Tuesday, May 28 (after Labor Day weekend)
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m.
X4Z/f=
Mike McCutcheon, Chair
rb i - ; . : Peggy Hardaway,Secret)
ecret ry
Jeffersonville Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting—April 30, 2019 Page 8 of 8