VANDERBURGH COUNTY

REZONING BOARD

FEBRUARY 20, 2007

The Vanderburgh County Rezoning Board met in session this 20^th day of February, 2007 at 4:50 p.m. in room 301 of the Civic Center Complex with President Cheryl Musgrave presiding.

President Musgrave: We will now commence the rezoning portion of our meeting. Welcome, Bev Behme from Area Plan, and I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes.

Commissioner Tornatta: So moved.

Madelyn Grayson: They were actually incorporated into the Commission meeting of the previous meeting. So, we’ve already approved those.

President Musgrave: Ms. Behme, if you’ll read off what’s on the docket tonight?

Bev Behme: Alright, good afternoon, Commissioners. Happy Birthday, Mr. Ziemer. We have two zonings. The first one is VC-2-2007, 3916 Charlotte Avenue. R.D. Flowers Construction is requesting a change in zoning from agricultural to R-2 for the property located at 3916 Charlotte Avenue. This is a 3.9 acre site located at the end of Charlotte, south of Lexington. It is located between residences fronting along St. Joseph Avenue to the east, and Motoux Park to the west. The owners have filed a request for a subdivision approval, 4S2007, which indicates that an eight lot residential subdivision, Preston Oak Subdivision, is planned on this site. Subdivision review committee reviewed this subdivision February 13, 2007, and is tentatively scheduled for hearing by the Plan Commission at the March 8, 2007 meeting. Charlotte Street is paved to the northern property line of the site, and must be extended for the proposed subdivision. All utilities are available to this site. However, sewers must be extended to the site to accommodate the planned subdivision. The comprehensive plan future land use map recommends this area for residential use. The change in zoning to R-2 for this 3.9 acre site is consistent with the overall plan for the area. Area Plan Commission voted February 8, 2007, nine yes votes and one abstention.

President Musgrave: Petition representative, Shannon Frank, come forward and address.

Shannon Frank: Good afternoon, Shannon Frank-McCray, of Olive Frank and Klingler, here on behalf of R.D. Flowers, the petitioner in this matter. As set forth in the report that was just read, the proposed rezoning is in compliance with the comprehensive plan, which shows an eight percent increase in residential population in this township. There’s a mixed use, and within a quarter mile, as you can see, surrounding the parcel at issue, that mixed use has six different current zoning classifications, R-1, M-1, M-2, C-2, C-4 and Agricultural. Multi-family housing is considered to be an acceptable use as a buffer between residential zoning and commercial and other zoning. If you’ll note, Lexington directly north of our proposed parcel, has approximately 32 homes running on Lexington. There is undeveloped land separating, then it Glisson’s Auto Salvage, which you can see located to the south, the very large parcel. There’s only eight lots that are going to be located on this just shy of four acre parcel. The traffic on those eight lots should be minimal, due to the number of units that are going to be put on there. The proposed units to be put on, if the subdivision is approved, are going to be approximately 1,300 square fee units each, two bedrooms, two bath, one and two car garage. The value of these homes, under the plan of the developer, will be substantially higher than the current homes that are on, currently built on Lexington, which those homes are approximately 40 to 50 years old. So, we certainly think it will not be any detriment to the existing homeowners just lying north of the proposed subdivision, if this is rezoned to R-2. The reason that R-2 was selected is because it is a very limited use, and my client wanted these surrounding lot owners to have a good understanding, and feel secure in exactly what he was going to be putting on the property.

President Musgrave: Are there any questions for Ms. Frank? Are there any remonstrators here today? Anyone want to speak either for or against this rezoning? Alright, come forward and state your name and address please.

Connie Wicker: My name is Connie Wicker, and I came to the last meeting and it didn’t do us any good, and it’s probably not going to do us any good this time. But, the street, that street right there, if you have two cars on it, it is very, very, very difficult to get through there. With all the traffic coming in and out, she said it will be minimal, and, okay, that’s fine, but to the rest of us there’s not that much room there. How are we going to get the traffic in and out of there? We also, not that it will do us any good, but, like I said, we went through the neighborhood and got a petition signed, and there’s only two people in the whole neighborhood that wants this to happen. Everybody else does not want this to happen. That lot, it floods, which I know is part of the Drainage Board, and the narrow streets. How are we gonna fix that to coincide with the new properties?

President Musgrave: Did you have a petition that you wanted to submit for the record?

Connie Wicker: I mean, I can, yeah.

President Musgrave: Okay.

Connie Wicker: I also have pictures of how tight the streets are with the cars coming through.

President Musgrave: Okay. Thank you.

Commissioner Nix: Do all the homes back there have driveways? Are there any homes that do not have driveways?

Connie Wicker: All the homes do have driveways, but they’re all mostly one car driveways.

Commissioner Nix: Beverly, can you scale, what is that?

Bev Behme: I’m sorry?

Commissioner Nix: Can you scale that for us?

Unidentified: It’s not to scale.

Commissioner Nix: Oh, it’s not to scale?

Unidentified: It’s a Power Point.

Commissioner Nix: Oh, okay, I’m sorry. I thought you were on the–

Unidentified: I can switch to GIS.

Commissioner Nix: How long with that take to do?

President Musgrave: A few minutes.

Unidentified: I don’t know, it depends on the connections.

Commissioner Nix: Oh, we got a good connection here.

President Musgrave: Wow!

Unidentified: Alright.

Bev Behme: Are you talking about the width?

Commissioner Nix: Curb to curb basically?

Connie Wicker: Curb to curb is 25 feet.

Commissioner Nix: Twenty-five?

Connie Wicker: Yes.

President Musgrave: Yeah.

Commissioner Nix: Yeah.

President Musgrave: I know, they’re going to have like ten more cars.

Commissioner Nix: I’m just wondering...the one that would be going in, that would be?

Connie Wicker: Charlotte.

Commissioner Nix: Charlotte, yes.

Unidentified: It’s actually the same distance as Lexington.

Commissioner Nix: Is parking the big issue? I mean, the width of the street, excuse me, is that the crux of this?

Connie Wicker: Yes.

Commissioner Nix: Okay.

Connie Wicker: Because there are people that have to park on the street. When we have, when neighbors have company over, you, getting through there is very difficult.

Commissioner Nix: Uh-huh.

President Musgrave: Okay, Commissioner, thank you very much.

Connie Wicker: Okay, thank you.

President Musgrave: Commissioners, do you have any further questions? Then, I’ll ask Ms. Frank to do a summation.

Shannon Frank: Well, we certainly appreciate the couple of remonstrators that felt it important to be here today to voice their opinion. Certainly their concern with the existing road, Charlotte, being extended we think is unfounded from the standpoint that that road has been there from the same time that this subdivision was originally developed. The existing road, Lexington, is the same width as the road, Charlotte, that they’re complaining about, and they, certainly, to my knowledge, there hasn’t been any complaints in front of the Commissioners with respect to the current traffic on Lexington, and their not being wide enough. We believe that it was the intention that there be further development on this property, given the fact that some 40, or however many years ago the road was extended, that being Charlotte, that it did stop without a cul-de-sac or curb or anything of that nature, as shown on this picture, that it was intended that there would be future development. We believe that what my client is proposing is certainly not egregious in anyway shape or form with it only being eight lots, and that there will, because of what he plans to put back there, there would be a low traffic count, although I don’t have that exact proposed information with me today, but I’m certain that Morley’s representatives could answer that. With respect to drainage, we feel that those issues will be addressed at the Drainage Board, which I believe is scheduled for next week. Thank you.

President Musgrave: Okay, Commissioners, if you have further questions, now would be the time. In the absence of any further questions, is there a motion to approve?

Commissioner Tornatta: Yes, motion to approve.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Roll call.

President Musgrave: Commissioner Nix?

Commissioner Nix: Yes.

President Musgrave: Commissioner Tornatta?

Commissioner Tornatta: Yes.

President Musgrave: And I vote yes. Show VC-2-2007 as approved.

President Musgrave: We move now to docket 2007-5-PC VC-3-2007, Hatfield Brothers Landholdings LLC. Mr. Hatfield?

Bev Behme: Hatfield Brothers Landholding is requesting to down zone the properties located at 6511 and 6531 Petersburg Road from C-1 to R-3. This is a 1.46 acre site at the northeast corner of Petersburg Road and Petersburg Place. The lot fronting along Petersburg Road, within Petersburg Place Subdivision, was rezoned to C-1 in 1985 for a future neighborhood commercial development. The lot west of this site at the intersection of Petersburg Road and Greendale Drive was developed as an assisted living facility in 1997. The remaining lots are undeveloped to date. This is a request to down zone two of the vacant commercial lots to R-3 for residential condominiums. Subdivision review committee reviewed plans on January 9, 2007 for four, four unit buildings planned on the site. A single access is planned onto Petersburg Place for the condominiums. Site review will address compliance with all code requirements upon submission of final plans for the development of the site. The comprehensive plan future land use map recommends this area for residential use. This change in zoning from R-3 for this 1.46 acre site is consistent with the overall plan for the area. The proposed site is located north of the Hamilton Golf Course. The comprehensive plan recognizes that multi-family is an appropriate buffer use adjacent to single family residential. Area Plan Commission on February 8, 2007 voted nine yes votes and one abstention.

President Musgrave: Mr. Hatfield?

Jeff Hatfield: How is everybody?

Commissioner Tornatta: Alright.

Commissioner Nix: How you doing, Jeff?

Jeff Hatfield: My name is Jeff Hatfield. I own Hatfield Brothers Landholdings, and I also own Core Contractors. Hatfield Brothers Landholdings holds and sells real estate, Core Contractors constructs it. I’m going to pass around a board of the floor plan and the elevation of the condominium project that we would like to develop there. What you’ll find is that it’s a three bedroom, three bath condominium. We hope to retail them for between $200,000, and, thank you, $200,000 and $215,000. Many of the other condominiums in the area are in that price point, and actually some are twice as much. The area is a nice area, nice residential area. The property is currently zoned for commercial, but, I think if anyone drives down Petersburg Road, I personally would not think commercial development would be good for the area, but, you know, others might disagree. The entrance, I’ve talked to several of the residents in Old Petersburg Place, and I don’t want to pretend to speak for them, but the comments they’ve made to me, the things that were important to them were that it stay residential in nature. Those trees down that street are very important, which we plan to keep. There’s only two that we’ll have to take out, to create the entrance, which will be right there in the center. The others will stay. Also, on our plat you’ll notice that we only, you know, put four buildings on the property. We could have put a different style of condominium on the property, it just, you know, it seemed a better plan to spread it out, create a lot of green space. The distance between the back side of this building on the north side, which would be here, and the property line is about 45 feet, which is a pretty good distance. Then the distance from the building here in this corner to Petersburg Road, is, I think about, 60 feet, 50 to 60 feet. So, we tried to create a lot of green space on the property so the residents and the area didn’t feel like it was just crammed in there. I’ll entertain any questions.

President Musgrave: Commissioners, are there any questions? Thank you, Mr. Hatfield. Are there any remonstrators on this project, either for or against who wish to speak? I see no one. If you wish to make a summation, you can. In the absence of questions, is there a motion to approve?

Commissioner Nix: I’ll make a motion that we approve.

Commissioner Tornatta: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: Commissioner Nix?

Commissioner Nix: Yes.

President Musgrave: Commissioner Tornatta?

Commissioner Tornatta: Yes.

President Musgrave: And, I vote yes. Show the motion as approved.

Jeff Hatfield: Thank you.

Commissioner Nix: Thank you.

President Musgrave: I believe that completes our rezoning agenda. Is there a motion to adjourn?

Commissioner Tornatta: So moved.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: We are adjourned.

(The meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m.)

Those in Attendance:

Cheryl Musgrave                                Bill Nix                            Troy Tornatta

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.                    Bev Behme                     Madelyn Grayson

Shannon Frank                                   Connie Wicker                Jeff Hatfield

Others Unidentified                             Members of Media

VANDERBURGH COUNTY

REZONING BOARD

Cheryl A.W. Musgrave, President

Bill Nix, Vice President

Troy Tornatta, Member

(Recorded and transcribed by Madelyn Grayson.)