Vanderburgh County
Rezoning Board
March 19, 2001
 
The Rezoning meeting was called to
order at 7:00 p.m.
President Mosby: I would like to call
to order the Board of Commissioners of Vanderburgh County Rezoning agenda
for March 19, 2001. Do we have approval of minutes from --
Jane Laib: Yes.
President Mosby: -a previous meeting?
Jane Laib: It's from December, so
Richard is supposed to do it.
President Mosby: This says Drainage
Board.
Commissioner Mourdock: It says Drainage
Board here.
Jane Laib: No.
Commissioner Mourdock: Do you have
another--
Jane Laib: Rezoning.
President Mosby: Where at?
Commissioner Fanello: I don't have
any in my packet.
President Mosby: Is it in here? Here
we go.
Jane Laib: Tammy put the wrong one
in the file, so.
President Mosby: Okay.
Commissioner Mourdock: As the past
President or Vice-President, which was I last year, Jane?
Jane Laib: You were the Vice-President.
Commissioner Mourdock: And being the
only person currently on the Board who was at attendance of the December
18, 2000 Rezoning Meeting, I will hereby move for approval of these minutes,
make the motion and against all rules of order, I will also second the
motion. Since none of the others were present. I will sign it.
President Mosby: We have a motion
and a second. So ordered. Being that you are the only person that was there,
I'm not sure if they are right either.
Commissioner Mourdock: It's a done
deal, though.
President Mosby: I trust you.
President Mosby: First readings. VC-7-2001,
petitioner, Jerilyn Buchanan. Address 620 Kimber Lane. Request CO-2 to
C-1. VC-6-2001, petitioner Sharon Working. Address 7401 Telephone Road.
Request agriculture to M1 to C-4. VC-5-2001, petitioner, Steve Wilcop.
Address 2200 S. Greenriver Road. Request R-1 to C-4. VC-4-2001, petitioner,
Three I Properties, LLC. Address 12700 Old State Road. Request A to C-4
with use and development commitment.
Commissioner Mourdock: That should
be Ag to C-4.
President Mosby: Okay. Ag to C-4.
Agriculture. VC-3-2001, petitioner, Three I Properties, LLC. 601 E. Boonville-New
Harmony Road. Request Agricultural to C-4 with use and development commitment.
To C-4 with use and development commitment. VC-2-2001, petitioner, Three
I Properties, LLC. 600 E. Boonville-New Harmony Road. Request Agricultural
and R-1 to C-4 with use and development. VC-1-2001, petitioner, Jeannie
Johnson. Address 5115 Millersburg Road. Request Agricultural to C-4, Section
4.
Commissioner Mourdock: And this is
the first reading of all those. Is there anyone present who wished to address
any of those particular zonings on first reading? Seeing no one present,
I will move approval on first reading of the previously mentioned zonings.
Commissioner Fanello: Second.
President Mosby: I have a motion and
a second. So ordered.
|
Bateman Minor-Subdivision,
Lot No. 2-Final Reading
|
President Mosby: Final readings. VC-12-2000.
8300 Wolfe Creek Drive.
Commissioner Mourdock: Just kind of
turn it over to Bev and she will go from there.
President Mosby: Yes. Is Bev in here?
Okay, she's down there.
Commissioner Mourdock: Mr. Atkinson,
before you start, all of you folks who just came into the room in the last
30 seconds, is there anyone here who is not here to discuss or be involved
in the Bateman Minor Subdivision? I presume that's what you are all interested
in. If not, we've had the first reading. Okay. Looks like everyone is here
for the same purpose. Just wanted to be sure. Okay, Bev.
President Mosby: I will let Bev address
this first, then we'll have you come up and address us.
Jerry Atkinson: Thank you very much.
Beverly Behme: I think, Mr. Hayes
is going to swear--
President Mosby: Right, I'll go ahead-
Beverly Behme: -swear everybody in.
President Mosby: -and who else?
Beverly Behme: Anyone who speaks for--
Commissioner Mourdock: Anyone who
speaks for or against this particular petition, please raise your right
hand.
Phil Hayes: I, state your name, hereby
promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in
the course of these proceedings before the Vanderburgh County Commissions
sitting in consideration of the various items on the docket this March
19th, 2001 so help me God.
Commissioner Mourdock: I now pronounce
you man and-
Phil Hayes: There's no sense in doing
this as to all matters, is there, Mr. Atkinson?
Beverly Behme: This is the only one.
Phil Hayes: Okay.
Beverly Behme: Rebecca Bateman is
petitioning to rezone her property located at 8300 Wolfe Creek Drive. This
11.65 acre site is Lot 2 of Bateman Minor Subdivision. This petition was
heard at the August 2nd , 2000 Area Plan Commission meeting,
and was recommended for denial with five yes votes, seven no votes and
one abstention. The petition was amended to include a use and development
commitment, which limits the number of residential units to be constructed
on the site. The R-1 is limited to six single family homes and the R-3
is limited to not more than eight four-plex condominium dwellings. The
petition was continued by the Area Plan Commission at it's meeting on November
1, 2000 until a response was received from FEMA regarding the requested
letter of map revision. The county received a letter FEMA dated December
13, 2000 regarding this request. The petition was heard at the Area Plan
Commission meeting February 7, 2001 and was continued to allow an amendment
of the use and development commitment to include assurance of construction
of a culvert and compliance with the conditions of the conditional FEMA
letter of map revision and DNR permits. The use and development commitment
states that the developer shall meet all conditions and obtain all permits
at it's own cost and expense, and shall post a letter of credit to assure
the construction of the culvert replacement. On March 7,2001, Area Plan
Commission recommended approval with seven affirmative votes , three negative
votes and one abstention. The area is identified on the year 2015 conceptual
land use map and the comprehensive plan as an area of residential development.
This proposal is to step up the zoning to R-3 for 7.77 acres and R-1 for
3.88 acres is consistent with the overall plan for the area. Multi-family
uses are considered residential development. The R-1 single family will
require sub-dividing and the subdivision platt will be reviewed by Subdivision
Review Committee, the Drainage Board and the Area Plan Commission.
President Mosby: First, we will hear
from the petitioner and then we will hear from the remonstrators and then
I'll give the petitioners attorney a three or four minute rebuttal period.
Before I do, and we start, anybody wising to speak tonight, please sign
this. Did you send one around?
Commissioner Mourdock: I think it
was just an attendance.
President Mosby: On the yellow one
just whoever wishes to speak . I would like to have you sign your name.
Commissioner Mourdock: And when you
come to the microphone, please state your name and address for the record.
President Mosby: Mr. Atkinson, I'll
let you start.
Jerry Atkinson: My name is Jerry Atkinson,
I have an office at 123 North West Fourth Street, Suite 7 in Evansville.
I represent the petitioner, Rebecca Bateman. I apologize for my voice tonight,
I will do what I can. The petitioner has an option with Haas Development,
Inc. The Haas family has been building houses on the west side of town,
high quality homes, for some period of time. It's a family effort. They
have developed Heartland Ridge Subdivision, Heartland Ridge II Subdivision
and I have some examples of their work . The developer proposes to acquire
this real estate and to build in the area that is shown on the site plan
as R-1, six single family residences. Those residences would have a value
of, sale price if you will, of $200,000 to $300,000. This is consistent
with the quality of the homes that are in Key West Subdivision, which is
adjacent on the east, I guess, which is almost a mile away if you drive
from one entrance to the other. It's similar in construction to the residence
of Mr. Weaver that has a home on Lot 1 of the Bateman Minor Subdivision.
This is a petition to rezone Lot 2 of that Minor Subdivision. Let me show
you some examples, the other area of the proposed rezoning is to the, I'm
going to call it west. I kind of got disoriented there. To the west and
across the creek , wooded creek, from the single family dwellings. The
single family dwellings will be adjacent to Mr. Weaver's residence. Mr.
Weaver is not objecting tonight. The condominium buildings will be eight
in number, they will be no larger than 8,000 square feet. They will have
no more than four units in them. They will be owned, they will not be student
housing. There will be a protective covenant restricting against people
who are college students using the condominiums for a place to live, unless
they are married to students 35 years of age or more, and unless they are
students, in fact, living with their family in the family's condominium
unit. We've researched this, the concept college student is not, if you
will, a protected class of people. You can discriminate, I guess, against
college students. You cannot do that to people by virtue of gender or national
origin or age , but a college student is not a class against which a restriction
is prohibited. The area to be, if I might, this is the land in the area
across the street, the ground is undeveloped, it's, I think, it was a bean
field or a corn field last summer directly across Eickhoff Road. Also,
directly across Eickhoff Road is where there will be the University Expressway,
the extension of Eickhoff is going to be constructed just a few feet away.
So, when you are looking at those fields, that's what you see when you
come from the property on to Eickhoff Road. Just an example of the quality
of workmanship that the Haas family utilizes. The condominiums are not
something that's just going to be made up and can't be seen and can't be
understood. They actually exist. The developer that created the facility
at River Park at Newburgh Road and I-64 and actually built these condominiums
and made the plans for the condominium project available to the Haas family,
the Haas family will upgrade those plans and put more brick, if you will,
put more exterior quality into them. When you look at the condominium building
from any particular view, you won't see a four-plex, you'll be looking
at not more than two units. You can only see two at a time. There are some
homes located both ways on Eickhoff Road from this project on the same
side of the street. Those homes are depicted in those photographs. There
has been some suggestions made that condominiums are maybe not good for
a neighborhood. These will be marketed as upscale condominiums for people
who are empty-nesters or who don't want the high maintenance of having
their own home. They are going to range in price from $120,000 for a small
unit to over $200,000 within a building. You'll have larger configurations
and smaller configurations within the same building. You won't have a building
that has 16 little units in it. You are going to have a maximum of four
units. There are examples of condominiums fitting in here in Evansville.
I took some pictures of the Woodland condominiums that have the R-1 housing
immediately adjacent to that. That's just across the street from the Evansville
Country Club's north end as you head west on Buena Vista. Timberlake condominiums
are on Kratzville Road on the east side of the road just off to the north
from the Kennel Club. As you can see, they fit in. I went to a little bit
of trouble and got the rezoning map (inaudible). What I am showing in yellow
here, the R-1 area that surrounds the Woodlands condominium.
Commissioner Mourdock: Woodlands is
again the one near the Country Club?
Jerry Atkinson: Evansville Country
Club, yes. The Country Club would be, if I could, let me find Buena Vista
all of a sudden. Here, this is the Country Club, the golf course. This
is Stringtown. Here, here. This is the Country Club. This is Buena Vista,
the pictures I've shown you are right along this street here. I have the
same with regard to Timberlake, the yellow again all around and the photographs
are both ways up the street. It's all R-1. Well, is this good land use?
Yes, it is. It's good land use because there is need for condominiums in
Evansville on the west side. There are no upscale condominium residences
on the west side, this project doesn't exist. There is a list of people
who are interested in purchasing these homes. This is not an apartment
project. This is not student housing. This is going to be a high quality
residential community that will have similar impact on it's neighborhood
as the impact that is present around Timberlake and Woodland. Is there
a traffic problem? Well, no there's not. This is the Expressway Parkway,
the University is over here. The Parkway when constructed will go across
here. This is the land involved. At this point, this is Eickhoff Road,
and for reference there was some suggestion that down here at West Terrace
Road there would be a traffic problem because of all the people who would
be going by there and the school busses. I agree that for the meantime
there is a hill there.
President Mosby: We're trying to pick
you up. We're trying to record this.
Jerry Atkinson: Right. There is a
hill there, we've asked the County Engineer if he could put a sign up and
he did that to mark that as a dangerous crossing, but when this is built,
all the traffic leaving this development will make a turn to the east and
come down here to get on the road to go to Evansville or go elsewhere.
This becomes a frontage road, so traffic is not a problem. To get from
the entrance here to the Key West Subdivision where people are remonstrating
from, you have to come out, come over, come around, come back in here,
and come back down to here. So, even though the (inaudible) is close here,
he's a long way away in terms of the impact of his property. What about
the flooding? I have a picture of the site. What about the flooding? What
about the flood plane? What about the 12' to 17' of fill dirt? I might
give to you also before I do that. I have a copy of the private covenant
(inaudible). We've had some dialogue with the neighbors. The dialogue has
not been one that resulted in agreement. There have been remonstrations.
We want to give them the assurances in the form of a private covenant that
will be a covenant running with the title to this land that there are only
going to be eight condominium buildings. There is not going to be student
housing. That there will be single family residences on the R-1 area consistent
with the quality of Heartland Ridge II, upgraded a little as we spelled
out in terms of the size of the facility and the exterior surface. There
are signatures in support by west side residents, petitions of folks who
are in favor of this development happening. What do we have to do to make
it happen? Well, to cause the development to be constructed, there has
to be an amendment to the FEMA F.I.R.M. map. Flood zone A as it currently
exists results in it looking like there should be 12' to 17' of fill on
this dirt. The existing FEMA map is in error. It's based on the best information
that was available at the time that the map was in fact prepared. That
information was not correct. There has been a study of the water shed upstream
and downstream, and FEMA has issued a conditional letter of map revision.
Want me to -----
President Mosby: No, that's all right.
Jerry Atkinson: The water shed...this
is Eickhoff Road right here. Right here, roughly, is where the Expressway
will pass through. This is David Weaver's house. Single family residences
in this pink area and condominiums in this pink area. This, the entire
pink area, is the existing flood zone A before the conditional letter of
map revision was issued. Based on the study that's been approved by FEMA
, only this green area will be the flood zone. No buildings will be built
in the flood zone, none what so ever. The water shed is the pink line all
the way around here. There's another finger to this, they come together
right here at the bridge at Wolfe Creek Drive. This outer yellow line is
the entire water shed for that unnamed tributary of Wolfe Creek. That has
already had a letter of map amendment, and this blue area now is the actual
flood zone A. The stream has been studied downstream for two, I'm sorry,
six hundred feet. There is a complete study of the complete water shed.
We have a letter from the DNR that indicates the cause of the size.
Commissioner Mourdock: Jerry, do you
have a (inaudible)?
Jerry Atkinson: Because of the size
of this being less than one square mile, DNR doesn't study. There's no
need to have approval in regard to that. Obviously, we have to get a permit
from DNR to correct the problem that's caused some flooding in this Subdivision.
When Wolfe Creek Drive was installed, that installation involved, I believe,
a 56' corrugated round pipe that's being replaced with a 5' by 6' box culvert.
The pipe was too small. I anticipate that you will see this evening, and
if you don't see the picture we can get it from the Plan Commission file,
you'll see a photograph of water going over the top of Wolfe Creek Drive.
The reason for that is that the pipe is too small under Wolfe Creek Drive.
That's also obstructed by timbers and other debris that is in there. The
developer is going to clear out the creek, not cut down trees, but clean
the creek. They are going to put an oversized culvert in, and are going
to build retention facilities that are six times what is required by the
Vanderburgh County ordinance to hold back water. There will be three ponds,
two of them will be good sized lakes in a park-like setting along the tree
line along the creek, the other one will be at the entrance and will have
an ornamental fountain in it.
Commissioner Mourdock: Let me clarify
something. I just want to be sure this is what you just stated. The current
Wolfe Creek Drive where the drainage is backing up is on the property of
the petitioner, is that right? You said there's an obstruction there he
will clean up.
Jerry Atkinson: It's a county dedicated
thoroughfare at this time.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay.
Jerry Atkinson: Isn't that right?
Wolfe Creek Drive, is it dedicated?
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, thank
you.
Jerry Atkinson: We have taken these
plans that we have and the conditional letter of map revision to the Building
Commissioner, to the County Engineer and to the County Surveyor. We have
what I call conceptual approval of what we're doing. There is a number
of conditions set forth in the conditional letter of map revision that
we have to comply with. We have to take out the undersized pipe, we have
to get necessary permits from necessary state agencies, the county has
to apply for the map amendment. That is typically done I'm told by the
Building Commissioner. We have to pay a fee of $3,400. We have to build
this, if you will, culvert and we have to submit as built plans and specifications.
The amended use and development commitment obligates the developer to do
all those things. To pay the money, to compete the process, to amend the
FEMA map, to also post the letter of credit to make sure that the project
is, the drainage project is built as designed so that the map can be amended.
This is a good project, this is a good land use, there has been confusion,
there has been misunderstanding. There is not a flooding problem, there
is not a drainage problem. There is not a flood plane problem , there is
not a fill problem. This is a residential use in a residential area. This
is a high end use, it's a quality use. It fits. It fits much more closely
to the folks in Key West than would fit some of the other uses that are
agricultural uses in the area. There is a consistency, and you should vote
for approval in this.
Jane Laib: Excuse me. We need to do
short tapes, 30 minute tapes tonight. We need to do a quick tape change.
Commissioner Mourdock: That's fine.
(Tape Change)
President Mosby: Are there any questions
of Mr. Atkinson?
Commissioner Mourdock: I don't have
any questions of you, Mr. Atkinson, but just from the proponent side of
this, are there others in the room who are supportive of this particular
project?
Jerry Atkinson: Yes, there are.
Commissioner Mourdock: Would they
like to speak?
Jerry Atkinson: There are some who
would like to speak.
Commissioner Mourdock: I would say
if we are going to do that, we ought to go ahead and do that now from the
proponent side.
President Mosby: Tom Haas.
Tom Haas: I just put that on there
in case there were any questions for me later on.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay.
Kenneth Myers: My name is Kenneth
Myers, I reside at 2819 Meadow Lark Court. I am for this project simply
because reaching the age of the empty-nesters, as it was spoken earlier,
we do not want to maintain property, we want to have somebody else to do
it for us. There is nothing available on the west side now . I've been
a west sider my entire life, and I hope to remain there. Therefore, we've
looked at this condominium project, we've looked at the one, I think, the
East Park Villa or River Park Villa or something like that. We've gone
through a couple of the units and like the concept very much. I do not
feel that it would be a negative thing for the neighborhood, I think it
would be an asset to it. The concept of the condominium life is intriguing
because of the way of life we've learned to be. I think it should be passed
because the project would be good for the community.
President Mosby: Any questions of
Mr. Myers? Is there anybody else who would like to speak for the project?
Patricia Freeman: My name is Patricia
Freeman, I reside at 9007 Farmington Drive on the west side of Evansville.
I have lived there for 44 years, and I hope to continue living on the west
side, but I too realize that there are not many alternatives other than
an apartment, and I'm not ready for that. I want to continue to be a homeowner.
We became acquainted with the Haas family about a year ago when we considered
downsizing, and they informed us that they were hoping to build some condos
in the future, so we were very excited about that. We are also very familiar
with another housing project of theirs, a subdivision, Heartland Ridge,
we have two friends who live there, we have been in their homes a number
of times and we've had an opportunity to observe the quality of construction.
We've been very impressed, and our friends are well pleased. We know that
the Haas' do ask that people who buy into their subdivisions help to maintain
the integrity of the community by turning on street lights at night, at
9:00 at night, which protects the safety of the community. They also require
that there are no mobile homes parked in the driveways, no boats, to maintain
the appearance of their development. I'm sure that they intend to carry
out that kind of integrity in this proposed project. We have condominiums
downtown, we have a number of them on the east side, we have a number of
them on the north side, but we don't have any on the west side, other than
a very small project on Boehne Camp Road. I know from my own personal experience,
and among my friends and acquaintances on the west side that there are
many of us who would like to stay there, but we have nowhere to go, so
we are very excited about this. We think the Haas family does quality work,
they maintain integrity, and we feel that we would be very happy living
in a condominium project that they have built. Thank you.
President Mosby: Any questions of
Ms. Freeman? Bill were you going to speak?
Bill Nicholson: No, I'm just here
to answer any questions that might come up.
President Mosby: Okay. Is there anyone
else who wanted to speak for the project? Seeing none. Paul Farmer.
Commissioner Mourdock: I guess, this
is a question for David, are we going to go simply through the order?
President Mosby: Exactly how they
signed up.
Commissioner Mourdock: How you signed
up is how you are called for.
President Mosby: I'm picking and choosing.
Pardon. Can we switch? There is just four. David, okay. Okay, so David
is going second, you are going third, and Jeff's going fourth.
Commissioner Mourdock: Next month
we'll announce it in advance. That is how you are going to speak.
President Mosby: There really was
only two of them out of line here.
Paul Farmer: My name is Paul Farmer,
I live at 3716 Koring Road on the west side of Evansville, and President
of the West Side Improvement Association. I would like to make a few comments.
You should have somewhere in your packet a letter from me indicating what
the West Side Improvement Association is willing to do. I want to also
begin by saying that I've know the Haas family for many years. Their quality
of work is just fabulous. I would want to live in one of their homes if
I could afford it, and was at the point in time of wanting to move. The
question is not the quality of home, it's not the quality of the people
who are building the development, it's merely, let's just take a look at
where this is and what the bigger picture is at this particular point in
time. There have been comments this evening that there has been some dialogue
with neighbors, and that dialogue was not resolving any problems, was not
always pleasant, and that's the way dialogue is when you get to zoning
issues and that sort of thing, and it takes dialogue over and over and
over again to build an understanding. Every time we sat at either an Area
Plan Committee meeting or at the Commissioner's meeting this evening, we
learn more and more in bits and pieces through their attorney, and that's
fine because we are learning that if you carry this on another seven or
eight months, we will see the whole picture. It would be kind of neat if
they would be willing to get together, show this to the entire community
of people who are involved with them, and we are willing as an organization
to help make that happen, if that is something that they would like to
do, and it is not a short period of time, just one meeting and one short
time, or whatever it would take to do that. We as an organization have
gone on record to be supportive of the neighbors, the closest neighbors,
and the things they are concerned about and want to support them, but we
feel from the West Side Improvement point of view, the issue is not this
development, even though we feel that the little piece of land where the
condos are is a smart use of that land because you can co-op with it and
you have a little short piece of land that you want to fill and get your
money out of it and that's fine, and they will do a quality job. The real
point is that this is along the Eickhoff Road project, and we know that
for the last two or three years the Eickhoff Road project has been expanded,
we know that there's been some properties at least negotiated for along
that way. We 've had a change in election of Commissioners, so nobody recently
has taken time to come to the west side and meet with the people one more
time and say this is where we are with this project. It is also beyond
the period of time where we just do something because somebody sold a piece
of property and we have a few remonstrators, that's not the purpose, the
purpose is today we're in that day and time when you need to take neighbors
in to consideration, you need to make some long range planning, we've talked
about long range planning on the west side for a long time. We blew the
62, as we well know, and that is continuing on and it gets better as time
goes on from time to time but nevertheless it is not a particular project
that was started, planned and fulfilled. We feel like this particular time
is an ideal time for the Eickhoff Road project to be brought forward, to
take a look at that, if not, you are going to be here meeting after meeting
after meeting after meeting with little piecemeal, because the next guy
is going to buy a farm, he's going to want to build something on it, pretty
soon you're going to have a store, all that sort of thing may be there
eventually, but it needs to be planned. Also, I think, this year is one
of the year's of looking at the comprehensive plan, bringing that up to
date, it's perhaps the time to look at that again. This still is considered
agricultural, at this particular point in time it also could be some residential
in R-1, and that's been spoken to this evening. We need to take a long
picture of that because even though we're going to be having maybe a frontage
road, eventually that gets out onto Eickhoff Road. The hill will be there
for a long time because there are lots of hills on the west side of town.
We found out from before the 62 project, you can move those hills, but
this one that they're concerned about with the busses will be there for
a long time. There are a lot of children that go to West Terrace school,
it's a route to that. It will eventually go into Hogue Road, and as it
expands out, we need to take a look at where is that going to be? What
kind of development do we need along there? So people understand that.
People are being asked to perhaps sell some of their property for the Eickhoff
Road extension, that is part of that process, where is that? People need
to know some of the potential happenings in that area as time goes on.
I'm offering to you to way-lay this, this evening, either to deny it if
that is what you have to do, or to put it on hold until there is some more
dialogue in the area . As an organization we are willing to sit down and
make sure that happens with you and members of the community and the members
of the development, because this is a great family, it's a good project
, they have a good track record in Newburgh and in the west side of Evansville,
and, I think, that if we did this, not only for this developer, but for
others, later on there might even be better things for them, more condominiums
in a different place. Thank you.
President Mosby: Any questions of
Mr. Farmer? Okay. David Taylor.
David Taylor: My name is David Taylor,
I live at 300 South Eickhoff Road, and I am here in opposition to the Wolfe
Creek project. I would like everyone that is opposed to this that is here
with us tonight to please raise their hand in a show of support in opposition.
First, I would like to mention that the vote from Area Plan Commission
was seven yes' and three no's and one abstained. The vote contained one
yes that I feel should not be counted. Mr. Herron's previous business relations
with Mr. Haas and without this vote the recommendation, it would come with
no recommendation from Area Plan. Now I would like to talk to you about
the R-3 zoning. On the maps I've given you, the purple lines indicate the
boundaries of three farms with livestock that adjoin this property. As
you can see on the smaller map, the four-plexes are very close to two of
these farms, both having horses, and one of them having cows. We all know
the nature of children, and these pastures are not safe places for kids
to play. These areas are not only dangerous for the children, but for the
animals as well. If the fence is cut or knocked down, the animals could
end up in the road, hit by a car, not only injuring or killing the animal,
but the vehicle in passing is also in great danger. The third farm along
Wolfe Creek has already had problems with people young and old in their
pastures just since the Wolfe Creek Drive was built. The area in orange
on the map is a single family home which is not in the project, as you
can see, the area takes up the majority of the land not in the flood plane.
The brown line has another creek they have not mentioned. This creek runs
through my property. I've seen this creek out of it's bank several times.
The pink flood zone area comes on to my property as well. Any fill in they
do on the Wolfe Creek property will adversely affect mine. I know the flood
zone is on my property, because I had to get an elevation certificate from
an engineer to obtain a building permit from the county earlier this year.
They talked about the screen. My house is the small dark blue square that
you can see on the map. They talk about leaving the tree line between R-1
and R-3. They also said the would clean the creek, now it's my understanding
that if you clean the creek, that is going to involve removing the trees.
Living in this area there's no other way you can clean that creek up, straighten
it out without removing the trees. There is no screen between the four-plexes
and my house. The other three will be on two sides of my property, if you
look this is my property here, they border on two sides. I would have to
look out my kitchen window and see these everyday. The multi-family dwellings,
the parking lots and all the cars. I also called Mission Viejo and Copper
Creek Townhouses for the people who didn't want yard work, and as of last
week there were 14 openings in Mission Viejo and Copper Creek, which is
still under construction, will have another 191 units available by the
end of the year, that is if construction stays on schedule. The third place
is on Boehne Camp Road as is mentioned, they are condominiums for sale,
they include garages and elevators for people. This is an approximate 12
acre parcel of land, it will be like an island development with no room
to expand. The other property owners and myself surrounding this property
have no desire to sell. This is too small of an area for this kind of development.
I would like to thank you for your time and ask for your vote of no on
this issue.
President Mosby: Any questions of
David?
Commissioner Mourdock: Just a quick
question, Mr. Taylor. I hear most of your comments, or at least it seems
most of them are directed at the condo side of this, the R-3 side, is that
fair to say?
David Taylor: Yes.
Commissioner Mourdock: If that side
was R-1 would there be any less concern that you would have for those houses
against your property?
David Taylor: If it was R-1, and instead
of having 32 families in eight buildings back there, if they had five or
six houses it would be not near as much of a concern. You've only got four,
five or six families instead of 32 then.
Commissioner Mourdock: I guess that
raises the question in my mind, would families in condos tend to have more
kids, or families in single family residences have more kids? You were
concerned about kids getting in-
David Taylor: I don't know the answer
to that question, but if you've got 32 families versus six families, the
chances are you are going to have more children involved.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay.
President Mosby: Any questions?
David Taylor: Thank you.
President Mosby: Mr. Krocker.
Rich Krocker: My name is Rich Krocker,
I live at 100 South Eickhoff Road, and I would be on the north side of
this development across Wolfe Creek. In the first attempt to pass this
by FEMA, they were just going to replace the existing 54" culvert with
a new 60" culvert. Since this first submittal, FEMA has informed them that
they must install a 6' by 5' box culvert based on the plan development.
Mr. Nicholson states that this development will not allow any more water
to flow to Eickhoff Road. If this is true, then why must they install a
new culvert under Wolfe Creek Drive that more than doubles the water flow
capacity from the current opening size of 12.53 square feet to one with
30 square feet? They have submitted a drawing showing the Eickhoff Road
bridge. The elevation on the bridge itself is more than 15' below the base
flood elevation. Mr. Jeffers corrected me on that earlier, it's not quite
that far below. The drawing indicates that the 100 year storm will only
reach an elevation of 444.1, leaving 2.7' between the high water and the
bottom of the bridge. This drawing only represents the flood waters from
the south branches, and it does not include the water from the north branch.
I would like to have informed you of what the additional flow from the
north branch represents, but the study submitted to FEMA in June of 1998
is missing from the file held at the Building Commissioner's office. So,
I couldn't get the information. I also can't comment on the DNR letter,
because I couldn't get a copy of that either, so I'm just going to go from
here. FEMA's response has come in the form of a conditional letter of map
revision dated December 13, 2000. Simply stated the letter says that the
culvert size increase will allow more water to flow under Wolf Creek Drive
and reduce the flood potential along that portion of the creek. The FEMA
letter specifically states that the future development in this area is
not recognized in this submittal , the FEMA letter is clear that any future
development upstream will have an adverse affect on the flood issues. FEMA
recommends a full comprehensive study be done on this area to ensure these
hazards are eliminated. I've attached that, and on the second page I've
highlighted that paragraph. Mr. Nicholson says that the entire creek has
been studied. This is only true in the vaguest sense. The two branches
of the creek were studied separately and for completely separate reasons.
The north branch was studied in 1998 to study the drainage from Heartland
Ridge north of Hogue Road, and the south branch was studied in 1999 for
the development we are discussing. The two studies have not been looked
at or linked together to provide the whole picture. Neither of these studies
takes into the account future development of the Haas property consisting
of 24 acres, which lies about 1400' off Eickhoff Road directly behind my
property. I've -
Commissioner Mourdock: Which direction
is that, Mr. Krocker, from the properties that are under consideration
tonight?
Rich Krocker: I can show you on the
map here. My property is right here.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, so it
would be north-
Rich Krocker: It would be east . Right
here.
Commissioner Mourdock: Over there,
okay. It doesn't come all the way over to Eickhoff?
Rich Krocker: No, sir. Actually on
the next little map, the FEMA flood has a map, and I had them put that
in. Here is the Wolfe Creek Drive development, and I'm placed right here
in this finger, between the two branches, and the future Haas development
is right behind, and then ,of course, Eickhoff-Koressel is west. They have
presented the nicely colored drawings that indicate nothing is wrong in
creek land, but if you look closely at these drawings, and that would be
one that Mr. Taylor had handed out before, and you refer to the conditional
letter sent by FEMA, which states that at a point 600' off stream from
Eickhoff Road the flood plane will be narrowed to a maximum 480', you will
find that the creek will still run over the existing bank by at least 20'
in the area that I pointed out. Their statement that the water will remain
within the creek banks is inaccurate. Mr. Atkinson has stated that we should
only look at the current project at hand, and that any future development
must be regarded on it's own merits. We disagree with this logic, especially
when we are dealing with a flood plane issue. Based on the fact that a
new survey conducted by an outside source will only cost the county little
or perhaps nothing, this is stated in the attached FEMA letter dated June
14th, and I've highlighted that also. It says that, this request
based on a project that was at least 50% federally funded will result in
no fees assessed to the requestor. We need to accept the government's funding
offer and study the entire creek as it relates to the current and future
development. I have a feeling that it is funded that way because of Eickhoff-Koressel
Road, would be my thinking on that, I'm not sure. The attached area drainage
map, I think, Mr Atkinson, had a much prettier picture than mine, but ,
shows the whole drainage area, and it takes into consideration over 400
acres that this water shed consists of. All the water that flows over that
site, flows to site A on that map, which is located at Roesner Road just
south of Hogue Road, it actually extends further than that. That stream
carries on into Posey County. Flooding pictures that I've taken really
tell the story of the flooding potential at present, without taking into
account the future development of this area. The amount of rain that caused
this was only 3.38" in a 24 hour period. The 100 year rainfall according
to the FEMA flooding maps is 7". If you go through them pretty much in
order, you will see that it has overflowed Wolfe Creek Drive, these are
where the condos are going to be located. Again, a picture of Wolfe Creek
Drive showing it coming over the road, and kind of a panoramic view, so
to speak, where it shows how that water flows down off the hills. A picture
of the Eickhoff Road bridge, I was standing on the bridge looking northeast,
and it shows that the water, that the bridge will not handle the water,
it's running off away from the bridge. This would be the bridge on my property,
my neighbors' sits over here, so all this water is flowing towards him.
There is a picture of me under my bridge, you can see that it holds a tremendous
amount of water. I estimated it at about 5700 gallons of water, it would
be the same as like a 12' by 12' by 4' deep pool. These are panoramic shots
looking off my front porch so that it would be looking west at the north
branch of the creek. You can see that it is overflowing and going towards
my neighbors house. The same thing with this one, there are a couple of
pictures in here that show the whole story of it, it's coming over the
banks real good. There are two pictures, and these are kind of hard to
see, really, but they are creek erosion, and you can see that the tree
is several feet away from the bank. This is towards the middle of the creek,
so the erosion is eating away at the whole tree. The same with this one.
It's not going to be long before these trees are falling in the creek also.
Finally, I've attached the petition against this rezoning, and it's got
95 signatures on it. Some of the people couldn't be here tonight because,
unfortunately, one of the neighbors passed away and the funeral was held
today, so we don't have as many as we would like tonight. I can answer
any questions. Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't quite finished. We had Richard Funk
with the Core of Engineers, he visited the site this morning and indicated
that permits from the Core alone will certainly be needed on the project,
and Mr. Funk also recommended that a complete and comprehensive survey
be done on this area, because the site, in his estimation, was not a very
good type of development for this area. Finally, the best mitigation for
flood zone areas is not to build on them, and we ask you to deny this request.
Thank you for your time.
President Mosby: Jeff Bowlin.
Jane Laib: We need to do another tape
change.
(Tape Change)
President Mosby: Okay. We're back
on.
Jeff Bowlin: Ladies and Gentlemen
of the Council, I'll be brief and try to cover something new and fresh.
My name is Jeff Bowlin, my address is 310 Key West Drive. I live on the
end of the cul-de-sac in Key West Estates nearest the proposed rezoning.
I'm not a lawyer or a local businessman, I'm just a guy trying to raise
a family and save for retirement. We are very concerned about the traffic,
the flooding and the possible occupants of these condominiums. I want to
discuss another long term impact on my family, one you may not hear often
in this situation, but it is very real. The financial impact. I would like
to present you with a quick hypothetical scenario just to kind of discuss
my point, suppose the Haas Development Corporation builds $1,000,000 worth
of luxury condominiums within a couple hundred yards of my home, and suppose
again in round numbers the Haas Development Corporation makes a margin
of 20% on this investment, or $200,000 on a $1,000,000 investment. Now
look at the impact on me and my neighbors. If our homes average approximately
$200,000 and our property values drop just 10% due to the multi-family
housing next door, I've just lost $20,000. If this happens to the first
five homes on each side of the street, the existing property values drop
as much as the developer's net gain. My wife and I already both need to
work to provide for our children and our future. Our home is an investment,
and a decrease in value now adds to the burden, and a decrease in value
now adds to the burden of working longer before we can retire. I'm only
35 years old, but I am seriously concerned about retirement. Also, I'm
sure that you, the County Commission, are interested in growing the tax
revenue to support the county infrastructure. The potential property tax
revenue for this multi-family development could be overshadowed by a drop
in tax revenue resulting in a significant decrease in adjacent property
values. This could be a lose-lose situation from a business standpoint.
All I ask of this council is that you give no more weight to the rights
of the Haas Development Corporation than you give to us, the individual
homeowners trying to provide for their families. You can do this by allowing
only single family homes to be built on this property. Thank you for your
time and consideration.
President Mosby: Any questions? That's
all the names I have that are signed up here. Mr. Atkinson, did you want
a couple of minutes to answer any of the questions?
Jerry Atkinson: You've seen some pictures,
and if I could approach to point out, this is in fact Wolfe Creek Drive.
Water runs downhill. Obstructed water puddles, ponds, overflows the top
of the roadway, that's what happens because of the small pipe, and because
of the debris that is in the ditch. That situation will be totally and
completely corrected, that's how the amendment to the FEMA map will occur,
that won't exist anymore. This is not Wolfe Creek Drive, this is not Eickhoff
Road, this is a driveway and there is substantial distance between the
top of the water passing under the driveway bridge and the bridge itself.
The entire basin has been studied, I guess, it was another photograph,
but that's alright, it has been studied, not just one time, it's been studied
twice for two different purposes, two different amendments to a map that
is consistently incorrect. This has also been federalized a little in terms
of yet another study, the elevations, if you will, in the basement subdivision,
that 's where the stream was coming through the land to be rezoned, start
at 447.58', there is a 9% grade, the rate of fall is 9/10 of a foot for
every 100' through the 1400 plus feet of the subdivision, the water is
coming downhill. On the Krocker property, which is the north branch of
this unnamed tributary on Wolfe Creek Drive, the drop is from 451.5 to
436.46, that's a 1.1' per 100' drop in the elevation as the water comes
through. Downstream, and this has been studied 600' downstream, downstream
there is a rate of fall of 6/10 per foot in the first 600', 6/10 per foot
per 100'. The flow capacity of the Eickhoff Bridge, and if you look there
are some charts behind the cover page. The flow capacity of the Eickhoff
Bridge, which would be your second exhibit, is a 172.4 cfs, cubic feet
per second. Downstream of that, the rate of flow is 292 feet per second,
now what I might say, I'm saying a couple of simple things, water goes
downhill, if the gradiant of the stream bed is sharp enough, if the fall
is sharp enough, water doesn't pond, it doesn't puddle. If it gets to a
bridge, and the opening in the bridge is big enough, you are not going
to have back water from, in this particular situation any water backing
up at the Eickhoff Bridge, you are not going to have any flooding onto
Krocker as a result of this development, because the rate of flow carries
away everything that goes under the Eickhoff Bridge, the rate of flow is
greater downstream. Head water will pass through the bridge without obstruction,
back water doesn't happen because of the downstream slope, if you will.
Is there going to be a flooding problem caused because of this development?
No, there is not. Is there going to be fill dirt caused by this development,
for the purpose of flood control? No, there is not. Was the FEMA map wrong?
Yes, it was. Is it being amended? Yes, it is. Where is flood zone A? The
top of the creek bank. Do we build any buildings, any houses, any condominiums
on flood zone A? Not even one. Has there been a study? There has been a
study, Mr. Nicholson is here, he can explain to you the things that I have
said in a shorthand fashion, he can give you the technical explanation
for it, but he has not just done two separate requests for FEMA map amendments,
he has taken into consideration all of the data from both of those, because
he did the work on both of those. The issue really is not flooding, and
I can't say it any more vigorously than that. The pictures create a false
impression. There will be water going downstream, there will be three lakes,
there will be no greater discharge of water, and, I think this is the biggest
insight with regard to the water situation coming out of the project, after
the project is developed and the retention ponds are in place, in a 100
year storm, 100 year flood, where Franklin and St. Joe would be under water
from the deluge, you are not going to have as much water coming out of
the development as comes out of there now. It is over designed, it is intentionally
over designed with six times the county ordinance retention capacity to
prevent that from being a problem. Do you have any questions?
President Mosby: Any questions? Do
you have any type of buffer plan? Any type of buffer on this property at
all?
Commissioner Mourdock: While you are
coming up to the mike, why don't you come up and show us on this set of
photos, because my question was going to be something similar to that.
Jerry Atkinson: We had originally
had several conversations, in fact the neighbors had proposed tree screening
between Key West, and as I understand we are certainly willing to do that
between Key West and the adjacent condominiums?
Tom Haas: Yes, we are.
Jerry Atkinson: If additional owners
on each side would like some trees along the property line, I think, you
would be receptive to that as well, would you not?
Tom Haas: Yes, we would.
Commissioner Mourdock: State your
name.
Tom Haas: My name is Tom Haas, I live
at 29 Faith Way. We had done our past development in Heartland Ridge, we
also met a wall of remonstrators on that also, and several, three or four
different people that were in that neighborhood that were remonstrating
against us decided to move into our subdivision because they liked what
we were doing. We did work with those people in the respect that we said
we would go in and plant some pine trees on their property for screening,
and we would be open to doing the same thing that we did in the past.
President Mosby: Okay, just so I got
you on the tape. You are willing to work with the neighbors on a buffer?
You are willing to-
Tom Haas: We are willing to do-
President Mosby: At your expense?
Tom Haas: On their property.
President Mosby: On their property.
Philip Hayes: Would you be willing
to make it a covenant? Use a private covenant?
Jerry Atkinson: I think the answer
to that is, yes, we would. We have been willing to give them a covenant
with regard to a number of things, and that too is subject to being done,
the problem is the dialogue broke down, it didn't end because we didn't
want to talk and we didn't want to make them happier, we simply aren't
having communication about what kind of buffer they would like, and we
would be receptive to do that, and I am sure you have no objection to committing
to do that in a way that is enforceable.
Tom Haas: We are not.
President Mosby: The other question
I had is. The ditch cleaning, what are you intending to do, are you going
to dredge the bottom of it, are you planning on?---
Tom Haas: We plan on going and removing
any trees that would potentially fall into the creek, leaving all trees
that were possible to leave for the buffer. We wouldn't just strip the
stream clear for any reason. We want to leave that buffer for both the
benefit of the condominiums and of the single family dwellings, but we
also want to make sure that existing trees will not fall into that and
cause a problem.
Jerry Atkinson: I might add, because
this is a condominium project, we're going to have a park-like setting
that is going to be maintained by the owner's association. If this were
a subdivision with six or seven houses along one side, and then six or
seven houses along the other side, those neighborhood associations don't
work as efficiently or effectively, in my experience, as condominium associations
do, where there is a management entity that is employed by the association
to take care of all the grounds. This will be a maintained waterway, they
will be maintained lakes, it will be quite attractive.
President Mosby: Any questions?
Commissioner Mourdock: Mr. Atkinson
made the comment, Mr. Haas needs to answer, I'm just setting up the question.
Mr. Atkinson made the comments that in the eight condos the eight buildings
that will be constructed, you will have 4,000 square feet in each of those,
and each of the condo units would then have 1,000', is that correct?
Tom Haas: Actually, I believe, it's
a maximum of 8,000 square feet for one whole building, with four units
making 8,000 feet total square footage.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, so roughly
2,000' for each condo.
Tom Haas: Yeah, and down from there.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, and then
you went on to say that the pricing would vary as much as from $120,000
to $200,000 for each unit?
Tom Haas: Yes, we have different square
footages starting around, I believe, 1300 square feet going up to 2100
square feet or two thousand one hundred.
Commissioner Mourdock: When you did
Heartland there were no condos there, correct?
Tom Haas: Not in Heartland, no there
wasn't.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. On the
set of photos that were provided to us, would you come up and kind of identify
the areas where the condos would be versus where the single family would
be?
Tom Haas: Okay. Here is Eickhoff Road,
you turn in here, and this is Wolfe Creek Drive right here, the condominiums
would be on this side, let's see if there is a better picture....Jerry,
you put these picture in here, where would the condos be? This is a single
family dwelling right here, this is a single family dwelling-
Jerry Atkinson: All of the (inaudible)---
President Mosby: Would this one help
us any?
Jerry Atkinson: This is the best shot.
This is Wolfe Creek Drive, it comes in here, it comes to a cul-de-sac,
Mr. Weaver's house is here-
Commissioner Mourdock: Wait a minute,
this is Wolfe Creek Drive.
Jerry Atkinson: No, no, the drive
actually comes right here.
Tom Haas: No, no this is it, Jerry.
This is Eickhoff.
Jerry Atkinson: Oh, I'm upside down.
This is Wolfe Creek Drive.
President Mosby: Here we go, this
is a picture of it right here.
Jerry Atkinson: This is the rest of,
this is Mr. Weaver's house, these are houses, this is a wooded tree lag,
and all, literally, you can't see very well through the trees to the location
from Mr. Weaver's house, so we want very much to do...
President Mosby: Yeah, here's Eickhoff,
here's , yeah, this is Wolfe Creek.
Tom Haas: We will come off it here
and then we're going to install a road coming up here. These won't accommodate-
President Mosby: Did you see the existing
big house back here with the cul-de-sac, here?
Commissioner Mourdock: That's not
existing, this is existing.
President Mosby: Oh, this-
Jerry Atkinson: These are the three
lakes, one, two, three.
Commissioner Mourdock: Just to be
fair here, the comment was made by one of the remonstrators about some
property that you otherwise have to the east and somewhat to the north,
do you care to comment what your development plans are for that as it relates
to all of this?
Tom Haas: We have envisioned putting
single family dwellings coming off of Hogue Road. We have preliminary layouts,
but we haven't finalized anything.
Commissioner Mourdock: The roads that
you have envisioned that you would build here do not connect to that property?
Tom Haas: No, they do not.
Jerry Atkinson: If you are asking
about property adjacent to this. There is no current plan for any development
for any property adjacent to this. This is a self- contained, one shot
deal, there is no road going anywhere. They have no right to purchase any
adjacent property at this point for any purpose.
Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, I understand,
you are talking about adjacent properties, I was just wanting to put on
the record the specific comment that was made about the other Haas property,
and, I think, that what you are saying is, if it's single family it would
be off Hogue Road at some point in the future, and that road would not
connect to this.
Jerry Atkinson: That's at another...that
is (inaudible)--
Tom Haas: Our property that we own
now off of Hogue Road does not physically touch this road, it doesn't in
any spot.
President Mosby: Any other questions?
Anybody have any new information to add? New info? Come forward, give us
your name and address.
Leanne Scholz: My name is Leanne Scholz,
I'm a resident of the Heartland Ridge Subdivision. I'm 330 Faith Way. I
didn't sign up originally because I really didn't have anything to say
and I just kind of came in support of some other homeowners on Eickhoff
Road. Some of the comments I've heard from Haas and from their family and
the lawyers and the opposers, Haas is saying that they're willing to work
with the residents, that they are willing to put barriers up like they
have done on Heartland Ridge. What they haven't told you is that the barriers
that they put up are about 2' tall, and they are probably slow growing,
so it will be about 15 to 20 years before that becomes a barrier. That
particular resident has their back of the house facing Hogue Road. I'm
the black sheep of the neighborhood, because Haas didn't build my house,
another builder built it, and had a lot of issues that had to be worked
out with Haas, they don't give and take, and that's a concern of mine,
is they say they will do it, but it's like pulling teeth from a hippopotamus,
it's almost impossible. That's all I have to say. Thank you.
President Mosby: Thank you very much.
Tom Haas: I would very much be interested
in what way you have asked us to do that we have not done.
President Mosby: I need to tell you,
you need to address us, in truth, we're not here to discuss that, because...
understand one thing, we're only here for land use-
Tom Haas: Okay.
President Mosby: -and we'll have Drainage
Board down the road here if this passes, and I mean a lot of the, you know,
flooding problems will be discussed at that meeting, and Mr. Jeffers and
John Stoll, but we're here really for land use. Now I would ask you one
question, awhile ago when I asked you about buffers, I would be talking
about something five or six foot, I wouldn't be talking about a little
one or two foot pine tree. You might want to answer that.
Tom Haas: I think we would be willing
to go more than that. One of the reasons we chose that size tree, initially
when you first plant a tree that size it takes a long time for it to start
growing fast, and whenever you plant a seedling, it's smaller, but then
it catches up with the taller trees, because you do not cut the root system
out of it and it does not go into shock and have to reestablish itself,
but we would be willing to go with higher trees if (inaudible).
President Mosby: That was one question
that really needed to be answered. Something new? I need you on the mike,
it's all being recorded.
David Taylor: As I stated earlier,
the surrounding properties on the three farms are in pasture use, the primary
source of a pasture is grass, you go planting pine trees on our property,
a mature pine tree will have at least a 30' spread, they have been planting
white pines predominantly, if that's what they planted there, it would
be at least a 30' spread and the full length of your property, you are
liable to lose several acres of your pasture under a pine tree. Grass does
not grow under pine trees, so any buffers would really need to be on their
property. Thank you.
President Mosby: Any other questions?
Patricia Freeman: It seems that the
main concerns of the opposition is flooding and Eickhoff Road, I would
like to ask the Commissioners, have you ever in the past had anybody who
lives on Eickhoff Road come to you and complain about flooding?
President Mosby: I haven't been here
long enough.
Commissioner Mourdock: I've been here
too long, and I don't know that there is a road in the county, the County
Surveyor here could probably answer better than me, but I don't know that
there are many areas in this county that at one time or another we haven't
gotten someone to complain about flooding. I mean, given the-
Patricia Freeman: I've traveled that
road many times and I have never in my 44 years on the west side been through
that road when there was water across it, or that I saw any apparent flooding,
and I would further like to say that I can't imagine a builder being dumb
enough to build something in an area that's going to flood, because it's
all going to come back on him, eventually.
Commissioner Mourdock: I could give
you that list too, it has happened, but let me just define something because
it is a term that doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, flooding versus
simply having water backed up because of an obstruction is two different
things, and some of the worst, quote flooding, we've seen is when there
have been obstructions, and I remember the one, in fact, Jane I remember
walking through your neighborhood one time when there was water ankle deep
in garages and everything else and it wasn't so much because of just the
topography, it's just because there was a temporary flooding with leaves
and obstruction and all that stuff.
Patricia Freeman: It appears to me
that has been thought of in this situation because they are proposing to
clean out a creek that is a contributory to the ditch, they are also proposing
to build retention ponds to take care of that flooding, and that is probably
more above and beyond what many developments do.
President Mosby: That's why I say
that will be addressed at Drainage Board, I mean, that's really not what
we're addressing tonight.
Patricia Freeman: Everybody has been
talking about-
President Mosby: I know, and I should
have probably stated that at the beginning, but I didn't. Something new?
Jerry Atkinson: Something new.
President Mosby: Okay.
Jerry Atkinson: They should have passed
these out to you earlier. Mr. Krocker has indicated earlier to the Plan
Commission that Roger Lehman and Bill Jeffers indicated that there needed
to be a whole study of...a completed project , or something to that effect,
I have visited with Roger Lehman and with Bill Jeffers and the position
of the Surveyor and the Building Commissioner has not changed from their
view earlier. They are not, in fact, recommending the study. It has been
done.
President Mosby: Okay. What's this?
Are there any other questions by any member of the Commission? Seeing none.
The chair will entertain a motion. We need to roll call don't we?
Commissioner Mourdock: Yes, we do,
and we need to make the motion in the affirmative here as we do with all
motions, then there is obviously a roll call vote to follow. I will move
approval for VC-12-2000 for 8300 Wolfe Creek Drive to rezone from Ag and
R-1 to, I'm sorry, from Ag to R-1 and R-3 with the use and development
commitment .
Commissioner Fanello: I'll second.
President Mosby: I have a motion to
adopt and call the roll in a second. Commissioner Mourdock.
Commissioner Mourdock: As it was said
here a minute ago, the issue is not really drainage, I don't think that
is a problem that is otherwise insurmountable, the discussion about the
F.I.R.M. maps and all those things, I don't see that as being the issue
here. I certainly do not see the issue as being the quality of the homes,
Mr. Haas and his company, certainly Heartland Ridge is one of the finer
developments out in the county, and I don't have any doubt that this would
be done as well. If this were, for me, all single family residential this
would be a very easy vote, the only real question is the condos, and I
think Mr. Farmer earlier made the comment about are we doing the right
thing by going to multi family with all of the other changes out in that
area, and this is a tough one, I will vote no, because I'm note sure the
condos are necessarily compatible with what else is there.
Commissioner Fanello: I agree with
Richard that the issues of (inaudible), but I don't see any problem with
the development, so I will vote yes.
President Mosby: As I stated earlier,
I think this is, the drainage part of it has to be addressed at the Drainage
Board. I was out there today, and I looked around the surrounding neighborhood,
and I would most definitely rather see residential go in here than any
type of commercial that we might start with, and looking at that I will
vote yes. Being two yes's and one no, VC-12-2000 is hear by declared a
docket.
Commissioner Mourdock: Since this
is your first meeting, the way we need to sign this is the two of you do
sign it and then I will not sign it since I did not move for it, which
is just normal rule.
President Mosby: Okay.
Commissioner Mourdock: Seeing no other
business before us, I will move for adjournment.
Commissioner Fanello: Second.
President Mosby: Hold on. I have a
motion and a second. So ordered.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30.
Those in attendance:
David Mosby
Catherine Fanello
Richard Mourdock
Philip Hayes
Jane Laib
Madelyn Grayson
Jerry Atkinson
Beverly Behme
Tom Haas
Kenneth Myers
Patricia Freeman
Bill Nicholson
David Taylor
Rich Krocker
Jeff Bowlin
Leanne Scholz
Other Unidentified
Recorded by Jane Laib and transcribed
by Madelyn Grayson.
Vanderburgh County
Board of Commissioners
_____________________________
David W. Mosby, President
_____________________________
Catherine Fanello, Vice President
_____________________________
Richard E. Mourdock, Member
Recorded and transcribed by Jane Laib
|