Floyd County BZA
Live stream not working or buffering in Chrome or Edge?
Troubleshooting steps
In your browser: open Menu (three dots) → Settings → System → turn off “Use graphics acceleration when available.” Then restart the browser.
Transcript
| Hi, good afternoon everybody. I would like to call tonight's meeting at the Floyd County Board of Zoning Appeals, umm. | 00:00:01 | |
| To order. | 00:00:08 | |
| And. | 00:00:09 | |
| It is 5:00 exactly. | 00:00:10 | |
| And today is Monday, April. | 00:00:13 | |
| 13th. | 00:00:15 | |
| So we'll begin with roll call. | 00:00:16 | |
| Mr. Beeble. | 00:00:19 | |
| Here here. | 00:00:20 | |
| Here here. | 00:00:23 | |
| Here, OK, we do have a full board, so we will move on from there. | 00:00:26 | |
| Next item on our agenda this evening is the minutes of our March 9th meeting. | 00:00:31 | |
| We also umm. | 00:00:36 | |
| Have had a subsequent meeting since then on the 26th, but those minutes were not prepared, so I'm going to ask that we just | 00:00:38 | |
| discuss and vote on the minutes of the ninth meeting. | 00:00:43 | |
| Those were circulated in advance, so I would entertain any. | 00:00:47 | |
| Corrections, comments, or. | 00:00:52 | |
| Edits to those. | 00:00:54 | |
| I'll make a motion to approve. | 00:00:56 | |
| OK. We have a motion. Do we have a 2nd I'll second. | 00:00:57 | |
| Motion is second. All those in favor signify by saying aye aye. | 00:01:00 | |
| Any opposed like son the minutes? | 00:01:03 | |
| Are passed for the March 9th meeting. | 00:01:06 | |
| We will review the others in our next meeting. | 00:01:08 | |
| We do not have any announcements that I'm aware of this evening, although. | 00:01:13 | |
| I would like to introduce a new member of our board this evening. Mr. Mark Lawrence is here. | 00:01:17 | |
| He's joined the board since our last meeting and we're happy to have him. So welcome. | 00:01:22 | |
| Thank you very much. Appreciate it. | 00:01:26 | |
| All right, we'll jump right into our. | 00:01:28 | |
| Agenda this evening. | 00:01:30 | |
| The first three items on our agenda. | 00:01:32 | |
| Are all from the same applicant. | 00:01:35 | |
| So is the applicant or their representative here? | 00:01:37 | |
| For items one through 3. | 00:01:41 | |
| Come forward and I'm gonna make a statement and ask you a question. So hang on one moment here. | 00:01:45 | |
| So what we often do? | 00:01:49 | |
| When we have multiple items for the same applicant. | 00:01:52 | |
| Is we ask if they're OK if we. | 00:01:54 | |
| If we hear them as one or at one time. | 00:01:57 | |
| And then vote on them separately that it's just more efficient for everyone else that's here. Are you OK with we do that? | 00:02:00 | |
| Yes, we agree to that. Sure. | 00:02:06 | |
| OK, that's fine. | 00:02:08 | |
| And then I understand that you may have an interest in withdrawing one of the three. Yes, the owner has a. | 00:02:08 | |
| Agree to withdrawal of. | 00:02:14 | |
| The item for the required sidewalks. | 00:02:17 | |
| OK, Thank you. And I made a mistake. I should have asked you to state your name and address for the record, please. My name is | 00:02:20 | |
| Todd Lanning. | 00:02:23 | |
| And I'm with a milestone group. | 00:02:26 | |
| And our address is 108. | 00:02:28 | |
| Daventry Lane, Suite 200. | 00:02:30 | |
| Are actually Suite 300. | 00:02:34 | |
| And it's Louisville, KY. | 00:02:35 | |
| 40223. | 00:02:37 | |
| OK. Thank you, Todd. We will call you back up in just a moment. Thank you. | 00:02:39 | |
| And just for clarification, agenda item 2FC0326-14, the sidewalk request, is that correct? | 00:02:43 | |
| Yeah, FC 03. | 00:02:56 | |
| 20. | 00:02:58 | |
| 14, yeah, that is your request withdrawal. That's the request. Thank you. | 00:02:59 | |
| Folks, I have a question for the audience. Were you guys able to hear her just now? | 00:03:05 | |
| Yeah. | 00:03:09 | |
| You couldn't hear him. | 00:03:11 | |
| OK. | 00:03:13 | |
| It is working. Thank you. | 00:03:17 | |
| OK, so so moving on with our agenda this evening, the first item on our agenda is FC-03-206-13. It is a development standards | 00:03:19 | |
| variance. | 00:03:24 | |
| And Frank is going to give us the. | 00:03:29 | |
| The staff report. | 00:03:31 | |
| And the antigen to item 3 which is FC. | 00:03:34 | |
| Dash 03-206-15. | 00:03:37 | |
| Correct. | 00:03:40 | |
| Also, I've got the updated site construction plans which I didn't have previously. We got these today. | 00:03:42 | |
| So I've got a copy here for the board. | 00:03:49 | |
| And that includes some of the updates that have been made based on recommendations and stuff. | 00:03:57 | |
| So docket number FC32613, petitioner TTCJ Properties, LLC. | 00:04:02 | |
| Representative Chad Ernst and Todd Lanning. | 00:04:09 | |
| Location 4865 Old Vinson Rd. Floyds Knobs IN. | 00:04:11 | |
| Request development standards variance from the minimum size. | 00:04:16 | |
| And the zoning district is general commercial. | 00:04:19 | |
| Applicant is seeking a development standards variance from Section 4.44 of the Floyd County Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial | 00:04:21 | |
| structure to have less than the minimum 2000 square foot requirement. | 00:04:27 | |
| In the general commercial zoning district. | 00:04:32 | |
| For extra clarification, that was. | 00:04:35 | |
| To be 440 square feet for the proposed structure. | 00:04:37 | |
| This property is a non conforming lot with 0.45 acres located along Old Vincennes Road near the Highway 150 intersection. | 00:04:40 | |
| And currently has a non conforming commercial building on the lot. | 00:04:48 | |
| The existing non conforming structure will be removed and a new non conforming structure is being proposed. | 00:04:51 | |
| The proposed development is located between two gas stations with the Highland subdivision to the South. | 00:04:56 | |
| There's not currently sidewalk provided along the stretch of Oldinson's Road. | 00:05:01 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:05:05 | |
| A non conforming structure is already present on the site. | 00:05:10 | |
| And given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Benson's Road, a larger structure which struggled to fit on the site with | 00:05:13 | |
| adequate parking and navigation. | 00:05:16 | |
| The petitioner has agreed to write in write out acts. | 00:05:19 | |
| Write out only access to the site to mitigate traffic concerns. | 00:05:22 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be subject to sorry will not be affected | 00:05:26 | |
| in a substantially adverse manner. | 00:05:30 | |
| Because the non conforming structure currently exists on the site and the adjacent uses are gas stations which are a much more | 00:05:34 | |
| intensive use than anything else nearby. | 00:05:38 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:05:42 | |
| because. | 00:05:44 | |
| Given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Vincennes Rd. A larger structure which struggled to fit on the site with | 00:05:47 | |
| adequate parking and navigation. | 00:05:51 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:05:54 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:06:01 | |
| A technical review committee was hosted on February 19th where concerns were raised over car stacking for the drive through and | 00:06:02 | |
| people turning left into the site from open Sends Rd. | 00:06:06 | |
| The county engineer recommended a write in write out access to Old Vincennes Road and signage stating do not block intersection. | 00:06:10 | |
| Applicant has submitted an updated development plan showing the write in write out access. | 00:06:17 | |
| The stormwater director also requested that the parking and dumpster at the rear of the site be flipped. | 00:06:21 | |
| So that the dumpster was further from the stormwater channel in the West and the detention basin for the Highlands. As an extra | 00:06:25 | |
| note, the plan that I. | 00:06:28 | |
| Just submitted to you guys. Has that reflected on it? | 00:06:32 | |
| Staff Recommendations. | 00:06:35 | |
| Whereas the site is currently non conforming at 0.45 acres, Currently has a non conforming structure under the minimum square | 00:06:37 | |
| footage requirement. | 00:06:40 | |
| Will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, general welfare of the community or on the value of the adjacent | 00:06:43 | |
| properties. | 00:06:46 | |
| And we're strict adherence to the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties. Staff has no recommended conditions for | 00:06:49 | |
| approval of this petition. | 00:06:52 | |
| Moving to the next. | 00:06:58 | |
| Agenda item 3. | 00:06:59 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/15. | 00:07:01 | |
| Petitioner TTCJ Properties, LLC Representative Chad Ernst and Todd Landing. | 00:07:04 | |
| Same location. | 00:07:09 | |
| Request was development standards variance for transparency. | 00:07:11 | |
| And also zoning district of general commercial. | 00:07:14 | |
| Applicant is seeking a development standards variance from Section 8.06, Item E, one of the Floyd County Zoning Ordinance, to | 00:07:18 | |
| allow a commercial structure in the Highlander Point Overlay District to have less than the minimum. | 00:07:23 | |
| Sorry, minimum of 30% of the front facade on the ground floor is transparent. | 00:07:28 | |
| Consisting of windows or door openings. | 00:07:32 | |
| The property is a non conforming lot with 0.45 acres located along Old Vinson's Road near the Highway 150 intersection. | 00:07:34 | |
| And currently has a non conforming commercial building on the lot. | 00:07:41 | |
| The existing non conforming structure will be removed and a new non conforming structure is being proposed. | 00:07:44 | |
| The proposed development is located between two gas stations with the Highland subdivision to the South. | 00:07:49 | |
| And there's currently no sidewalk provided along the stretch of Oldinson's Road. | 00:07:53 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:07:58 | |
| the variances from an aesthetic concern to the proposed design has been approved by the State of Indiana Code requirements per the | 00:08:02 | |
| applicant. | 00:08:05 | |
| No injurious impact is expected. | 00:08:09 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:08:12 | |
| manner because the adjacent uses along Old Vincennes Rd. are gas stations, with the Marathon gas station predating the current | 00:08:15 | |
| standards. | 00:08:19 | |
| No substantially adverse impact is expected on the user value of this area. | 00:08:23 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:08:28 | |
| because. | 00:08:30 | |
| Given the site. | 00:08:33 | |
| Sorry, given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Vincent's Road, a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site | 00:08:35 | |
| with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:08:38 | |
| Given that this is a drive through only site, extra windows would not provide aesthetic views of the lobby. | 00:08:41 | |
| And the taller building structure to the right with the Bigby signage, is a bathroom. | 00:08:45 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:08:50 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:08:56 | |
| A technical review committee was hosted on February 19th where concerns were raised over car stacking for the drive through and | 00:08:57 | |
| people turning left into the cycle Vincent's Road. The county engineer recommended a write in write out access to Oldenson's Road | 00:09:01 | |
| and signage stating do not block intersection. | 00:09:05 | |
| Applicant has submitted an updated development plan showing the right MRI of access. | 00:09:10 | |
| Stormwater Director also requested that the parking and dumpster in the rear of the lot be flipped so that the dumpster was | 00:09:14 | |
| further from the stormwater channel in the West and that detention basin for the Highlands. And again, you guys have that updated | 00:09:17 | |
| plan. | 00:09:21 | |
| Staff Recommendations Whereas the site is currently non conforming at 0.45 acres and any structure will need to have a reduced | 00:09:25 | |
| footprint. | 00:09:28 | |
| Where the reduced footprint reduces the aesthetic value of the transparency standard. | 00:09:32 | |
| Where the variance will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, general welfare of the community or on the value of the | 00:09:36 | |
| adjacent properties, and where strict adherence to the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties, staff has no | 00:09:40 | |
| recommended conditions for this addition. | 00:09:44 | |
| OK. Does the ward have any questions? | 00:09:50 | |
| For Frank while he's here. | 00:09:53 | |
| Not at this time. None at this time. Thanks, Frank. | 00:09:56 | |
| OK, we have. | 00:10:01 | |
| Heard from staff. | 00:10:02 | |
| I would now like to ask. | 00:10:04 | |
| Representative for the applicant or the applicant to come forward again. | 00:10:06 | |
| Since we got your name and address earlier, you can just state your name again please just for clarity. | 00:10:13 | |
| Yes, my name is Todd Landing. | 00:10:18 | |
| Last name is LANNING. | 00:10:20 | |
| Thank you. Todd, is there anything else that you would like to share with the board? | 00:10:23 | |
| Given what staff just went over. | 00:10:27 | |
| I think Frank. | 00:10:31 | |
| Franklin's adequately addressed all the. | 00:10:32 | |
| The points of the project and I really don't have anything further to add except to maybe ask answering your questions that you | 00:10:35 | |
| may have. | 00:10:38 | |
| Gotcha. Thank you. Is there any questions from the board? | 00:10:41 | |
| I've got a question. | 00:10:44 | |
| The the basin. | 00:10:45 | |
| That's off to the. | 00:10:46 | |
| Left of the site, it's got here Kroger limited partnership. | 00:10:49 | |
| That's the, that's the retention basin that they're going to use. | 00:10:53 | |
| That's is that where it's going to? | 00:10:57 | |
| Yes, the water will actually surface flow into that basin area. | 00:10:58 | |
| And so is that like a regional basin or something they? | 00:11:03 | |
| Kroger's built that, and they have a right to use that. | 00:11:06 | |
| They're not killed, Nick. | 00:11:08 | |
| Are you building the retain? No, it's an existing base. That's my thought, yes. | 00:11:10 | |
| So. | 00:11:14 | |
| As far as? | 00:11:15 | |
| I'm not sure if it's a regional kind of local there's is there an agreement to use it I guess? | 00:11:17 | |
| What? I'm asking. Yeah, I. | 00:11:21 | |
| Honestly. | 00:11:23 | |
| I, I really don't know that. I think we we have the right to do it, but I'm not sure exactly 100%. | 00:11:25 | |
| Frank, you might be able to add to that, possibly Frank. | 00:11:30 | |
| Hey there, Nick. | 00:11:36 | |
| Sorry. | 00:11:38 | |
| Nick Creepy, director of. | 00:11:41 | |
| Play Commission operations. | 00:11:43 | |
| The site itself falls under the storm water requirements, so the natural drainage of of the property is allowed. | 00:11:46 | |
| We do not require them have to have independent. | 00:11:56 | |
| Drainage. | 00:12:01 | |
| And the stormwater director? | 00:12:02 | |
| Was part of the TRC for this. | 00:12:05 | |
| It has reviewed those plans and and finds some contribution drains to that basin already. | 00:12:09 | |
| Right it it does. | 00:12:15 | |
| OK. | 00:12:17 | |
| All right. Thanks, Nick. | 00:12:18 | |
| Any other questions from the board? | 00:12:23 | |
| Anyone else? | 00:12:25 | |
| OK. Thank you, Sir. All right, thank you. | 00:12:28 | |
| OK. Having heard from staff and the applicant will close those sections of the meeting and we will open the floor to anyone else | 00:12:33 | |
| here this evening that would like to come forward and speak in favor. | 00:12:38 | |
| Of this request. | 00:12:43 | |
| Seeing none, we'll close that section and we'll open the floor to anyone who would like to come forward in opposition. | 00:12:48 | |
| To the request. | 00:12:53 | |
| OK, seeing. | 00:13:00 | |
| Seeing none. | 00:13:02 | |
| Then I would entertain a ballot. | 00:13:03 | |
| I have. | 00:13:07 | |
| Docket FC03-206-13. Petitioners named TTCJ Properties. | 00:13:09 | |
| LLC. | 00:13:16 | |
| After Keffer reviewed, the board finds that. | 00:13:17 | |
| One approval of the variance. | 00:13:19 | |
| Will not be injurious. | 00:13:21 | |
| To the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:13:22 | |
| A non conforming structure is already present on the site. | 00:13:26 | |
| Given the size of the site. | 00:13:29 | |
| And the large volume of traffic on Old Vincent's Road, a larger structure which struggled to fit. | 00:13:31 | |
| On the site with adequate. | 00:13:36 | |
| Parking and navigation. | 00:13:37 | |
| The petitioner has agreed. | 00:13:39 | |
| Do a write in and write out only access to the site to mitigate traffic concerns. | 00:13:41 | |
| #2 the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance. | 00:13:47 | |
| Will not be affected in a substantial adverse manner because a non conforming structure currently exists on the site and. | 00:13:52 | |
| And adjacent uses. | 00:13:58 | |
| Or gas stations. | 00:14:00 | |
| Which are much more. | 00:14:01 | |
| Intensive use than the proposed business. | 00:14:03 | |
| #3 the strict application of terms of zoning garnish. | 00:14:06 | |
| Will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because the size of the site. | 00:14:09 | |
| And with traffic on Old Vincent Rd. a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:14:14 | |
| #4 The variance does not involve a structure. | 00:14:22 | |
| That is near an airstrip or regulated in Indiana code H-201-10. | 00:14:25 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeals hereby grants the petitioner variance that the meeting held on the 13th of April, 2026 that completes | 00:14:32 | |
| my ballot. | 00:14:35 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a second? | 00:14:39 | |
| I'll second. | 00:14:42 | |
| The ballot and a second. | 00:14:42 | |
| Any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:14:44 | |
| Seeing none. | 00:14:47 | |
| All those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:14:48 | |
| Aye, any opposed? | 00:14:50 | |
| That motion passes. | 00:14:52 | |
| Having heard from staff. | 00:14:55 | |
| For FC-03-206-13 and just voted on that one as well as FC-03-206-15. | 00:14:57 | |
| Do we have a ballot for the second? | 00:15:07 | |
| Request I do. | 00:15:09 | |
| Docket FC03-206-15. Petitioner TTC J Properties, LLC. | 00:15:12 | |
| After Keffer reviewed, the board finds that one approval of the variance will not be interest to the public health safety. | 00:15:19 | |
| Morals and gender warfare the community because this variance is from an aesthetic concern. | 00:15:25 | |
| And the proposed. | 00:15:30 | |
| Design has. | 00:15:31 | |
| Has been. | 00:15:32 | |
| Approved by the state of Indiana's code requirements per the application. | 00:15:34 | |
| Per per the applicant. | 00:15:38 | |
| No injurious impact is expected. | 00:15:40 | |
| #2. | 00:15:42 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in this variance. | 00:15:43 | |
| Will not be affected in a substantial adverse. | 00:15:47 | |
| Matter because the adjacent uses along with Vincent Rd. or gas stations. | 00:15:51 | |
| No substantially adverse impacts is expected on the use. | 00:15:56 | |
| Or value of the area. | 00:16:01 | |
| With the with the addition of this business. | 00:16:02 | |
| #3 the strict application that turns the zoning. | 00:16:06 | |
| Will result in practical difficulties and use the property because the size of the site. | 00:16:09 | |
| And with the traffic. | 00:16:14 | |
| Of on the old Vincent's Road, a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:16:16 | |
| Given that this is a drive through only development extra windows. | 00:16:22 | |
| Were not significantly improved the aesthetics of the structure. | 00:16:26 | |
| #4 the variance. | 00:16:30 | |
| Does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 8-201-10. | 00:16:31 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeals hereby grants the petitioner. | 00:16:39 | |
| Variance at the meeting held on the 13th of April 2026 that completes my ballot. | 00:16:41 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a second? | 00:16:47 | |
| I'll second. | 00:16:49 | |
| We have a ballot and a second. | 00:16:50 | |
| Any other? | 00:16:52 | |
| Questions or comments from the board? | 00:16:53 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:16:55 | |
| Aye, any opposed like sign? | 00:16:58 | |
| That motion. | 00:17:00 | |
| Also. | 00:17:02 | |
| Passes. | 00:17:02 | |
| Congratulations. | 00:17:05 | |
| Thank you. | 00:17:06 | |
| Moving on with our agenda this evening. | 00:17:08 | |
| Agenda. | 00:17:12 | |
| Items. | 00:17:13 | |
| 4:00 and 5:00. | 00:17:14 | |
| Also. | 00:17:16 | |
| Two requests from. | 00:17:17 | |
| The same applicant and I see a representative from that applicant coming forward. | 00:17:19 | |
| If you don't mind, state your name and address for the Mr. Chairman Jason Copperway with Primavera and Associates, 1000 Bell Lane, | 00:17:23 | |
| New Albany, IN. | 00:17:26 | |
| We are. | 00:17:30 | |
| Perfectly happy, and we're actually going to request that those two docket items be heard together. | 00:17:31 | |
| Thank you very much. Thank you. | 00:17:35 | |
| OK, so. | 00:17:38 | |
| We have for consideration this evening agenda items four and five, FC-03-206-19. | 00:17:39 | |
| And FC-03-26 Dash. | 00:17:48 | |
| 20 and Frank is once again gonna. | 00:17:51 | |
| Give us the staff report on both of those and then we'll discuss and vote separately. | 00:17:54 | |
| OK. | 00:17:59 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/19 Petitioner Prime Property Development Code. | 00:18:02 | |
| Representative Jason Copperway, Location Hwy. 115 does not have an address at this time. | 00:18:07 | |
| Parcel #22. | 00:18:13 | |
| 04. | 00:18:14 | |
| 01. | 00:18:15 | |
| 900. | 00:18:16 | |
| Dash 83. | 00:18:17 | |
| .000 Dash 006. | 00:18:19 | |
| Request development standards variance for the lot area for Summit Ridge Commons. | 00:18:23 | |
| Zoning district is general commercial. | 00:18:27 | |
| The petitioner is seeking a development standards variance from section 4.44. | 00:18:29 | |
| The general commercial development improve. | 00:18:34 | |
| Performance standards to allow lots numbered 1-2 and four to be less than the required minimum lot area. | 00:18:36 | |
| Of 43,560 square feet of one acre. | 00:18:41 | |
| Lot #1 is proposed as 0.546 acres. Lot #2 is proposed at. | 00:18:45 | |
| 0.655 acres and lot #4 is proposed at 0.9 acres. | 00:18:51 | |
| The property is located within a commercial growth area, the Lafayette Township. | 00:18:55 | |
| And falls under the Highlander Point overlay district. | 00:18:59 | |
| With the Highlander Point corridor identified as a main commercial corridor and a primary gateway for the county as identified by | 00:19:01 | |
| the Comprehensive Plan. | 00:19:05 | |
| The property is surrounded by commercial and residential growth areas within the Lafayette. | 00:19:09 | |
| This land is designated as a growth area due to its proximity to utilities, Hwy. 64 and existing amenities such as shops, schools, | 00:19:13 | |
| and other institutions. | 00:19:18 | |
| With an intent to focus development here rather than in areas. | 00:19:23 | |
| That the plan has designated as transitional or agricultural areas. | 00:19:27 | |
| To the east is the platted subdivision of Fairway Estates, zoned residential suburban. | 00:19:31 | |
| To the north, along the southern side of East Luther Rd. are a vacant property and a single family residence is owned urban | 00:19:35 | |
| residential. | 00:19:38 | |
| To the West, across Hwy. 150 are wooded properties, zoned residential, suburban and urban residential. | 00:19:42 | |
| To the southwest, South and southeast are various properties zoned general commercial. | 00:19:47 | |
| The site has proposed access through the new. | 00:19:53 | |
| Proposed signalized intersection along Hwy. 150 that will connect to the new JC on the other side of the highway. | 00:19:55 | |
| The site proposes further connection to the. | 00:20:02 | |
| Lacolet commercial plated subdivision to the South. | 00:20:05 | |
| And we'll have a road ext to allow for connections to East Luther Rd. should future developments occur. | 00:20:08 | |
| The applicant is requesting A variance from lot area with the intent of providing a diversity of commercial lot options. | 00:20:14 | |
| The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 0.68 units per acre. | 00:20:20 | |
| And excluding the common area and roadways, the average density is 0.94 units per acre. | 00:20:24 | |
| Meaning that on an average it is meeting that general. | 00:20:29 | |
| Commercial development requires. | 00:20:32 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:20:35 | |
| the average density of the proposed lots still falls under the required one unit per acre development standard. | 00:20:40 | |
| Department while providing a diversity of options to the community. | 00:20:45 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:20:49 | |
| manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:20:53 | |
| With the commercial subdivision already in existence to the South. | 00:20:58 | |
| The comprehensive plan encourages commercial development. | 00:21:01 | |
| Be directed to areas such as this one, designated as commercial growth districts. | 00:21:05 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:21:09 | |
| because the commercial. | 00:21:12 | |
| Market demand is for a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:21:15 | |
| This proposal. | 00:21:18 | |
| Provides one larger lot of 2.305 acres and three smaller lots of less than one acre each. | 00:21:20 | |
| To meet local commercial demand. | 00:21:26 | |
| Despite being zoned general commercial, the slot has sat undeveloped for over a decade. | 00:21:27 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:21:32 | |
| For staff comments, the 2017 Comprehensive Plan indicates an opportunity to focus on entrepreneurship. | 00:21:38 | |
| Identified on pages 2831 and 37 of the Comp Plan. | 00:21:44 | |
| Entrepreneurs and commercial uses do not have a uniform set of needs for space. | 00:21:48 | |
| The website loopnet lists. | 00:21:53 | |
| Local commercial lots and of the 16 listed lots, two of them were under one acre. | 00:21:55 | |
| As a potential indication of the lack of supply in this size range. | 00:22:00 | |
| While This site is wooded, the site was previously cleared as recently as 2010. | 00:22:04 | |
| Many of the trees on the site are now invasive species that do not add to the rural character or ecological health of the | 00:22:08 | |
| community. | 00:22:11 | |
| Staff Recommendations. | 00:22:15 | |
| Whereas the proposed variance provides flexibility of lots while still meeting an average density requirement. | 00:22:16 | |
| Where the comprehensive plan supports lowering barriers to entry for entrepreneurs. | 00:22:22 | |
| Where this is a commercial growth area and where there is no expected negative impact to the public health, safety, general | 00:22:26 | |
| welfare or the value of adjacent properties. | 00:22:29 | |
| And where this lot has sat vacant for the last decade, staff has no recommended conditions for approval of this petition. | 00:22:33 | |
| OK. | 00:22:46 | |
| 2nd docket. | 00:22:47 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/20. | 00:22:49 | |
| Same petitioner, same location. Request development standards variance for lot width and frontage for some average Commons. | 00:22:52 | |
| The petitioner is seeking a development standards variance from section 4.44, General Commercial Development and Performance | 00:22:59 | |
| Standards, to allow lots numbered 1234 and six to be less than the required minimum lot width and frontage of 200 feet. | 00:23:05 | |
| Lot #1 is approximately 110.82 feet. | 00:23:12 | |
| Lot #2 is approximately 121.97 feet. | 00:23:16 | |
| Lot #3 is 184. | 00:23:19 | |
| .10 feet. | 00:23:21 | |
| Lot #4 is 137.42 feet. | 00:23:23 | |
| And lot number six is 183.87 feet. | 00:23:26 | |
| The approximations are based on curves. | 00:23:29 | |
| From the. | 00:23:31 | |
| The property is located within a commercial growth area of the Lafayette Township and falls under the Highlander Point Overlay | 00:23:33 | |
| District, with the Highlander Point corridor identified as a main commercial corridor and a primary gateway for the county has | 00:23:37 | |
| identified by the Comprehensive Plan. | 00:23:41 | |
| This property is surrounded by. | 00:23:45 | |
| Commercial and residential growth areas within the Lafayette Township. | 00:23:47 | |
| This land is designated as a growth area due to its proximity to utilities, Hwy. 64 and existing amenities. | 00:23:50 | |
| With an intent to focus development here rather than in areas that the plan is designated as transitional or agricultural areas. | 00:23:56 | |
| To the east is the planet subdivision of Fairway Estates, zoned residential suburban. To the north, along the southern side of | 00:24:02 | |
| East Luther Rd. are a vacant property and a single family residence, zoned urban residential. | 00:24:07 | |
| To the West, across Hwy. 150 are wooded properties, zoned residential, suburban and urban residential. | 00:24:12 | |
| To the southwest, South and southeast are various properties zoned general commercial. | 00:24:17 | |
| The site has proposed access through the newly proposed signalized intersection along Hwy. 150 that will connect to the new JC on | 00:24:22 | |
| the other side of the highway. | 00:24:25 | |
| The site. | 00:24:29 | |
| Proposes further connection to the Lafollette. | 00:24:31 | |
| Commercial platted subdivision to the South. | 00:24:34 | |
| And we'll have a road ext to allow for connections to East Luther Rd. should future development occur. | 00:24:37 | |
| The applicant is requesting A variance from lot area. | 00:24:41 | |
| Or sorry from lot width with a intent of providing a diversity of commercial lot options. | 00:24:45 | |
| The growth density of the proposed subdivision is .68 units per acre. Excluding the common areas and roadways, you average density | 00:24:50 | |
| is .94 units per acre. | 00:24:53 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:24:58 | |
| these lot frontages are facing a low speed subdivision St. | 00:25:02 | |
| Reducing the potential for traffic backing up to to patrons entering or exiting a lot. | 00:25:06 | |
| The subdivision has an intent to service letter from the Highlander Fire Protection District. | 00:25:11 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:25:16 | |
| manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:25:20 | |
| With the commercial subdivision already in existence to the South, that includes several strip malls sharing their Rd. frontage. | 00:25:25 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:25:31 | |
| because the commercial market demand is for a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:25:35 | |
| This particular property is located along Hwy. 150 and providing A subdivision St. limits the accessible space available, creating | 00:25:39 | |
| thinner lots. | 00:25:43 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:25:47 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:25:53 | |
| The 2017 Comprehensive Plan indicates an opportunity to focus on entrepreneurship. | 00:25:55 | |
| That's pages 2831 and 37 of the compliant. | 00:25:59 | |
| Entrepreneurs and commercial users are. | 00:26:02 | |
| Sorry, entrepreneurs and commercial uses do not have a uniform set of need for space. | 00:26:04 | |
| The website Loopnets lists local commercial lots. | 00:26:09 | |
| And of the 16 listed lots, two of them were under one acre, potentially indicating a lack of supply and the size range. | 00:26:12 | |
| While This site is wooded, the site was previously cleared as recently as 2010. Many of the trees on the site are invasive species | 00:26:18 | |
| that do not add to the rural character or ecological health of the community. | 00:26:22 | |
| For staff recommendations, whereas the proposed variance provides flexibility of lots while still meeting an average density | 00:26:27 | |
| requirement. | 00:26:30 | |
| Where the fire district provided an intent to service letter implying no issue with providing services to the lots despite their | 00:26:33 | |
| shorter frontage. | 00:26:36 | |
| Where the comprehensive plan supports lowering barriers to entry for entrepreneurs. | 00:26:39 | |
| Where this is a commercial growth area and where there is no expected negative impact to the public health, safety, general | 00:26:44 | |
| welfare or the value of the adjacent properties, and where this lot has sat vacant for the last decade, but where lots one and two | 00:26:48 | |
| have a particularly reduced frontage. | 00:26:52 | |
| Staff recommends the following condition. | 00:26:56 | |
| Lots #1 and #2 are to share an access drive and create an. | 00:26:58 | |
| In a shared parking lot use and maintenance agreement. | 00:27:02 | |
| OK. Thank you, Frank. | 00:27:08 | |
| Any questions from the board? | 00:27:09 | |
| Of Frank. | 00:27:11 | |
| Thank you. | 00:27:14 | |
| OK. | 00:27:16 | |
| We have heard the staff reports. | 00:27:17 | |
| Mr. Copperweight. | 00:27:20 | |
| Let you come forward again, please. | 00:27:22 | |
| The information you have, I just want to make sure you. | 00:27:29 | |
| Hey, Cortana. | 00:27:34 | |
| Thank you. | 00:27:36 | |
| Mr. Copperweed, is there anything else you would like to add to what? | 00:27:50 | |
| Frank's already shared with us. Yeah, I think staff did a pretty good job explaining the project. This is 8.8 acres on the 8.88 | 00:27:54 | |
| acres on the South side of about a 17 acre parcel. | 00:27:59 | |
| It's on the east side of 150, just north of Apollo Station. | 00:28:04 | |
| It is proposed to be. It is already zoned general commercial. | 00:28:08 | |
| So we're not here asking for any use variances or. | 00:28:11 | |
| Changing any uses that's already. | 00:28:14 | |
| By right, what we're asking for later tonight at the Planning Commission is a subdivision. | 00:28:15 | |
| A6 lot subdivision. | 00:28:20 | |
| Plus a common area. | 00:28:21 | |
| As you mentioned in the staff report. | 00:28:24 | |
| I'll phrase his ratio in another way. | 00:28:26 | |
| If you take the six lots and divide it by the average. | 00:28:28 | |
| It's actually 1.07 acres per lot. | 00:28:32 | |
| Because you have one lot that's 2.3 acres. | 00:28:34 | |
| A couple of lots that are one acre. | 00:28:37 | |
| And then a couple that are three of them that are slightly smaller, but the average lot size is greater than. | 00:28:39 | |
| That one acre. | 00:28:43 | |
| COVID obviously changed the marketplace. | 00:28:45 | |
| There are many businesses that just do not need an acre anymore. | 00:28:48 | |
| Your zoning ordinance was written back in 2006. | 00:28:51 | |
| Probably need some updates, but that's not why we're here tonight. But. | 00:28:54 | |
| You know and and this is not an announcement of any potential user, but users like. | 00:28:58 | |
| Seven Brew. | 00:29:03 | |
| Starbucks. | 00:29:04 | |
| Smaller, even bank. | 00:29:06 | |
| Bank tellers that just need an ATM or something like that, they just don't need an acre. | 00:29:08 | |
| So what the developer is trying to do here is create, as staff mentioned, a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:29:12 | |
| That that would meet meet some market needs that are out there. | 00:29:18 | |
| In addition, the property is about 288 feet wide. | 00:29:22 | |
| And we're dedicating 56 feet for. | 00:29:25 | |
| A road ride away on the east side. | 00:29:28 | |
| Which leaves. | 00:29:30 | |
| You know you're you're at your ordinance is sort of envisioning a 200 by 200. | 00:29:31 | |
| Lot, acre, lot. | 00:29:36 | |
| Well, we have an extra width that we have nothing to do with. | 00:29:37 | |
| So we could get our acre on some of the lots without slightly reduced. | 00:29:41 | |
| With frontage so. | 00:29:44 | |
| So the width of the lot as well as just general changes in in market conditions. | 00:29:46 | |
| Is our hardship. | 00:29:51 | |
| I did want to talk about and I apologize to staff. | 00:29:53 | |
| I didn't. I had read the staff report but I didn't see that condition the following on. | 00:29:55 | |
| About the shared access drive and the interlocal parking. | 00:30:00 | |
| When we had met with the plat review committee on site. | 00:30:04 | |
| One of the members had asked us. | 00:30:08 | |
| You know, are you going to come back for zoning? | 00:30:10 | |
| Variances on parking and that kind of thing. | 00:30:12 | |
| And and Mr. Sam's answer. Who's with me tonight? | 00:30:14 | |
| Was that that the user would be tailored to that size lot so. | 00:30:17 | |
| You know, a smaller footprint would. | 00:30:21 | |
| Would naturally result in lower parking spaces. | 00:30:23 | |
| As the site grades and I know some of you have visited the site. | 00:30:28 | |
| It rises from the fallout station. | 00:30:31 | |
| Sort of high in the middle and then it drops off again. | 00:30:34 | |
| As these lots are developed, they're going to have some great change. | 00:30:37 | |
| Lot to lot. | 00:30:40 | |
| I'm not sure that we're going to be able to do shared parking among those lots because of that grade change. | 00:30:42 | |
| I guess I would request that that condition be changed. | 00:30:48 | |
| Work with the county engineer. | 00:30:51 | |
| To properly locate. | 00:30:53 | |
| Driveways, which we have to do anyway. | 00:30:55 | |
| Rather than imposing a shared. | 00:30:58 | |
| Driveway and shared parking. | 00:31:00 | |
| We just don't know what those. | 00:31:02 | |
| How those lofts are going to layout? | 00:31:03 | |
| But certainly have no problem working with the county and the county engineer to make sure that it's. | 00:31:05 | |
| That is functional and and that it meets everyone's needs, obviously. | 00:31:09 | |
| But but we'd we'd rather not. | 00:31:13 | |
| We'd rather not have that condition at most. | 00:31:16 | |
| We haven't answered any questions you have. | 00:31:18 | |
| Any questions from Mr. Copperwick? | 00:31:20 | |
| I have a question. | 00:31:23 | |
| Again, looking at the preliminary plat and as it. | 00:31:25 | |
| I see their proposed signal off 150. | 00:31:28 | |
| And maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here. | 00:31:31 | |
| Where would an exit lane? | 00:31:33 | |
| Be to exit into that where the signal is to turn I just. | 00:31:35 | |
| So. So I think the county is designing those signal plans and the version that I saw had a full blown intersection. | 00:31:39 | |
| With signal. | 00:31:46 | |
| With a left turn into the. | 00:31:48 | |
| Site across 150 right turns into ours as well as left turns from the northbound. | 00:31:50 | |
| I just came to our side as well. | 00:31:55 | |
| So that intersection is. | 00:31:57 | |
| Federal project. | 00:32:01 | |
| So we have in dot standards. | 00:32:02 | |
| All of the. | 00:32:04 | |
| Turning motions. | 00:32:07 | |
| On all sides of that intersection. | 00:32:09 | |
| Have been proposed and accepted by in that. | 00:32:12 | |
| To meet any and all of our traffic demand through there. | 00:32:15 | |
| OK. Thank you. | 00:32:19 | |
| Other questions? | 00:32:21 | |
| Seeing none. Thank you. | 00:32:25 | |
| Thank you. | 00:32:26 | |
| Oh, Jason, sorry. | 00:32:28 | |
| I'm sorry. | 00:32:30 | |
| Since some of the I don't know if everybody visited the site. | 00:32:32 | |
| We can, I don't think, I don't know if everybody on the board visited the site. | 00:32:36 | |
| But would you kind of explain? | 00:32:39 | |
| That this is a. | 00:32:41 | |
| Detention basin situation here, Sure. So the common area on the North End of the site shown on the plat. | 00:32:42 | |
| Is is set aside for a detention basin? | 00:32:48 | |
| Your stormwater manual in a residential subdivision. | 00:32:51 | |
| Requires COM. | 00:32:54 | |
| Detention basins to be in common areas. | 00:32:56 | |
| For commercial, it doesn't. | 00:32:58 | |
| But we are dedicating that as a, as a common area. | 00:32:59 | |
| That will be maintained by a lot owners association. | 00:33:02 | |
| And then as I mentioned, the site sort of crowns in the middle. | 00:33:05 | |
| It drains N toward A toward a stream that runs through there, and it drains S toward the fall station. | 00:33:08 | |
| So I think you'll see on the plat. | 00:33:13 | |
| We've designated an area for detention along the South Line. | 00:33:15 | |
| Before it drains into La Follette or into Hwy. 150. | 00:33:19 | |
| I think we're right now we're thinking that's going to be underground detention. | 00:33:23 | |
| So that that law can still be adequately developed with parking over that area. | 00:33:26 | |
| We've still got to flush those plans out and obviously that gets approved, submitted and approved to county stormwater before we | 00:33:30 | |
| can. | 00:33:33 | |
| Proceed. | 00:33:37 | |
| Anything else? | 00:33:39 | |
| Thank you again. Thank you. | 00:33:42 | |
| OK, so. | 00:33:47 | |
| Again, we've heard from the staff, we've heard from the applicant. | 00:33:48 | |
| We will close those sections of the median, open the floor to anyone who is here this evening that would like to come forward and | 00:33:51 | |
| speak in favor. | 00:33:54 | |
| These requests. | 00:33:58 | |
| Seeing none, we'll close that section and open the floor to anyone who may be here to speak in opposition. | 00:34:03 | |
| If you don't mind come forward, state your name and address for the record. | 00:34:13 | |
| My name is Michelle Atkins. | 00:34:19 | |
| We own the property they keep. What's your address please? | 00:34:22 | |
| 4615 E Luther OK, one moment before you start just. | 00:34:25 | |
| To clarify for those either here this evening, want to make sure everyone understands when we open the floor for public comment. | 00:34:29 | |
| There are time limits. | 00:34:35 | |
| So we have 10 minutes. | 00:34:36 | |
| For those who would have been in favor, we didn't have any. | 00:34:38 | |
| 10 minutes for those who were opposed. And then if necessary, we'll bring the applicant back up to respond to any questions that | 00:34:41 | |
| come up. So I just want to make sure we're clear. | 00:34:44 | |
| So please go ahead. | 00:34:48 | |
| Uh, we own the property that is on the north side of. | 00:34:51 | |
| This proposed. | 00:34:55 | |
| Start dictation. | 00:34:59 | |
| And I wanted to state that in. | 00:35:00 | |
| The staff report. | 00:35:03 | |
| The gentleman presented something incorrect information. | 00:35:05 | |
| That is not. | 00:35:08 | |
| A vacant lot. | 00:35:09 | |
| That property is part of the lot on the on the corner of 150 and West Luther. | 00:35:10 | |
| So it is not a vacant lot. | 00:35:18 | |
| I don't understand what you're saying. | 00:35:21 | |
| There's nothing built on this property. | 00:35:24 | |
| But I know what. | 00:35:26 | |
| This is not a lot. | 00:35:34 | |
| This belongs to this block, right? | 00:35:35 | |
| They can, meaning there are no buildings. OK under that, yes, but it is it does belong to this lot and it does not be standalone | 00:35:38 | |
| lot. | 00:35:41 | |
| He said this is this is the assessors office. I was using their classification. | 00:35:45 | |
| Gotcha. | 00:35:49 | |
| This is mine. | 00:35:51 | |
| Can you go back down microphone? I'm sorry. | 00:36:03 | |
| Yeah, we, we need to. We have to come. | 00:36:06 | |
| She thought about this, she said to the north, repeat what I just said. I just paid Saturday the assessors office. So I know for a | 00:36:11 | |
| fact, OK, so, so Frank, I'll let you respond to that so we can capture that on on record as well. | 00:36:17 | |
| Sure. | 00:36:24 | |
| So I was pulling that information from Beacon using the tax assessor. The assessors listed classification for that corner parcel. | 00:36:25 | |
| And by that it means vacant, no building on there, not vacant, meaning nobody on, correct? | 00:36:35 | |
| Was that were were you? | 00:36:42 | |
| Was your position that it was? | 00:36:45 | |
| You're you're just clarifying who owns it. | 00:36:47 | |
| I'm just clarifying that it is. | 00:36:49 | |
| There is an owner to the property. Gotcha. It is not. | 00:36:51 | |
| Just a vacant out there piece of property. | 00:36:54 | |
| Sure, we we understand. | 00:36:57 | |
| OK, that's what I just wanted to make clear because he kept saying they can never get. | 00:36:59 | |
| It belongs with the other piece that when the state came through, they cut it right down in half. | 00:37:04 | |
| I think you you mean vacated. | 00:37:08 | |
| It's not a vacated lot. | 00:37:11 | |
| It's owned, but it is vacant, meaning there's nothing on it. | 00:37:13 | |
| So I just want to clarify for the record. | 00:37:18 | |
| And then I add my head a question as to because I have not seen the gentleman's actual. | 00:37:20 | |
| Flat drawings. | 00:37:25 | |
| What he is planning on putting. | 00:37:27 | |
| Up against my property. | 00:37:29 | |
| OK. | 00:37:31 | |
| Is there anything else? | 00:37:33 | |
| I, I always say that I, I, I will be an opposition because I always say it in opposition to anything growth in that area. But that | 00:37:36 | |
| doesn't really matter at this point. | 00:37:39 | |
| Sure. We'll, we'll give them a chance to respond in just a moment. Thank you. | 00:37:43 | |
| Is there anyone else that would like to come forward and speak in opposition? Please come forward. State your name and address for | 00:37:48 | |
| the record. | 00:37:51 | |
| Hi, I'm Bob Steiner. | 00:37:57 | |
| 3215 chip away court. | 00:37:58 | |
| I've lived at that location for 49 years. | 00:38:01 | |
| My house is directly. | 00:38:04 | |
| Behind where the new light is going to go in. | 00:38:06 | |
| Probably 300 feet or 400 feet. | 00:38:09 | |
| Back and my only I'm not necessarily against or. | 00:38:11 | |
| For the project. | 00:38:14 | |
| I just. | 00:38:15 | |
| Was hoping that there might be some discussion about. | 00:38:17 | |
| Berm or protection? | 00:38:19 | |
| Along the lines of those properties which. | 00:38:21 | |
| Mine and probably 10 other people. | 00:38:24 | |
| Live on that edge of that property. | 00:38:27 | |
| So. | 00:38:30 | |
| I don't know what this is appropriate time to ask that or suggest that, but. | 00:38:31 | |
| Certainly a concern. | 00:38:35 | |
| We appreciate you bringing that to our attention. We'll make sure that again when. | 00:38:36 | |
| When the applicant comes back. | 00:38:40 | |
| That they can speak to that. Great. Thanks. | 00:38:42 | |
| Thank you. | 00:38:44 | |
| Was there others here? | 00:38:46 | |
| Please come forward and state your name and address for the record. | 00:38:50 | |
| My name is Melanie Davis. | 00:38:57 | |
| 4820 Smith Rd. | 00:38:59 | |
| I actually own property also on Lawrence Bennett. | 00:39:03 | |
| But I guess my only question is, I assume that these are going to be connected to the to the sewer and not require septic. | 00:39:07 | |
| I'm going to let Nick respond to that. | 00:39:18 | |
| Yes. | 00:39:24 | |
| Sure. | 00:39:28 | |
| Was that it? | 00:39:29 | |
| OK. Thank you. | 00:39:31 | |
| Is there anyone else? | 00:39:33 | |
| Here this evening that would like to speak in opposition. | 00:39:34 | |
| OK, seeing seeing no other. | 00:39:42 | |
| Comments from the floor. We will close that section. | 00:39:45 | |
| And Mr. Copper, wait, would you like to come back and address the? | 00:39:48 | |
| Questions that came up. | 00:39:52 | |
| Sure. So I'm sure everyone received a notice that was it's too deep from. | 00:39:56 | |
| The property. | 00:40:01 | |
| But but the applicant is only developing the sort of the South half. | 00:40:02 | |
| So it doesn't, it doesn't proceed all the way N to miss Miss Atkins property. | 00:40:06 | |
| That would remain vacant. | 00:40:10 | |
| It's still zoned general commercial. It could be developed in the future, but it is not part of this proposal tonight. | 00:40:12 | |
| As far as Burma protection. | 00:40:19 | |
| This this. | 00:40:21 | |
| As as we're developing this property, it actually does not. | 00:40:22 | |
| I think it's fairway states there's not a but Fairway Estates. | 00:40:25 | |
| There's another property between this property. | 00:40:28 | |
| And fairway estates. | 00:40:30 | |
| There whenever general commercial is developed adjacent to residential. | 00:40:32 | |
| There are buffer yard requirements. | 00:40:36 | |
| But we're not. | 00:40:39 | |
| Touching those properties so. | 00:40:40 | |
| I don't know that those are subject to. | 00:40:41 | |
| This property. | 00:40:43 | |
| And then yes, there is a letter. | 00:40:45 | |
| I don't know if it's in your file, but in the Planning Commission file. | 00:40:47 | |
| From New Albany a willingness to serve letter that this will be on sewers. Your ordinance requires that as well. | 00:40:50 | |
| Right. Thank you, Jason. | 00:40:55 | |
| Yes. | 00:40:56 | |
| Could you? | 00:40:57 | |
| Clarify something here. | 00:40:59 | |
| The founder. Is this not drawing correctly for? | 00:41:01 | |
| Here or share that it touches the that may be in in our. | 00:41:04 | |
| Maybe an in off for drawing but OK if you look see these this line right here. | 00:41:08 | |
| Yes, Sir, is Fairway states. | 00:41:12 | |
| OK. | 00:41:14 | |
| And stuff. Just shortly, just clarification that survey actually. Thank you Sir, understand. | 00:41:15 | |
| Any other questions for Mr. B? | 00:41:23 | |
| Mr. Beagle House. I'm sorry, Jason. | 00:41:25 | |
| Yes. | 00:41:28 | |
| This is what you're referring to, the darker shaded areas with. | 00:41:29 | |
| Going now. | 00:41:32 | |
| I wish and that drawing is just to indicate. | 00:41:34 | |
| Approximately where it is, it's not definitive. This is what you were talking about, Yeah. | 00:41:36 | |
| That N to the north is not being developed currently. | 00:41:41 | |
| Were it to be developed, it would have to come back to the Planning Commission at last. | 00:41:46 | |
| And with additional notifications. | 00:41:49 | |
| Got it. Any other questions while he's here? | 00:41:51 | |
| Yes. | 00:41:55 | |
| Into Larry's point. | 00:41:56 | |
| And again, you're saying? | 00:41:58 | |
| This is not touching the property. | 00:41:59 | |
| Correct. Do you know what that distance is between? | 00:42:01 | |
| Approximately 30 feet or so. | 00:42:04 | |
| And it's road right of way that's near it is not any lot. | 00:42:07 | |
| The road right away is 56 feet right here, OK. | 00:42:10 | |
| So, So the nearest lot is probably 80 plus feet. OK, OK. | 00:42:13 | |
| Better understand. Thank you. | 00:42:19 | |
| Appreciate it. OK. | 00:42:21 | |
| Thank you, Sir. Thank you. | 00:42:23 | |
| OK. | 00:42:25 | |
| Having heard from. | 00:42:27 | |
| All parties? Do we have a ballot? | 00:42:28 | |
| I do. | 00:42:31 | |
| Docket FC-03-206-19. | 00:42:33 | |
| Prime property development representative. Adjacent copperweight. | 00:42:38 | |
| After careful review, the board finds that. | 00:42:42 | |
| Number one approval of the variance will not. | 00:42:45 | |
| Be adjourned to the public. Health, safety, morals. | 00:42:48 | |
| In general welfare of the community because. | 00:42:51 | |
| The average density of the proposed lot still fall under the required. | 00:42:53 | |
| One unit per acre development standard. | 00:42:57 | |
| Forward while providing a density. | 00:43:00 | |
| Options to the community. | 00:43:04 | |
| #2. | 00:43:06 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property include included in the variance. | 00:43:07 | |
| Will not. | 00:43:13 | |
| Be affected in a substantial adverse manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:43:14 | |
| With a commercial subdivision already in existence to the South. | 00:43:21 | |
| The comprehensive plan encourages commercial development. | 00:43:25 | |
| Be directed to the areas such as this one. | 00:43:28 | |
| Designated as Commercial Growth districts. | 00:43:31 | |
| #3. | 00:43:35 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will. | 00:43:36 | |
| Result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because. | 00:43:40 | |
| The commercial market demand is. | 00:43:44 | |
| For a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:43:46 | |
| This proposed proposal provides. | 00:43:49 | |
| One larger lot of 2.305 acres in three smaller lots of less. | 00:43:51 | |
| Than an acre each to meet local. | 00:43:57 | |
| Commercial demands. | 00:43:59 | |
| Despite being zoned general commercial. | 00:44:01 | |
| This lot has. | 00:44:04 | |
| Set under develop for over decades. | 00:44:05 | |
| #4 This variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip. | 00:44:09 | |
| And Reg. | 00:44:14 | |
| Indiana code 82110. | 00:44:15 | |
| The Board of Zoning. | 00:44:20 | |
| Pill hereby grants. | 00:44:22 | |
| The petitioner variance at the meeting held on the 13th day of April. | 00:44:24 | |
| 2026 and that completes my ballot. | 00:44:28 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a 2nd? I'll second it. | 00:44:32 | |
| OK. We have a ballot and a second. Any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:44:35 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye aye. Any opposed like sign. | 00:44:39 | |
| OK, that one passes. Do we have a ballot for? | 00:44:45 | |
| FC-03-206-20. | 00:44:49 | |
| I do. | 00:44:52 | |
| OK. All right. | 00:44:53 | |
| This is docket FC-03-206-20. | 00:44:55 | |
| Petitioner. | 00:45:01 | |
| Prime Properties Development Company representative is Jason Copper White. | 00:45:02 | |
| After careful review, the board finds that. | 00:45:06 | |
| Approval of the variance will not. | 00:45:10 | |
| Be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:45:13 | |
| These lot frontages are facing a low speed subdivision St. reducing the potential for traffic backup. | 00:45:18 | |
| Due to patrons. | 00:45:26 | |
| Or exiting a lot. | 00:45:29 | |
| The subdivision has an intent to service. | 00:45:31 | |
| Attention service letter from the Highlander Fire Protection District. | 00:45:34 | |
| #2. | 00:45:38 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not. | 00:45:40 | |
| Be affected in a substantial adverse manner because. | 00:45:45 | |
| The property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:45:48 | |
| With a commercial subdivision already in existence to the South that includes several strip malls sharing. | 00:45:52 | |
| Road frontage. | 00:45:58 | |
| Item 3. | 00:46:00 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will. | 00:46:02 | |
| Result in practical difficulties. | 00:46:06 | |
| In the use of the property because. | 00:46:09 | |
| The commercial market demand. | 00:46:11 | |
| Is for the diversity. | 00:46:13 | |
| Of lot sizes. | 00:46:15 | |
| The particular property is located along Hwy. 150 and providing A subdivision St. limits. | 00:46:17 | |
| The accessibility space available creating thinner. | 00:46:22 | |
| Item 4. | 00:46:27 | |
| This variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip. | 00:46:28 | |
| And regulated under code. | 00:46:33 | |
| 8-201-10. | 00:46:35 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeal appeals hereby grants. | 00:46:41 | |
| The petitioner of variance at the meeting. | 00:46:44 | |
| Held the 13th day of April, 2026, with the following condition. | 00:46:47 | |
| That. | 00:46:54 | |
| The. | 00:46:55 | |
| Petitioner will work with staff. | 00:46:56 | |
| And the county engineer. | 00:46:59 | |
| On entrance locations. | 00:47:01 | |
| For future development. | 00:47:04 | |
| OK, We have a motion or a ballot. Do we have a 2nd? I'll second. | 00:47:07 | |
| With the ballot and a second, any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:47:10 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:47:15 | |
| Aye, any opposed like son? | 00:47:18 | |
| And that motion passes. | 00:47:21 | |
| Thank you very much. Thank you. | 00:47:25 | |
| Folks, looking at the agenda tonight, I do not see anything else on there. Is there anything else? | 00:47:28 | |
| Staff is aware to come before the board. | 00:47:33 | |
| Seeing none, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. | 00:47:36 | |
| No. Everybody leave until they get this sign, please. OK, we do have to sign the ballot, but we still can adjourn. | 00:47:38 | |
| Motion to adjourn from. | 00:47:43 | |
| We have a motion. Do we have second, second. | 00:47:45 | |
| Motion and 2nd All those in favor signify by saying aye aye, and we are. | 00:47:47 | |
| Adjourned. Thank you folks, for being here. | 00:47:52 | |
| You really really, really really. | 00:47:57 |
Transcript
| Hi, good afternoon everybody. I would like to call tonight's meeting at the Floyd County Board of Zoning Appeals, umm. | 00:00:01 | |
| To order. | 00:00:08 | |
| And. | 00:00:09 | |
| It is 5:00 exactly. | 00:00:10 | |
| And today is Monday, April. | 00:00:13 | |
| 13th. | 00:00:15 | |
| So we'll begin with roll call. | 00:00:16 | |
| Mr. Beeble. | 00:00:19 | |
| Here here. | 00:00:20 | |
| Here here. | 00:00:23 | |
| Here, OK, we do have a full board, so we will move on from there. | 00:00:26 | |
| Next item on our agenda this evening is the minutes of our March 9th meeting. | 00:00:31 | |
| We also umm. | 00:00:36 | |
| Have had a subsequent meeting since then on the 26th, but those minutes were not prepared, so I'm going to ask that we just | 00:00:38 | |
| discuss and vote on the minutes of the ninth meeting. | 00:00:43 | |
| Those were circulated in advance, so I would entertain any. | 00:00:47 | |
| Corrections, comments, or. | 00:00:52 | |
| Edits to those. | 00:00:54 | |
| I'll make a motion to approve. | 00:00:56 | |
| OK. We have a motion. Do we have a 2nd I'll second. | 00:00:57 | |
| Motion is second. All those in favor signify by saying aye aye. | 00:01:00 | |
| Any opposed like son the minutes? | 00:01:03 | |
| Are passed for the March 9th meeting. | 00:01:06 | |
| We will review the others in our next meeting. | 00:01:08 | |
| We do not have any announcements that I'm aware of this evening, although. | 00:01:13 | |
| I would like to introduce a new member of our board this evening. Mr. Mark Lawrence is here. | 00:01:17 | |
| He's joined the board since our last meeting and we're happy to have him. So welcome. | 00:01:22 | |
| Thank you very much. Appreciate it. | 00:01:26 | |
| All right, we'll jump right into our. | 00:01:28 | |
| Agenda this evening. | 00:01:30 | |
| The first three items on our agenda. | 00:01:32 | |
| Are all from the same applicant. | 00:01:35 | |
| So is the applicant or their representative here? | 00:01:37 | |
| For items one through 3. | 00:01:41 | |
| Come forward and I'm gonna make a statement and ask you a question. So hang on one moment here. | 00:01:45 | |
| So what we often do? | 00:01:49 | |
| When we have multiple items for the same applicant. | 00:01:52 | |
| Is we ask if they're OK if we. | 00:01:54 | |
| If we hear them as one or at one time. | 00:01:57 | |
| And then vote on them separately that it's just more efficient for everyone else that's here. Are you OK with we do that? | 00:02:00 | |
| Yes, we agree to that. Sure. | 00:02:06 | |
| OK, that's fine. | 00:02:08 | |
| And then I understand that you may have an interest in withdrawing one of the three. Yes, the owner has a. | 00:02:08 | |
| Agree to withdrawal of. | 00:02:14 | |
| The item for the required sidewalks. | 00:02:17 | |
| OK, Thank you. And I made a mistake. I should have asked you to state your name and address for the record, please. My name is | 00:02:20 | |
| Todd Lanning. | 00:02:23 | |
| And I'm with a milestone group. | 00:02:26 | |
| And our address is 108. | 00:02:28 | |
| Daventry Lane, Suite 200. | 00:02:30 | |
| Are actually Suite 300. | 00:02:34 | |
| And it's Louisville, KY. | 00:02:35 | |
| 40223. | 00:02:37 | |
| OK. Thank you, Todd. We will call you back up in just a moment. Thank you. | 00:02:39 | |
| And just for clarification, agenda item 2FC0326-14, the sidewalk request, is that correct? | 00:02:43 | |
| Yeah, FC 03. | 00:02:56 | |
| 20. | 00:02:58 | |
| 14, yeah, that is your request withdrawal. That's the request. Thank you. | 00:02:59 | |
| Folks, I have a question for the audience. Were you guys able to hear her just now? | 00:03:05 | |
| Yeah. | 00:03:09 | |
| You couldn't hear him. | 00:03:11 | |
| OK. | 00:03:13 | |
| It is working. Thank you. | 00:03:17 | |
| OK, so so moving on with our agenda this evening, the first item on our agenda is FC-03-206-13. It is a development standards | 00:03:19 | |
| variance. | 00:03:24 | |
| And Frank is going to give us the. | 00:03:29 | |
| The staff report. | 00:03:31 | |
| And the antigen to item 3 which is FC. | 00:03:34 | |
| Dash 03-206-15. | 00:03:37 | |
| Correct. | 00:03:40 | |
| Also, I've got the updated site construction plans which I didn't have previously. We got these today. | 00:03:42 | |
| So I've got a copy here for the board. | 00:03:49 | |
| And that includes some of the updates that have been made based on recommendations and stuff. | 00:03:57 | |
| So docket number FC32613, petitioner TTCJ Properties, LLC. | 00:04:02 | |
| Representative Chad Ernst and Todd Lanning. | 00:04:09 | |
| Location 4865 Old Vinson Rd. Floyds Knobs IN. | 00:04:11 | |
| Request development standards variance from the minimum size. | 00:04:16 | |
| And the zoning district is general commercial. | 00:04:19 | |
| Applicant is seeking a development standards variance from Section 4.44 of the Floyd County Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial | 00:04:21 | |
| structure to have less than the minimum 2000 square foot requirement. | 00:04:27 | |
| In the general commercial zoning district. | 00:04:32 | |
| For extra clarification, that was. | 00:04:35 | |
| To be 440 square feet for the proposed structure. | 00:04:37 | |
| This property is a non conforming lot with 0.45 acres located along Old Vincennes Road near the Highway 150 intersection. | 00:04:40 | |
| And currently has a non conforming commercial building on the lot. | 00:04:48 | |
| The existing non conforming structure will be removed and a new non conforming structure is being proposed. | 00:04:51 | |
| The proposed development is located between two gas stations with the Highland subdivision to the South. | 00:04:56 | |
| There's not currently sidewalk provided along the stretch of Oldinson's Road. | 00:05:01 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:05:05 | |
| A non conforming structure is already present on the site. | 00:05:10 | |
| And given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Benson's Road, a larger structure which struggled to fit on the site with | 00:05:13 | |
| adequate parking and navigation. | 00:05:16 | |
| The petitioner has agreed to write in write out acts. | 00:05:19 | |
| Write out only access to the site to mitigate traffic concerns. | 00:05:22 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be subject to sorry will not be affected | 00:05:26 | |
| in a substantially adverse manner. | 00:05:30 | |
| Because the non conforming structure currently exists on the site and the adjacent uses are gas stations which are a much more | 00:05:34 | |
| intensive use than anything else nearby. | 00:05:38 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:05:42 | |
| because. | 00:05:44 | |
| Given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Vincennes Rd. A larger structure which struggled to fit on the site with | 00:05:47 | |
| adequate parking and navigation. | 00:05:51 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:05:54 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:06:01 | |
| A technical review committee was hosted on February 19th where concerns were raised over car stacking for the drive through and | 00:06:02 | |
| people turning left into the site from open Sends Rd. | 00:06:06 | |
| The county engineer recommended a write in write out access to Old Vincennes Road and signage stating do not block intersection. | 00:06:10 | |
| Applicant has submitted an updated development plan showing the write in write out access. | 00:06:17 | |
| The stormwater director also requested that the parking and dumpster at the rear of the site be flipped. | 00:06:21 | |
| So that the dumpster was further from the stormwater channel in the West and the detention basin for the Highlands. As an extra | 00:06:25 | |
| note, the plan that I. | 00:06:28 | |
| Just submitted to you guys. Has that reflected on it? | 00:06:32 | |
| Staff Recommendations. | 00:06:35 | |
| Whereas the site is currently non conforming at 0.45 acres, Currently has a non conforming structure under the minimum square | 00:06:37 | |
| footage requirement. | 00:06:40 | |
| Will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, general welfare of the community or on the value of the adjacent | 00:06:43 | |
| properties. | 00:06:46 | |
| And we're strict adherence to the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties. Staff has no recommended conditions for | 00:06:49 | |
| approval of this petition. | 00:06:52 | |
| Moving to the next. | 00:06:58 | |
| Agenda item 3. | 00:06:59 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/15. | 00:07:01 | |
| Petitioner TTCJ Properties, LLC Representative Chad Ernst and Todd Landing. | 00:07:04 | |
| Same location. | 00:07:09 | |
| Request was development standards variance for transparency. | 00:07:11 | |
| And also zoning district of general commercial. | 00:07:14 | |
| Applicant is seeking a development standards variance from Section 8.06, Item E, one of the Floyd County Zoning Ordinance, to | 00:07:18 | |
| allow a commercial structure in the Highlander Point Overlay District to have less than the minimum. | 00:07:23 | |
| Sorry, minimum of 30% of the front facade on the ground floor is transparent. | 00:07:28 | |
| Consisting of windows or door openings. | 00:07:32 | |
| The property is a non conforming lot with 0.45 acres located along Old Vinson's Road near the Highway 150 intersection. | 00:07:34 | |
| And currently has a non conforming commercial building on the lot. | 00:07:41 | |
| The existing non conforming structure will be removed and a new non conforming structure is being proposed. | 00:07:44 | |
| The proposed development is located between two gas stations with the Highland subdivision to the South. | 00:07:49 | |
| And there's currently no sidewalk provided along the stretch of Oldinson's Road. | 00:07:53 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:07:58 | |
| the variances from an aesthetic concern to the proposed design has been approved by the State of Indiana Code requirements per the | 00:08:02 | |
| applicant. | 00:08:05 | |
| No injurious impact is expected. | 00:08:09 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:08:12 | |
| manner because the adjacent uses along Old Vincennes Rd. are gas stations, with the Marathon gas station predating the current | 00:08:15 | |
| standards. | 00:08:19 | |
| No substantially adverse impact is expected on the user value of this area. | 00:08:23 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:08:28 | |
| because. | 00:08:30 | |
| Given the site. | 00:08:33 | |
| Sorry, given the size of the site with the traffic on Old Vincent's Road, a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site | 00:08:35 | |
| with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:08:38 | |
| Given that this is a drive through only site, extra windows would not provide aesthetic views of the lobby. | 00:08:41 | |
| And the taller building structure to the right with the Bigby signage, is a bathroom. | 00:08:45 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:08:50 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:08:56 | |
| A technical review committee was hosted on February 19th where concerns were raised over car stacking for the drive through and | 00:08:57 | |
| people turning left into the cycle Vincent's Road. The county engineer recommended a write in write out access to Oldenson's Road | 00:09:01 | |
| and signage stating do not block intersection. | 00:09:05 | |
| Applicant has submitted an updated development plan showing the right MRI of access. | 00:09:10 | |
| Stormwater Director also requested that the parking and dumpster in the rear of the lot be flipped so that the dumpster was | 00:09:14 | |
| further from the stormwater channel in the West and that detention basin for the Highlands. And again, you guys have that updated | 00:09:17 | |
| plan. | 00:09:21 | |
| Staff Recommendations Whereas the site is currently non conforming at 0.45 acres and any structure will need to have a reduced | 00:09:25 | |
| footprint. | 00:09:28 | |
| Where the reduced footprint reduces the aesthetic value of the transparency standard. | 00:09:32 | |
| Where the variance will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, general welfare of the community or on the value of the | 00:09:36 | |
| adjacent properties, and where strict adherence to the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties, staff has no | 00:09:40 | |
| recommended conditions for this addition. | 00:09:44 | |
| OK. Does the ward have any questions? | 00:09:50 | |
| For Frank while he's here. | 00:09:53 | |
| Not at this time. None at this time. Thanks, Frank. | 00:09:56 | |
| OK, we have. | 00:10:01 | |
| Heard from staff. | 00:10:02 | |
| I would now like to ask. | 00:10:04 | |
| Representative for the applicant or the applicant to come forward again. | 00:10:06 | |
| Since we got your name and address earlier, you can just state your name again please just for clarity. | 00:10:13 | |
| Yes, my name is Todd Landing. | 00:10:18 | |
| Last name is LANNING. | 00:10:20 | |
| Thank you. Todd, is there anything else that you would like to share with the board? | 00:10:23 | |
| Given what staff just went over. | 00:10:27 | |
| I think Frank. | 00:10:31 | |
| Franklin's adequately addressed all the. | 00:10:32 | |
| The points of the project and I really don't have anything further to add except to maybe ask answering your questions that you | 00:10:35 | |
| may have. | 00:10:38 | |
| Gotcha. Thank you. Is there any questions from the board? | 00:10:41 | |
| I've got a question. | 00:10:44 | |
| The the basin. | 00:10:45 | |
| That's off to the. | 00:10:46 | |
| Left of the site, it's got here Kroger limited partnership. | 00:10:49 | |
| That's the, that's the retention basin that they're going to use. | 00:10:53 | |
| That's is that where it's going to? | 00:10:57 | |
| Yes, the water will actually surface flow into that basin area. | 00:10:58 | |
| And so is that like a regional basin or something they? | 00:11:03 | |
| Kroger's built that, and they have a right to use that. | 00:11:06 | |
| They're not killed, Nick. | 00:11:08 | |
| Are you building the retain? No, it's an existing base. That's my thought, yes. | 00:11:10 | |
| So. | 00:11:14 | |
| As far as? | 00:11:15 | |
| I'm not sure if it's a regional kind of local there's is there an agreement to use it I guess? | 00:11:17 | |
| What? I'm asking. Yeah, I. | 00:11:21 | |
| Honestly. | 00:11:23 | |
| I, I really don't know that. I think we we have the right to do it, but I'm not sure exactly 100%. | 00:11:25 | |
| Frank, you might be able to add to that, possibly Frank. | 00:11:30 | |
| Hey there, Nick. | 00:11:36 | |
| Sorry. | 00:11:38 | |
| Nick Creepy, director of. | 00:11:41 | |
| Play Commission operations. | 00:11:43 | |
| The site itself falls under the storm water requirements, so the natural drainage of of the property is allowed. | 00:11:46 | |
| We do not require them have to have independent. | 00:11:56 | |
| Drainage. | 00:12:01 | |
| And the stormwater director? | 00:12:02 | |
| Was part of the TRC for this. | 00:12:05 | |
| It has reviewed those plans and and finds some contribution drains to that basin already. | 00:12:09 | |
| Right it it does. | 00:12:15 | |
| OK. | 00:12:17 | |
| All right. Thanks, Nick. | 00:12:18 | |
| Any other questions from the board? | 00:12:23 | |
| Anyone else? | 00:12:25 | |
| OK. Thank you, Sir. All right, thank you. | 00:12:28 | |
| OK. Having heard from staff and the applicant will close those sections of the meeting and we will open the floor to anyone else | 00:12:33 | |
| here this evening that would like to come forward and speak in favor. | 00:12:38 | |
| Of this request. | 00:12:43 | |
| Seeing none, we'll close that section and we'll open the floor to anyone who would like to come forward in opposition. | 00:12:48 | |
| To the request. | 00:12:53 | |
| OK, seeing. | 00:13:00 | |
| Seeing none. | 00:13:02 | |
| Then I would entertain a ballot. | 00:13:03 | |
| I have. | 00:13:07 | |
| Docket FC03-206-13. Petitioners named TTCJ Properties. | 00:13:09 | |
| LLC. | 00:13:16 | |
| After Keffer reviewed, the board finds that. | 00:13:17 | |
| One approval of the variance. | 00:13:19 | |
| Will not be injurious. | 00:13:21 | |
| To the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:13:22 | |
| A non conforming structure is already present on the site. | 00:13:26 | |
| Given the size of the site. | 00:13:29 | |
| And the large volume of traffic on Old Vincent's Road, a larger structure which struggled to fit. | 00:13:31 | |
| On the site with adequate. | 00:13:36 | |
| Parking and navigation. | 00:13:37 | |
| The petitioner has agreed. | 00:13:39 | |
| Do a write in and write out only access to the site to mitigate traffic concerns. | 00:13:41 | |
| #2 the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance. | 00:13:47 | |
| Will not be affected in a substantial adverse manner because a non conforming structure currently exists on the site and. | 00:13:52 | |
| And adjacent uses. | 00:13:58 | |
| Or gas stations. | 00:14:00 | |
| Which are much more. | 00:14:01 | |
| Intensive use than the proposed business. | 00:14:03 | |
| #3 the strict application of terms of zoning garnish. | 00:14:06 | |
| Will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because the size of the site. | 00:14:09 | |
| And with traffic on Old Vincent Rd. a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:14:14 | |
| #4 The variance does not involve a structure. | 00:14:22 | |
| That is near an airstrip or regulated in Indiana code H-201-10. | 00:14:25 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeals hereby grants the petitioner variance that the meeting held on the 13th of April, 2026 that completes | 00:14:32 | |
| my ballot. | 00:14:35 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a second? | 00:14:39 | |
| I'll second. | 00:14:42 | |
| The ballot and a second. | 00:14:42 | |
| Any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:14:44 | |
| Seeing none. | 00:14:47 | |
| All those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:14:48 | |
| Aye, any opposed? | 00:14:50 | |
| That motion passes. | 00:14:52 | |
| Having heard from staff. | 00:14:55 | |
| For FC-03-206-13 and just voted on that one as well as FC-03-206-15. | 00:14:57 | |
| Do we have a ballot for the second? | 00:15:07 | |
| Request I do. | 00:15:09 | |
| Docket FC03-206-15. Petitioner TTC J Properties, LLC. | 00:15:12 | |
| After Keffer reviewed, the board finds that one approval of the variance will not be interest to the public health safety. | 00:15:19 | |
| Morals and gender warfare the community because this variance is from an aesthetic concern. | 00:15:25 | |
| And the proposed. | 00:15:30 | |
| Design has. | 00:15:31 | |
| Has been. | 00:15:32 | |
| Approved by the state of Indiana's code requirements per the application. | 00:15:34 | |
| Per per the applicant. | 00:15:38 | |
| No injurious impact is expected. | 00:15:40 | |
| #2. | 00:15:42 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in this variance. | 00:15:43 | |
| Will not be affected in a substantial adverse. | 00:15:47 | |
| Matter because the adjacent uses along with Vincent Rd. or gas stations. | 00:15:51 | |
| No substantially adverse impacts is expected on the use. | 00:15:56 | |
| Or value of the area. | 00:16:01 | |
| With the with the addition of this business. | 00:16:02 | |
| #3 the strict application that turns the zoning. | 00:16:06 | |
| Will result in practical difficulties and use the property because the size of the site. | 00:16:09 | |
| And with the traffic. | 00:16:14 | |
| Of on the old Vincent's Road, a larger structure would struggle to fit on the site with adequate parking and navigation. | 00:16:16 | |
| Given that this is a drive through only development extra windows. | 00:16:22 | |
| Were not significantly improved the aesthetics of the structure. | 00:16:26 | |
| #4 the variance. | 00:16:30 | |
| Does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 8-201-10. | 00:16:31 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeals hereby grants the petitioner. | 00:16:39 | |
| Variance at the meeting held on the 13th of April 2026 that completes my ballot. | 00:16:41 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a second? | 00:16:47 | |
| I'll second. | 00:16:49 | |
| We have a ballot and a second. | 00:16:50 | |
| Any other? | 00:16:52 | |
| Questions or comments from the board? | 00:16:53 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:16:55 | |
| Aye, any opposed like sign? | 00:16:58 | |
| That motion. | 00:17:00 | |
| Also. | 00:17:02 | |
| Passes. | 00:17:02 | |
| Congratulations. | 00:17:05 | |
| Thank you. | 00:17:06 | |
| Moving on with our agenda this evening. | 00:17:08 | |
| Agenda. | 00:17:12 | |
| Items. | 00:17:13 | |
| 4:00 and 5:00. | 00:17:14 | |
| Also. | 00:17:16 | |
| Two requests from. | 00:17:17 | |
| The same applicant and I see a representative from that applicant coming forward. | 00:17:19 | |
| If you don't mind, state your name and address for the Mr. Chairman Jason Copperway with Primavera and Associates, 1000 Bell Lane, | 00:17:23 | |
| New Albany, IN. | 00:17:26 | |
| We are. | 00:17:30 | |
| Perfectly happy, and we're actually going to request that those two docket items be heard together. | 00:17:31 | |
| Thank you very much. Thank you. | 00:17:35 | |
| OK, so. | 00:17:38 | |
| We have for consideration this evening agenda items four and five, FC-03-206-19. | 00:17:39 | |
| And FC-03-26 Dash. | 00:17:48 | |
| 20 and Frank is once again gonna. | 00:17:51 | |
| Give us the staff report on both of those and then we'll discuss and vote separately. | 00:17:54 | |
| OK. | 00:17:59 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/19 Petitioner Prime Property Development Code. | 00:18:02 | |
| Representative Jason Copperway, Location Hwy. 115 does not have an address at this time. | 00:18:07 | |
| Parcel #22. | 00:18:13 | |
| 04. | 00:18:14 | |
| 01. | 00:18:15 | |
| 900. | 00:18:16 | |
| Dash 83. | 00:18:17 | |
| .000 Dash 006. | 00:18:19 | |
| Request development standards variance for the lot area for Summit Ridge Commons. | 00:18:23 | |
| Zoning district is general commercial. | 00:18:27 | |
| The petitioner is seeking a development standards variance from section 4.44. | 00:18:29 | |
| The general commercial development improve. | 00:18:34 | |
| Performance standards to allow lots numbered 1-2 and four to be less than the required minimum lot area. | 00:18:36 | |
| Of 43,560 square feet of one acre. | 00:18:41 | |
| Lot #1 is proposed as 0.546 acres. Lot #2 is proposed at. | 00:18:45 | |
| 0.655 acres and lot #4 is proposed at 0.9 acres. | 00:18:51 | |
| The property is located within a commercial growth area, the Lafayette Township. | 00:18:55 | |
| And falls under the Highlander Point overlay district. | 00:18:59 | |
| With the Highlander Point corridor identified as a main commercial corridor and a primary gateway for the county as identified by | 00:19:01 | |
| the Comprehensive Plan. | 00:19:05 | |
| The property is surrounded by commercial and residential growth areas within the Lafayette. | 00:19:09 | |
| This land is designated as a growth area due to its proximity to utilities, Hwy. 64 and existing amenities such as shops, schools, | 00:19:13 | |
| and other institutions. | 00:19:18 | |
| With an intent to focus development here rather than in areas. | 00:19:23 | |
| That the plan has designated as transitional or agricultural areas. | 00:19:27 | |
| To the east is the platted subdivision of Fairway Estates, zoned residential suburban. | 00:19:31 | |
| To the north, along the southern side of East Luther Rd. are a vacant property and a single family residence is owned urban | 00:19:35 | |
| residential. | 00:19:38 | |
| To the West, across Hwy. 150 are wooded properties, zoned residential, suburban and urban residential. | 00:19:42 | |
| To the southwest, South and southeast are various properties zoned general commercial. | 00:19:47 | |
| The site has proposed access through the new. | 00:19:53 | |
| Proposed signalized intersection along Hwy. 150 that will connect to the new JC on the other side of the highway. | 00:19:55 | |
| The site proposes further connection to the. | 00:20:02 | |
| Lacolet commercial plated subdivision to the South. | 00:20:05 | |
| And we'll have a road ext to allow for connections to East Luther Rd. should future developments occur. | 00:20:08 | |
| The applicant is requesting A variance from lot area with the intent of providing a diversity of commercial lot options. | 00:20:14 | |
| The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 0.68 units per acre. | 00:20:20 | |
| And excluding the common area and roadways, the average density is 0.94 units per acre. | 00:20:24 | |
| Meaning that on an average it is meeting that general. | 00:20:29 | |
| Commercial development requires. | 00:20:32 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:20:35 | |
| the average density of the proposed lots still falls under the required one unit per acre development standard. | 00:20:40 | |
| Department while providing a diversity of options to the community. | 00:20:45 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:20:49 | |
| manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:20:53 | |
| With the commercial subdivision already in existence to the South. | 00:20:58 | |
| The comprehensive plan encourages commercial development. | 00:21:01 | |
| Be directed to areas such as this one, designated as commercial growth districts. | 00:21:05 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:21:09 | |
| because the commercial. | 00:21:12 | |
| Market demand is for a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:21:15 | |
| This proposal. | 00:21:18 | |
| Provides one larger lot of 2.305 acres and three smaller lots of less than one acre each. | 00:21:20 | |
| To meet local commercial demand. | 00:21:26 | |
| Despite being zoned general commercial, the slot has sat undeveloped for over a decade. | 00:21:27 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:21:32 | |
| For staff comments, the 2017 Comprehensive Plan indicates an opportunity to focus on entrepreneurship. | 00:21:38 | |
| Identified on pages 2831 and 37 of the Comp Plan. | 00:21:44 | |
| Entrepreneurs and commercial uses do not have a uniform set of needs for space. | 00:21:48 | |
| The website loopnet lists. | 00:21:53 | |
| Local commercial lots and of the 16 listed lots, two of them were under one acre. | 00:21:55 | |
| As a potential indication of the lack of supply in this size range. | 00:22:00 | |
| While This site is wooded, the site was previously cleared as recently as 2010. | 00:22:04 | |
| Many of the trees on the site are now invasive species that do not add to the rural character or ecological health of the | 00:22:08 | |
| community. | 00:22:11 | |
| Staff Recommendations. | 00:22:15 | |
| Whereas the proposed variance provides flexibility of lots while still meeting an average density requirement. | 00:22:16 | |
| Where the comprehensive plan supports lowering barriers to entry for entrepreneurs. | 00:22:22 | |
| Where this is a commercial growth area and where there is no expected negative impact to the public health, safety, general | 00:22:26 | |
| welfare or the value of adjacent properties. | 00:22:29 | |
| And where this lot has sat vacant for the last decade, staff has no recommended conditions for approval of this petition. | 00:22:33 | |
| OK. | 00:22:46 | |
| 2nd docket. | 00:22:47 | |
| Docket number FC 3/26/20. | 00:22:49 | |
| Same petitioner, same location. Request development standards variance for lot width and frontage for some average Commons. | 00:22:52 | |
| The petitioner is seeking a development standards variance from section 4.44, General Commercial Development and Performance | 00:22:59 | |
| Standards, to allow lots numbered 1234 and six to be less than the required minimum lot width and frontage of 200 feet. | 00:23:05 | |
| Lot #1 is approximately 110.82 feet. | 00:23:12 | |
| Lot #2 is approximately 121.97 feet. | 00:23:16 | |
| Lot #3 is 184. | 00:23:19 | |
| .10 feet. | 00:23:21 | |
| Lot #4 is 137.42 feet. | 00:23:23 | |
| And lot number six is 183.87 feet. | 00:23:26 | |
| The approximations are based on curves. | 00:23:29 | |
| From the. | 00:23:31 | |
| The property is located within a commercial growth area of the Lafayette Township and falls under the Highlander Point Overlay | 00:23:33 | |
| District, with the Highlander Point corridor identified as a main commercial corridor and a primary gateway for the county has | 00:23:37 | |
| identified by the Comprehensive Plan. | 00:23:41 | |
| This property is surrounded by. | 00:23:45 | |
| Commercial and residential growth areas within the Lafayette Township. | 00:23:47 | |
| This land is designated as a growth area due to its proximity to utilities, Hwy. 64 and existing amenities. | 00:23:50 | |
| With an intent to focus development here rather than in areas that the plan is designated as transitional or agricultural areas. | 00:23:56 | |
| To the east is the planet subdivision of Fairway Estates, zoned residential suburban. To the north, along the southern side of | 00:24:02 | |
| East Luther Rd. are a vacant property and a single family residence, zoned urban residential. | 00:24:07 | |
| To the West, across Hwy. 150 are wooded properties, zoned residential, suburban and urban residential. | 00:24:12 | |
| To the southwest, South and southeast are various properties zoned general commercial. | 00:24:17 | |
| The site has proposed access through the newly proposed signalized intersection along Hwy. 150 that will connect to the new JC on | 00:24:22 | |
| the other side of the highway. | 00:24:25 | |
| The site. | 00:24:29 | |
| Proposes further connection to the Lafollette. | 00:24:31 | |
| Commercial platted subdivision to the South. | 00:24:34 | |
| And we'll have a road ext to allow for connections to East Luther Rd. should future development occur. | 00:24:37 | |
| The applicant is requesting A variance from lot area. | 00:24:41 | |
| Or sorry from lot width with a intent of providing a diversity of commercial lot options. | 00:24:45 | |
| The growth density of the proposed subdivision is .68 units per acre. Excluding the common areas and roadways, you average density | 00:24:50 | |
| is .94 units per acre. | 00:24:53 | |
| Approval of the variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because | 00:24:58 | |
| these lot frontages are facing a low speed subdivision St. | 00:25:02 | |
| Reducing the potential for traffic backing up to to patrons entering or exiting a lot. | 00:25:06 | |
| The subdivision has an intent to service letter from the Highlander Fire Protection District. | 00:25:11 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse | 00:25:16 | |
| manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:25:20 | |
| With the commercial subdivision already in existence to the South, that includes several strip malls sharing their Rd. frontage. | 00:25:25 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property | 00:25:31 | |
| because the commercial market demand is for a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:25:35 | |
| This particular property is located along Hwy. 150 and providing A subdivision St. limits the accessible space available, creating | 00:25:39 | |
| thinner lots. | 00:25:43 | |
| The variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip and regulated under Indiana Code 82110. | 00:25:47 | |
| For staff comments. | 00:25:53 | |
| The 2017 Comprehensive Plan indicates an opportunity to focus on entrepreneurship. | 00:25:55 | |
| That's pages 2831 and 37 of the compliant. | 00:25:59 | |
| Entrepreneurs and commercial users are. | 00:26:02 | |
| Sorry, entrepreneurs and commercial uses do not have a uniform set of need for space. | 00:26:04 | |
| The website Loopnets lists local commercial lots. | 00:26:09 | |
| And of the 16 listed lots, two of them were under one acre, potentially indicating a lack of supply and the size range. | 00:26:12 | |
| While This site is wooded, the site was previously cleared as recently as 2010. Many of the trees on the site are invasive species | 00:26:18 | |
| that do not add to the rural character or ecological health of the community. | 00:26:22 | |
| For staff recommendations, whereas the proposed variance provides flexibility of lots while still meeting an average density | 00:26:27 | |
| requirement. | 00:26:30 | |
| Where the fire district provided an intent to service letter implying no issue with providing services to the lots despite their | 00:26:33 | |
| shorter frontage. | 00:26:36 | |
| Where the comprehensive plan supports lowering barriers to entry for entrepreneurs. | 00:26:39 | |
| Where this is a commercial growth area and where there is no expected negative impact to the public health, safety, general | 00:26:44 | |
| welfare or the value of the adjacent properties, and where this lot has sat vacant for the last decade, but where lots one and two | 00:26:48 | |
| have a particularly reduced frontage. | 00:26:52 | |
| Staff recommends the following condition. | 00:26:56 | |
| Lots #1 and #2 are to share an access drive and create an. | 00:26:58 | |
| In a shared parking lot use and maintenance agreement. | 00:27:02 | |
| OK. Thank you, Frank. | 00:27:08 | |
| Any questions from the board? | 00:27:09 | |
| Of Frank. | 00:27:11 | |
| Thank you. | 00:27:14 | |
| OK. | 00:27:16 | |
| We have heard the staff reports. | 00:27:17 | |
| Mr. Copperweight. | 00:27:20 | |
| Let you come forward again, please. | 00:27:22 | |
| The information you have, I just want to make sure you. | 00:27:29 | |
| Hey, Cortana. | 00:27:34 | |
| Thank you. | 00:27:36 | |
| Mr. Copperweed, is there anything else you would like to add to what? | 00:27:50 | |
| Frank's already shared with us. Yeah, I think staff did a pretty good job explaining the project. This is 8.8 acres on the 8.88 | 00:27:54 | |
| acres on the South side of about a 17 acre parcel. | 00:27:59 | |
| It's on the east side of 150, just north of Apollo Station. | 00:28:04 | |
| It is proposed to be. It is already zoned general commercial. | 00:28:08 | |
| So we're not here asking for any use variances or. | 00:28:11 | |
| Changing any uses that's already. | 00:28:14 | |
| By right, what we're asking for later tonight at the Planning Commission is a subdivision. | 00:28:15 | |
| A6 lot subdivision. | 00:28:20 | |
| Plus a common area. | 00:28:21 | |
| As you mentioned in the staff report. | 00:28:24 | |
| I'll phrase his ratio in another way. | 00:28:26 | |
| If you take the six lots and divide it by the average. | 00:28:28 | |
| It's actually 1.07 acres per lot. | 00:28:32 | |
| Because you have one lot that's 2.3 acres. | 00:28:34 | |
| A couple of lots that are one acre. | 00:28:37 | |
| And then a couple that are three of them that are slightly smaller, but the average lot size is greater than. | 00:28:39 | |
| That one acre. | 00:28:43 | |
| COVID obviously changed the marketplace. | 00:28:45 | |
| There are many businesses that just do not need an acre anymore. | 00:28:48 | |
| Your zoning ordinance was written back in 2006. | 00:28:51 | |
| Probably need some updates, but that's not why we're here tonight. But. | 00:28:54 | |
| You know and and this is not an announcement of any potential user, but users like. | 00:28:58 | |
| Seven Brew. | 00:29:03 | |
| Starbucks. | 00:29:04 | |
| Smaller, even bank. | 00:29:06 | |
| Bank tellers that just need an ATM or something like that, they just don't need an acre. | 00:29:08 | |
| So what the developer is trying to do here is create, as staff mentioned, a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:29:12 | |
| That that would meet meet some market needs that are out there. | 00:29:18 | |
| In addition, the property is about 288 feet wide. | 00:29:22 | |
| And we're dedicating 56 feet for. | 00:29:25 | |
| A road ride away on the east side. | 00:29:28 | |
| Which leaves. | 00:29:30 | |
| You know you're you're at your ordinance is sort of envisioning a 200 by 200. | 00:29:31 | |
| Lot, acre, lot. | 00:29:36 | |
| Well, we have an extra width that we have nothing to do with. | 00:29:37 | |
| So we could get our acre on some of the lots without slightly reduced. | 00:29:41 | |
| With frontage so. | 00:29:44 | |
| So the width of the lot as well as just general changes in in market conditions. | 00:29:46 | |
| Is our hardship. | 00:29:51 | |
| I did want to talk about and I apologize to staff. | 00:29:53 | |
| I didn't. I had read the staff report but I didn't see that condition the following on. | 00:29:55 | |
| About the shared access drive and the interlocal parking. | 00:30:00 | |
| When we had met with the plat review committee on site. | 00:30:04 | |
| One of the members had asked us. | 00:30:08 | |
| You know, are you going to come back for zoning? | 00:30:10 | |
| Variances on parking and that kind of thing. | 00:30:12 | |
| And and Mr. Sam's answer. Who's with me tonight? | 00:30:14 | |
| Was that that the user would be tailored to that size lot so. | 00:30:17 | |
| You know, a smaller footprint would. | 00:30:21 | |
| Would naturally result in lower parking spaces. | 00:30:23 | |
| As the site grades and I know some of you have visited the site. | 00:30:28 | |
| It rises from the fallout station. | 00:30:31 | |
| Sort of high in the middle and then it drops off again. | 00:30:34 | |
| As these lots are developed, they're going to have some great change. | 00:30:37 | |
| Lot to lot. | 00:30:40 | |
| I'm not sure that we're going to be able to do shared parking among those lots because of that grade change. | 00:30:42 | |
| I guess I would request that that condition be changed. | 00:30:48 | |
| Work with the county engineer. | 00:30:51 | |
| To properly locate. | 00:30:53 | |
| Driveways, which we have to do anyway. | 00:30:55 | |
| Rather than imposing a shared. | 00:30:58 | |
| Driveway and shared parking. | 00:31:00 | |
| We just don't know what those. | 00:31:02 | |
| How those lofts are going to layout? | 00:31:03 | |
| But certainly have no problem working with the county and the county engineer to make sure that it's. | 00:31:05 | |
| That is functional and and that it meets everyone's needs, obviously. | 00:31:09 | |
| But but we'd we'd rather not. | 00:31:13 | |
| We'd rather not have that condition at most. | 00:31:16 | |
| We haven't answered any questions you have. | 00:31:18 | |
| Any questions from Mr. Copperwick? | 00:31:20 | |
| I have a question. | 00:31:23 | |
| Again, looking at the preliminary plat and as it. | 00:31:25 | |
| I see their proposed signal off 150. | 00:31:28 | |
| And maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here. | 00:31:31 | |
| Where would an exit lane? | 00:31:33 | |
| Be to exit into that where the signal is to turn I just. | 00:31:35 | |
| So. So I think the county is designing those signal plans and the version that I saw had a full blown intersection. | 00:31:39 | |
| With signal. | 00:31:46 | |
| With a left turn into the. | 00:31:48 | |
| Site across 150 right turns into ours as well as left turns from the northbound. | 00:31:50 | |
| I just came to our side as well. | 00:31:55 | |
| So that intersection is. | 00:31:57 | |
| Federal project. | 00:32:01 | |
| So we have in dot standards. | 00:32:02 | |
| All of the. | 00:32:04 | |
| Turning motions. | 00:32:07 | |
| On all sides of that intersection. | 00:32:09 | |
| Have been proposed and accepted by in that. | 00:32:12 | |
| To meet any and all of our traffic demand through there. | 00:32:15 | |
| OK. Thank you. | 00:32:19 | |
| Other questions? | 00:32:21 | |
| Seeing none. Thank you. | 00:32:25 | |
| Thank you. | 00:32:26 | |
| Oh, Jason, sorry. | 00:32:28 | |
| I'm sorry. | 00:32:30 | |
| Since some of the I don't know if everybody visited the site. | 00:32:32 | |
| We can, I don't think, I don't know if everybody on the board visited the site. | 00:32:36 | |
| But would you kind of explain? | 00:32:39 | |
| That this is a. | 00:32:41 | |
| Detention basin situation here, Sure. So the common area on the North End of the site shown on the plat. | 00:32:42 | |
| Is is set aside for a detention basin? | 00:32:48 | |
| Your stormwater manual in a residential subdivision. | 00:32:51 | |
| Requires COM. | 00:32:54 | |
| Detention basins to be in common areas. | 00:32:56 | |
| For commercial, it doesn't. | 00:32:58 | |
| But we are dedicating that as a, as a common area. | 00:32:59 | |
| That will be maintained by a lot owners association. | 00:33:02 | |
| And then as I mentioned, the site sort of crowns in the middle. | 00:33:05 | |
| It drains N toward A toward a stream that runs through there, and it drains S toward the fall station. | 00:33:08 | |
| So I think you'll see on the plat. | 00:33:13 | |
| We've designated an area for detention along the South Line. | 00:33:15 | |
| Before it drains into La Follette or into Hwy. 150. | 00:33:19 | |
| I think we're right now we're thinking that's going to be underground detention. | 00:33:23 | |
| So that that law can still be adequately developed with parking over that area. | 00:33:26 | |
| We've still got to flush those plans out and obviously that gets approved, submitted and approved to county stormwater before we | 00:33:30 | |
| can. | 00:33:33 | |
| Proceed. | 00:33:37 | |
| Anything else? | 00:33:39 | |
| Thank you again. Thank you. | 00:33:42 | |
| OK, so. | 00:33:47 | |
| Again, we've heard from the staff, we've heard from the applicant. | 00:33:48 | |
| We will close those sections of the median, open the floor to anyone who is here this evening that would like to come forward and | 00:33:51 | |
| speak in favor. | 00:33:54 | |
| These requests. | 00:33:58 | |
| Seeing none, we'll close that section and open the floor to anyone who may be here to speak in opposition. | 00:34:03 | |
| If you don't mind come forward, state your name and address for the record. | 00:34:13 | |
| My name is Michelle Atkins. | 00:34:19 | |
| We own the property they keep. What's your address please? | 00:34:22 | |
| 4615 E Luther OK, one moment before you start just. | 00:34:25 | |
| To clarify for those either here this evening, want to make sure everyone understands when we open the floor for public comment. | 00:34:29 | |
| There are time limits. | 00:34:35 | |
| So we have 10 minutes. | 00:34:36 | |
| For those who would have been in favor, we didn't have any. | 00:34:38 | |
| 10 minutes for those who were opposed. And then if necessary, we'll bring the applicant back up to respond to any questions that | 00:34:41 | |
| come up. So I just want to make sure we're clear. | 00:34:44 | |
| So please go ahead. | 00:34:48 | |
| Uh, we own the property that is on the north side of. | 00:34:51 | |
| This proposed. | 00:34:55 | |
| Start dictation. | 00:34:59 | |
| And I wanted to state that in. | 00:35:00 | |
| The staff report. | 00:35:03 | |
| The gentleman presented something incorrect information. | 00:35:05 | |
| That is not. | 00:35:08 | |
| A vacant lot. | 00:35:09 | |
| That property is part of the lot on the on the corner of 150 and West Luther. | 00:35:10 | |
| So it is not a vacant lot. | 00:35:18 | |
| I don't understand what you're saying. | 00:35:21 | |
| There's nothing built on this property. | 00:35:24 | |
| But I know what. | 00:35:26 | |
| This is not a lot. | 00:35:34 | |
| This belongs to this block, right? | 00:35:35 | |
| They can, meaning there are no buildings. OK under that, yes, but it is it does belong to this lot and it does not be standalone | 00:35:38 | |
| lot. | 00:35:41 | |
| He said this is this is the assessors office. I was using their classification. | 00:35:45 | |
| Gotcha. | 00:35:49 | |
| This is mine. | 00:35:51 | |
| Can you go back down microphone? I'm sorry. | 00:36:03 | |
| Yeah, we, we need to. We have to come. | 00:36:06 | |
| She thought about this, she said to the north, repeat what I just said. I just paid Saturday the assessors office. So I know for a | 00:36:11 | |
| fact, OK, so, so Frank, I'll let you respond to that so we can capture that on on record as well. | 00:36:17 | |
| Sure. | 00:36:24 | |
| So I was pulling that information from Beacon using the tax assessor. The assessors listed classification for that corner parcel. | 00:36:25 | |
| And by that it means vacant, no building on there, not vacant, meaning nobody on, correct? | 00:36:35 | |
| Was that were were you? | 00:36:42 | |
| Was your position that it was? | 00:36:45 | |
| You're you're just clarifying who owns it. | 00:36:47 | |
| I'm just clarifying that it is. | 00:36:49 | |
| There is an owner to the property. Gotcha. It is not. | 00:36:51 | |
| Just a vacant out there piece of property. | 00:36:54 | |
| Sure, we we understand. | 00:36:57 | |
| OK, that's what I just wanted to make clear because he kept saying they can never get. | 00:36:59 | |
| It belongs with the other piece that when the state came through, they cut it right down in half. | 00:37:04 | |
| I think you you mean vacated. | 00:37:08 | |
| It's not a vacated lot. | 00:37:11 | |
| It's owned, but it is vacant, meaning there's nothing on it. | 00:37:13 | |
| So I just want to clarify for the record. | 00:37:18 | |
| And then I add my head a question as to because I have not seen the gentleman's actual. | 00:37:20 | |
| Flat drawings. | 00:37:25 | |
| What he is planning on putting. | 00:37:27 | |
| Up against my property. | 00:37:29 | |
| OK. | 00:37:31 | |
| Is there anything else? | 00:37:33 | |
| I, I always say that I, I, I will be an opposition because I always say it in opposition to anything growth in that area. But that | 00:37:36 | |
| doesn't really matter at this point. | 00:37:39 | |
| Sure. We'll, we'll give them a chance to respond in just a moment. Thank you. | 00:37:43 | |
| Is there anyone else that would like to come forward and speak in opposition? Please come forward. State your name and address for | 00:37:48 | |
| the record. | 00:37:51 | |
| Hi, I'm Bob Steiner. | 00:37:57 | |
| 3215 chip away court. | 00:37:58 | |
| I've lived at that location for 49 years. | 00:38:01 | |
| My house is directly. | 00:38:04 | |
| Behind where the new light is going to go in. | 00:38:06 | |
| Probably 300 feet or 400 feet. | 00:38:09 | |
| Back and my only I'm not necessarily against or. | 00:38:11 | |
| For the project. | 00:38:14 | |
| I just. | 00:38:15 | |
| Was hoping that there might be some discussion about. | 00:38:17 | |
| Berm or protection? | 00:38:19 | |
| Along the lines of those properties which. | 00:38:21 | |
| Mine and probably 10 other people. | 00:38:24 | |
| Live on that edge of that property. | 00:38:27 | |
| So. | 00:38:30 | |
| I don't know what this is appropriate time to ask that or suggest that, but. | 00:38:31 | |
| Certainly a concern. | 00:38:35 | |
| We appreciate you bringing that to our attention. We'll make sure that again when. | 00:38:36 | |
| When the applicant comes back. | 00:38:40 | |
| That they can speak to that. Great. Thanks. | 00:38:42 | |
| Thank you. | 00:38:44 | |
| Was there others here? | 00:38:46 | |
| Please come forward and state your name and address for the record. | 00:38:50 | |
| My name is Melanie Davis. | 00:38:57 | |
| 4820 Smith Rd. | 00:38:59 | |
| I actually own property also on Lawrence Bennett. | 00:39:03 | |
| But I guess my only question is, I assume that these are going to be connected to the to the sewer and not require septic. | 00:39:07 | |
| I'm going to let Nick respond to that. | 00:39:18 | |
| Yes. | 00:39:24 | |
| Sure. | 00:39:28 | |
| Was that it? | 00:39:29 | |
| OK. Thank you. | 00:39:31 | |
| Is there anyone else? | 00:39:33 | |
| Here this evening that would like to speak in opposition. | 00:39:34 | |
| OK, seeing seeing no other. | 00:39:42 | |
| Comments from the floor. We will close that section. | 00:39:45 | |
| And Mr. Copper, wait, would you like to come back and address the? | 00:39:48 | |
| Questions that came up. | 00:39:52 | |
| Sure. So I'm sure everyone received a notice that was it's too deep from. | 00:39:56 | |
| The property. | 00:40:01 | |
| But but the applicant is only developing the sort of the South half. | 00:40:02 | |
| So it doesn't, it doesn't proceed all the way N to miss Miss Atkins property. | 00:40:06 | |
| That would remain vacant. | 00:40:10 | |
| It's still zoned general commercial. It could be developed in the future, but it is not part of this proposal tonight. | 00:40:12 | |
| As far as Burma protection. | 00:40:19 | |
| This this. | 00:40:21 | |
| As as we're developing this property, it actually does not. | 00:40:22 | |
| I think it's fairway states there's not a but Fairway Estates. | 00:40:25 | |
| There's another property between this property. | 00:40:28 | |
| And fairway estates. | 00:40:30 | |
| There whenever general commercial is developed adjacent to residential. | 00:40:32 | |
| There are buffer yard requirements. | 00:40:36 | |
| But we're not. | 00:40:39 | |
| Touching those properties so. | 00:40:40 | |
| I don't know that those are subject to. | 00:40:41 | |
| This property. | 00:40:43 | |
| And then yes, there is a letter. | 00:40:45 | |
| I don't know if it's in your file, but in the Planning Commission file. | 00:40:47 | |
| From New Albany a willingness to serve letter that this will be on sewers. Your ordinance requires that as well. | 00:40:50 | |
| Right. Thank you, Jason. | 00:40:55 | |
| Yes. | 00:40:56 | |
| Could you? | 00:40:57 | |
| Clarify something here. | 00:40:59 | |
| The founder. Is this not drawing correctly for? | 00:41:01 | |
| Here or share that it touches the that may be in in our. | 00:41:04 | |
| Maybe an in off for drawing but OK if you look see these this line right here. | 00:41:08 | |
| Yes, Sir, is Fairway states. | 00:41:12 | |
| OK. | 00:41:14 | |
| And stuff. Just shortly, just clarification that survey actually. Thank you Sir, understand. | 00:41:15 | |
| Any other questions for Mr. B? | 00:41:23 | |
| Mr. Beagle House. I'm sorry, Jason. | 00:41:25 | |
| Yes. | 00:41:28 | |
| This is what you're referring to, the darker shaded areas with. | 00:41:29 | |
| Going now. | 00:41:32 | |
| I wish and that drawing is just to indicate. | 00:41:34 | |
| Approximately where it is, it's not definitive. This is what you were talking about, Yeah. | 00:41:36 | |
| That N to the north is not being developed currently. | 00:41:41 | |
| Were it to be developed, it would have to come back to the Planning Commission at last. | 00:41:46 | |
| And with additional notifications. | 00:41:49 | |
| Got it. Any other questions while he's here? | 00:41:51 | |
| Yes. | 00:41:55 | |
| Into Larry's point. | 00:41:56 | |
| And again, you're saying? | 00:41:58 | |
| This is not touching the property. | 00:41:59 | |
| Correct. Do you know what that distance is between? | 00:42:01 | |
| Approximately 30 feet or so. | 00:42:04 | |
| And it's road right of way that's near it is not any lot. | 00:42:07 | |
| The road right away is 56 feet right here, OK. | 00:42:10 | |
| So, So the nearest lot is probably 80 plus feet. OK, OK. | 00:42:13 | |
| Better understand. Thank you. | 00:42:19 | |
| Appreciate it. OK. | 00:42:21 | |
| Thank you, Sir. Thank you. | 00:42:23 | |
| OK. | 00:42:25 | |
| Having heard from. | 00:42:27 | |
| All parties? Do we have a ballot? | 00:42:28 | |
| I do. | 00:42:31 | |
| Docket FC-03-206-19. | 00:42:33 | |
| Prime property development representative. Adjacent copperweight. | 00:42:38 | |
| After careful review, the board finds that. | 00:42:42 | |
| Number one approval of the variance will not. | 00:42:45 | |
| Be adjourned to the public. Health, safety, morals. | 00:42:48 | |
| In general welfare of the community because. | 00:42:51 | |
| The average density of the proposed lot still fall under the required. | 00:42:53 | |
| One unit per acre development standard. | 00:42:57 | |
| Forward while providing a density. | 00:43:00 | |
| Options to the community. | 00:43:04 | |
| #2. | 00:43:06 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property include included in the variance. | 00:43:07 | |
| Will not. | 00:43:13 | |
| Be affected in a substantial adverse manner because the property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:43:14 | |
| With a commercial subdivision already in existence to the South. | 00:43:21 | |
| The comprehensive plan encourages commercial development. | 00:43:25 | |
| Be directed to the areas such as this one. | 00:43:28 | |
| Designated as Commercial Growth districts. | 00:43:31 | |
| #3. | 00:43:35 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will. | 00:43:36 | |
| Result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because. | 00:43:40 | |
| The commercial market demand is. | 00:43:44 | |
| For a diversity of lot sizes. | 00:43:46 | |
| This proposed proposal provides. | 00:43:49 | |
| One larger lot of 2.305 acres in three smaller lots of less. | 00:43:51 | |
| Than an acre each to meet local. | 00:43:57 | |
| Commercial demands. | 00:43:59 | |
| Despite being zoned general commercial. | 00:44:01 | |
| This lot has. | 00:44:04 | |
| Set under develop for over decades. | 00:44:05 | |
| #4 This variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip. | 00:44:09 | |
| And Reg. | 00:44:14 | |
| Indiana code 82110. | 00:44:15 | |
| The Board of Zoning. | 00:44:20 | |
| Pill hereby grants. | 00:44:22 | |
| The petitioner variance at the meeting held on the 13th day of April. | 00:44:24 | |
| 2026 and that completes my ballot. | 00:44:28 | |
| OK, we have a ballot. Do we have a 2nd? I'll second it. | 00:44:32 | |
| OK. We have a ballot and a second. Any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:44:35 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye aye. Any opposed like sign. | 00:44:39 | |
| OK, that one passes. Do we have a ballot for? | 00:44:45 | |
| FC-03-206-20. | 00:44:49 | |
| I do. | 00:44:52 | |
| OK. All right. | 00:44:53 | |
| This is docket FC-03-206-20. | 00:44:55 | |
| Petitioner. | 00:45:01 | |
| Prime Properties Development Company representative is Jason Copper White. | 00:45:02 | |
| After careful review, the board finds that. | 00:45:06 | |
| Approval of the variance will not. | 00:45:10 | |
| Be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because. | 00:45:13 | |
| These lot frontages are facing a low speed subdivision St. reducing the potential for traffic backup. | 00:45:18 | |
| Due to patrons. | 00:45:26 | |
| Or exiting a lot. | 00:45:29 | |
| The subdivision has an intent to service. | 00:45:31 | |
| Attention service letter from the Highlander Fire Protection District. | 00:45:34 | |
| #2. | 00:45:38 | |
| The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not. | 00:45:40 | |
| Be affected in a substantial adverse manner because. | 00:45:45 | |
| The property is already zoned as general commercial. | 00:45:48 | |
| With a commercial subdivision already in existence to the South that includes several strip malls sharing. | 00:45:52 | |
| Road frontage. | 00:45:58 | |
| Item 3. | 00:46:00 | |
| The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will. | 00:46:02 | |
| Result in practical difficulties. | 00:46:06 | |
| In the use of the property because. | 00:46:09 | |
| The commercial market demand. | 00:46:11 | |
| Is for the diversity. | 00:46:13 | |
| Of lot sizes. | 00:46:15 | |
| The particular property is located along Hwy. 150 and providing A subdivision St. limits. | 00:46:17 | |
| The accessibility space available creating thinner. | 00:46:22 | |
| Item 4. | 00:46:27 | |
| This variance does not involve a structure that is near an airstrip. | 00:46:28 | |
| And regulated under code. | 00:46:33 | |
| 8-201-10. | 00:46:35 | |
| The Board of Zoning Appeal appeals hereby grants. | 00:46:41 | |
| The petitioner of variance at the meeting. | 00:46:44 | |
| Held the 13th day of April, 2026, with the following condition. | 00:46:47 | |
| That. | 00:46:54 | |
| The. | 00:46:55 | |
| Petitioner will work with staff. | 00:46:56 | |
| And the county engineer. | 00:46:59 | |
| On entrance locations. | 00:47:01 | |
| For future development. | 00:47:04 | |
| OK, We have a motion or a ballot. Do we have a 2nd? I'll second. | 00:47:07 | |
| With the ballot and a second, any other questions or comments from the board? | 00:47:10 | |
| Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. | 00:47:15 | |
| Aye, any opposed like son? | 00:47:18 | |
| And that motion passes. | 00:47:21 | |
| Thank you very much. Thank you. | 00:47:25 | |
| Folks, looking at the agenda tonight, I do not see anything else on there. Is there anything else? | 00:47:28 | |
| Staff is aware to come before the board. | 00:47:33 | |
| Seeing none, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. | 00:47:36 | |
| No. Everybody leave until they get this sign, please. OK, we do have to sign the ballot, but we still can adjourn. | 00:47:38 | |
| Motion to adjourn from. | 00:47:43 | |
| We have a motion. Do we have second, second. | 00:47:45 | |
| Motion and 2nd All those in favor signify by saying aye aye, and we are. | 00:47:47 | |
| Adjourned. Thank you folks, for being here. | 00:47:52 | |
| You really really, really really. | 00:47:57 |