By the numbers:
70 acres — Parcel size proposed for redevelopment
140 — Homes in original plan
2 — Tracks of land
In-depth coverage
The Springfield News-Sun digs into stories about the local housing market, including recent stories about home sales and a drop in foreclosures.
A developer has proposed re-zoning 70 acres of agricultural property in Mad River Twp. and Enon to residential, but faces opposition from area residents concerned about flooding and other issues.
The proposed project in the northeast corner of Fairfield Pike and Hunter Road near the Houck Meadows subdivision was unanimously approved by the Clark County Planning Commission, but was rejected by the rural zoning commission earlier this month in a unanimous vote.
The issue is expected to come before the Clark County commissioners next month for the final say.
Steve Butler, president of developer Community Civil Engineers, said the builder want to establish a new subdivision with single family homes to benefit the entire county.
“As Clark County strives to attract new businesses, I think having new housing available for families would be a very positive attribute that the county could offer,” Butler said.
But the plan has been put on hold, Butler said, since it was denied by rural zoning officials who heard from several residents opposed to the project.
Debra Gaskill said her biggest concern is losing the agricultural feel of the neighborhood and the increased traffic a large subdivision would bring.
“It’s just a little disconcerting to have houses suddenly behind you after being here for 25 years,” Gaskill said.
She said Hunter Road is a high traffic area and additional houses would only cause more problems.
Garnett Traylor circulated a petition against the development and hopes residents can stop the project.
“I do object to them trying to double the number of houses. I think it would put a severe strain on everything around here. Our schools are bursting at the seams. They’ve got trailers over there at Greenon High School and they don’t have enough room in the schools,” Traylor said.
Mad River Twp. Trustee Kathy Estep said residents who live at a nearby subdivision have flooding issues and are concerned a new subdivision would worsen the problem.
She also said trustees want the development to adhere to a township land use plan that calls for any new development over 5 acres to be a low density development with conservation of green space.
“Rather than having particularly large lots, you might have lots clustered in areas and save the unique properties of the land,” she said.
Estep described the area as wooded in the upper portion and the lower portion has a creek going through it.
She also said a significant portion of the land is in the village of Enon and in the flood plain.
“The position of the township land use plan is we do not want to see development in flood plains and the county’s land use plan concurs with that,” Estep said.
Many residents who live in a nearby subdivision spoke in opposition of the development at the rural zoning commission because they already have problems with water runoff from the “hilly” portion of the property.
“They’re really concerned about additional water runoff problems. They do have problems with water in their backyard,” Estep said. “… There are legitimate issues that they want to make sure are addressed. Their concern is if a straight R-1 zoning takes place those issues may or may not be properly addressed in the subdivision plan.”
Estep said she hopes commissioners uphold the rural zoning commission’s ruling to ensure the subdivision will follow the township’s land use plan.
Clark County Engineer Johnathan Burr wrote in a letter to the planning commission that he has some concerns about the project. He said issues with annexation and a split jurisdiction needs to be resolved.
Clark County Commissioners Rick Lohnes and John Detrick are also member of the planning commission that unanimously approved the project.
Lohnes and Detrick both say when the issue came before the planning commission they didn’t hear from residents as public comments aren’t allowed.
But they say they will study the issue before it comes before the three commissioners and listen to any objections at the upcoming meeting.
“Everybody wants to know what the plan is. Well, no one is going to spend any money to do a good plan if it’s not even zoned for anything. But if it’s zoned for building single family homes there, that doesn’t guarantee anything. That just means now if they really want to build there they will have to submit very detailed specific plans and meet some stringent requirements to get approved,” Lohnes said.
Detrick said he wants to hear about water and flooding issues at the nearby subdivision before making a decision.
“We don’t have all the new details that came up, but it was a slam dunk with us (planning commission) at first,” Detrick said. “They had more information than us. We will be taking comments when we have our meeting.”
But Detrick added that a new subdivision would increase the population in the area and help property values.
“I have not made up my mind yet. I’m going to keep an open mind to the flooding issues,” Detrick said, adding that he didn’t want to be swayed by those who simply don’t want it in their backyard.
Butler said developers do not know how large the subdivision will be, but want to keep some of the same characteristics of the area.
He said he disagrees that the development would negatively impact drainage issues in the area.
“The majority of the residents to our east in the existing subdivision have many drainage issues and our development will not be impacting those issues and would not be worsening those issues. We just have to be able to show them that. Our subdivision’s going to be draining to the north and they are to our east. If anything their storm water will come on to our property,” Butler said.
About the Author