Planning commission deadlocks, rejects final development plan for Condit Road office conversion

The New Albany Planning Commission on July 20 failed to approve a final development plan for 6600 New Albany Condit Road after a 2–2 vote that left the applicant without the commission’s sign‑off. The proposal, presented by city planning staff, would have converted an existing house to office use, added 20 parking spaces and a 6‑foot screening wall and retained the house’s residential character while applying a traditional commercial storefront for the office frontage.

Staff told the commission the final plan was consistent with the previously approved preliminary plan but that several technical items remained. The engineering reviewer said the project must provide a fire‑truck turning analysis, a sanitary/water utility plan, sight‑distance documentation at the driveway and a parking schedule that shows required and ADA stalls. "This is a final development plan for the site at 6600 New Albany Condit Road," staff said during their presentation, adding that the plan was consistent with the previously approved rezoning but subject to conditions.

A neighboring resident, Danielle Jeffers, told the commission she believed the required screening fence would extend to an adjacent property’s fence line and raised concerns that fence placement could conflict with utility poles and prevent fire‑truck access. "There are poles that go down between the property and our property; I'm not sure that a fire truck could fit if you put a fence in at that property line," she said. Engineering and staff said the applicant would have to secure permission from the easement owner if fence placement fell inside the utility easement and that the required fire access analysis was a condition of approval.

When the commission voted on the plan, Commissioners Larson and Wallace voted no, Commissioners Kirby and Bridal voted yes, producing a 2–2 split. The chair declared the motion failed. Commissioners who voted against the plan cited concerns about the appropriateness of the use for that lot and potential circulation and safety issues.

The applicant’s representative asked about options going forward; staff and legal recommended meeting with village planning staff and, if additional information were available (for example, a fire‑chief letter or an easement agreement), pursuing a motion for reconsideration under the code or resubmitting a revised plan. The meeting record shows the applicant may return with added engineering analyses or an easement agreement to address the outstanding condition.

Next steps: the applicant may supply the requested technical documents or pursue a motion for reconsideration under the village code. The commission’s file will reflect the failed vote and the record of the questions and conditions raised at the hearing.