Daviess County court holds first reading on rezoning for 1651 Parish Plaza Drive amid debate over recovery-focused housing

Daviess County Fiscal Court on Aug. 21 took up a first reading of an ordinance to change zoning for a 6.103-acre parcel at 1651 Parish Plaza Drive from B4 (general business) to R3MF (multifamily residential). The Owensboro Metropolitan Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the change after its July 10 meeting; the court reviewed the commission’s record and allowed clarifying questions and public comment. No vote was taken; the matter will return for a final vote at the court’s next meeting.

The proposal, described in materials from the planning office and by the developer’s counsel, would allow roughly 44 multifamily units on the site. Center for Addiction Recovery and a development partner intend to seek Low Income Housing Tax Credit funding from the Kentucky Housing Corporation and plan a project that, if funded, would give a targeted preference — discussed in the record as up to 80% of units — to people in recovery from substance use. Cody Duvall, legal counsel for the developer, told the court the project is not intended as a short-term transitional home but as permanent multifamily housing; he said the team would comply with setback and other requirements in county zoning when they file a development plan.

The proposal drew extended public comment from owners and managers of nearby rental properties and residents who said they feared impacts on safety, tenant stability and property values. Jamie Clump, an adjacent owner, said tenants already have told him they may move if the rezoning is approved. Roger and Clinton Connor, who operate multifamily properties near the site, said a stated preference for people in recovery could run afoul of fair-housing protections because addiction may be treated as a disability. Clinton Connor said more than half of his tenants signed a petition opposing the rezoning.

Supporters of the development described long experience operating similar housing in other Kentucky communities and offered results-based arguments. Dale Sites, who identified himself as having recovered from addiction and who described work building recovery housing in Henderson, said research and university evaluations of those projects show residents succeeded in employment and family reunification, and that the housing did not create the public-safety problems opponents predicted. He said operators maintain screening, employment support and security systems and that law enforcement in Henderson has worked with the developments.

Court members and staff clarified the scope of the vote before them: the fiscal court was reviewing the planning commission record and the technical question of whether the zoning classification is appropriate at this location, not approving any final development plan or the operator’s management practices. Planning staff member Trey Pedley told the court that the property is contiguous to existing multifamily zoning, which favors a recommendation for rezoning under the county comprehensive plan’s “logical expansion” criteria.

Developers told the court a typical program component would be random drug testing for residents; in the hearing a representative said random tests would be expected “probably three times a year,” with scope and enforcement to be addressed in later development-permit materials. Counsel for the developer also said preference wording helps make projects more competitive for state housing credits but is not a legally binding entitlement for any individual tenant.

Because this was the ordinance’s first reading, the court did not vote. The judge told the public that the court will return to the item at its next meeting for a final vote and that the county’s practice is to limit public comment on appeals to those who had spoken to the planning commission record.

Ending: The court’s next regular meeting will include the final vote on the ordinance amending zoning for 1651 Parish Plaza Drive; the judge and staff said the record before them — the planning commission transcript, findings and exhibits — will form the basis of the court’s decision.