News and Tribune

November 7, 2013

MAC Asphalt case back in court

Dispute has been ongoing since 2006 between company, neighbors

By BRADEN LAMMERS
braden.lammers@newsandtribune.com

JEFFERSONVILLE — A 3-year-old case about the location of MAC Construction’s Asphalt Plant near a Jeffersonville neighborhood was back in court this week.

Attorneys representing nearby residents in the matter presented a request motion to compel MAC to hand over a “plethora of documents.” The plaintiffs believe the documents are pertinent to the plant’s approval for a zoning variance that was granted in 2005 to locate on its current site.

The plaintiffs argued Tuesday that the zoning interpretation and the Improvement Location Permit were improperly issued. In addition, it was argued that the building commissioner did not sign the improvement location permit and that the permit for construction had a nonconforming use under the city’s zoning ordinance.

“It’s simply a discovery dispute at this point,” said Jason Lopp, attorney representing MAC.

A fight has been ongoing since MAC Asphalt located its plant along Quarry Road in Jeffersonville in 2006.

Residents of the nearby Jefferson Court trailer park have complained of soot, noise and odor problems from the plant, which they argue is out of compliance with zoning regulations and that a hearing on the plant’s construction was never held. They filed suit in 2010 against MAC, the city of Jeffersonville, several city departments and Ingram Land Corp.

Clark County Superior Court 2 Judge Jerry Jacobi dismissed the case in October 2011, granting the defendants summary judgment based on a statute of limitations that applied to public officials.

That decision was reversed by the Indiana Court of Appeals in 2012 and returned to the trial court.

No decision was made by special Judge Daniel Donahue and the matter was taken under advisement Tuesday.

Lopp said he did not know when a decision is likely to be returned and said it could be anywhere from a week to sometime in December before a ruling is issued.

“This is just one of the step in the litigation process,” he said.

Calls to Eli Baccus, attorney for Pat Barrow and Charlie Hanka, the plaintiffs in the case were not returned as of press time.