- Let's go ahead and call this meeting to order. Process of pulling up this information. I did not print
- it out in advance. I apologize. Want an agenda? Oh, this would be fantastic. Thank you. All right, let's
- let's take a roll. All right, I'll call the roll for the May 6th, 2026 Board of Zoning Appeals in Monroe
- County. Margaret Clements. Skip daily.
- Yeah, I'm with Davidson here. Guy Loftman here and Jeff Morris. Here and apologizing for my last minute
- change in attendance. Alright, alright, so we have three in person which makes an in person quorum and
- four total. Alright, could we please introduce the evidence? I'd like to introduce the following items.
- into the evidence. The Monroe County Development Ordinance as adopted and amended, the Monroe County
- Comprehensive Plan as adopted and amended, the Monroe County Board of Zoning Appeals Rules of Procedure
- as adopted and amended, and the cases that were legally advertised and scheduled for hearing on tonight's
- agenda. I would like to make a motion to introduce the evidence as just enumerated by you. Second. Great.
- There's been a motion and a second to
- I've got the items of evidence. Skip Daly? Yes. Pamela Davidson? Yes. Guy Hoffman? Yes. Jeff Morris?
- Yes. Carries four to zero. All right, Assistant Director, it looks like we have a few changes to the
- agenda as it was placed in the packets. Is the old business
- being continued and not being shown tonight? Correct. Okay. And is the Campanella variance 26-6 withdrawn?
- Is that correct? Correct. We have one, there will be one item at the very end of the agenda tonight,
- I do believe.
- And they may speak to it later when it comes up, but McWhorter VAR-26-14 is considering continuing part
- A of that. Part A, but they will still want to be heard part B. Okay. All right. So we'll just deal
- with that in order then. All right. Can we go ahead? Mr. Daly, maybe we should make clear to the public
- that the Campanella item will not be heard. So if anybody is here,
- for that item, you may leave or you may stay, but we won't be hearing that item. I just wanted to make
- sure the public knew that that will not take place. Both the Donovan and the Campanella will not be
- on tonight's agenda. With that being said, could we approve the agenda with the exclusion of the Donovan
- and Campanella?
- So moved. I get for that. Sorry. I didn't hear a second. Oh, I'll second it. Sure. Oh, sorry. All right.
- So this is a motion and a second to approve the agenda for tonight's meeting. Pamela Davidson? Yes.
- Guy Loftman? Yes. Jeff Morris? Yes. And Skip Daly? Yes. Motion carries four to zero. All right.
- Is there any administrative business that we have to deal with? It doesn't look like there's anything
- on the packet, so let's... And let's look at variance 2611. Looks like... No, I think that's... You're
- seeing one, maybe. On front... Oh, sorry, I apologize. Variance 25-72.
- Golf Fisk Lake Monroe Setback Variants to Chapter 805. Mr. Chairman, if I can, I see that the recommendation
- from the plan department is approval on this item. This being an approval item,
- I'd like to inquire and then I may want to make a motion that we... There is a procedure we use if something
- is unopposed that sometimes moves the meetings along, which is I would like to inquire whether anybody
- either in or the chair will inquire as to when anyone here or do you want to go ahead and do that? Is
- there anybody?
- present or online that wishes to speak toward the Fisk Lake Monroe setback variance to chapter 805,
- other than the petitioner? Anybody online? May I assume you wish to call the question? I like move to
- call the question. Is it seconded? Did we verify that there was nobody online?
- as well. Okay, great. Then I will second that. Second to call the question. Can we take a roll on calling
- the question? That motion is based on staff's findings and recommendations. Well noted. We'll get to
- that when we get to the approval. It has to be part of the motion. Right. And based on the recommendations
- and report of the facts and findings of the
- plan staff. I agree with the motion and second it. I will second that. Well, okay. Procedurally, we
- have a motion on the table to call the question. Yes. If that's approved, at that point, you can motion
- to approve the variance
- based on the findings of that. Got it. So we're just voting on whether we're gonna vote. We could have
- a roll call based on calling the question, please. Calling the question. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- All right. Now that the question has been called, do we have a motion either to approve or to deny?
- I move to approve variance 2572G based on the recommendations and findings of the staff as reported
- in our meeting package. I'll second that. Great. There's been a motion and a second to approve variance
- VAR-25-72G, the Fisk Lake Monroe Setback from Chapter 805. The vote yes is a motion to approve.
- Yes. Guy Loftman. Yes. Jeff Morris. Yes. Pamela Davidson. Yes. Motion carries 4-0. Thank you, Mr. Brown.
- And thank you, Assistant Director. Let's move on to, my eyes. Okay, we'll move on to variance 26-11.
- front yard setback variance to Chapter 805. Mr. Myers, if you would present for us, please. Thank you.
- All right, this is VAR-26-11, the bone front yard setback variance to Chapter 804.
- This is at 3985 South Knight Ridge Road. It is in Salt Creek Township, Section 20. It is zoned Conservation
- Residential 2.5 and is also located in the Eco or Environmental Constraints Overlay Area 2. Positioners
- requesting one development standard variance from the front yard setback requirement of Chapter 804
- for a residential storage structure. This structure is going to measure 960 square feet.
- It is a detached garage, 32 feet by 30. This detached garage will exhibit a new driveway entrance from
- South Knight Ridge Road. The property is one 3.9 acre lot. That's zoned CVR as I stated previously.
- And it currently contains a 1,968 square foot single family residence and an 80 square foot utility
- shed. Mr. Bone is acting as the property owner's representative for this petition and is also the sales
- manager of Coach House Garages.
- Early conversations between Mr. Bone and the Planning Department regarding the proposed detached garage
- resulted in staff clarifying that all three parcels of this subject property that you will see on a
- map in a moment are considered one lot of record. Additionally, staff informed Mr. Bone that establishing
- a new driveway would require a right of way activity permit from the Highway Department. Staff had originally
- suggested that the new garage
- utilize an existing southern driveway entrance on the property that would avoid the need for a new right
- of way activity permit. However Mr. Bone stated that the owner only wants to build the detached garage
- if the new driveway can be established. Mr. Bone went ahead and submitted two right of way activity
- permit applications because there are actually two existing driveways on the property so this detached
- garage would have created a third.
- Upon review of the petition cites two existing driveway entrances and those respective highway activity
- permits, the highway department denied both. Those were RW-26-45 as well as RW-26-66. Mr. Bone appealed
- these two denials on behalf of the property owner and the appeal was heard by the Monroe County Board
- of Commissioners on April 9th, 2026.
- Ultimately approved one of those appeals to grant the new driveway entrance on the condition that the
- existing second driveway which will is currently in the middle of the property and you'll see that on
- a map in a moment. That second driveway be removed so as long as they remove that second driveway they
- can they can build a new one for the new detached garage if that if this variance is approved for the
- front yard setback.
- Planning staff also informed Mr. Bone of the setback requirements and the buildable area constraints
- on the property. Being in the eco area too, slopes greater than 15% are protected from any land disturbance
- activity or the removal of vegetation in those sloped areas. Additionally, the petition site is located
- in lot one of the September Hill subdivision, which has a dedicated 25 foot right of way from the center
- line of South Knight Ridge Road.
- and a 25 foot setback from that right of way. So that's a total of 50 feet from the center line that
- they have to abide by for new structures. According to Mr. Bone and the property owners proposed location
- for the new structure to avoid encroachment into the steep slopes, a front yard setback variance is
- required in order to build the size of the structure and orientation of the structure that they want.
- The side setback is 15 feet, so the property
- the proposed structure will be meeting that setback. It's just only the front setback that can't be
- met. And the structure's location will be 35 feet from the center line. So that's an encroachment of
- 20 feet, approximately 20 feet encroachment into the setback. And Mr. Bone attests that this location
- was selected in order to utilize the existing buildable area on the site.
- And any further back from the road would result in the structure encroaching into the steep slopes that
- are greater than 15%. Here on the screen we have the letter from the petitioner as well as the plot
- plan that was provided by the petitioner.
- Now on the screen, we have the scaled plot plan that was drafted by staff. That black line that you
- see there is the edge of the right-of-way dedication of the September Hill subdivision. So then an additional
- 25 feet from that line is where the structure is allowed to go based on the front setback. You can see
- also on this map the location of the existing driveways. We have one to the far south and then one in
- the middle.
- The one in the middle is the one that will be removed per the appeal request. And the new driveway here
- to the north will service the detached garage alone. Here we have the location map, Salt Creek Township.
- We have South State Road 446 here, and then the road that accesses the property is South Knight Ridge.
- Here is the site conditions map. On this screen, all the red is over 15% in slope.
- Those are the protected slopes based on the eco area. This is just the same map just zoomed in a bit
- more to show where those slopes are and the limited buildable area that we have between the edge of
- the road and the beginning of the steep sloped areas. And now we have some aerial pictometry of the
- site that reveals the two driveway entrances that are existing, the existing home as well. And then
- just panning around here
- showing different angles from different directions of the property. Now on the screen we have a street
- view that shows the two existing driveway entrances. Again, the northern driveway or the one in the
- middle as I like to call it. That one is the one that will be removed per the highway department's request
- and approval of the appeal by the board of commissioners. Another image there of showing that driveway
- entrance that will be removed.
- And then now on the screen is the proposed location of the detached garage. If you were to look further
- back into the background of this photo, you can see how the slope begins to fall off into that 15% and
- more. All right. This brings me to staff's recommendation. Staff recommends denial of the front setback
- variance, stating that practical difficulties have not been demonstrated.
- The condition requiring the variance can be avoided through redesign, relocation, or reorientation of
- the proposed detached garage structure. Staff has included additional language that if there is an approval
- forwarded by this BZA, that staff recommend including a condition of approval, and that condition of
- approval would be that the petitioner receive an approved right-of-way activity permit from the Highway
- Department for the new driveway entrance.
- They did win the appeal. However, a new right of way activity permit is still required to formally permit
- the new driveway entrance if this front setback variance is approved. With respect to staff's recommendation,
- we did work to see if there was somewhere else on the property the same size structure could fit. So
- now on the screen is a map showing the steep slopes as well as measurements from property lines and
- the center line of South Knight Ridge Road of a location that could
- the same size of structure that they're wanting. It's just a lot closer to the existing residence and
- would also utilize the existing driveway that comes in front of the existing residence rather than being
- further away from the existing residence. And now I want to take any questions. We listen to the petitioner
- first. If there's nothing imminent,
- Let's move on to the petitioner. Is the petitioner or a representative here in person? If you could
- come forward. And while you come forward, keep this in mind. Make sure that the microphone is appropriate
- length from where you'll be speaking from. Correct. And we'll also need you to sign in, please. And
- then state your name for the record.
- My name is Brett Bone. I am a representative of Coach House Garages. All right. Thank you, Mr. Bone.
- Now, if you could raise your right hand and swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth
- as you know it. Absolutely. Yes. All right. Thank you. You will be given 15 minutes if you wish. You
- can begin anytime. Thank you. Upon meeting Mr.
- He explained to me his situation where he's in need of a new garage with the hail that happened about
- a month ago. He said it'd be nice to get that garage up sooner and later. But with I've learned with
- bidding being a new company in the Bloomington area, there are some difficulties and challenges I did
- not face in Illinois and it's called Hills and I'm learning as I go here that
- to keep things in the general area where we need to be, we're limited on what we can do, where we can
- do it. So Mr. Richard asked if we can do the garage on the, I will call it the east end or the north
- end of the property where the slope drop was not affected. But we worked that out. And originally when
- I spoke with Drew, before we got the county involved, I was under the understanding the setback from
- the side of the road to where the garage should start would be about 25 feet.
- So I made it 26 feet. And there is a row of trees along the red end where the slope drop begins. So
- we don't want to uproot those because of the root system. It affects erosion. We want to leave those
- trees if all possible. So we move that back. Yes, right in there. We move that back as close as we could
- to those trees, getting the setback off the road to meet the requirements. It's just we're not able
- to get the 50 foot from the center of the road.
- to where the building starts, there's a 15 foot difference is what it is. But there's still adequate
- space with the county approving the driveway. It'll be a 12 foot wide driveway going up to the new garage,
- which is plenty long. It'll be 12 by 25 feet from the edge of the road is what that new concrete driveway
- would be. And then the building will sit behind that with your approval, of course.
- I missed on that, Jeff? Okay, that's pretty much what I have. Right, thank you. Do we have any questions?
- I do have a question. Yes, ma'am. The staff said that if the garage location could be moved closer to
- the house and so on, then this won't be an issue or a problem. What is the, is that
- not acceptable? No, thank you. I failed to mention one thing. One of the main reasons Jeff was wanting
- to put it where he wanted to put it was he believes in solar power. And the way that the roof line has
- to sit for the diameter of the building where we laid that out, it's going to get the most sunlight
- to affect the charging stations that are going to be placed on his roof of that. So I don't know with
- moving that closer if the trees
- are gonna block that shade, I'm not sure, but with the sunshine, and he lives there, not me, but with
- the sunshine in the afternoon, through morning through afternoon, that's where it gets the most sun
- to properly juice, I guess, juice the solar-powered system that's gonna sit there. Interesting, thanks
- for that answer. Yes, yes. Mr. Loughlin. The need for a driveway, we're not really
- looking at the need for the driveway and the drive, okay. So I think that answers my question that,
- you know, why are we, why don't we like the one that does comply? Mr. Morris, do you have any questions
- for the petition or staff? No questions for me. Thank you, Skip. I have a question. Yes, sir.
- and has two driveway curb cuts and they U. The petitioner's intention to once the middle driveway is
- uprooted to connect the southern driveway through the yard to the new driveway. As of right now, the
- main idea is to come in off of
- night ridge with the driveway that goes into the overhead door of our garage door where the bay will
- be in part there and as of right now there's no thought of continuing that. I can't speak for Jeff I
- can't but that's not been discussed. I do have a question of staff. Mr. Myers was the was the intention
- of solar and
- rationale brought up to you during the process with the petitioner? Mr. Bone came in several times to
- discuss the details of this petition, and I believe he did mention at one point or another that one
- of the rationale pieces was to incorporate solar power into the garage structure. However, reading the
- strict application of the ordinance, even if that was their rationale, the ordinance would say, well,
- do you need to have solar power? And the answer would be,
- most likely from the ordinance, no, you can adjust it and relocate it somewhere else and remove the
- solar power and not need a variance. So just looking at a strict application, not an accommodation to
- his desire for this. Correct, yeah, the ordinance does not take into account a property owner's preference
- in architectural or other standards. This is why we're here. This is why we're here, yep. Absolutely.
- My question for staff is,
- If the garage were relocated to the site you like better, because it fits our criteria, would that require
- cutting down trees for solar installation, do you think? Do you know? I don't know. I'd have to look
- at that and do some analysis on that. I do have one question for staff. This is a platted lot.
- and the plat specifies the setback. If it wasn't part of a subdivision, if it wasn't part of
- that subdivision, if it didn't specify the setback, the normal county setback would go from the edge
- of the road, not from the center of the road, or what's that rule?
- Correct. When the phone first came in that was the conversation that I had with him because I was unsure
- that the property was an implanted subdivision and typically the ordinance does state that if there
- is no dedicated right-of-way then the setback is measured from the edge of right-of-way which in this
- case would have been the edge of pavement which would have resulted in no need for a variance most likely.
- Okay I'm ready to make a motion.
- Before we do that, I would like to ask Mr. Villanueva to have a seat and we'll see if there's... I just
- want to mention one more thing, if that's okay. On behalf of relocating it to another area, he did say
- if they shifted over this way, there would be neighbors trees that would shadow and he didn't feel like
- he would want to have the neighbors cut down the trees to get this overpowered. Thank you. Thank you.
- And we may or may not call you back up based on folks responding. Is there anybody in the audience tonight
- that wishes to speak on behalf of this petition? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak
- in opposition to this petition? Is there anybody online or on a phone that wishes to speak
- for this petition. Is there anybody online or on a phone that wishes to speak in opposition to this
- petition? I see no one, is that correct? All right, we'll open it up to board discussion. Mr. Loppen,
- you discussed a matter. I did, I did.
- I think there's been substantial discussion and I'm comfortable moving that we approve variance 2611,
- bone front yard setback at 3985 South Knight Ridge Road on the grounds that the, moving the driveway,
- excuse me, moving the garage to the desired location
- is consistent with the, my principles that solar power when available is a desirable thing for the property
- owner and for the planet. And particularly in light of the fact that if it hadn't been, subdivision
- hadn't set that setback, it would be perfectly legal. So down the road, this would be,
- We wouldn't even need this in light of those I moved that we approved it. I'm going to I'm going to
- ask you to clarify. I'm going to ask you to clarify that that have practical difficulties been met based
- on the testimony. Yes, which can to me establishes practical difficulty difficulties. And this is subject
- to the condition that the
- petitioner receive an appropriate approved right away activity permit from the Highway Department for
- the new driveway entrance off South Night Ridge Road before proceeding with construction. You did so
- well with that guy. I'll second that. It's been moved and seconded. This is objective. May we have a
- roll call on the vote?
- a motion and a second to approve VAR-26-11 the bone front setback variance to chapter 804 and that is
- with one condition of approval that the petitioner receive an approved right-of-way activity permit
- from the highway department for the new driveway entrance off of South Knightridge Road. Guy Loftman?
- Yes. John Morris? Yes. Pamela Davidson? Yes.
- and carries four to zero. Thank you. Congratulations on that. We're going to move along to variance
- two six dash one two. That is the cook maximum in previous cover variance to chapter eight zero eight.
- You have to forgive me. We just met and I don't have my glasses on your last name.
- via the bar mister by thank you it's great to meet you for the second time uh... could you please go
- ahead and present the case uh... excuse me mister chair president but uh... this is i'd believe another
- approved case staff approved case conditions conditions well because if the petition or a cruise the
- conditions which we can determine quickly
- then you have the right as a board member to call the question at any point. And then we'll look into
- the other details. Okay, I move we call the question, which doesn't mean we're approving it. It just
- means that we're gonna proceed without the full presentation. If, okay. If no one opposes. No one opposes.
- First we call the question, then we determine whether we want to proceed under the simplified provisions.
- So this is just to say, are we going to consider going without the full staff report? And that depends
- on public and petitioner. Is there anybody here tonight that wishes to speak on variance or online that
- wishes to speak on variance 26-12?
- Nobody in the room, anybody online or on the phone? No. And is there a representative, excuse me, a
- petitioner of Cook available in the room or online? Okay, well, are you familiar with the staff recommendation?
- You know, well, then if you determine at any point that you will agree to all those, we can we can maybe
- move on to a quicker procedure. But first, let's see what the let's. Yes, so you will not be motioning
- for a call to question. Or you will.
- They aren't consenting, so I'm not going to move to... All right. Mr. Dubaya, could you please move
- forward with your presentation? And thank you. Okay. Good evening, everyone. Hope everyone can hear
- me all right. So this is the Cook Maximum Previous Cover Variance to Chapter 808. So the request is
- to place eight new generators
- on an area that is not currently impervious surface. The petitioner would like to add a generators with
- equipment pads, which we utilize 2782 square feet of concrete and stone or about 0.06 acres. The property
- zone light industrial, the lots are total of 12.29 acres are platted and a butt West constitution after
- the South and South Curry Pike to the West. The lots are currently at 58.5% impervious cover
- which is over by 13.5% of the max permitted for developments in zoning district L.I. within a critical
- watershed. The petitioner was approved for rezone of the property from partially PUD to L.I. in 2022
- to change the open space requirement. Under the PUD, which was 40% allowing 60% impervious, the property
- was zoned to L.I. and under the prior zoning ordinance, which had an open space requirement of 20%,
- which allowed for 80% impervious service.
- The CDO added more stringent impervious cover requirements tied to locations in the critical watershed
- area, which has impacted this petition site, now making it pre-existing nonconforming. So in summary,
- the petitioner is requesting a percent increase rather than a square footage allowance to allow for
- future space for more impervious cover on the site. They did undergo a site plan amendment in 2022 to
- add additional parking, which put the site at even more impervious cover.
- that was permitted at the time as they had received approval for that rezone in 2021.
- The impervious service for both lots are included in the request for the impervious cover maximum petition
- as the site plan submitted by the petitioner in 2022 included an integrated site plan outlining the
- impervious cover for both lots and both lots have been determined to be one legal lot of record. The
- petitioner states that the generators are too heavy as they are 16,000 pounds each so they feasibly
- cannot be placed on top of the existing roof.
- on the lot and the running engines would create too much noise and vibration. Petitioners added that
- they do intend to fill and relocate some of the existing swells for the new generator pads and also
- possibly install underground drainage piping.
- just to ensure that stormwater is still carried to the same location as before. And if the variance
- is granted, the petitioner will have to apply for a site plan review. So there will be steps that will
- include stormwater as well to ensure that the flow is still adequate. If variance is denied, then any
- permits related to this proposal will need to be redesigned to meet the development standards or be
- denied. So here are the dimensional standards for the light industrial
- Zoning district, as you can see, maximum pervious cover for development within a critical watershed
- is 45%. Here's a location map. Here is the comprehensive plan, showing that it is in the MCUA employment
- region. Zoning map, site condition map, and here is an aerial from Eagle View facing south, showing
- where the proposed generators will be placed. Here is an aerial view
- per EGLE view is again showing where the proposed generators will be placed. And here's a photo I took
- on site showing where the proposed generators will be placed. And a picture of an existing swell that
- was indicated will be relocated, or not swell, culvert, that will be relocated. Here's a letter to the
- BZA included in the package for today.
- Here's the site plan that was included in the packet. It's kind of hard to see on here, but it was included
- in the packet for today's meeting. And what is the condition that you were specifying for approval?
- The petitioner is limited to 3,000 square feet of imperfect surface to accommodate the current proposed
- project. Thank you. Just here's the plot.
- and here's the integrated site plan showing both plots. And here's my recommendation or staff's
- recommendation. May I ask you a question about the 3,000 square feet? That includes the pad and the
- generators themselves, the concrete pad. Do two generators and the concrete pad fit?
- in that 3,000? Yeah, so they do. Yeah, they know that it will utilize 2782 square feet of concrete and
- stone. So that's what they've outlined as the square footage they require. OK, thank you. So perhaps
- we could appropriately require of the. Yeah, good point. Mr. By thank you for that is the petitioner
- or representative here to speak.
- All right, and the same procedure will take place. Please make sure you adjust the microphone so we
- can hear you loudly and clearly, and sign your name. My name's Hogan Helms with Cornerstone Engineering
- and Design.
- Representing cook project. All right. Thank you. Could you please raise your right hand? Do you swear
- that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth as you know it? Right I'm going to before we
- start your clock. I know miss Lopman is wanting to know the answer to something and he is wanting to
- know if I'm not mistaken if the condition that was read is
- Um, then, uh, your acceptance. I understood it. I believe so. You're just, you're limiting the proposed
- additional impervious to 3000 square feet, which would cover this project that we proposed, but not
- necessarily a number. Cause I think in the original item, I'd asked for 60%, which would have allowed
- like this project and maybe another 3000 or so. That is correct.
- That's acceptable. All right. Well, at this point, we're going to go ahead and I'm going to ask based
- on the presentation and the limited testimony of the petitioners representative, is there anybody now
- wishing to speak from the audience or online either for or against this petition? Seeing and hearing no one.
- Mr. Loppen, did you want to interject? Yes, I move we approve variance 2612. You'll have to call the
- question first. With the condition that it be limited to 3,000, I move we call the question. Move to
- call the question. All right, is there a second? Yes. All right, Assistant Director, could you call
- a roll call on calling the question and ending the testimony at this point? Calling the question would
- be Pamela Davidson. Yes. Jeff Morris.
- Yes. Great. Guy Loftman? Yes. And Skip Daly? Yes. Carries 4 to 0. With that being said, Mr. Loftman,
- would you like to add a motion? Yes. I move that we approve variance 26-12, 3,800 West Constitution
- Avenue for Cooke, impervious cover variance,
- on the condition that the maximum impervious cover increase is 3,000 square feet. I'll second that.
- All right. There's been a motion and a second to approve variance VAR-26-12, the cook maximum impervious
- cover variance to chapter 808.
- And that is with one staff condition, which is that the petitioner is limited to 3000 square feet of
- impervious surface to accommodate the curtain, the current proposed project. Jeff Morris. Yes. Kamala
- Davidson. Yes. Guy Loftman. Yes. Skip Bailey. Yes. Motion carries four to zero. Thank you. Thank you.
- Good luck. All right.
- All of that being said and done, let's move on to the next variance application. It is variance 26-13,
- up church, eco, area two, 15% slope encroachment, variance two, chapter eight, two, three. Vaya, is
- this you again? It is me again. Fantastic, please carry on. All right, the purpose of the request is
- to construct a deck addition
- for the petitioner to construct the deck addition to a two-story storage barn. The petitioner's Western
- variants allow for the construction of a 10-foot elevated deck to an accessory structure. The deck will
- measure 42 feet along the north side and 30 feet along the east side of the structure and will require
- eight six inches by six inches posts, joists, and decking. The petitioner stated he would like to instruct
- the addition to the structure that has been on the property since at least 2006.
- There is a play area immediately to the west which the applicant stated would inhibit construction in
- the buildable area on the south and west portion of the storage barn. So, the petitioner selected a
- location that encroaches into an area with a slope greater than 15% as identified by Beacon GIS as the
- deck would be located around the northern and eastern portion of the storage barn. According to Chapter A23-5B1,
- The maximum land slope upon which any land disturbance involving construction of buildings, driveways,
- roads, parking lots, utilities can occur shall be 15% and you see a little snippet I have there outlining
- those regulations. Eco area too.
- developments that is if the slope encroachment variance is approved the petitioner will be able to continue
- with the permitting process for the proposed deck if the 15% slope encroachment variance is denied the
- petitioner will be unable to pursue the proposed deck in its current proposed location so this is a
- snippet from Beacon GIS areas shown in blue and light green are buildable areas per chapter 823 this
- is a picture of the
- plot plan that the petitioner marked when he came into our office on March 24th. These are the site
- conditions, as you can see. The area he's proposing building that deck addition is in the 25 plus percent
- non-buildable area and steep slope. Location map. I'm sorry, comprehensive plan map.
- zoning map zone residential one and you can see the little blue outline the almost at the very north
- that displays the eco area too and the residence is just just barely in there the explanation of photos
- submitted by the petitioner and these are the photos that the petitioner submitted showing where the proposed
- stairs as well as the deck will be placed. These are included in the packet for today. And this is the
- letter to the BCA by the petitioner, the site plan or plot plan that the petitioner created and the
- deed. And the staff recommendation is denial
- as the petitioner requests for the construction of the deck results from a preference that strays from
- the intent of the county development warns rather than a necessity. I just have a very quick question.
- There was an existing deck that they took down, correct? Is that true? I'm not aware of an existing
- deck. Are you referring to? Maybe I'm just wondering, these pictures look familiar to me, and I thought
- maybe there had been a deck there at one time.
- and we're off. Okay, thanks. All right, let's carry on and bring up the petitioner or a representative
- if they are available. Fantastic. In the same process we'll apply, please adjust the microphone to your
- liking and sign in.
- If I could have you state your name for the record, please. My name is Ken Upchurch. Mr. Upchurch, could
- I have you raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth as you know it for your testimony?
- All right, fantastic. Mr. Upchurch, we're going to clock you at 15 minutes if it pleases, and you can
- go. Well, we are adding on, would like to add on, a 10-foot
- deck around this area and it's to help get all this organized. And it's also going to be where you can
- have the second story with the deck and the bottom part will also be storage. It will just consist of
- eight posts with the concrete piers that would be, I guess that's what it's called, to be placed for
- the deck to be built on with a ledger board around the building. Well, it sounds to me like, right.
- So Mr. Dubaya had mentioned
- his rationale for the denial, which is letter of the code, is this does not meet the practical difficulties.
- Would you like to address that aspect? Practical. Practical difficulties. That's the part of the code,
- which is why it's not allowable and why you have to come to the board for approval. And it looks like
- you've got some assistance coming in. Could you please
- Sign in, and we'll continue your 15 minutes as soon as we get you sworn in. I'm Gwen Upchurch.
- Gwen Upchurch. And do you swear the testimony you're about to provide is the truth as you know it? Yes.
- All right. Now, go ahead. So the peer, there will be peers that just the few that need to be put in
- by Eric Smith. We talked to a construction person.
- this part by ourselves, even though Ken has built a lot of this all on his own. But the place where
- the variance is, the concrete piers would just be for the posts, and then everything else is above onto
- the barn, the existing barn, and the
- place that is in the variance will just have those concrete posts to make sure that the deck is solid,
- supported. What would involve these three? And the reason, the whole reason for this is because the,
- when he built the barn, he
- thought that he was going to be doing this so that underneath he was able to have storage area,
- you know, for the tractor and that sort of thing. That is on the back side of our property and dog run
- is on the other side that is concreted. And so that's, that the, it's, it's, it's difficult because the,
- we're in that area just a little bit in that variance for those poles. I don't know if that's making
- any sense. I believe I believe you've expressed
- Your desire, yeah. So, Mr. Ruff Church, did you build that barn yourself? Is that what your wife just
- said? I do. Oh, yeah. And it doesn't have storage, and now the deck is the solution to that on the backside.
- So there's never been a deck because it's been a barn, not part of a house. OK, all right. OK. Yes,
- my dad passed away, and we have a lot of things from his estate in there. Yeah. All right.
- We'll call you up if we need you. I have a quick question for Mr. Baier before we move forward. The
- petition looked to me like it was just for the posts and the raised deck, but the petitioner was talking
- about storage. Did they talk about building a solid
- surface? No, but the piers will still disturb the land in this deep. The piers? Correct. I understand
- that. Right. But I was wondering if they had mentioned as any part of the plan also for disturbance
- for to build a level surface to have storage.
- Can I have one of you or both of you back up? I just want to understand the complete project. And from
- what you were telling me versus what I'm seeing on this picture, appear to be two different things.
- So when, I'm sorry. Excuse me for one moment. Could you bring up one of the pictures, maybe the one
- that they took of where it would be? All right. Is this where posts will be going?
- Mr. Mr. Mr. All right. Would you also have to do something to level land in order to put storage there?
- Okay. When when when he's saying storage, it's you're thinking of something different than what he's
- thinking. He's cleaning all that out, cleaning all of it out. But it still looks okay. All right.
- And the storage would just be, where he got this idea is my father built a deck onto their house and
- underneath there was a nice area and that's where Ken got the idea. I just want to make sure that the
- project is what we're seeing and it doesn't, in your mind it's not something different from what
- So it's not a poured floor. It's the ground floor with gravel or so on. Correct? No. All right. No.
- Thank you. All right. Do we have questions for staff at this moment from the board? We'll start with
- Mr. Morris. No questions for me.
- We know if anyone wants to speak against this. Or just that we don't we don't we don't. We'll ask in
- a moment here. If you guys had any questions before that. No staff question. At this time we'll ask
- if there's anybody in the audience or online that wishes to speak for this petition.
- Seeing, hearing, nothing. Anyone that wishes to speak against this petition, either in the room or online
- or on a phone? Seeing, hearing, nothing. All right. By this photo, 10 feet out, how far, sir, do the
- peers then violate? 8 feet would be OK, but not 10.
- So based on this photograph showing the destruction, it looks like it would be that corner there would
- be where the majority of that disturbance in the steep slope area is located. I believe he said it was
- eight foot. Yeah, about 10 foot. 10 foot. 10 foot. Oh, 10 foot. I apologize. Okay.
- That is quite a steep slope down that hill. I can see that. No, I don't have any questions. The following
- construction of eight six-by-six posts by my arithmetic, that would be a total fine
- disturbance of two square feet in the the prohibited area and That's that two square feet, but it's
- not 200 or 2,000 Yeah, I I'm just waiting
- if there's anyone else has discussion, I am not sure. While I don't necessarily disapprove, I don't
- know that a testified address has been made to the practical difficulty statement that our staff has
- It is somewhat of an optional choice to put a deck on a barn, particularly with that slope. And that's
- not a very generous-sized deck. It's a modest-sized deck, 10 feet. I can understand the space underneath.
- It's alluring. I can get that. But it's definitely not a necessity in some ways. That slope looks pretty
- serious. I actually have a follow-up question for the petitioner.
- Were these post holes going to be hand dug or were you bringing a machine back there to do that? What
- was your plan to dig the holes? A hand operated auger, is that what you're thinking about? That answers
- your question, assistant director.
- And that's less disturbance is what you're talking about. If it was a machine, it would be quite destructive
- to bring it on that slope. That's a good point. Well, is a hand auger considered hand dug? I was envisioning
- something with tracks. If there was something that would have to drive back there, that might be confirming.
- You guys are the planners. Let me ask you, does the fact that these are hand dug posts, does that satisfy
- your planning expertise, satisfy the spirit of the 15 degree slope ordinance?
- I have seen that made as a condition of approval on slope type variances. Which is what I'm thinking.
- And also I was going to have you pull up the watershed image that we have where the site is in relation
- to Lake Monroe. And I don't know if you can see that at the very top. No, it's a distance. Right on
- the edge of the watershed.
- It is at the very top middle of that. There it is. I see it. So are you suggesting that a potential
- disturbance could be minimal compared to if it were somewhere else? Is that what I'm reading into this?
- I mean, I'm just pointing out that that is a finding of fact. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, with that,
- I'm going to make a motion that we approve.
- that the- variance twenty six dash thirteen the up church eco area to fifteen percent slope encroachment
- variance to. Chapter eight twenty three with the condition. That the appears be hand dog without any
- and second seconded. So we have a motion and a second. The motion is to approve based on the findings
- with one condition of approval and that is that the peers within the restricted slopes are hand dug
- and that means without machinery such as tracks that are going to disturb the slopes. Right so I will
- go ahead and call the roll.
- That also means the size of the deck is also predetermined by what they submitted to the 10 feet. That's
- part of their petition, so that also is there. It would be following the site plan that is in the staff
- packet there. Thanks for confirming that. All right, I'll go ahead and call the roll. Jeff Morris? Yes.
- Kamala Davidson? Yes. Guy Loftman? Yes. Guy Loftman, sorry.
- Skip daily. This guy. I lost my track. Skip daily. Was that it? Yeah. I need a... I'm not certain that
- a practical difficulty is demonstrated, but I believe the
- of the ordinance of which you would be in violation is covered. It's passed regardless, so I'll add
- a yes. All right, motion carries four to zero. Thank you, you've been approved. Thank you.
- one of these two. We will move on. We have a double bill. We've got variance 26-14 alpha and 26-14 bravo.
- The corridor accessory dwelling unit, 1,000 square foot size limitation to chapter eight, 11, and the
- mid-corridor cost conservancy
- Area Setback Variance to Chapter 826. If you're following along at home, it's on page 78 in your books.
- And we have Mr. Brown. Oh, thank you. Was this where they were looking for? All right. So, yes. Should
- we call them up to make a plea for that? Is that the proper protocol in this? All right. Is the petitioner here?
- We understand that you wish to request a continuance on 26-14 alpha. All right. If you could sign in,
- please, and go through the same rigmarole. Thanks for your patience this evening.
- Hey, no problem. Thank you. All right, if you could. There you go. Do you swear to tell the truth in
- your testimony as you know it? Yes, sir. All right. Fantastic. We'll go ahead and give you a chance
- to plea on this continuous request. OK, first of all, my name is Robert McCord Jr., homeowner of 1837
- East Sanders Second Avenue. The reason why I want to potentially continue
- The first variance is after I finally got a phone call back from the land surveyor and legal advice.
- It has been brought to my attention that the determination of lot of record may not be correct. And
- this would cause a big can of worms if we were to combine two dwellings on to the same property with.
- not the correct determination, I believe. So I may have to apply for an appeal later. When are you thinking
- you would like to continue this? I know the land surveyor told me that he could get me a site, a whole
- property site plan in three weeks. That's three weeks. Yep, but I would probably, my intention is to
- table or get rid of this variance
- because I don't think it is gonna be needed. And I don't know how we proceed about discussing that,
- Daniel. We would review any evidence that is brought to us and then make a determination that way. I
- have a question. Has this variance proposal been paid for? It has, yes. Okay, so if he were to throw
- it away and have to resubmit at some point, at that point he would have to
- pay again. The fee to continue and you could continue this out two months, three months is $20. And
- if you want to completely withdraw that part, then you would be paying that fee over again. I believe
- I'm looking after your wallet. That's why I'm asking these questions. I appreciate that. I would I would
- just like to can I go into depth a little bit of why I think based off of the
- determination from the land surveyor? Do you want a time limit on this? I'm just asking. The matter
- that's before us right now is whether or not we will approve you to continue. We can't make any decision
- based on if it's a good idea for you to do that or not. My guess is coming before the board right now
- and saying you've got some site plan stuff that's in question, my guess is you're not going to have
- a problem.
- being offered a continuance. That is my thought. Don't quote me on that, but that is my belief. So that
- is the only matter. So we're not going to set a clock. We're just going to say ask for it or make it
- known that you want it withdrawn. And if you want a continuance, just give us a, hey, today's May, let's
- do it in September.
- or let's do it in August or let's do it whenever. And then at that point, you can pay your $20 for the
- continuance. And then if you wish a later date to make a decision based on the information that you
- receive, you can make that decision. Is that fair? Yeah, that's fine. I would like to continue this
- in post-market for June. That would be one month from now.
- one month, so three weeks. So July, let's do July just to give me some time. Yeah. All right. And we
- often have our calendar a little askew in July because of the 4th of July holiday. Assistant director,
- could you pull up when July's meeting? It's often the last Wednesday of June. I'm not mistaken. As long
- as I'm not on duty at the firehouse, that'll be fine.
- It is July 8th. Oh, it's July 8th. Okay. So you're requesting a continuance on variance 26-14 alpha
- until July 8th. Is that correct? Do we have room on the docket for that? We would. And so this is for
- VAR-26-14A. Yes. Okay. And that is to continue.
- I would note I will not be able to attend that meeting, which if there isn't a quorum, it just would
- get continued automatically again. But hopefully everybody else will be able to be here, but I will
- have to pay another $20. No, OK. It's 600 and all that. It's easy already there. Fair enough, alright.
- Okay, so you've made an official request to continue this until the July 8th meeting. Do I hear any
- motion on this? I'll move to continue variance 26-14A until the July 8th meeting, based on the introduction
- of more evidence. All right, do I hear a second? Second. All right, it's been moved and seconded.
- Assistant director, could you please call a roll. I think Pamela Davidson. Oh, sorry. Well, this is
- a motion to continue to July 8th, 2026. Thank you. Pamela Davidson. Yes. Jeff Morris. Yes. Guy Loftman.
- Yes. Skip Bailey. Yes.
- Motion carries four to zero. So we will be focusing tonight then on VAR-26-14B, which deals with a karst
- conservancy area variance. Absolutely. All right. And at this point, Ms. McCor, if I could ask you to
- step down and we're going to provide Mr. Brown the floor and he will go through his presentation. You've
- got it. Thank you.
- So since we will be focusing on VAR-26-14B, I will say that the purpose of this variance is to establish
- a 1,600 square foot residential accessory structure on the property. That is discussion about A, which
- was continued. So Chapter 826-3 of the County Development Ordinance states that all Karst features must
- have a Karst Conservancy area
- that at minimum encompasses the entire karst and all area within 50 feet of said karst. However, the
- petitioner's proposed garage would be located approximately five feet from the karst itself, so a variance
- is required. The petitioner does argue that alternative locations for this garage other than the target
- site are incredibly limited since there is steep slope on much of the property and it is in the environmental
- constraints area two
- as well as the fact that much of the buildable area is already taken up by septic systems as seen in
- exhibit five. In particular, these are the standards for 826-3G. Would the board like me to go through
- these? No, we've seen them, thank you. All right. So here are two images showing the Karst Conservancy
- area. The image on the left shows the Karst as it is shown on
- Beacon GIS, we mark this by noting closed contours that have elevation that goes down as you get further
- inwards and measure from the furthest out closed contour. So that is the image on the left. The image
- on the right shows the blue line that shows how much of the area of
- 1837 East 2nd Sanders Avenue is within the Cars Conservancy area based on our estimates. And here is
- the location map and zoning map of the property, as well as comprehensive plan and site conditions map.
- Here is a rough elevates view of, here's a rough eagle view
- of the property. I apologize if this is inaccurate. I did have to somewhat draw this in because the
- lines on Eagle View were glitching out and not providing an accurate view. Here is the view of the driveway
- onto the property as well as several other properties off the driveway. The image on the right, it shows the
- here is the image on the left is the home that is going to be the subject of VAR-2614A, but on the right
- is roughly the area where the proposed garage is to be placed, roughly measuring from the picnic table
- to the red pickup truck. Here is a admittedly not too good
- This is a photo showing where the karst is on a property to the south. The karst and the karst conservancy
- area kind of expand onto the subject lot. Here is a map the petitioner provided of septics that are
- on the property. On the left, the leftmost black rectangle is the septic system for 1837 East Second Sanders.
- Middlemost black rectangle is roughly the location of the septic for the home across the driveway at
- 1839 East Second Sanders, and the one on the right is the septic system for 1845 East Second Sanders.
- There is one area that staff has identified as potentially where the garage could go without encroaching
- into the car's conservancy area or encroaching into areas of steep slope and the environmental constraints
- overlay area two, as shown here. It would be limited to areas pretty much within the blue and green
- here. And this is more related to VR dash
- So I will just kind of run through this. And so in regards to VAR-26-14B, staff recommends denial, as
- practical difficulties have not been demonstrated, as petitioner could potentially relocate the proposed
- garage to an area that is out of the Curse Conservancy area. However, if the Board of Zoning Appeals
- does approve VAR-26-14B, the Drainage Board will need to review the project.
- The review is tentatively at this time on the agenda for May 19th, 2026. And I will take any questions.
- Do we have any questions for staff before we bring up the petitioner? I'd like to hear a petitioner.
- All right, Mr. McQuarter, come on down. You're the next contestant. Now, please remember that you are
- still under oath for your testimony.
- And you're 15 minutes. Let's go ahead and reset that if you will. Let's let's start. OK. All righty,
- so this afternoon I did take a couple of pictures of that location where Daniel was speaking, which
- is on the north side there. If you can. That one there. So do I present these to you that I or?
- You can request permission to approach and it's granted. Don't speak because it's not on the record,
- but you can hand it to him and go back. And there are two pictures. Yes, and I'll look at them. He'll
- explain them in front of the Mike. I look at the self and then I will hand them down to my what is he
- looking at? OK, so there's two pictures. One is where the easement runs all the way north through that
- property there for power lines. You can go back to that.
- That square Daniel. Yep, that one. So there is a power pole that goes and then there's a drop that goes
- from that power pole across the property, which that electrical would have to be moved, which Duke and
- energy and all that would have to approve on getting that relocated. There is also a propane tank there
- that has an underlying gas line to the house, so that would have to also be relocated if that was a
- place to get moved. And there is a
- waterway on a landscaping pond right in the front there. That is also there that would have to be relocated.
- So in my eyes practical. What's that second difficulties difficulties that would be extremely difficult
- to do moving and relocating all that stuff.
- If we go to the one with all the skeptics on Daniel, if you would please. So yes, unfortunately, this
- is how all these properties are set up. My septic is in my backyard for 1837, the home to the north
- of me. It was approved by the county to put that septic system all the way down there. And therefore
- I can't it's right in my front yard. It's my uncle septic system.
- It's there. I can't build on top of it. Even the lines that the septic permit show go across the north
- side of my house up to his storage tanks. So to build over the top of that on the north side of my house
- to would not be very. I think it demonstrates practical difficulties and then the second location which
- would be East.
- On my father's property. If I continued with that first variance was going to be right over his septic
- system and his front yard and can't do it there. So what I tried to do was map out based off of property
- setbacks and lines a 40 by 40 spot that is right in front of my current garage that I have which
- We are growing family. I have a 14 year old boy that's going to be starting to drive in two years. As
- you can see, I can't even fit mine and my wife's car in our current garage because we also have kids
- who have bicycles and I have a lawnmower and. Those Rogers are not built. Yeah, if you wouldn't mind
- going with the red truck in 2001 that garage wasn't built for an SUV or a truck so.
- We are out of space. Also, I have a recreational camper that I like to go to the state parks in. That's
- what me and my family do for all the holidays. And it is outside underneath Tarp. You could go to the
- aerial shot, just one of them. And that is another, yep, that one, my camp right here, which is towards
- the end of the driveway.
- And I want to put that inside to keep it protected as it's an investment for me and my family as well.
- And that's one of the main reasons to build that garage there. I feel like it's clearly set back away
- from the property lines on the south side of the property. I understand that the cars features there,
- but as you can see, I honestly think that's the only place that I can put it. There's nowhere else that
- I can. I also wanted to ask,
- Or mention that within this car's conservatory area the KCA already, if you wouldn't mind going to the
- yellow. You can see my neighbor to the south his corner of his house is already in it. The next neighbor
- to the West, the corner of their property is on that slope and I believe in 2016 2017 they put a septic
- system in that area which.
- To my recollection, it was 2015 that this ordinance was adopted for KCAs, is that correct, for 50 feet?
- It was 2024. 2024, but it was 25 feet prior, correct? That's correct. Okay, so even with the 25 foot
- prior, I believe a variance would have had to have been approved for that septic system go inside the
- KCA, because if I'm correct,
- even set back away from it. It's inside of it. And so I think that's that's also good evidence. I'm
- not going to be in it. I'm close to that rim that is designated. I understand that there's a setback
- for the ordinance. I think it's right around 20 feet of what the garage is going to be within that 50
- foot. Is that correct? It's basically half of it. And so that's
- That's my difficulties, I guess I would say. Are you planning to leave the existing garage there and
- build a second one in this other spot? So the garage will be there. Yes, that will stay there. As of
- right now, that is going to be an accessory room onto our house.
- I'm not even taking the garage door out. But yes, this garage will take that place. You will not be
- able to get a vehicle in and out of there based on the property lines and my setbacks that I have to
- stay from. There's no way I could build a garage on my property. That's as I've shown you that won't
- be in front of that one, unfortunately. And that's why I need to make it bigger.
- And I have a question for Mr. Brown. He has said that the site, the staff likes has the propane tanks,
- the pool, the rock pool that we saw in the picture. And utilities. And what else? Utility line. And
- the utility lines. So that is the spot that we're recommending, the staff is recommending.
- Well, we weren't aware that a gas utility line was there. We were aware that there was an easement,
- as shown on a survey that was done back in 1991. However, we believed that the area proposed was far
- away enough from that easement to qualify. However, the utility line, such as the gas utility line,
- that was not known to staff when we made this recommendation. With that being said,
- can you confirm that that gas line is there at this point? We do not have that information at this time.
- Okay, if it were confirmed, would that change your recommendation? Would that change your belief that
- there would be another place on the property? I believe it might, yes. Okay, thank you. All right, Ms.
- Loppen, you have something to say? Yeah, well, I have some
- something to ask, some things to ask, four and a half things to say. I don't know whether staff or Mr.
- McQuarter is better to answer that, Mr. Brown or Mr. McQuarter, but there's a 50-foot setback from the
- rim. The proposed garage is in that setback. Here's what I'm gonna get at, so let me start there.
- We had, as I recall, a sort of a similar thing not too long ago. And in that situation, they were able
- to put gutters on the building they were talking about so that the water all discharged outside the
- 50-foot. The construction was inside, but the discharge was entirely outside.
- Do you know whether that would be something you would be able to do? Actually, if you do have the 15%
- grade map on here at all for. I can bring that up real quick. If you look at this picture here on the
- left where it has the rim of the KCA right where I want to put the back of the garage is actually up
- probably 6 or 7 feet.
- from the back slope of the house. It actually shows up red, like those marks do, because I think it's
- too steep of a grade to build on. And so the garage will actually go in front of that. And then as the
- right side of it has to be built up, it would then slope towards the driveway. Yeah, so that yellow
- marker there is where the back of the garage would meet.
- And so this pad where we're currently parked, all slopes towards driveway this way. That make sense?
- Yeah, it slopes away from the cars. Yes, it slopes away from the cars currently. And then for the garage
- construction, this southern side of it will also have to be built up to get the garage square and flat,
- right? And then slope towards that. So all the water would then run away from
- Okay, so let me be real specific. If a condition of granting your request was that the drainage for
- the building drained away from the karst area, would that be acceptable to you? It sounds like it's
- plan A, and plan A is fine with you. Yeah, that is perfectly fine with me, yes.
- Very good, that's my question. Mr. Morris, do you have anything to add before we ask for public comment?
- Hearing nothing, is there anybody online that wishes to speak for or against this? Seeing nobody.
- I did see Mr. Morris pop back up. Let's get his two cents real quick. Thank you, Mr. Daley. I had just
- turned on my camera in case you called me. I didn't have any further comment. Yes, he was away from
- the microphone. And let me summarize. The petitioner testified that the way he plans to build this
- the drainage would all go away from the karst and would be where the water would discharge would be
- outside the 50 foot area. And that he'd be happy to have that as a condition because it's what he plans
- to do anyway. Fair summary? Yes, sir. Clarify, Mr. Morris. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Lawson. All right, is
- there any other board discussion? Anyone want to ask questions or chat about the weather?
- not at this point. All right. Anyone? You asked specific questions, and you seem to have... Oh, well,
- do we have the public? We already asked. Nobody wanted to talk. Okay. That being the case, I move that
- we approve
- Various 2614B McWhorter-Karst Conservancy area setback at 1837 E Sanders Second Avenue and 1845 E Sanders
- Second Avenue with the condition that any gutters and drainage from the construction go away from the
- Karst area and discharge outside the 50-foot setback.
- And should we add to that the practical difficulties have been made because met because of the utility
- lines? Yes, practical difficulties have been made and when in terms of putting it at what might have
- been a practical alternate location turns out to be impractical. Second that motion. We have a second
- and can we have a roll call on that vote or do you have?
- something else. We had a condition recommended in the staff packet that if the Board of Zonian Appeals
- approves VAR-26-14B that the Drainage Board will need to review the project. The review is tentatively
- set for the May 19th, 2026 meeting. Well, let me say this. That's a very important point.
- If the, let me ask staff, if the- Would that not have to, I'm gonna interrupt you. Would that not already
- have to be a condition? Oh, that's not a legal condition already if we were to approve this? I mean,
- if you had denied it, it would not have to go to the board or to the drainage board. Okay. But because
- it is being approved here, then it does need to go. And so I would add a condition that
- it only proceed that the project only proceed if the drainage board approves it, or in accordance with
- any conditions the drainage board sets. Is that language that you were seeking, Mr. Brown and Assistant
- Director Berman? So you would want to switch the original condition that you had crafted about the gutters
- and the drainage going out? I want to have both. You want to have both? Great. I can do both. And I
- will second that.
- It changed motion. Okay, that's been seconded There's been a motion and a second to approve VAR-26-14B
- which is the McWhorter Karst Conservancy area setback to chapter 826 and there are two conditions one
- is a condition in the staff report that reads that the drainage board will need to review the project and
- and it is tentatively on the agenda for May 19th, 2026. And the second agenda crafted by the BCA was
- that any gutters and drainage discharge should be away from the Karst Conservancy area and should be
- discharged outside of the KCA, Karst Conservancy area. All right, so there was a motion and a second.
- I'll go ahead and call the roll. Jeff Morris? Yes.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- The drainage board is held in the showers building on the first floor. If you contact the stormwater
- department, they will be able to tell you when exactly, when at the exact time and place. All right,
- Mr. Schilling, assistant director and Mr. Brown and Mr. Myers, Mr. DeVaya, thank you for your service
- and your time. Board members, thank you. Can I hear someone call for an adjournment? I'll move to adjourn.
- All right, adjourn.