- Let's call to order the August 26th, 2026 meeting of the Monroe County Board of Zoning and Appeals meeting.
- I will be filling in for the chairman who could not make it to our meeting this evening. Inspector,
- if you could go ahead and call the roll. Sure. Margaret Clements. Here. Skip Daly.
- Yes. Guy Laughman. Yes. Jeff Morris. Pamela Davidson. Yes. We have four members in person in a quorum.
- Okay, fantastic. Let's go ahead and introduce the evidence, please.
- I'd like to introduce the following items into the evidence. The Monroe County Development Ordinance
- as adopted and amended. The Monroe County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Control Ordinance as adopted
- and amended. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan as adopted and amended. The Monroe County Board of
- Zoning Appeals Rules or Procedure as adopted and amended. And the cases that were legally advertised
- and scheduled for hearing on tonight's agenda.
- I move that to introduce the evidence for tonight as you've just enumerated so well. I second the motion
- to approve. It's been moved and seconded to approve the introduction of evidence. A vote yes is about
- to approve. Skip Daly. Yes. Guy Lofman. Yes. Pamela Davidson. Yes. Margaret Clements. Yes. Motion is
- approved four to zero.
- All right, before we approve the agenda, I understand there's a motion that's going to be made. Yes,
- I'd like to move that we approve tonight's agenda as advertised except that we move the administrative
- business to the end of the meeting. I second that motion.
- Okay, it's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda as presented with the motion to move administrative
- business to the end of new business, and otherwise the cases will go in order as advertised. A vote
- yes is a vote to approve the agenda with that one amendment. Guy Laughman? Yes. Pamela Davidson? Yes.
- Margaret Clements? Yes. Skip Daly? Yes. Motion is approved, four to zero.
- All right. Board members, is there anybody going to ask a question in the negative? Is there anybody
- that has not had the opportunity to review the April, May or June 2026 meeting minutes? Hearing no one.
- Is there anybody on the board that recommends any amendments to those?
- Hearing nobody, I approve the minutes for April, May, and June of 2026. Let's see, no old business.
- Let's go ahead and start with our new business. The Brown Eco Area 2 Variants 26-1.
- Mr. Myers, before you get into your presentation, for the record, has the petitioner complied with notice
- to everybody that is statutorily required? Yes. All right. Thank you. Please proceed. All right. So
- this is at 3701 East Maples Way.
- This is one 5.03 acre parcel in Bloomington Township section 26. It's zone conservation residential
- and it's in the environmental constraint overlay area two. The petitioner is requesting one residential
- development standards variance from the environmental constraints overlay area two related to the 15%
- slope regulation. The petitioner is proposing to construct a new 1,250 square foot two-story residential
- accessory structure.
- each floor will measure 25 by 25 feet for a 625 square foot footprint with an additional seven feet
- on one side to accommodate stairs. The total height of the structure will be just under 30 feet which
- is the maximum height for accessory structures in this zoning district. The proposed structure will
- contain a bathroom but no bedrooms or kitchen facilities. Because of the proposed bathroom a separate
- septic system connection will be installed for this structure. There is a mistake in the
- Report that states a separate septic system as in a brand new septic system will be installed, but upon
- the site visit and conversations with the petitioner, a connection to the existing septic system will
- be acquired for this structure. The proposed accessory structure will sit approximately 65 feet from
- the rear of the house and encroach approximately 20 feet into an area with slope greater than 15%.
- The position site is listed as Lot 9 of the Lanham Ridge Estates Section 2 subdivision, which was recorded
- on August 23, 1997. And for the record, the first iteration of the environmental constraints overlay
- was adopted by the Monroe County Board of Commissioners on January 23, 1992. The Chapter 823 of the
- Monroe County Development Ordinance regulates
- the Eco Area 2, which states that the maximum land slope upon which any land disturbance activity, which
- includes the removal of vegetation involved in construction of buildings, driveways, roads,
- parking lots, and utilities shall be 15%. Therefore, any land disturbance activity to slopes greater
- than 15% is prohibited by Chapter 823 for property in this Area 2. On the screen, you have the purpose
- statement from the environmental constraints overlay in that chapter.
- Now on the screen you have the provisions for Area 2 with respect to the Chapter 823-5b which provides
- regulations for Area 2. There are four items here and we're concentrating on item number one and item
- number two. Item number one I just referenced with respect to any land disturbance activity is prohibited
- on slopes greater than 15% and item number two is states that no land disturbance of natural vegetation
- beyond the 15% slope line.
- So due to the nature of this request on this petition with respect to constructing a new residential
- accessory structure, both of those standards require a variance in order to proceed with the building
- permit process. The other items three and four will be met.
- Now on the screen is definitions for practical difficulties, and this is one of the important pieces
- to the puzzle of the variance process for the board zoning appeals to consider, so I have that here
- on the screens also included in the packet and we can come back to these definitions, if necessary.
- Here we have the location map Bloomington township.
- We're fairly close to the city of Bloomington's jurisdiction. And interestingly, we are in the Lake
- Griffey watershed, which is also regulated by the environmental constraints overlay. It's not just Lake
- Monroe watershed. On the right, we have the site conditions map. All of the red areas are sloped greater
- than 15%, which are the areas of regulation. This is just a zoomed in version of the site conditions map here.
- And here we have the eco area map as presented. So all of the red hatching areas are area two and the
- blue hatching is area one. You can see the area one as you get closer to Lake Griffey and we are far
- enough away from Lake Monroe that you won't see the blue with respect to area one for that reservoir.
- Now on the screen we have a series of aerial pictometry showing different angles of the property and
- the existing conditions. So we have the primary residence as well as a detached structure existing on
- the property. The proposed location of the accessory structure will be in the tree line here a bit.
- I'll show you some more imagery and site plans that give you a better idea of where that will be located. So just
- spinning around, looking at the different angles of the property with some contour lines shown here
- as well. Now we have some on the ground photos of the site. On the left-hand side, we have a few
- Minor items on the ground, those kind of identify where the existing septic tank is. On the right, we
- have a tree in the background. That is a tree that the petitioner has stated that is likely having to
- be removed due to its condition and health, as well as it's affecting the location, the eventual location
- of the proposed structure. Some more photographs here as we traverse the site.
- On the right, we see the wood planks here or branches on the ground. And the petitioner stated during
- the site visit that that's approximately where the front of the structure will go. So it will extend
- further into the tree line there, extending into the woods as it goes into the 15% slope. More photographs here.
- Bottom right photograph. Behind me, taking this picture, is where the septic field is. So there is quite
- a bit of a distance from the septic tank to the septic field. And I can show you on some other maps
- the location of that field. Now on the screen, we have the letter from the petitioner stating their
- request and their rationale as to why they want the structure on the proposed location. This is included
- in the packet.
- Here we have the site conditions map prepared by the petitioner. So the dark rectangle on the right
- side or eastern side of the property is the existing septic field. The small square that is located
- to the north of the existing home is the existing septic tank. And then this smaller dark rectangle
- is where the proposed structure will be approximately placed. So you can see there.
- that it is showing as extending into the protected slope areas. Down the screen is an exhibit produced
- by the petitioner that indicates trees in the immediate vicinity that will need to be removed with respect
- to the construction of the residential accessory structure. And here we have the original
- subdivision plant that has lot number nine shown here, as well as a delineation of its building envelope
- that was detailed back when this was recorded in 1996. Now on the screen are a couple of figures, this
- slide and the next.
- Staff did a little bit of analysis with respect to the available buildable area on the property with
- respect to the existing septic tank and other structures on the property. So this is figure one showing
- an approximate alternate location of the proposed structure within buildable area and with enough distance
- away from the septic tank. And then this is another figure showing another alternative location for
- the proposed structure that meets buildable area away from the septic tank.
- existing structures, as well as the existing septic field. All right, so that brings us to
- staff's recommendation. Overall, staff recommends denial of VAR-26-28, stating that practical difficulties
- have not been demonstrated. Per the strict application of the county development ordinance, there are
- other areas on the property suitable for the construction of the proposed residential accessory structure
- that do meet buildable area. I'll now take any questions.
- By this time, unless if there are any imminent clarification questions for staff, which I'm seeing none,
- let's just go ahead and bring up the petitioner. Thank you. While you approach, please keep in mind
- that the microphone, we need to hear what you have to say, so adjust that as needed. If you could sign in.
- And after signing in, if you could speak your name for the record. My name is Kevin Brown. Kevin Brown? Yes.
- Mr. Brown, before you begin, if you could raise your right hand for me. Do you swear that the testimony
- you're about to provide is the truth as you know it? It certainly is. We're going to offer you 15 minutes.
- Okay, okay. I also have a bit of a presentation, but I also have copies, hard copies that may help you
- guys follow along. You can approach and hand them, but you can't speak because it's not on the record.
- if staff could make sure that that's entered into evidence. First off, thank you for giving me this
- opportunity to talk to you. And I thought Drew's presentation was pretty much right on point. Let me
- tell you just a little about our background for this. My wife and I bought this property and built the
- house in 2005. If you look at the lot, there's an absolutely gorgeous ravine that's part of it.
- We really wanted to build something so we could see the ravine when we originally did it, but didn't
- have the money. So now that I've finished teaching, so I was a law professor here for 35 years.
- Thank you. The last four years, I was in South Carolina teaching there. And indeed, part of teaching
- there was to get the money to build this structure here.
- I know that there's some concern about the potential water runoff into Lake Griffey. And I also go to
- Lake Griffey, so I really care about Lake Griffey. It's about a 45-minute walk from my house. I just
- have to know how to actually get there. But there is a way to get there. So this, for us, is the project
- we're doing, because now I am retired. So I'm spending a lot more time at the house. And we now have
- the money to actually
- build this structure. And I only got one. Thank you. That's to show you that the structure itself will
- mimic the front of the house. So it'll be very much a building that looks like it's part of the property.
- As I understand
- The primary problem here is that there are potentially other locations where I could build it. And that's
- what I want to address, those other locations. And this is where, I don't know, is there some way we
- can advance? Yes, so just go to the first picture. So this is where
- I want to build the structure. And I'll quickly talk about why I want to build it there. And then I'll
- address the two alternatives. When we originally were going to do this, we were going to push it closer
- to one of the alternative sites. But it turns out, and this is literally in the last three weeks, we've
- got the largest oak tree on our property that has clearly died or is in the process of dying.
- So we brought out two different tree people, as well as an arborist, Matt Baldwin, to take a look at
- the tree to see if it could be saved. All of them agree that the tree has to come down. So since there's
- a tree that's going to have to come down, we decided that would be the perfect place to put it because
- we will have already disturbed the soil and we're going to have to go through the whole process of taking
- it down. So that's why that's the favorite site for us.
- it's also directly closest to the house, which means, and this is a supplemental property that is intended
- to be connected to the house by a walkway. So putting it there, the walkway is not very large. And we
- know that one big tree has to come down
- We're not sure if we'll have to take down other trees. It's possible that we'll have to take down another
- one, maybe three, but I think only another one. But that's not even certain. So that's one of the real
- reasons that we want to do it there, connect it to the house closer through the walkway that we'll have,
- which will be elevated by 10 feet. So it's not on the ground. It's actually coming 10 feet off.
- The reason we have to connect it with the walkway is because we do have coyotes on our property, and
- we have a ton of those possums on there. So there's a little danger about walking there at night, and
- we do also get an occasional skunk. My wife, if she were here, she would tell you there's absolutely
- no way she would let me go there if there wasn't a walkway. So from the standpoint of mitigation efforts,
- we're willing to do whatever it takes.
- Our contractor, which is Josh Walcott, is going to put a silk screen, as I understand it, standard of
- silk fence. But indeed, we'll actually put two to make sure that we minimize any runoff of the water.
- If we do have to take down other trees, we would take them down only to the stump. So we wouldn't dig
- up the roots. We'd leave the roots there in order to keep the soil compacted there.
- And we have recently had Nature's Link redirect some of the water that was standing in our backyard
- into one of the spaces where it's one of the alternative sites. And I'm going to show you that in just
- a minute, too. But that's why we want to build it there. Now, if you could go to the next slide for me. OK.
- This is the first alternative site. And then if you could go to the next slide. This is the
- second alternative slide. And then if you can go to the next slide. And this is the one I want to talk
- about. Well, OK. So let me start here.
- you're pointing at the tree that has to come out. And if we do one of the alternative sites, I think
- that other tree has got to come out. And that other tree is the third largest tree that we have. So
- we're losing our largest tree, which means if we end up having to pull that tree down, then that's losing
- our two of our tallest three trees. But let me go into, so
- Go to the next slide. Okay. This is my rendering of the proposed place we want to do it, which is in
- the middle. And then there are the other two. And this is the slide I think I'll use to try to explain
- why I think the two alternative sites don't work nearly as well as the first one. The first alternative site
- You can see how far away it is from our house. So we would be building a walkway that's got to go all
- the way there, which is quite a distance. Now I'm actually going to turn 70 in October. My wife is 65.
- So one of the things we're worried about is a long distance that we'll have to walk as we get older.
- A second problem that we have with that site there
- Let's see. Oh yeah. Is to build a walkway there is gonna compromise a lot of my backyard because the
- walkway would have to come from the main house all the way there so you can see how much of the backyard
- is gonna be compromised by the walkway. And then that won't actually give us nearly as good of a view
- of the ravine, right? The whole purpose of this is a tree house to get a better view of the ravine.
- So the reason we're against that site is, number one, it would be a long walkway. That means it'll cost
- more to build it. But then, as I said, we're worried about, as we get older, the difficulty of getting
- out there. And then it doesn't give us nearly as good of a view of the ravine as what we're trying to
- get with the other property or with the other location.
- With respect to the second location, it is closest to the house, so it reduces the issue of the walkway.
- And this may be my fault, but I am certain that if I put it there, it will compromise my septic tank
- because I have the septic tank
- means from the septic tank to the septic field has to run right through there. So it would mean we'd
- have to completely move the septic field or septic connector. Of course, I don't know exactly how expensive
- that's going to be, but it would clearly have to be done. The other problem with this one
- As I said before, it's going to require me taking down my third largest tree on my property. So it actually
- will disturb more soil than if we put it where we already have to take down the biggest tree. Oh, and
- a sprinkler system. We just put in a sprinkler system literally six weeks ago. And locating it there
- would clearly
- require us to move the sprinkler system because part of it. So that's the reasons that we're kind of
- against number one and number two, I'm sorry, the two alternative proposed sites as opposed to our preferred
- one. Now, if you go forward to the next slide,
- I thought this was a better picture in the sense that this shows you the one tree that we'd have to
- take down. That's the tree that has to come down anyway. So that's the tree where we're really trying
- to locate this at. Next slide. Oh, come back, come back to the tree, to the tree. That's the tree.
- So you can see how that tree is dying. It has to come down. I mean, under any circumstance, we've got
- to take that tree down. In the next slide. Okay. Then it just shows you the outside of the structure.
- The next slide. That's all of the slides that I have. I understand that the packet that we received
- has more pages, but the attachments that I received, that was the end of it.
- All right, okay, so screwed up my presentation there. Although you should have gotten, I actually sent
- three different emails. Yes, two of them, I believe, were of the same materials. And then the third
- one was this one here. We have additional pictures of the tree in the packet you provided us on page
- 12. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, let's do it that way. That'll help. So I guess I was smarter than I
- thought I was
- in terms of preparing this packet. Can I take you then to? And to be forthcoming here, looks like your
- time is down to three plus minutes. Oh, yeah, you know, I'm almost done. I'm almost done. That won't
- be a problem. So if I can take you to page 15 in the packet. Page 15 is to give you a view of where
- proposed site number one would be.
- And then page 16 is really just an effort to show you how long of a walkway I would have to build from
- our house to that location for the first alternative site that was suggested. So I'm really just trying
- to display that's going to require a very long walkway, much longer than the one that we want to put
- it would have to build for the proposed site.
- And then the next one would be page 18. And 18, this shows you the area where the second alternative
- site is at. And it's also trying to show you it's got to cut that two that's taking the refuse from
- the septic tank
- to the septic field, because it just has to be there. And in page 19, what I'm trying to show you there,
- page 19, that tree, that's the tree that would have to come down if it's that second alternative site.
- And you can see that's a very healthy tree. You can also see the tree that we're going to have to take
- down anyway. So the core I'm really saying here is our proposed
- site means less of a walkway to get there, less disturbance of the property itself. It actually preserves
- a number of trees for us, and it doesn't create a septic problem for us. And as I said, we're very interested
- in protecting Lake Griffey. So we're willing to do any additional mitigation measures that you think
- would be helpful. And with that, I think that's the end of my presentation.
- Thank you. Yes, I have questions. Can we go back to the slide with the three boxes showing the three
- sites? Out of those three, you know, left, middle, right, your proposed site is the middle.
- Because that's where the tree that's got to come down is at. I see. OK, great. I have another question,
- but I forgot, and I'll think of it as you ask yours. I'm still thinking of mine. As I recall, you're
- saying that this condition, that this structure is going to be elevated? It would be a two-story tree house.
- I mean, I call it a tree south, but it's really just a two story structure. So you mean, so it's ground
- level going up. Okay. It's not that you have pillars that go up and then you get to the tree. No, no,
- no, no, no. This is built directly on the ground. My second question is for staff. We're worried about
- the 15% slope and I'm very much
- appreciate your service as a law professor, oh my, for all those years. But also coming with such good
- information about tree loss, because we do care about tree loss and disturbance of soil, as you do as
- well. We're worried also about the 15% slope. This proposed structure, did I read in the notes that
- it takes us to the 25% slope? Is that the differential or?
- Can you clarify that for me? It seemed to me that it was 20 feet into the 15. Yes, I don't believe that
- it encroaches into the 25%, but let me see if I can verify that one second. The slope also matters,
- particularly to some of my colleagues. And while he's checking that, Mr. Brown, is the foundation a slab?
- there's nothing underneath it. There's no basement or anything like that. Now, because there is some
- slope to the ground, I guess there's got to be... Or the impartial crawl. Yeah. Yeah. So there's got
- to be, I guess, some gravel that goes. Okay. Yep. Okay. I can answer Pamela's question now. It does
- not encroach into 25% slope. It's only the 15% that's in violation. And is Mr. Talley right?
- 20 feet into the 15%. 20 feet out of a total footprint of what? 25. The footprint of the structure is
- 25 by 25. Although something there said 32. Right. I do 32 because there's got to be a stairway to get
- you from the first floor to the second floor. But that would be, we haven't quite figured out. I'm to
- meet with the architect tomorrow to figure out
- how he does that. So that's why I went with 32 feet instead of 25. But that's width. That's not depth.
- So the 32 feet doesn't go into. Can I confirm with Mr. Myers that what we're seeing here is what he
- submitted to 32 by 25 then? What was submitted was 25 by 25 with the addition of a six to seven foot
- stairwell on the side. And he communicated that there was still some deliberations about architectural
- standards.
- And that stairwell wouldn't be impacted by the code, would it? The structure encroaches back into the
- slope area. So it goes into the slope and then out into the slope. And so, yeah. Out of curiosity, from
- the picture that was shown. I don't want the stairs. That's the whole notion. I want the stairs to go
- up part of the way and then come back.
- not go all the way back, because I don't want it encroaching into, yeah, I don't want it going up, because
- that would start to block the view of the second floor windows. So I want it to go up and then come
- back, if that helps. My question is, from the picture that you had of those three sites, the two that
- staff said
- could work, and you suggested otherwise. Why couldn't that third structure, or maybe it could, be brought
- closer in to have less of an impact? Oh, the answer to that simple is it's a septic tank. I've got to
- say 10 feet away from the septic tank. OK, so the tank is there. Yeah, yeah. You sort of see the satellite antenna.
- the septic tanks just right on the ground. Yeah. Yes. It was just blown my mind there. Believe me, I
- would have. But as I said, I'm trying to stay 10 feet away from the septic tank. Anywhere in your packet
- here, I have just quickly thumbed through. Is there anything you've had a lot of professionals out there?
- Have they put on pen to paper?
- on the trade-off, the environmental trade-off versus encroaching on that 15-degree slope versus what
- you're offering, which could have a less detrimental impact on the environment? Only in the sense that
- they talked about how much damage is going to be done to the soil to take down that one big tree.
- I mean, that's what's driven our selection of that spot was, if you had to take that anywhere, anyway,
- that's the place to put it. All right. Do we have any other questions? I just have a question about
- this would be contingent upon the building department issuing augmentation to the septic, the current
- septic field. I mean, I imagine there would be a bathroom inside. This would be subject to
- the building department and health department's approval of additional bathroom. So the health department
- issues septic permits based on bedroom count. So I'm not sure how they would address another connection
- to the existing septic tank. I don't know of the septic tank's current capacity, how many bedrooms it's
- rated for.
- So the petitioner, as part of those standard building permit process, would need to go to the health
- department to make sure that a new connection to that system is feasible and is documented as part of
- the process. So he says he might have one bed in the. No, no, I won't have a bed in there. I'm sorry.
- Our house is a five bedroom house. And when we built it, I had two minor kids with me and two kids in
- college. They're all gone.
- So we have four vacant bedrooms. So we don't need another bedroom. I mean, the drawings don't depict
- it like a bathroom or... No, there is a bathroom. Yeah, there will be a bathroom. Okay, that's an or
- a kitchen? No, just a bathroom. Okay, that clarifies one question I had. Do we have any other questions?
- Yeah, I'm struggling. Okay, let me be...
- I'm struggling with this, okay? I'm not... Can I see the pictures of the front of the house? Yeah, that's...
- Okay. Now is that... This is the proposed front of the tree house, the new building, yes. And so you
- walk out your door and walk down the walkway,
- You walked out your back door, I assume, and down the walkway, and then you go in the door here. OK,
- I hear what you're saying. The answer to your question is no. First off, I would say, this is me on
- AI. OK, so this is me putting it in an artificial intelligence, pushing it out. This is not an architectural
- drawing. But what that would be is more or less the front
- So you'd have maybe three or four feet that extend from the building for the two pillars. But the walkway
- will have to come in, I would suspect, up there at the second level, not the first level. So what's
- on the first level? What's in the first level? Yeah. Well, the purpose of the front level is just a
- great room. So it would be a room.
- that would have granite on the walls and pillars in the corners. OK, let me tell you one of my... Sometimes
- we've had structures that encroach that were elevated. They were built on poles, on pillars, on stilts.
- OK. So that each stilt only has a final disturbance of like one square foot.
- as opposed to being built on a foundation. If you build this on a foundation, it's going to have a lot
- of disturbance of this slope. But a room that's not critical to your treehouse. If you mean the first,
- The first floor. It's absolutely critical because otherwise I'm at the ground level and I'm not going
- to be able to see. No, I'm saying if you if instead of a full structure, you put lift this up and I'm
- I'm not an engineer and I'm not an architect. But if instead of having a ground floor and a second floor,
- you just put the second floor on stilts. Eliminate the first floor.
- And eliminate, but lift it. Lift the floor. If I lift the first floor, and hence the second floor, because
- you're telling me I can't go higher than 30 feet. What I'm saying is that instead of these being pillars
- that you walk in the front door here, these are because you don't walk in the front door. You're going
- to walk in the front door. No, no. You can't walk in the front door.
- walk over the grass as opposed to the walkway. OK, so what I'm suggesting is if instead of this being
- a solid structure, this is just pillars so that the whole thing is elevated. Well, what about the first
- floor? You wouldn't have a first floor. You would just have the second floor, which would have a beautiful
- view. The first floor is, OK, I'm sorry. Let me describe the first floor then.
- because the first floor is to me as important as the second floor. So the point of the first floor is
- to create a room that is just a fantastic room to be in. So it would have along each wall, granite slabs,
- and those have already been picked out. The floor of it would be a gold tile floor.
- And then the ceiling would be a coffered ceiling with specially designed towels in the middle. So the
- point of the first floor is really to bring people into a space where they go, wow, this is an incredible
- space to be in. I understand that. I understand that. I'm just not comfortable with this much encroachment
- into 15 square, into a 15% slope. It's one of my...
- touchstones. And in terms of taking down the tree, I mean, a tree can be taken down with minimal disturbance
- of the soil. You don't have to dig out the root system. If you need to get rid of the tree, you can
- get rid of the tree so it's not a hazard without actually disturbing much soil. And I'm just not comfortable
- It's just one of my things. It's one of the things I care about particularly and I care about it in
- Lake Monroe and I care about it in Lake Griffey is that there's no particular reason that this is not
- the most convenient place to build. Number one is a practical place to build, but it means you got a
- longer walk. But. Well, it's but it's. You mean as opposed to the
- other one that's further away. Yeah, yeah. Number, if they're one, two, and three, I understand three
- is impractical because it would be over your pipe from your septic system to your septic field. And
- that's not a practical solution. That's not a solution. Number two, the preferred site is a, your preferred
- site, it's got several advantages.
- But it's got one big disadvantage, and that is it encroaches a substantial distance into the 15% slope.
- Site one. Can you at least say in response, part of the reason it has to encroach is because I have
- to say 10 feet away from the septic system. The encroaching is required. OK.
- To put it in number two, to put it in your preferred location, it has to be as far back as it is. It
- has to encroach that much. But if you put it in number one, it doesn't have to encroach at all. You've
- got a longer walk. And you don't care about the trees? I do care about the trees. I do care about trees.
- back more quickly, you know, the house is going to be there for a very, very, it's not a house, but
- this structure is going to be there for a very long time, many, you know, for decades or a century or
- whatever. And you want to put a
- Our ordinance doesn't say you can't cut down trees. We care about cutting down trees, but you don't
- need a variance to cut down the trees. You need a variance to extend into the 25 foot, 15% slope. And
- that's the decision I'm presented with. Is it impractical? I know it cuts down.
- And I'm sorry it cuts down trees, but you don't need any variance for that. You're allowed to do that.
- You're not allowed to do this unless we decide there's something impractical about the other solution.
- And frankly, I hate to say it. I'd love to say yes. I mean, one of the things we do is try to get to
- yes, but I don't see how I can get to yes.
- because this also makes it a longer walk for me as I start to approach 80. I mean, I'm 70 now, but that
- doesn't move you. OK, OK. May I ask a question? Between the site on the left and the middle one, the
- recommended and the preferred, in between those two, because there's a patch of ground, would that
- would it ameliorate having to take the trees down? And would it make the walk from the house any shorter
- if it were in between? So this is where I will have to take down the lead. It's conceivable. I don't
- want to say for certain, but it's conceivable. The only tree that has come down is the tree that's got
- to come down.
- If I do move it, I'm still got to stay away from the septic field, septic tank, which is going to push
- me into taking down more trees. I personally don't have a problem pushing it further to the left.
- As I said, we really are siding it this way because we've got to take away the tree. And the second,
- of course, is the length of the walkway is shorter with number two than pushing it further.
- For the benefit of my colleagues, I think some of the issue is here, it's that 15 degree slope is not
- a straight line, right? It's beyond page five of his handout, it jigs and jags and part of the house
- is within the 15 degree slope. The entire septic field is in the 15 degrees. I mean, there's, it's just,
- waving in and out, and there's just a very small portion. And that happens to be the portion where his
- septic tank is, and he's got a legal perimeter around there that needs to be refrained. And so I would,
- regardless of how you're leaning, just please keep that in mind. I'm going to ask for
- calling the public up at this time. Good idea. And we'll see what anyone may or may not have to say.
- Thank you. Thank you very much for your time. Now, if somebody does have a disagreement, you'll have
- the opportunity to read about that. All right. Is there anybody in the room that wishes to speak on
- behalf of this presentation and petition?
- Is there anybody online that wishes to speak on behalf of this petition? All right. Is there anybody
- in the room that wishes to speak against this petition? Is there anybody online that wishes to speak
- against this petition? Seeing no one. Let's go ahead and have some dialogue here and see if there's
- a motion to be had.
- a piece of clarification with respect to tree removal on property. Tree removal does not require a permit
- or a variance as long as it's not in the 15% slope when it's in area two. So the trees on the property
- that are outside of slope greater than 15% are not protected. But if you are a tree and you're in the
- 15% slope area, it is protected. So I just wanted to offer that clarification. OK.
- So does that apply to the tree he's having removed? It's hard. Yes, I believe the tree that is planning
- to be removed due to its health is in the 15% slope. But the other trees that he mentioned that would
- have to be removed from option two from staff, I believe maybe outside of the slope area. So those would
- not require a variance if you just
- chose to remove those, but he's saying that he does not want to remove those with respect to his decision.
- Could you put back the three? So you're saying with this one, which is the one on the left, would that
- require, do you think that would require a variance for tree removal?
- It's hard to see on this map without showing the shading of the sloped areas. The 15% is a seven and
- a half foot fall over a 50 foot distance. So if this location that he's depicted is true that it's not
- in any 15% slope area and it is located exactly where staff had
- delineated, then those trees would not be protected. So he would theoretically be able to build there
- without a variance and eliminate those trees without a variance, because it's all outside of the slope.
- Could I ask? OK. I'm looking at the house. And is it in compliance?
- Or was a variance issued previously so that this could be built within the slope, the home? The existing
- house? Yes. So oftentimes we see with older properties, we will see LIDAR data and the contours shown
- here. Sometimes that is contour data that was taken maybe before construction occurred, or it is actually
- taken into account the slope of the property. So those slopes that are shown in red
- right where the home is may have been manmade. And then the LIDAR data depicted them as steep slope,
- but it was manmade. Okay, thank you. I do find it compelling that the amount of land that they have
- to choose to build on is quite modest in size. And thank you, Mr. Daley, for commenting that the slope
- undulates, goes in and out. It is not a straight line. Undulate, that is a good word. And it's not a
- straight line. And so the property could not precisely fit any perfect scenario. The preferred site.
- Yes. Any comments?
- I just was thinking about it in totality, you know, and I understand the constraints of the septic field
- and the septic tank and then the pipe connecting the two and the irrigation system, et cetera, but then
- there's the 15% slope restriction into which you're significantly wishing to build.
- Um, it's 32 feet by 25 feet, including the staircase. So that's, uh, causing me a little consternation,
- um, more than a little consternation, you know, um, I understand the desire. And I believe while it's
- 32, there's only 20 feet.
- that is being impacted by this. There's only 20 feet that's impacting the 15 degrees. I see. I see.
- Is there any thought about reducing the size of the structure so the slope is not impacted? Or is the
- size of the structure deeply in your heart? And believe me, I understand about winning a first floor
- and a second floor. I get that completely.
- I hadn't even thought about doing it smaller. It's got to be big enough to make it worthwhile to do.
- I mean, that would be a completely different project. Yeah. That's what I'd have to, I don't know. Just
- had to ask. Yeah. Well, I'll say, because part of it
- And I'll say one of my real concerns about that is because we do need a bathroom on that second floor.
- That means the first eight feet of that second floor is taken up by the bathroom. And then there would
- be the utility closet in just a little small space. So I've only got 17 feet plus 25. So it'd be 17
- by 25, which I could put windows in.
- all of a sudden I gotta pull that in five by five, for example, then it's 15 by 12. That would be.
- That would, yeah. So that's why I'd have to do a lot of thinking. I'm gonna just remind my colleagues
- here, I had Mr. Myers put up the,
- definition of practical difficulties rises from conditions of the property that do not generally exist
- in the area. You know, this ungulation is pretty unique. Precludes the development or use of property
- in a manner enjoyed by other conforming properties. Yeah, I mean, he made the case of the distance and
- the consistency with the design.
- I think the petitioner made a reasonable claim for letter C, which is really in here. I'm tending to
- this could be a coin flip. I'm tending to think that by the letter of our definition of practical
- difficulties, I think he made his case.
- There's also the impairment and stability of a natural or scenic area. The one that seems to. The standards
- for design variance approval. Well, that's not in question here.
- bring that to us to determine. What was the question? I'm sorry. Design standards variance, the rationale
- for design standards variance, whether or not the condition has been met. You brought this forward to
- us to define whether or not practical difficulties have been met. Is that correct?
- Yes, so in the findings of fact for the petition, there was a finding that practical difficulties have
- not been demonstrated. And then there was a finding that it could impair the stability of a natural
- or scenic area based on the encroachment to the slope area. And that's item number one as stated in
- 841-4F, standards for design variance approval.
- So there were two conditions, if you will, that triggered staff's recommendation. And I may remind the
- board that staff is recommending denial and oftentimes if we are recommending approval, we also may
- offer conditions of approval. So if the board finds that there are specific conditions of approval that
- they would like to add to a motion, then they are welcome to do so. Thank you.
- have any other discussion or feel compelled to motion. I'm not sure how popular this will be but I'm
- going to recommend we approve variance 26-28 brown eco area to 15% slope encroachment variance to chapter
- 823 because in my estimation practical difficulties in terms of the
- land site have been demonstrated. I'll second. It's been moved and seconded to approve VAR-26-28, which
- is the brown eco area to 15% slope encroachment variance to chapter 823. A vote yes is a vote to approve.
- I'll remind everyone that since we have four members tonight, we still need a vote of at least three
- members for it to pass. Guy Lofman? No. Pamela Davidson? Yes. Mark? This gives me a lot of consternation.
- It really does. I've been thinking about this and I drove by the property and I don't think I've really seen
- proposal with this amount of disturbance, you know, 20 feet into the 15% slope. And that's
- pretty significant. You know, I would kind of prefer to see if this could be continued to see if any
- kind of redesign could be done or if the other conditions can be met. My suspicion is
- that it's not going to meet the septic approval. And I'd like to make sure that it meets the septic
- approval. But right now, as it is, it's a significant encroachment into the 15% slope. And I feel you
- have a great vision for this. And you want that treehouse. You have the opportunity with the tree coming down.
- but my vote is going to have to be no. I'm sorry. Skip daily. Yes. Okay. Set motion does fail by a vote
- of two to two options are to put another motion to vote on, or this automatically is continued to our
- next meeting, which isn't until October, October 7th.
- So in other words, it's not an outright rejection. It is a continuance because we neither approved nor
- denied the proposal. So this gives an opportunity to go back to the drawing board and figure out whether
- those stairs are inside or outside the building, whether or not there's any accommodation that can be made to
- move the structure slightly more into, you know, without encroaching as much into the 15% slope. And
- then there's also going to be a third person here in October that could change the vote, so to speak, right?
- if I could have found a better spot for it. Mr. Brown, I'm gonna ask you to hold off one moment. I'll
- give my colleagues the opportunity for another motion. I don't know if they'll take that opportunity.
- My guess is no. All right, at this point,
- do we have to motion to continue with this? It's automatically. I'm going to go ahead and close this.
- And with that, as Ms. Clements mentioned, there are five members of the BZA. Tonight there's only four.
- You had a stalemate tonight. You'll have the opportunity to reschedule and to come back. I think you'll
- probably have the
- option of October or perhaps November, but you can work that out with your person at staff. I would
- recommend you listen through and go on to CATS TV and watch this a couple times and hear whatever concerns
- that were mentioned and sit down with your engineering team and sit down and see if you can
- come a little closer to where the comments are, and maybe you'll find the votes. Maybe you won't. I'm
- not sure, but we'll welcome you back in October or your soonest convenience. Thank you. Thank you very
- much for your time. I appreciate it. Thank you. Your outstanding presentation. Outstanding. And thank
- you, Mr. Myers and director. All right. Next up,
- Number two and number three altogether. Variants 26-29 alpha and 29 Bravo. The Rocky Side Yard setback
- variance to chapter 804 and the Rocky Riparian area setback variance to chapter 813. Mr. Brown, before
- you go forward with your presentation, has the petitioner complied with the statutory requirements of
- notification?
- yes fantastic if you could continue with your presentation thank you the purpose of this petition is
- that the petitioner is planning planning to construct a 1200 square foot measuring 30 feet by 40 feet
- detached garage on this property the petition site is zoned agricultural residential 2.5 agr and contains
- 2.5 acres by deed more or less according to the
- To chapter 804 of the CDO, the side yard setback for a property in the agricultural residential 2.5
- zone is 15 feet from the property line. The proposed detached garage will sit three feet from the property
- line instead, which is a 12-foot encroachment. In addition, a riparian area is present on the side and
- rear of the property, which has a required setback of 50 feet from the center line. According to observations
- made by staff
- the detached garage will encroach seven feet into the required riparian area setback, which is demonstrated
- in exhibits six and seven in the staff report. So a bit of background. Supplying staff was contacted
- by the builder, Nick Rocky, in July of 2026 about the permit process. We informed him of the details,
- and a pre-design was applied for PILP-364
- During that review, the zoning inspector discovered that based on the location of the proposed garage,
- a side yard setback, rear yard setback, and a riparian area setback would be required. But the planning
- director communicated with a petitioner who agreed to move the proposed garage forward slightly in order
- to avoid requiring a rear yard setback in addition to the other two variances you're hearing tonight.
- The petitioner's property is practically bisected by a riparian area.
- with the existing single Hamley family home and driveway access all on the eastern side of the riparian
- area. There is an existing shed in the same general area as the proposed garage, which would be demolished
- if this variance is approved. And we do acknowledge that there is some challenging topography as well
- that the petitioner is trying to work with in placing the structure in their proposed location.
- Here's the location map and zoning map of the property and surrounding area, as well as the comprehensive
- plan and site conditions map. Here are some images of the property. The image on the left is a partial
- view of a mobile home, as well as the existing home on the property. By mobile home, I just
- mean a recreational vehicle. I apologize. The image on the right is a closer look at the existing home.
- These two images show the proposed location, as indicated by some snakes that were put out. As I said,
- the shed, as well as I believe the playground equipment, would be demolished or perhaps relocated in
- the case of the latter. Here's a view of the area just west of the proposed location, showing a sharp D
- a sharp decline in slope near the riparian area. And the images on these next two slides show the riparian
- area itself. This is a certified plot plan that was done by a surveyor with an after the fact marking
- showing the proposed location of the garage near where my mouse is on screen.
- There is also an aerial of the property showing the riparian areas in question as well as the proposed
- location of the garage. And so staff recommends denial of VAR-26-29A and VAR-26-29B. We feel that the
- petitioner could redesign or relocate the structure to be 15 feet in height or less.
- which under the standards of the county development ordinance would make it only require a five foot
- side yard setback or even move it to another location to meet a riparian area setback. The petition
- site also functions as a single family residential lot without the addition of a pole structure or garage.
- And these petitioner has not submitted findings to support all of the criteria for practical difficulties.
- And I will take any questions. Do we have anything imminent for Mr. Brown?
- All right, let's go ahead and call up the petitioner and or a representative. If you could adjust the
- mic to your liking and sign in your name. Sure. And when you're done with that, if you could go ahead
- and speak your name into the microphone for us.
- That's a reminder that anything that you say that needs to be on the record needs to be spoken into
- the microphone. Nick Rocky. Nick Rocky. Rocky, could you raise your right hand? And do you swear that
- the testimony you're about to give is the truth as you know it? It is. All right. We're going to set
- 15 minutes on that timer and you're good.
- OK, if you could go back to the plot map that shows the location of everything. This one on screen?
- That works. I can work with that. OK. So with the property shaped the way that it is, the driveway comes
- in right here, as you can see. This is the fence line right here. This is the riparian right away right here.
- There really is nowhere else to build. This is it. Literally, this is it. There's nowhere else to go.
- With this being the riparian right here, this was also called riparian right here, but it's not. I still
- don't understand why it is, other than the fact that it's stormwater drain off. This is dry 99% of the time.
- The only time there's water right here is when everything washes down. But there's no set stream. There's
- no spring. I understand it's called riparian, but there's no water back here. No problem. We can move
- it up. And I agreed to move it up. And the three-foot setback on the side, we can go to five. That's
- not a problem. What we can't do is shrink the height of it.
- The height is so we can store a boat and other vehicles. If we shrink the height, we can't put the boat
- in there, which defeats the whole purpose of this. So I feel like I've done everything I can to try
- and make this work. There is no other way to make it work. The photos that were shown of the riparian
- over here, I don't really know how those are even relevant.
- because it's not within 50 feet. It's not within 100 feet of what we're doing. So those right there,
- I don't even understand why those were taken. But there it is if you want to see it. Like I said,
- the back, there's no water. You're welcome to come and look. That's all I've asked for all along is
- people to communicate and come and look and see what's actually happening. It's hard to see on a photo.
- A photo's worth 1,000 words, but
- your eyes see a lot more. I don't know what else we can do, but I'm game to listen if anybody has any
- suggestions. Thank you.
- I would like to start by saying, Mr. Rocky, of all the witnesses we've had, you're the only one who
- ever figured if you carry the microphone with you, you can get up close to the. It just seemed a lot
- easier. And I'm going to suggest it to witnesses in the future. And I would appreciate your figuring
- out that little solution to our conundrum. That's what I do. I solve problems. My question for staff
- is we've just heard the petitioners say they can move
- the structure to comply more with the setback and with another issue, but the height is his question.
- The documents we have that you denied, the petition that you denied, was it plan A or plan B with the
- changes he agreed to?
- So I will say that the petitioner and the representative has been very communicative. At first application,
- we identified three variances. They moved it. We went down to two variances. And now they're stating
- that they will try to maybe make it one variance. So if they move it seven feet, if you have seven feet
- more, because you already moved it two feet, if you move it seven more feet north and stay out of that
- that would make one of the variances no longer necessary. Now your request to move it over to meet a
- five foot setback as sort of a moot point if the structure is more than 15 feet in height. So that's
- just if you would like to make that as a
- to the BZA since that is a standard in the county if something's accessory to a residence and it's 15
- feet or higher or less, 15 feet high or less, it can be five feet from the setback. So right now what
- he's proposing is three feet on the side. So if that helps.
- What you're saying is that if we move the structure a few feet, then they can have the height they want.
- If they move the structure seven feet north, they get out of the riparian setback and they no longer
- need the VAR-26-29B and they only need the side yard setback. Right. Can we go back to the slide that
- was just up?
- Now, the red is the proposed structure. Yes. And we're saying move it a little farther away up here
- toward where I've put my laser. Correct. OK. Mr. Rocky, are you saying that that's acceptable? That's
- acceptable. We can do that. It's the height. I can't come down. But the height's OK if it's moved that
- much. Is that right?
- So he's exceeding the 15 feet. So he's exceeding the height structure of 15 feet. So his side setback
- is 15 feet. So if he moves at seven feet, it will only be the side setback that we're talking about.
- In terms of what you would need our approval for. Right. I just want to know in this photo right here,
- if I may, this is taller than 15 feet, this barn. In fact,
- all of the accessories around here are taller. They're all barns. Once again, Mr. Brown, on the side
- setback, was that six feet that we were talking about? What's the side setback problem? The side setback
- is supposed to be 15 feet for structures that are 15 feet or higher in height. So what is the deficit
- that we're
- experiencing. We are looking at a 12 foot encroachment into a 15 foot setback. So he's got a three foot
- setback and he needs 15. That's correct. So assuming you move that seven feet north, that's all we're
- looking at right now.
- does not have 15 feet for the record. You don't have 15 feet to meet the side setback. You'd run into
- the house. Right. So, so instead of it being a three foot, I could do five foot, but that's like my
- limit. I can't at that point. We got you. We got you. We got you. We're just trying to understand if
- and then statements. Okay. So other questions?
- So as I understand it, you're saying you could move it a few feet north and a few feet. Absolutely.
- Yes. And that would minimize the non-compliance. Yes. OK. Well, we'll see what the public has to say
- and all that, but that's important concessions to me. Any other questions for staff or the petitioner
- at this time?
- All right, seeing nothing, we're gonna ask you to take a seat real quick and we may or may not bring
- you back up. Is there anybody in the room or online that wishes to speak in favor of this petition?
- Seeing nobody. Anybody in the room or online that wishes to speak in opposition to this petition? Seeing
- no one. All right, colleagues, what do you have?
- I want to fight back to that one again, one that we were looking at with the red. Yeah. From this, it
- looks like there is nobody nearby who would be affected by this side yard setback. It's rural country.
- We're looking at agricultural buildings, adjoining it.
- I think we've gotten important concessions to minimize this. So I am going to be comfortable supporting
- this petition with the conditions that I think he's agreed to moving. All right. I would like to, before
- we get into this, I would like to motion to separate and
- motion to continue variance 26-29 Bravo. Therefore that would give the petitioner the opportunity to
- either come back or make the decision for to change the plan to seven feet making this move. That make
- sense. Yes. All right. I would like to make the
- If I can. If if he's comfortable making the changes where. Get out of here tonight and he can proceed
- with his project, right? That's fine, but continuing this gives him the option to review something and
- make the decision to dismiss and withdraw or to come back and plead that case again for us. Well,
- If he's, it seems to me he is, my intuition, my instinct is that he is comfortable making those as a
- condition of granting the, and he has people close to him who may be actual owners of this property,
- who just might be nodding their heads in approval. So I think they'd like to get on with it rather than
- come back. So. All right, so I hear no second to my motion.
- What else do we have? Well, if any, I'll make a motion. I move that we approve variances 26,
- 29A and 6, 29B, the sandifer. Now, wait a minute. No? That we're, that we,
- How can I? Should I help you with that? Help me with that. Okay, great. You've made a motion to approve
- those two, the Rockne side yard setback variance to chapter 804 and the Rockne riparian area setbacks
- variance to chapter 813, subject to the condition as we just heard the petitioner
- Uh, uh, say under oath that they will move the structure seven feet to the north. And what was the other
- seven feet to the north? Three feet, five, five feet, five feet to the west and five feet to the west.
- Subject to that condition. I just would like to ask staff one question. Would they move it to the north?
- Is the side yard setback still necessary? Yes.
- Okay and we have the option to either request that he move it or to grant his variance correct. So you
- could deny the riparian area setback which forces them to move at seven feet you could continue it to
- the October meeting in which case if he goes back to the drawing board tries to move at seven feet cannot
- he doesn't have to pay to reapply for the variance. What I was trying to protect
- But if you approve it, he doesn't have to move it. He could keep it. Because if you're saying approval
- and then conditioning, he move at seven feet, he doesn't need that variance. Right. So that's why I'm
- going to move that we grant 29A on the condition that they move at five feet west that we deny.
- 29A move five feet to the west. We deny 29B because. Those are separate motions. Deal with one. OK.
- Deal with one. Separate motion. I move we grant 629A on the condition that they move the structure five
- feet west away from the property line. And also seven feet north? No. We're just looking at A, which
- is side yard only. I'll second that. OK.
- If I may, what's putting moving the structure five feet to the West would probably move it to the house.
- What's I think the petitioner was saying is that he could move it an additional two feet to the West
- for a total site. It's like a five feet. That's right. Is that correct? Yeah. OK, then then then I move.
- So that thank you.
- That was an important misunderstanding. For the record, the defendant was affirmative with that question.
- Yes, we've been a little informal here. First, I withdraw my motion, and you withdraw your last one,
- because you're going to change it, correct? We're starting anew. Starting anew. Starting anew. I withdraw
- mine, you withdraw yours. That's true. All right, good. You want to try? No. OK.
- grant variance 26 29 a on the condition that the total setback permitted the total encroachment permitted
- is how many feet. The encroachment permit is is 10 feet. Yes. I'll second that one. Okay it's been moved
- and seconded to approve
- VAR-26-29A, which is the rocky side yard setback variance to chapter 804, with the condition of moving
- the structure to only allow an encroachment of 10 feet on the eastern property line. A vote yes is a
- vote to approve. Margaret Clements? Yes. Skip Daly? Yes. Guy Lofman? Yes. Pamela Davidson? Yes. Motion
- is approved.
- four to zero. If I understand it, if we simply deny 2629B, that's an acceptable outcome to the petitioners
- because they can move the structure seven feet and then they don't need a variance. Well, we're not
- here for their acceptance. We're here to make a decision.
- but given that this will, that they don't really, they've acknowledged they don't really need this variance
- and move to deny 26-29B, the riparian variance. I mean, Daniel, you've been working with this case and
- this case, does this achieve the objectives of the landowner? I believe as stated during the
- Petitioner's testimony that this would meet those standards. There's no movement north of nine feet.
- Is that correct? That's necessary anymore. It's that the petitioner has agreed that they can move it
- seven feet directly to the north through a redesign of the. OK, thank you. Then they won't need a variance.
- Yes, yeah.
- and and I'm just you know because I don't want them we keep it open if they run into problems they can
- come back in and right I am not going to support that motion of denial straightforward because it does
- not protect the petitioners right to come back and plead a case
- should he go back to the drawing board and review this it's just it just just makes no sense it does
- the same exact thing but protects the petitioner so i mean he can still go ahead with his um design
- but if he gets into problems we still have the case open in case he needs to come back in and appear
- before us so we're trying to help you out okay so you you're able to go ahead i also uh would vote
- Well I'd like to make a motion that we continue. There's an open motion on the table. Is there a second
- anywhere? It sounds like a no. I don't hear a second. All right you have the floor. I'd like to continue
- VAR-26-29B. Second. Okay it's been moved and seconded to continue VAR-26-29B which is the riparian area
- setback variance to chapter 813.
- this would be continued to the October 7th meeting, but if the petitioner moves the structure so as
- to not require this variance, then we will withdraw it from that agenda and they can receive a permit
- sooner than that date. So a vote yes is a vote to continue this to October 7th, 2026, just in case.
- Skip Daly? Yes. Guy Lofman? Yes. Pamela Davidson? Yes.
- Margaret Clements yes okay motion is approved four to zero thank you beautiful property that's a beautiful
- property and good luck with everything that you're doing there my suggestion is you continue to work
- closely with staff and get the outcomes that you want and if you need you can come back hopefully we
- won't see you all right let's let's move forward
- Looking at number four on your scorecard, if you're following along, variance 26-30, the Quintana automotive
- sales and or rental use variance to chapter 811. Mr. Brown, you've got the call on this as well before
- you get into your presentation. Could you please confirm that the petitioner
- withheld all of their statutory requirements on communication with neighbors? Yeah. Fantastic. You got
- the floor. Thank you. So the purpose of this is that the petitioner is seeking to renew a discontinued
- use of an automotive sales and or rental use on the property that taking the form specifically of a
- used car dealership.
- The petitioner intends to purchase the property and utilize it as their primary business location, according
- to the use petitioner's use determination application, quote, used to showcase cars for sale will not
- have any cars worked on at this location used for pickup and delivery of cars. Currently, the petition
- site is vacant in terms of use, though there is a structure on site and retains the ability to operate
- any uses in a limited business zoning district.
- Prior to the adoption of the county development ordinance, and it's a map changes on December 18th,
- 2024, this property was owned pre-existing business, which was defined as, quote, pre-existing business district
- The pre-existing business PB district is defined as that which is primarily intended to accommodate
- commercial and business service uses that were in operation prior to the adoption of this 1997 zoning
- ordinance. The intent of the PB district is to identify locations of commercial activity that are not
- supported by the comprehensive land use plan, but where commercial and service operations continue to exist."
- This district has identified further purposes of maintaining commercial activities with business zoning,
- while at the same time not allowing for the expansion of new business activity proximate to the location
- of the PV district. Expansion of the business is permitted within the lot of record, however. The type
- of business may be changed to one of equal or lower intensity as identified in table 2-1 permitted land
- uses, unquote.
- During the adoption of the CDO, all PV properties were rezoned to another more clearly defined zoning
- district as staff and the commissioner saw it. Further, the prior planning director conducted research
- and determined that the site was used as a residential site until 2011, and then an automotive sales
- business called Morgan Auto Services moved into the property at that point. Since automotive boats
- Automative slash boat repair shop was a high intensity use under the prior code. It was determined that
- the automotive abuse was not legal as shown in exhibit eight on the staff report and a planning process
- would be first be required to resume the use.
- Now, the use of automotive sales and or rental is defined as establishments primarily engaged in the
- retail sale of new and used automobiles, noncommercial trucks, motorhomes or recreational vehicles,
- including incidental storage, maintenance and servicing. In addition, establishments involved in renting
- passenger cars, noncommercial trucks, motorhomes or recreational vehicles, including incidents till
- parking and servicing of vehicles available for rent.
- This use includes but is not limited to airport transportation service, automotive rentals, automotive
- sales, automotive supply, and motorcycle sales. The particularly important one is just automotive sales.
- Here are the location and zoning maps of the property, as well as the site conditions map.
- This is a potometry view of the property and the existing structure and photos of the same. Here's what
- the petitioner has proposed so far as a preliminary plan for the property measuring the setbacks from
- the sides rear as well as the length as the width of the property.
- And here is a table of permitted land uses. As you can see from this automotive sales and a rental is
- permitted in the general business and airport zoning districts. And the image on the right is a list
- of currently permittable uses in the limited business zoning district as shown in chapter 807 of the
- county development ordinance. So in regards to this case, staff recommends denial per chapter eight
- District application of terms of the ordinance will not constitute unnecessary hardship when applied
- to subject property. The petitioner or the owner have supplied new information under this use variance
- request regarding why the use variance constitutes unnecessary hardship. And I will take any questions.
- Let's go ahead and bring the petitioner or a representative up. I'm going to trust you've been paying
- attention and now to speak into the mic and sign your name and then speak your name. My name is Christopher Quintana.
- Mr. Quintana, could you raise your right hand? And do you swear that the testimony you're about to provide
- is the truth as you know it? Yes. Fantastic. You're going to have 15 minutes. You've got it. Thank you.
- So my objective here is to get my used car dealer license. In order to get that, I have to have a building
- that can support up to 10 vehicles. And it has to be zoned accordingly. Right now, we're at limited business.
- and we need to get to a general business zoning variance. So my idea with this dealership, we are looking
- to do mainly online sales. The purpose of the location is going to be just for showcase for me. We are
- going to do appointment only. It's not going to be ran every single day, but any time that I have an
- appointment available due to state standards, I will be available.
- I am sorry. I do want to minimize any impact on any of the neighbors. There's a couple areas on here
- that I do not wish to utilize. We have already cleared up pretty much all this area. I got that boat
- out of there. I'm not planning on storing any vehicles that aren't running here.
- The area on the north side of the building up against this neighbor, I do not wish to really use most
- of that. I don't want to impact any of their values. That is not our intentions. Mainly the south of
- the building is the area that we are trying to utilize any kind of customer parking in the front. Maybe
- vehicles right up in the front area also where that grass patches. In the future, I do wish
- to do improvements to any of the
- outside areas where the grass is maybe add gravel or asphalt on the sides. And then, yeah. Questions?
- You have any questions for the positioner? I do want to reiterate, no mechanical work will be done here.
- I mean, possibly
- interior detail on the inside of the building, but nothing exterior is shown to the public. So I have
- an offsite building at my home that I do all the mechanical work to. Any kind of deliveries will be
- done at my house, like any kind of transports. So nothing is going to be used for this building other
- than just a showcase. Mr. Brown, could you flip back to the picture you had prior to this? I believe
- it showed the neighbor. Yeah, is that
- Is the folks across the street, is that a commercial building? It looks like a commercial parking lot.
- I believe that's a residential or agricultural use. At the very least, according to the zoning map,
- it is zoned agricultural residential 2.5. That one is it's used as a motorcycle repair shop. This one
- straight across down here.
- I apologize, I thought Mr. Daley was referring to the property directly to the north here where my mouse
- is indicated. But yes, the property directly across the street is currently used as a motorcycle repair
- shop. Is that within proper code? That, I believe, might be in a similar state to the proposal that
- the petitioner is doing. And as you can see from this map, it is also zoned limited business.
- difference here between this property and the one across the street is the sales I believe automotive
- sales and or rental am I correct that repair would be allowed in the agricultural if conditionally and
- service in limited business would be permitted with standards it's the sales that is
- the motorcycle business to across the street is long zoned limited business and repair is different
- than sales so there's a little bit of difference there that we could look into now you mentioned something
- about a desire to asphalt the driveway as well yes in the future if i am a permanent tenant here also
- would that be
- So if the use variance is approved by the board, what we would require is a site plan, a commercial
- site plan, where we would go through the standards for parking, surfacing, landscaping, any detention
- required, things like that. Multiple steps. The problem with turning it to general business is the other
- uses that could take place on that property, because of course his intention is motor vehicle
- repair and sales and just sales repair. Yes, he repairs him on another facility. So right now the request
- before the board is under the CDOs defined use of automotive sales and or rental use. So if the petitioner
- would like to optionally commit
- under a written commitment to narrowing that use. That's something that we could hear from them tonight
- and get recorded.
- the meeting, but I'll also note Miss Clemens point just to clarify. So he's zone limited business and
- this is a use variance. So what he's asking for and what he's saying is that there's no other appropriate
- use on this property. Therefore, I would like to be granted this automotive sales and or rental. It
- doesn't give him any other uses under the general business zoning district. OK, thank you. Thank you,
- Jackie. That variance to just stay with me, correct?
- So if I were to leave- It runs with the land. Sails with the property. Yes. Okay. Was there a pre-existing
- use of auto sales? In 2011, as Daniel Brown mentioned in the beginning part of the presentation, there
- was an automotive use, but there was a break in that use, and then it restarted, and then there was
- an enforcement issue which required it to close.
- So there was a break, then it was no longer a pre-existing business. They tried to use it and they weren't
- allowed to.
- Based on the prior director's research, there was a residential use there from 1997 to 2011. So I don't
- know if there was an error in zoning it pre-existing business at the time, but their determination was
- that it shouldn't have even been zoned pre-existing business. And if it was, it was a low intensity
- use and it couldn't be transferred to the automotive repair or sales. Would have this worked in 2023?
- No, at that time, we would have still required the same process as what we were mentioning. So it's
- not like it was closed for six weeks or six months. It was closed. The prior auto sale place was closed
- for a long time before now. So I don't know. What I heard from the owners is that they had a repair
- shop there and there was a lot of vehicles around and a lot of waste around the building.
- And whenever they had a complaint against them, they decided to just move out of that location completely
- without filing any kind of zoning variance for themselves. But from what the owner told me is that they
- kind of disappeared and everything was moved out and everything was gone after that. But as a repair
- facility with a lot of waste. And about how long ago was that? Do you have any idea?
- I do not. She didn't give me any specifics on that. I did see some aerial shots of some of these areas
- back in the day, and I believe it was around the 2014 time era, right around there, just according to
- aerial shots because you can see the mess that was on the property.
- Okay, that's helpful. I was wondering whether I can talk myself into doing pre-existing business,
- but I can't. That's too much for me to hang my hat on that. So we're back to this simple, straightforward
- question. I understand we could say the general, put into car,
- sales without without authorizer repairs or any other business uses is that correct? So repair is a
- different use so they would not be able to do repairs in in addition to the sales. Right we could say
- limited to car sales used car sales only if we wanted to be very strict.
- Okay, thank you. Do we have any other questions for the petitioner? All right, seeing done, why don't
- you go ahead and have a seat and we'll call you up if need be. Thank you. At this time, do we have anybody
- present that wishes to speak in support of this petition? We have anybody online that wishes to speak
- in support of this petition?
- Do we have anybody present in the courthouse that wishes to speak against this petition? Come forward.
- Same rules are going to apply except you're going to get a limited amount of time. If you're speaking
- into the microphone and sign in and state your name for us as well.
- here at Rutherford. What's your last name? Rutherford. Rutherford? Yeah. Okay. Mr. Rutherford, could
- you please raise your right hand and do you attest that the testimony you are about to provide us is
- the truth as you know it? Yeah. You can have three minutes. Sure. Go ahead. I live across the street
- and there's been several businesses over the last several years come and go constantly. No gas there.
- They just saved about one year because there's no gas. They can't eat. I kind of oppose this because
- a business they had a few years ago was kind of a trashy place and a lot of people hung out over there
- constantly in the evening and made noise and mischief. And I've been there going on 35 years and I'm
- getting too old for that crap. There was an automotive repair shop there
- About three years ago, before, after that, there was a guy who prepared equipment there. There was a
- stencil equipment vehicles there and just recently a screen printer there. It used to be a gas station
- years and years and years and years ago. And my understanding was that the gas tanks are still underground and the
- person who bought this ground years ago, powered off with a pump set and buried it in black top concrete,
- black top, I'm sorry. So I don't know if there's tanks to sit there, I have no idea. But I have,
- you know, my concern is mischief at night and commotion and the motorcycle shop, he has problems at
- nighttime, people were allowing him using stuff too. So I'm getting too old to listen to that kind of stuff.
- But other than that, I haven't got a problem with business or anything, but it's just people come and
- go constantly. Why? I don't know. There's a problem somewhere along the line. Is that all you have for
- us? OK. Well, thank you. I have a question for Mr. Rutherford.
- That sounds like it's been very you had a long series of bad neighbors and I that you don't want another
- bad neighbor and I don't blame you. And I'm I don't know what staff would say, but we. We have some.
- Assuming that you know if everybody agreed and it was binding that it could only be used car sales.
- There'd be no shop work
- they would only be in operation, that no operations would take place after 8 p.m. Would that make you
- more comfortable? Yeah, it'd make me more comfortable, but like I say, people come there at nighttime
- and I'm sure there's a drink going on, I have no idea, but I'd say this mischief goes on. Yeah, right.
- I haven't got problems with auto sale, I mean, like that,
- as long as it's not going to be repairs and stuff like that. Like I say, business comes and goes here
- for some reason, constantly. Why? I don't know. It's got a history that you don't trust a bit. It's
- nothing to do with Mr. Cantana, but it's got to do with the history of this property. It seems to draw
- problems. It's out in the country and when people come by, there's people going back and forth, north
- and south. So they know it's empty or it's not empty.
- Okay, thank you. Thanks. All right, is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to oppose this
- petition and be heard? Seeing nobody online that wishes to oppose this, I see a hand. Could our tech
- crew please allow Deb
- Can you unmute Deb, please, or Deb, can you please unmute yourself? Deb, you will have to unmute from
- your screen. I think I got it figured out. All right. Hi, Deb. And I apologize, I don't know how to
- get my camera going. Deb, can you hear me? Yes.
- All right, can you please state your name? My name is Deb Tamaro, T-O-M-A-R-O. All right, Tamaro, could
- you please raise your right hand and attest that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth
- as you know it? Yes, it is. All right, we're going to set a clock with three minutes, and that's the
- time that you're going to have
- to share your thoughts. Go ahead. Thank you. I also live across the street. I joined properties with
- Gary who just spoke. Our biggest concern, I want to echo and support Gary, but I also have questions
- about lighting. I know a lot of car dealerships have very bright lights. And as Gary said, we live out
- in the country. We love to see the stars. We already have some pretty bright lights from their motorcycle
- repair shop.
- Um, and I'm just curious as to what the lighting situation might be over there and how that might impact
- because they're completely surrounded by residential, you know, we're all residential around them.
- Thank you. All right. Well, thank you for your thoughts. Is there anybody else online that wishes to
- speak in opposition of this position? Please go ahead and click your hand raise.
- I don't see any of that. We're going to offer you five minutes to address the two concerns that were
- brought to you. If you could remember that you're still under our oath in that we expect your truthful
- testimony. Yes, of course. Five minutes, please. All right. So for the lighting, I did not really think
- into adding any additional lighting. Can we go to one of those pictures from the front of the building?
- Because I believe there's some sort of light outside already. But no, I did not think that I'm going
- to be adding any additional lighting. If anything, my business hours were going to be before 5 p.m.
- I wasn't trying to stay there later than that so lighting shouldn't really be an issue since everything's
- going to be during the day. I do know that I can't operate on Sundays too so nobody will be there on
- Sundays showing any cars. Honestly I shouldn't be there on Sundays either unless I'm inside of the building
- itself. I can always show vehicles inside the building for additional lighting but there was no plans
- on adding any additional lighting to the exterior of
- property. I do not want to operate late either, so you did mention 8 p.m. being maybe like a rule, but
- I wasn't expecting to stay there that late anyways, especially it's by appointment also. What were the
- concerns that Gary would like me to answer? Mr. Rutherford.
- I think generally maybe speaking to the security of the property, how you will secure it after hours.
- OK. I was going to add security cameras. I can't answer to the mischief that they've had in the past.
- That's all going to be me and maybe one other person that operates, me and my partner. But for the most
- part, I wasn't planning on having big groups around.
- Everything's by appointment. I doubt I would have several people at once. It's not like a typical used
- car dealership. A lot of the stuff will be online. Some vehicles may be sold before they even reach
- my house or this location. I don't believe there'd be any mischief being caused by me. I am fairly new
- to the city. I've lived here for four years. I came from Las Vegas, Nevada.
- So I don't really have a big crowd around me. So that's pretty much it. All right. You addressed the
- question I was going to ask. It's going to be you and one other colleague. And so two total. Yes, exactly.
- That will be employee staff. OK, good. I wanted to know that too. Thank you. I just have a question.
- Please. Mr. Kingana.
- would you accept that if you had to add or replace any lighting that you would make it dark sky compliant?
- Of course. Okay. That's helpful to the neighbor across the street. Thank you. I have a question regarding
- the operation of business. It will help me better understand and to weigh in the concerns of your neighbors.
- to use car lot, but your appointment only if folks are, I guess the operation of the business is not
- clear to me. Will folks be able to drive by and go, oh, hey, I wanna go check out these vehicles and
- be able to stop and get out of their vehicle and look around and,
- kick the tire and look at a sticker on the windshield. Yeah. So I guess it's mainly for purchases at
- that point where I'd have to make an appointment with them. It is required by the state to be available
- at certain times. But in the very beginning, I know there's going to be a lot of inventory that I have
- to research, research how to do finances with certain customers and like
- offering financing. At the very beginning, I only want to do vehicles that are just paid by cash right
- away. So I guess it's mainly, I need time to figure everything else out on that end, especially like
- trying to figure out how to get to auctions, purchasing vehicles, how to get them to my place. I won't
- be at the location very much. And then just doing sales online through CarGurus, Facebook Marketplace,
- things like that, scheduling appointments that way.
- Have you considered, and I'm saying this only because it was one of the concerns of the folks opposing
- this, is have you considered some kind of lot security to shut down folks from even being able to approach
- when you or your partner is not there, like some kind of
- chain or some kind of fence or something to that liking? Have you considered that? Oh, yeah. We thought
- about adding bollards and having chains between both driveways. I don't want to impact anything up against
- the north property over there. It's right where that yellow 50 foot setback is, but mainly right over
- here in the front. But I believe we were just going to apply bollards and then just a chain that goes
- straight across.
- between both of those driveways whenever we're not there. And then we're going to have security cameras
- too. Have you had the opportunity to knock on the door of the motorcycle repair shop and discuss and
- get his or her feedback on best practices or some of the concerns of the traffic or mischief that's
- being described?
- any other questions of the petition or of staff? All right, thank you. Why don't you go ahead and have
- a seat and we'll figure things out. Thank you. Lopman, I have a feeling you have some thoughts. Well,
- the I'm very, very concerned about neighbors.
- But these concerns are not universal to, not specific to this business, but generic. It seems to me
- if we approve this with the conditions that there would be no commercial activity after 7 p.m., that
- would minimize or eliminate the risk.
- there after 7 p.m. doesn't have the reason right to be there because there's there's it's there no commercial
- activities and there's no other reason for people to be there so I'm leaning toward approving it with
- with that condition you also add the condition of the light yes and that if any lighting is added
- that it would be dark sky compliant. I added or replaced. And or replaced. Yes. Well, I could second
- that. We have other thoughts to be shared before a motion. That was that was consideration, but now
- I'll make a motion. And the motion is that I move we approve
- variance 26-30 with the conditions that there be no commercial activities after 7 p.m. on, and that
- any lighting addition or replacement be dark sky compliant. And do you want to add that it's limited
- to auto sales only? Limited to auto sales only, not auto repair. Second that.
- Well, we have a motion and a second before you call role director. Could you clarify something quickly
- for me? Their precedent of. The BZ a. Approving something with a condition of time restraints of business
- operating hours. We have done that in the past.
- Okay, so there's been a motion and a second to approve VAR-26-30 with three. I'm sorry, but it probably
- should say 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. We don't want it opening, after seven is just, I think seven, all business
- commercial activity between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Okay, do we have a second on that? I would second the
- amendment. The amended amendment.
- the amended motion has been seconded okay so it's been moved and seconded to approve var-26-30 which
- is the quintana automotive sales and or rental use variance to chapter 8 11 with three conditions commercial
- activity be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. all lighting that is added or replaced on the site shall be
- in compliance with the Dark Sky organization, and that the use variance is limited only to automotive
- sales. A vote yes is a vote to approve the use variance with the conditions as stated. Margaret Clements?
- Yes. Skip Daly?
- I'm going to explain myself. I'm going to vote no, because I'm not comfortable putting a governmental
- restriction on business operating hours without a pathway for enforcement. So no. Guy Lofman?
- That was a yes. Yeah, I'm sorry. Yes. Pamela Davidson?
- yes okay the motion is approved three to one all right well congratulations you still have a pathway
- to get there and being a good neighbor is always recommended
- All right, let's move forward. We have numbers five, six, and seven. Mr. Myers, you're back up to the
- table. Variance is 26-32, Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie. Turning point, Apostolic Church. Side yard, yeah,
- yeah, I know. I'm not working well today, but thank you. Side yard, set back.
- Max and previous cover variants and this another side yard setback variance to chapter eight oh four.
- Mr. Myers, is the petitioner compliant with the statutory requirements for notification? Yes.
- Thank you. Please proceed with your presentation. Thank you. So this is the turning point apostolic
- church side yard setback variance to chapter eight oh four.
- for a primary structure, a maximum previous cover variance chapter 804 for the entire site, and a second
- site yard setback variance chapter 804 for an accessory structure. This property is located at 2633
- North Smith Pike. It's a zoned agricultural residential, and we're in Richland Township section 24.
- petitioners requesting three non residential development standards variances in order to redevelop the
- petition site as a religious facility petition site is zoned agricultural residential and currently
- contains a 676 square foot single family residence 480 square feet of a detached garage and a 984 square
- foot pole barn
- Proposed religious facility will consist of an 11,667 square foot primary building, a 2,251 square foot
- accessory structure, new driveways, parking lot, sidewalks, landscaping and rain gardens, including
- stormwater infrastructure. A future playground area is also proposed with the petition, but is listed
- as a future possible future development.
- Two variance requests are from the non-residential side yard setback requirement of the agricultural
- residential zone, which is 50 feet for non-residential structures. That is for the proposed primary
- building, which will be the residential, excuse me, the religious facility on the north side of the
- property. And the relocated accessory structure, which is currently on the property, proposed to be
- relocated to an area that will be along the south
- of the property, and both of those will be in violation of the 50-foot non-residential side yard setback.
- The primary structure will encroach 31.67 feet into the side yard setback along the north property line,
- and the accessory structure will encroach 16.17 feet into the side yard setback along the south property
- line. Please note that both structures will still maintain what would have been the normal side yard
- setback for residential structures
- which is a minimum of 15 feet. The maximum impervious cover of the property in this zoning district,
- which is the AGR zone, is 35,000 square feet for a lot with 2.51 to 5 acres. Normally, a property that's
- in a critical watershed like this one has a more restrictive impervious cover
- requirements with respect to square footage. However, when a lot has a certain amount of acreage, it
- is outside of that threshold for additional regulations. So this property is in the Jax DeFe critical
- watershed, which is important in consideration of impervious cover. But like I stated, its acreage is
- higher than what we would normally see with respect to additional restrictions regarding impervious cover.
- So the proposed religious facility will result in 67,500 square feet of impervious cover. That includes
- all of the structures, driveways, parking lots, sidewalks, et cetera, which is 32,500 square feet over
- the current limit. Here on the screen, I have the definitions relevant to this petition. We have a definition
- for religious facility, as well as a definition for impervious cover.
- We have a page dedicated to practical difficulties if we need to come back to these with respect to
- the petitions discussion. This slide is with regard to parking and impervious cover. So table 6-1 in
- the county development ordinance requires that a religious facility have at least one space for every
- four seats within the building.
- The proposed development includes a total of 113 parking spaces, which is the minimum required for a
- proposed capacity of 450 seats, which is what is proposed with this facility. Chapter 14-11 of the County
- Development Ordinance provides an opportunity to modify that parking minimum as it relates to a violation
- of the maximum impervious cover.
- So specifically, chapter 814-11B1C reads, planning staff may approve a reduction of the number of required
- spaces if the minimum required parking conflicts with the maximum impervious coverage permitted for
- the site or tree canopy preservation area. Therefore, staff has the ability to reduce the minimum required
- parking spaces from 113 down to 57 spaces per this chapter provision.
- Reducing overall parking area could allow for future expansions on the property, such as the playground,
- and also avoid needing another maximum impervious cover variance in the future if the structure, the
- primary structure needs expanding or other expansions of impervious cover are warranted.
- So part of the discussion this evening is staff will be curious to hear from the petitioner and stating
- what maximum previous cover they need at the moment and what they might need in the future as to limit
- the number of times that they may be coming back to this board for further variances with respect to
- that regulation.
- Here on the screen we have the location map again we're in richland township this is north smith pike
- running north south and we have to the south west wood yard road the petition site has road frontage
- only on north smith pike. Here we have the site conditions map you'll note that there are no slopes
- greater than 25% which is the only percentage that's of regulation in this area.
- I will note, with the contour lines here, too, you can kind of see a natural drainage swale cutting
- through the property, running from the east to the west. And that will come up as an important fact
- later on in the presentation. Now on the screen, we have a map of the critical watersheds. So you can
- see the property is clearly identified in the Jax Defeat Creek critical watershed.
- And also on the screen we have a map that indicates the property is located in the county development
- ordinance urban area boundary, which is one of the triggers for the construction of sidewalks. So the
- petitioner will be constructing sidewalks and they are not requesting a variance to that standard. On
- the screen now we have table 2-804.
- for the Agricultural Residential Zoning District, which details the maximum impervious cover value,
- as well as the side yard setback value for non-residential use. Now we have a series of photographs
- from aerial imagery showing the petition site in its current state, showing the existing residents,
- the small detached garage, and the accessory pole barn.
- Here we have some street view imagery showing the property in question. This view is shown from the
- property immediately to the south, and it's zoomed in a little bit so you can kind of see the backyard
- beyond the chain link fence, which is the petition site.
- On the screen we have the letter from the petitioner's representative stating their requests with respect
- to the side yard setback as well as the impervious cover variance and their rationale as to why they
- believe the variances should be approved. We have a consent letter from the owners of the property for
- the petitioner's representative to submit the variance application and operate on their behalf.
- And we have a boundary retracement survey that shows the current conditions of the property. I will
- note that the current pole barn on the property is meeting that 15-foot residential side yard setback.
- And that pole barn structure is the one that's going to be relocated elsewhere on the property to the
- south and west. On the screen, we have the conceptual site plan provided by the petitioner's representative.
- showing the new structures as well as all the new hardscape or impervious cover. This page shows it
- a little bit more zoomed in to give a bit more detail showing all the parking sidewalks. The accessory
- structure is located to the south here along the south property line and the new building is here along
- the north property line and then of course that future playground area as mentioned before. You can
- see in the middle of the
- page here, these oval shapes. Those are proposed rain gardens. I believe they are terraced as you go
- down in elevation. And one of the rationale points provided by the petitioner is that they are wanting
- to keep the side yards or encroach into the side yard setbacks so that they are able to utilize the
- existing topography of that area for drainage purposes.
- You will also note that the driveway entrance will also be slightly shifting towards the south instead
- of being where it currently is, which is right along the north property line in the corner. We do have
- one letter from the public. This comes from the neighbor to the north, which interestingly is also a church.
- And that church actually received a special exception from the Monroe County Plan Commission in 1995.
- Back then the zoning regulations were different and the church facility needed a special exception from
- the Plan Commission. We don't do special exceptions anymore and churches are permitted in almost every
- zoning district now and just must follow the standard site plan procedures. So
- The petitioner provided some information as well as some dates that the staff was able to verify with
- respect to the planned commission meeting minutes back then that their church did receive that special
- exception and was discussed having two phases. They've only completed the first phase, and they are
- hoping to initiate the second phase in the future. So as stated in the letter,
- And I have physical copies as well for any members of the public, as well as members of the board that
- talks about their concerns with respect to the development of their neighbor's property to the south.
- OK, that brings me to staff's recommendation. So breaking this out into three different ones, staff
- recommends approval of the side yard setback variance of Chapter 804, citing the findings of fact and
- practical difficulties have been demonstrated.
- That is for the side yard setback for the primary structure. Staff recommends denial of VAR-26-32B,
- which is the maximum impervious cover variance to chapter 804, citing findings of fact, specifically
- number 1C and number 3. Practical difficulties have not been demonstrated. And finally, VAR-26-32C.
- Staff is recommending approval, which is the side yard setback variance to the accessory structure.
- citing the findings of fact and that practical difficulties have been demonstrated. I will not take
- any questions. Are there any imminent concerns that need to be asked of staff at this time? Seeing nothing,
- let's go ahead and bring up the petitioner and or representatives.
- If you could just be reminded to adjust your microphone as needed. Go ahead and sign in and then speak
- your name. We'll apply that oath.
- Are you going to be sharing your 15 minutes? I will be sharing my 15 minutes, so I'm having you go ahead
- and sign in. We're going to need you both to sign in. And while that's happening, can you go ahead and
- speak your name at least? Yes. My name is Chelsea Moss with Abramoss Design Group. Thank you, Chelsea.
- and perhaps a few. Just to make sure it's picked up, your name? My name is Ron Hawkins. Ron? Pastor,
- the church. Okay, pastor. If the two of you could please raise your right hand. Is the testimony you're
- about to provide the truth as you know it? Yes. Yes. Fantastic. We're gonna set 15 shared minutes for you guys.
- And you can go ahead. Okay. It's great to be here. I am the site engineer for this project and I'm mostly
- going to address the impervious area as that is the portion that is most concerning from staff's perspective.
- that's a great perspective. So I want to give you a little bit of a history and some insight into where
- this church currently sits. This church is in the downtown Ellitsville area. It is right on Jax DeFeek
- Creek. They have expanded the church in the past, and in an effort to meet their growing congregational
- needs, they have actually applied and had plans designed and everything for another expansion. FEMA
- turned them down.
- right now. Part of the church is elevated. There is a portion of the church that is no longer usable
- because of flood inundation and that they can't get it operational. Congregation keeps growing and they
- are out of space. Their current seating capacity is 240 and their average attendance right now is 220.
- That's over 90% capacity and the recommendation typically in church building is you shouldn't be exceeding
- 80% capacity. They're well beyond that. So if they have visitors come, there's almost no seating. Ron
- will talk a little bit more to that in the future or once I'm done. But from an engineering standpoint,
- they can't expand where they currently are.
- with their current capacity in their current site we are looking at about they currently have I believe
- I wrote down 45,000 square feet of impervious area at their existing site just to give you a perspective
- of where the impervious area we're talking about at 67.5 we're talking about doubling the size of the building
- But we're not doubling the size of their existing impervious area. So this new site would be a better
- use, a less impactful use per seat as far as impervious area goes. It is zoned agricultural, but this
- is in the urbanizing area.
- on Smith Pike, so it backs up against traditional agricultural area, but it's highly residential and
- it does already have several church and childcare child development facilities in your proximity. Grace
- Baptist is probably the largest church, Grace Church, which is just south of them. They are about 1200
- feet south of this site and Grace has
- about 61,000 square foot of a pervious area. Then we also have the Head Start and the villages just
- south of us as well. So this isn't a unique type of development along Smith Pike. We're not talking
- about putting a big church in the middle of nowhere. The church has been very thoughtful and mindful
- in what they're developing. They're not going extravagant.
- This has not got tons of wings and everything. It is a square building. It has a second story. They
- are trying to use their space efficiently. We have designed this parking lot to be 113 spaces, which
- is the minimum required by the ordinance. There are allowances for administrative reductions in that.
- I know Drew mentions that.
- in places in the report and the findings of fact my concern is and in talking with the church staff
- that if we go much below that that is one seat for one car for every four people if we start pushing
- below that we're not going to have enough parking for people when they get there that's that's going
- to be your average family size coming to church and so
- parking layout. 1 to 4 is actually more strict than the old ordinance, which was 1 to 3. So we. Got
- on parking in my opinion to begin with. Um. The parking layout looks a little wonky. I'll give you. Um I know
- the eastern most open space that is to allow for a front section addition somewhere down the line.
- Right now, the expansion is going to be good for them for their foreseeable future. And although in
- an ideal scenario, we would try to get full variance upfront. We understand that we're asking for a
- substantial variance right now. And
- the parking. They are looking for other options, and I have even brought up other options if they do
- the addition in the future, but to plan for that right now, we feel is a little too far out. Um. So
- at this point, all we've done is made sure our parking is laid out so that we're minimizing the disruption
- to that while still providing.
- I'm going to go to the next slide. Let's see. So from their current position, they bought this property
- in 2024. They did buy it before the new ordinance was put into effect. But my clients did their due
- due diligence. They did have a member of their trustees call and talk to planning. We're not sure exactly
- who they talked to at the time, but they did do some research into it
- As with many churches though, through planning and funding, we're just now getting to where we're getting
- boots on the ground, wanting to actually get design documents for everything. And so that's where the
- impervious area has kind of come up and become a bit of a sticking point. My concern with any of the
- mitigations that Drew has recommended in reducing parking or reducing the size of the building
- is that's not going to meet their purpose and what they're needing to do with this property. The longer
- they're stuck on the property in the flood zone, the riskier it gets for them. There are certain limits
- in flood ways, particular that if a large enough storm comes through and you get enough damage, rebuilding is
- they're not going to be able to move to the site. And that can be prohibitive or prohibited by FEMA
- if a certain percentage of a building is damaged. And so they are going to have harder and harder issues
- the longer they stay in that building, not only because of capacity, but also just staying there. They
- put a lot of time and effort in trying to get moved to the site. And at this point,
- living waters did mention keeping a buffer. From the survey, the existing wood line buffers appears
- to be completely on living waters property on that side of the parcel. We are not required to have a
- buffer yard, but because our parking is along there, we will have very intense parking lot landscaping
- with the trees, the shrubs, all the standards. We are not requesting any variances from landscaping.
- So that will all be along there and be an incredible buffer between the Living Waters and this church.
- So. I'm a preacher, I need to ask how much time I have. You have six and a half minutes. Six and a half
- minutes? Okay, well, I won't take all of that. But I want to, first of all, I want to say that we appreciate
- the opportunity to address
- board and thank you for your consideration in this variance. I am, as I said, I'm the pastor. I've been
- the pastor at Turning Point for 28 years. My predecessor, my mentor, my pastor was there for 34 years.
- The church was founded in 1960 at 210 West Vine Street in Ellisville. They built alongside Jax DeFeat
- Creek and we have been fighting Jax
- Defeat Creek for years. We have experienced flooding. We have a fellowship building on our property
- that we finally just gave up on because we had to keep going in and repairing it. And we decided our
- money was better spent building a building fund and moving. We did try, as Chelsea alluded to, we did
- try to build where we are now a few years ago.
- FEMA said, the codes have changed in the last 20 years, obviously. No building, can't build anything
- there, as far as FEMA said. Go back just a few years after I became the pastor, so 25-ish years ago,
- our congregation grew from about 40 to about 80 within about a year or two. And we were in our current,
- the building then seated about
- 90 people 70 comfortably but we were pushing 70 8090 the shoe telling the foot how big to grow we kept
- bouncing 70 to 90 and we wanted to move then had some trouble finding property then we decided to
- by a home that was adjacent to our church property and demolished that. We were able to build, again,
- that's been 20 some years ago, we were able to build a pretty interesting building elevated up out of
- the flood zone. We built a sanctuary that seats 230, 240 tight. And we built the sanctuary, restrooms, office,
- We still have our original building that is at ground level. That part of the church has taken on water
- a couple of times, but we've been able to repair it. We started the building for children and youth,
- but we've outgrown that. We have 20 babies in our church right now that are getting ready to go into
- nursery class. We don't know where to put them. We have a lot of young adults. We're a multi-generational
- church. In the last few years,
- attendance has gone from about 160 to we're pushing 220 and more on our main Sunday service. So we have
- tried for the last seven years to find property. We had an offer
- on the land right across from Arby's in Ellitsville where they've got the apartments now. We had an
- accepted offer and we're pursuing financing when COVID hit and the bank pulled out on us. So we were
- disappointed about that. We've looked for land, I mean constantly, it's either way overpriced or there's
- just not enough acreage
- put a church. So we were ecstatic when we saw this property up for sale. We were on our way to Pichetto's
- one night and my wife said that's for sale. So the next morning we met with our realtor. We had some
- people in the church call the county, find out if there were any codes that we needed to be aware of.
- We felt like we did our due diligence then and made an offer
- purchased the land two years ago and as Chelsea said we've been working towards our financing towards
- our planning and we're very disappointed to hear that this has come up because we were just so excited
- about this this new property. I will tell you that I feel like we've done we're trying our best anyway
- to build the building as she said in a square box we are going to use the main sanctuary for worship
- slash recreation slash dinners that's what we're doing right now so we we've built as small as we feel
- like we can we have 220 right now and we are i really feel like building a 450 seat auditorium is what
- we need to do and i feel like we'll grow into that fairly quickly
- Everything I'm telling you tonight is based on our history of growth and what I feel like is our projected
- trends. And again, I say thank you for considering us tonight. Appreciate that. Go under six and a half
- minutes. I want you to hang on and receive questions. My question is,
- I read the materials and I've heard you both. Your attendance right now, 240 would be capacity, and
- you're at 220. This new facility is 450, so it's not quite doubled, not quite doubled. And the parking
- spots, which really infect impervious cover,
- is 113 parking spots for 450. That's a lot of growth from 240 to 450 with those immutable parking spots.
- So any insight onto that?
- So they had a growth of 50 attendance in the last three years, and that is with a cramped space. And
- your rate of growth is going to decline with a cramped space. People just will come and visit and not
- feel like they have the space to stay. So with still getting a growth of 50 over the past three years,
- the, I think the number that you guys were talking is within the next four years, five years, you could
- easily see 360 and possibly more. And so growing into that, getting to that 80% is there. I mean, that's
- potentially reaching that 80% in five years. They feel that the growth is there and that's in talking
- both with the church, but also
- their consultants, that's where this looks to be going. And so by putting in double the capacity, that's
- what they're planning for. And the impervious cover, the playground is maybe potential. But that would
- also affect impervious ground, I think, at some point, depending on what the surface matter was. Yeah,
- Drew, I left you a voicemail on that.
- If it's a mulch or something, my understanding was that that did not fall under impervious.
- Is that incorrect? We understand if there's a concrete or a mat. Assholes. Yeah. But with a typical
- more of a mulch playground scenario, which is what you guys are considering, we're not looking at anything
- crazy fancy, that would be pervious, correct?
- So on the screen, we have the definition for impervious cover. And it gives some examples. It says,
- impervious services shall include without limitation rooftops, gravel areas, excluding landscape
- applications, pervious pavers, asphalt or concrete, private access roads, driveways, and parking lots,
- decks, patio areas, swimming pools, and tennis courts. So it's my understanding that if it's truly mulch,
- which would be similar to a landscaping
- feature that that would not count as impervious cover, but we would want to consult the stormwater program.
- Yeah, I know on other projects I've had that that has been the determination. We've only counted the
- concrete areas in a playground, but I just wanted to kind of confirm that. Thank you. As you stated,
- the neighboring church or the church a quarter mile down the way. Yes. You said they currently have.
- 1,000 square feet of impervious. That would be Grace Church. And they are about 1,200 feet south of
- us, I believe. Yeah, yes, measurements quickly, so. Yes. I just have a question. You know, Ms. Moss,
- it's good to see you again. Have you given much consideration to
- pervious pavers. So for the ordinance, they don't help us. They don't give us any extra credit, and
- that's why we've not pursued that. I see. So. I have a staff question. When they started looking at
- this property, was the ordinance different so that they would have been able to proceed? So back before
- December 18th, 2024, which is when the county development
- ordinance was adopted. The ordinance regulated sites by building coverage in most cases.
- know what the stormwater program ordinance was like at that time in its specific detail. But we do have
- record of someone calling the office and inquiring whether or not a church would be permitted on this
- property. And back then, the zoning was agricultural residential, which was very similar to what it
- is zoned now. And the basis of the conversation was, yes, the use of a religious facility is permitted.
- but please submit a pre-design for more information about the commercial development process of that.
- And we have no record of any pre-design being submitted after that conversation, but we did not have
- the maximum impervious cover regulations as they are today, as strict as they are today back then in
- 2024. Let me ask the staff another question.
- If the building has that footprint, and I know we can fudge around a little bit with parking spots,
- not optimal, but we could. The impervious ground, I mean, that's kind of, just those two things have
- really set them above the number they need, just the building itself and the
- parking lot, correct, before the sidewalks, before everything else you need, just because of the footprint
- of that building? I don't have a line item calculation of what the percentage of impervious cover is
- of the sidewalks, what is of the hardscape, meaning parking and driveways. And we can look at the structure
- and tell what its square footage is, along with the accessory structure. So I can't give you an example
- of percentages,
- A lot of the impervious cover, looking plainly at the site plan, does come from the structures as well
- as the parking area and driveways. I'll allow you to respond to that after you allow me the answer to
- what is the material of your little island there? So the kind of big, weird island in the middle? Well,
- obviously it's meant to expand the parking and then expand the building.
- What's the material of it? It'll be grass. At this time, the intent is that that will be grass. Now
- you wanted to comment on that last? Yes. So I do have some quick calculations. So we have just under
- 14,000 square feet is allocated to the buildings. So that is the main building and the accessory.
- structure and then 47.5 is parking just the asphalt on the parking not even including the curbs the
- remaining 6100 is your curbs and sidewalks and we've gone pretty minimal on on sidewalks and stuff we're
- not going crazy on that but 6100 is that kind of remaining so the parking is our biggest but as i said the
- we're concerned about reducing that number as of the size of families that they have. And connecting
- to the existing sidewalk structure of the neighborhood is not going to be an issue? No, so we have a
- connecting sidewalk. There is intermittent neighborhood sidewalks right now, but we do connect the sidewalk
- along the north side of the parking all the way out to a new sidewalk along the road.
- of course, been in and out of style. Any other questions for staff or the petitioner? All right. Depending
- on what we have, we might invite you back up. Pardon me. At this time, is there anybody in the audience
- that wishes to speak in favor of this petition? Please come on up. Been here for a while. You know the drill.
- Please. If you could say your name for us. Justin Honeycutt.
- Mr. Could you please raise your hand. Do you attest that the testimony you're about to provide is the
- truth as you know it. Three minutes for your comments. Okay, I won't need that just I wanted to.
- talk on a couple of things. So I am a board member of the church and some of the things I wanted to
- address the attendance question. And so I didn't want to say we do have the numbers they said were spot
- on, but we do actually have more members to our church.
- than just that we have several quite a few of our older residents who don't like the crowds and they
- say you know we'll join us or we'll come to the service as soon as you know we have more room to that
- so we do have closer I don't know the exact number but it is closer to 300 ish members of our church
- as opposed to just what the attendance is on the average so I wanted to add that
- Also, there's a lot of ministries that we used to do or want to do that we're not able to do at this
- time because of our building in. We don't have the space for that at this time, so we don't have the
- kitchen anymore. We used to do some dinners and things like that for the community for the homeless.
- We want to be able to do that and serve the community at our new building, which we're not able to do
- at this time. So and we just we want to be good neighbors and and serve the community and just looking
- for the opportunity to do that.
- Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this
- petition? Seeing no one. Is there anybody online that would like to speak in favor? Raise that Zoom
- platform in his hand. All right. Seeing no one. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition of
- this petition? Anybody online wish to speak in opposition?
- Fantastic. Let's go ahead and have some discussion. Well, to me, the only real concern is the impervious
- cover. The staff has recommended approval on the side yard setback, both of those, and I'm good with
- that. The impervious service, I'm concerned about that. I mean, look at the weather out right now. The
- rain is so hard. Where does it all go?
- I have a lot of concerns about that. And I don't know how to address it because the physical footprint
- of the building and 450 versus 113 spots. I mean, we could say, gee whiz, you could have fewer spots,
- but that may be a problem going into the future. Well, my soft spot is people who start
- one set of plans and then we move the goal posts. I'd like where we put the goal posts. I think the
- impervious rules we have are very sensible and I don't like varying them, but they searched and searched
- and searched and found a piece of property which would meet their goals. And I understand not then going
- down with a set of plans because that's,
- You gotta get the money. You gotta make sure you're gonna be able to pay. I've done building projects
- at my church. I'm sympathetic with them having inquired saying it was looking positive. I'm certainly
- comfortable with the recommended approvals, but I'm also comfortable with going ahead and saying that
- started their planning and I'm willing to let them proceed on their original understanding. I'd like
- to ask Mr. Myers, at the beginning or the middle of your presentation, you mentioned some curiosity
- about a few subjects. Did the petitioner relieve any of your curiosity?
- Let me get back to that one second. So I believe in most cases, yes, because the playground was communicated
- as mulching rather than another type of surface that may be considered impervious.
- It did not mention any additional expansion currently in their plans other than the playground. But
- it is maximum curve is cover variances are not a blanket variance. They are determined with respect
- to a certain request, just like buildable area and slope variances. So if they are.
- If the variance for impervious cover is approved this evening, it's approved for the square footage
- that they are proposing. And if that they need to expand in the future, then they will have to come
- back to this board for further evaluation and another variance. Thank you. I have one question of staff.
- In the back of the church, there were some
- rain gardens that were established. Is there anything that they could do with regard to the planting
- area in the back that could mitigate rainwater runoff?
- Although I do have an environmental science background, I don't know all the particular options available
- to them with respect to the topography of the site. The terraced rain gardens sound like a very nice
- design, and I'm sure that their engineering firm has done their calculations or their math on the amount
- of rainwater that
- those areas are supposed to accommodate. But I'm sure that there are other opportunities for further
- expanding the conservation efforts. The general idea for stormwater flow is to spread it out and slow
- it down. So I'm not sure if they've entertained that idea for that back portion of the property. They
- have not mentioned anything about
- for future use of that area, whether it be for picnics or what you have. So I've invited you back to
- help clarify some of that reminder that the oath is held. Yes. Yes. Thank you. So the intent is those
- rain gardens will do some detent, like they will detain back and spread that flow out some. They will
- also be the bulk end of our treatment.
- getting any of the impurities out of that stormwater in order to meet the stormwater ordinance. But
- then I have also, and we have not gone through and fully sized anything on purpose because this is so
- critical to how this moves forward, but we have tons of space to work with. And so that very back corner,
- mostly towards the north end, is where water is currently exiting the site.
- it does make for a good area to put in additional detention, traditional dry detention in addition to
- those bioretention areas because this is in a critical watershed it does have more stringent detention
- requirements anyways so it will have kind of the most stringent in the county within those critical
- watersheds
- stormwater ordinance has gone to a set discharge per acre. And I believe the critical watersheds are
- half of what the rest of the county is. It's pretty extensive, so. Let me assume that your client is
- committed to every possible avenue, should we bang the gavel on approval. You know,
- that area from the water runoff. Yeah, so we have already had the discussions about maintenance of these
- items. I'll be providing them with full maintenance. So this will all be, you know, it'll go through
- stormwater review. We'll have to put that in just as part of the normal design for this. They won't
- get approved plans before stormwater approves it.
- And in addition to that, I have had preliminary conversations with them about what the maintenance on
- that looks like. Maintenance for stormwater management in the county now has to be recorded. So we put
- together the maintenance manual and they have to sign an agreement that is then a recorded at the courthouse
- for perpetuity of the project. So. I appreciate you coming back. Thanks. All right.
- We have any other discussion here? Are we ready to move forward? We're ready to make a motion to approve
- variances 26-32A, B, and C for the turning point church side yard setback variance to chapter 804 and
- also the impervious cover variance to chapter 804. Based on? Based on practical difficulties, would you say?
- would say. Would you? Yes, yes. Motion. I'll second it. Okay, it's been motioned and seconded to approve
- VAR-26-32A, 32B, and 32C. That's the side yard for the primary structure, the impervious cover, and
- the side yard for the accessory structure.
- A vote yes is a vote to approve all three variances with no required conditions. Guy Lofman? Yes. Pamela
- Davidson? Yes. Margaret Clements? Yes. Skip Daley? Yes. Okay, the motion is approved four to zero. Here
- you go. I think we should run away. I know
- We had decided to move the rural change to the end. But may I suggest we move? Is there any impaired?
- May we do that next time for those of us who left windows down on our car? Sure. Yes. And are very stressed
- about it. We're going to officially hear
- adjourn the meeting suspending the administrative business until our next scheduled meeting. Thank you,
- good luck, please continue to work well with staff and we'll see you guys down the road.