Board of Zoning Appeals (bza) - Regular Meeting

I'll put him in here with the

She did not want to get dressed. She was running around in her nightmare. It was It was great.

Looks like six o' to me. So, I'll call this uh meeting of the board of zoning appeals to order and uh ask for a roll call, please. Randy Jones here. John Dilberger, I'm here. Dyla Brown here. Jane Goyer here. Andy Boy, present. I trust everybody had a chance to review the minutes. I know you didn't have a lot of time, but uh hopefully you did. If you have any changes to suggest, please please let me know. Otherwise, I'd entertain a motion to accept them as written. I'll move to accept. I'll second.

Okay. We have a motion to accept last month's minutes. Roll call up when you're ready. John Dilberger, yes. Angel Boils, yes. Scarlet Brown, yes. Randy Jones, yes. Jane Boy, yes. Okay. Minutes are approved. Uh we don't have any old business tonight. There was one item on the docket, but uh the petitioners asked that it be withdrawn. So we'll go right to new business tonight. First item is docket number B A-07. Uh this is a request for a variance from setback. Whenever you're ready, Danielle. Okay.

All right. Docket number 25-V07. Hearing date December 18th, 2025. Petitioners and property owners Herald Construction for Julie and Michael Bode. Request variances from the rear setback requirement of 25 ft and from the side setback requirement of 3 ft for an accessory structure and the side setback requirements of 10 and 15 ft for a residence. Ordinance provisions section 3.6 variances and 4.6B and 4.7A standard setbacks of the Brown County zoning zoning ordinance. Location 715A Cedar Drive, Ninevea and Hamlin Township within the Cordre Sweetwater Conservancy District. The property is located on the west side of Cedar Drive, approximately 340 ft east of the intersection with Kulpa Drive. Zoning and current land use. The property is zoned lake residential LR and has an existing home and decks on the property. General findings. One, the Brown County zoning ordinance provides that the minimum distance between the rear line of structure. Sorry, my and the rear property line should be no less than 25 ft. The minimum side setback requirement provided in the ordinance for an accessory structure is 3 ft. The minimum side setback requirement provided in the ordinance for the residence is 10 ft and 15 ft. Two, since new construction must meet current setback requirements, this request requires variance approval from the rear lakeside and left north

property line and right south property line of the property. The petitioner is requesting a variance to allow construction of a deck to the edge of the north side property line with a zero setback. The petitioner is also requesting to build an addition to the house with a right side setback of 5T and a left side setback of 5'3 in three. The owners provided a letter from the health department that stated if the variance is approved, the owners have agreed to install a pump and hall system consisting of two 1500gallon folding tanks. second floor to the residence as well as extending the existing deck. The proposed new construction will extend north and south from the existing deck and east from the existing residence. Five, there are many examples of reduced setbacks for pre-existing and for new construction within the tow water conservancy district nearby. According to the site plan, the front setback will be met The board may grant a variance with respect to specific property if after conducting a hearing under section 7.2 of the Brown County zoning ordinance. It finds that one, there are special circumstances relating to the property that do not generally affect other property or other uses of the same kind in the same district and vicinity. Two, the special circumstances create hardship in that if the variance is not granted, a substantial property right that is enjoyed by other properties in that district and vicinity cannot be enjoyed. Three, the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious

to other property or uses in that district and vicinity. Summary. There are many examples of reduced setbacks within the Lake Residential Zoning District. However, the board must decide if allowing a zero setback for the deck on the side property line as well as a reduced rear setback and the side setbacks for the residents will be material materially injurious to other properties in that district and facility. Here is a photo from the GIS map. This is from the driveway. It's the one behind the tree.

Could you be more specific? [laughter] The middle tree. Gotcha. Oh, okay. The house is or is that the deck? The house is down there. Yeah. And then that's showing the side property. The deck extension requested the right side property line. So the right side property line. So that's what she's shown here. The the the house in question is on the left. Yes. Petitioner's house is on the left.

Yes. The blue one. And then that looks like the right side of the house. And then the new addition requested at the front of the home. It would go on both sides. And then there's the view from the rear. And then this shows the plan. So you see the new addition up front and then the existing deck is I don't know if my mouse is over here or not. So there's the existing deck and then it goes all the way to the property line. And then this is all going to be new as well.

Okay. Nice. And then this is the lower floor layout. The upper floor layout. Here's the aerial view. And the white is where the property is. And then this is showing all the other approved clearances in the vicinity. all the pink squares. That's the end. Thank you, Danielle. You're welcome.

Anybody on the board have any questions for Danielle about the report cards? There were 12 sent and seven returned. um petitioners here tonight. Is there anything that you wanted to add to Danielle's report? Anything you want us to know? I think so.

Okay. All right. Anybody here tonight who wants to speak for or against this petition? Don't see anybody. So, I'll bring it back to the board for us to decide. I don't have a problem with it. You do, but I do have a question. Are you representing either one of your petition? Yeah. Okay. There's a house out a home out there now is occupied. Correct. Do you do you want to come up to the microphone? So, we just record these for minutes. So, okay, just identify yourself.

Steve Herald with Herald Construction. Okay. There's someone living there now. It's a part-time residence. Yes, part-time res. Okay. So, there's an existing septic system there now. Correct. Okay. However, if the bearings is approved, then they're going to have to upgrade or change over to a dual tank hall system. Correct. Correct. That's correct. Okay. So the footprint of the new construction would impact the existing system. The existing system is not adequate for what is being done because it's an older system. Yeah. Okay.

I answer my question. Thank you. You're welcome. Thanks. Any other questions? No, I don't think so. Sit down first. thoughts on this? Um, I know we've got a couple letters here, but I'm not exactly sure where uh those apply to the other agenda item for tonight. I'm Laurel's cuz they're not neighbors and can't find them on that street. So,

so I have a question for Danielle. Um the other the other variances that are shown on there blue are any of them zero? Do you know? Sorry. I don't I can pull it up and see what it says on the GIS map.

I don't know. T the closest one I remember us dealing with was two feet if I'm remembering right. That's just one minute. I don't if if either neighbor doesn't have an issue with it, then I don't have an issue with it. At least I feel the same way. Yeah. All right. Well, I'll move we approve document number 25-d007, which is a request from a variance from a side setback.

I'll second right call when you're ready, Danielle. Okay. Andy Boils, yes. Darla Brown, yes. Randy Jones, yes. Jane Gore, yes. John Dilberger, yes. Okay, your request is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Uh the next item on our agenda tonight is uh document number 25-BA. This is another request for a variance from the setback requirement. A staff report whenever you read, Daniel.

Okay. Docket number 25-v8 hearing date December 18th, 2025. Petitioners and property owners construction for Jerry and Kimberly Mace request variance from the side step setback requirement of 10 ft for an attached garage. Ordinance provisions section 3.6 variances and 4.6B 6B and 4.7A standard setbacks of the Brown County zoning ordinance. Location 7889 Laurel Drive, Ninevea in Hamlin Township within the Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District. The property is located on the west side of Laurel Drive, approximately 540 ft west of the intersection with Cordry Drive. Zoning and current land use. The property is zoned lake residential LR and has an existing home and boat house on the property. General history one. On May 1st, 2025, permit number 25-33942 was issued to Herald Construction for the construction of a detached garage with a side step back of 6 ft from the right north side property line. A detached garage is considered an accessory structure and has a minimum setback of 3 ft from the side property lines. Two, after the project began, the petitioners decided to attach the garage to the home. The general contractor, Herald Construction, made staff aware of the change. As of December, the attached garage is completely framed and electrical work can be done. Three, staff was made aware of the setback issued by a neighbor. Staff informed the building contractor that since the scope of work for the permit had changed from detached to attached, variance approval was

required. General findings. One, the owners wish to allow construction of the new attached garage. The proposed new construction will extend north from the existing residence. Two, the Brown County zoning ordinance provides that the minimum side setback requirement for a residence is 10 ft. Because the garage is attached to the residence, it is considered part of the residence. Three, since new construction must meet current setback requirements, this request requires variance approval from the north side property line. The petitioner is requesting a variance to allow building an attached garage 6 ft from the north north side property line. Four, the attached garage will have no new plumbing and thus does not require approval from the health department. Five, there are many examples of reduced setbacks for pre-existing and for new construction within the Cordri Sweetwater Consery District nearby. Six, according to the site plan, the front and rear setbacks will be met. The board may grant a variance with respect to specific property if after conducting a hearing under section 7.2 of Crown County zoning ordinance, it finds that one, there are special circumstances relating to the property that do not generally affect other property or other uses of the same kind in the same district and vicinity. Two, the special circumstances create hardship in that if the variance is not granted, a substantial property right that is enjoyed by other properties in that district and vicinity cannot be enjoyed. Three, the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to other property or uses in that district and vicinity. Summary, there are many examples of reduced setbacks within the lake residential zoning district. The board must decide if allowing a reduced setback for the attached garage on the

side of property line will be materially injurious to other properties in that district and vicinity. And this is the view from the driveway. [snorts] That's the attached garage. I believe that's the property marker. This is the variants that are in the surrounding areas. Daniel, would you back up for one and just orient beyond that area? Do you

or I'll ask the petitioner if you'd rather? Yeah. Yeah. [laughter] Okay. Um, is the Are you the petitioners? Yes. Yes. Would one of you mind orienting me on this of what I'm looking at from above? I assume this doesn't have the garage under construction. This is an earlier photo. Correct. Yeah. Here's a driveway here. Yes. Is this supposed to be the property line? The white. Well, it's it's not the scale. Okay. Well, we're BB12 and 12. Okay. Gotcha. And this area here is our driveway.

Yes. Concrete driveway. And the garage is right about here. Okay. Gotcha. I got it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um Danielle, were you finished with your report? Yes. Okay. Any questions from the board for Danielle? So, they got an approval for a detached garage. May. Yes. Same location. Same location. It was just attached by a breezeway. No breezeway. There's no breezeway. There was no breezeway or there is one now. Okay.

Completely attached. [clears throat] It's I don't want to breezes through there. And in the original v variance that we granted it was a detached garage. I sort of remember the permit that was given to them was for a detached which would have allowed the three foot setback. That would have been okay set back. I don't I'm I'm still not seeing how the math maths. If it's detached it's further from the house. If it's attached, it's closer to the house. No, we left the point in where it was. Gotcha. [clears throat] And attached. I I wasn't following it. I'm sorry. I couldn't see it. Right.

There was a four or five foot separation, I believe, when we first got the permit. Danielle, from the photos, it seems pretty clear that this is a garage, but there's a second full second story above it. Correct. So, okay. This is adding on to the home more than a garage, right? That's a question for storage. That's where go to that picture using it for storage. Sir, could you come up to the microphone just so when they're recording minutes they can

Yeah. Actually, I I what I'd like to do is finish up with Danielle. You can stay there if you'd like. And then I'm going to ask once the board's got their questions for Danielle out of the way, I'm going to have them have you talk and they can ask you questions. Okay. So, you're talking about the second story here, right? Was the detached garage twotory? Yes. Okay. All right. So, they were approved to add this addition on the home, which looks like it includes a single car garage as well as some downstairs space and some a full upstairs space. Is that right? Let me look at the I think we have the permit in the actual packet here.

Okay. Cuz they're shaking their head know that it wasn't a part of the original plan. So on let's see and the only reason I'm exploring this just so to you guys know and everything is that we've had some letters that uh speak to this petition and I want to understand the situation from the permit that I have. It's an attached garage 24x 24 so 576 ft. It does not say anything about how many levels.

It doesn't say it's twostory edition. It just speaks to a 24x 24 garage. And then it has the neighbor to the right complaining on 11 2025 about it being three permits. Three permits for the project. Sorry to interrupt. There's three permits to the project. I can clarify if need. Okay. So So basically the first permit was a detached permit. No, that's okay. if need be. Let's see if need be first. Okay. If it is, I'll have you come up the microphone at different speed. So, am I understanding this correctly that that this is kind of an after the fact compliance? The discretion was already done. It It's done now.

Yeah. But we had a permit. They had a permit for the for a detach. No. Right. Which and three. I got three permits. So every time that it I'm building up area I think baby [laughter] you better come on here and identify yourself and and kind of fill us in on what's So my name is Matt James and I'm with Her Construction the project manager.

So in the very beginning we did come down here we got a permit for a detached garage single story which obviously set back. We didn't have to six was six foot was good. So before we started building it, they wanted to attach it. So right before we I came down here, talked to Lonnie. So do you mind if I interrupt? Yeah. So that original permit for a 24x 24 garage, was that just a garage, a single car garage with a a work area? Correct. Okay. Did they have a second story on it? Not at that time. Okay. Thanks. So then I came back in after they wanted to have have it attached. Came back, talked to Lonnie. money didn't have to be filled out any more paperwork and gave me a new permit for it to be attached. Okay. So, it's still a garage single story, but it's attached.

Correct. Okay. Got it. Further down the line, they wanted to see if they could do twotory. I came down, talked to Lonnie. Lonnie approved it and gave me a new permit for the second story on it. Okay. Got it. Three permits that happened through it. Okay. And how was it how was it a how how was it revealed that they needed a new variance because the permit type changed? A neighbor called to complain about the height I believe.

Gotcha. So I don't want to put you on the spot but Kayla reviewed this I assume. Is she comfortable with the sequence of permitting and stuff? Yes, I believe so. I only have the one permit in the packet. Okay. So, I'm I don't know about the other two that you're talking about. What I'm looking at here is basically that this action by the petitioner seems to be bringing into compliance according to item number three under our general history. Is that is that a correct assumption? Yep.

Okay. All right. So where they ran into trouble in our ordinance is when that second permit was requested to attach the garage and then they needed the variance because it's an addition instead of because the requirements differ and if it's addition to the house then correct it's worth but the petitioner [clears throat] or the GC wasn't operating without permit. They filed the paperwork and went through the process. Right. Every step, but with every correction.

Yes. And now we're here to get the variance. Got it. God. So, it seems perhaps when that second permit was issued to attach this that that's when maybe we might have caught that that would require a variance. Correct. But we didn't. And but the neighbors finally brought it to our attention. Yes. Gotcha. Gotcha. And so cards that were sent out on this, there were 20 cents and 15 returned.

Okay. Very good. Thanks. Okay. All right. Um, any other questions for Danielle? No. Okay, you're off. Any other questions for the petitioner?

Do we do for or against? What's that? We haven't really asked in favor. We haven't asked that yet. No. I was catching myself up on our order about No problem. Is there anybody here tonight that wants to speak in favor of this petition? Yes, sir. Would you come would you come up to the microphone and identify yourself and let us hear what you have to say.

My name is Jerry Mace. I am the property owner along with my wife Kim. And of course, I'm in favor of the petition. You know, if we would have been informed one of these three times that we were in violation, we would have followed the regulations we were required to. But, you know, at this point in the game to deny this variance, it's going to cost thousands of dollars to correct it if it's not granted. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks a lot. Is there anybody else here tonight who wants to speak to this petition for or against? Either way.

Yes, sir. I'm Steve Herold with Herald Construction. I just want to follow up on what these guys had said that, you know, we did our part by following the rules and, you know, things changed throughout the middle of it. There's really no where to point fingers or whatever, but it slipped through the cracks. We were trying to do everything that we needed to do to do it right. um if we need we filed for multiple variances. We did one earlier tonight, right? So, it's not like we were trying to get over on anybody to do anything, right? So, we were just doing what we needed to do and it then all a sudden the neighbor complained and even the complaint of the neighbor if we were to detach the garage, the garage is going to be in the exact same spot. There's going to be a separation between the house and the garage and nothing changes. The only thing that changes is they have less of a usable garage. The neighbors are still going to have the exact same view because we don't have to move it off the property line if it's detached, right? So, the setback is what it should be.

So, it absolutely changes nothing for them. So, at what point did the second story start to go up? Do you know the back

after we had the permit? Yeah, we have we have the permits over there. So on so on 51 to 25 we had the detached garage permit approved on May 1st. So then May 1st seems to be the same date. It's uh is that the same day?

Well, anyway, it's the it's because it's the same permit and it was changed to an attached garage. Um so I don't know what that date was on that one. It still says May 1st on the permit. And then on 10:17, we had a permit for that's when the detached garage was. Okay, I'm going backwards here. So on 101723, we had a permit for a detached garage and then it was going to be attached on May 1st. And then on whatever date, it still says May 1st, it was going to be a twostory attached garage. Yes. So sometime after May 1st,

yeah, plan changed to a twotory edition or a one story edition. Okay. Now, the permit that you're referring to on each one of those are those through the building inspector. Yeah. No, I just wasn't. The term permit can apply to a number of different things. So, I just assume that's what he was talking about, but I wanted to make sure of that. Yes. Okay. Does he make you buy each one of them? Just the first one. So there were change orders that took place or there were changes which took place during this time period. But you came in and talk with the building inspector each time to advise what the changes and modifications. Yeah.

Were being proposed. Correct. Is that correct? Correct. That is correct. Okay. So the owners were, you know, spending a lot of money on what the project is. So, it's like, how can we get the best bang for our buck? Well, they have no storage really at the lake. So, then a second story was really the ideal thing cuz it's you're already putting in a foundation for a garage. Now, all you're doing is throwing some floor joist up and the same trust system is just elevated up to the next part. So, I mean, square footage cost was pretty cheap at that point. So, square footage.

Yeah. If we can finish it. So, one of the neighbors letters says the plans for this new addition are dated October 4th, 2025. So, do you know where they got that October 4th date? Probably from the consery because the conservancy wants us to as a courtesy give them whatever permitting we have from the county. So, would the second story have started going up then after October 4th or before? The second story?

Yes. I guess my question is when it would when would it have been obvious to the neighbor that the second story was going up because that seems to me what the complaint really is about that it's blocking their view. I have to look the I have to see when we actually started building the second story. But we didn't start building anything till after we had the the letter we have from the the deers says that the neighbors called a complaint occurred on November 20th. They called you guys, I take it. Yes,

that that's according to the deaners. Yes, that's that was the date that we received a complaint. Okay. I know we keep referring to this as a garage, but essentially this is adding on living space to this house with a garage on the first floor. And you're saying storage, but it looks, you know, I I haven't seen a a floor plan or I've heard any testimony from anybody about that. This is an adding living space to the home, which is what it looks like. So, I thought Jared did say it's just for storage. That's all it is. No dear us. So, it can't be a bedroom.

Can't be a bedroom legally, right? Is it accessed only from the garage by stairs? Is that it? So it isn't accessed from the rest of the house. Okay. So it's a frog finished room above garage. Yeah, I got it. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions from the board?

Okay. Well, then I'll bring this back to us on the board to discuss. I'm uh I guess Okay. All of us on the board received a couple of letters about this petition um from neighbors. One, as I mentioned, was from the Craig and Elaine Diner. Um their concern was that uh there might be living space above that garage and it could place an additional stress on the septic system and potentially impact the lakes's health. Um, from what I'm hearing, there's no plumbing there. And if it's not accessible from the rest of the house, then I don't believe it could be used as a bedroom. So, I don't think it affects the septic system, the existing septic system. You guys feel the same way?

I would agree with that. Yeah. Uh, but I think it might be wise for us to request from the petitioner that there's a written uh guarantee that that is not going to be used for any type of a residence or residential purpose in the future. Why is that? Well, you never know. Well, right. I understand that it's finished down and it possibly could be. U so I guess I would like to have that insurance if I was uh both on this board as well as a neighbor.

Yeah. I I guess my thing with no plumbing, no closets, no I didn't hear no closets. I thought Yeah, it's just it's just a open room and the windows not meeting eress would automatically exclude it from being um it would not meet livable space. Um, but I I have a similar space above my garage that my wife won't go up, but there's a lot of room up there and we use it for storage. So, I totally understand from a design aspect. What type of stairs are going up to it? Are they full size stairs or is it a drop down? No, it's full size. Full size stair. I would think with correct.

Well, I don't think we're asking for anything that is all we're asking for. All I'm all I'm requesting and asking for is that there be uh a condition placed on if the approval goes through that it is for storage only and not for residential use. I agree Andy that presently the way property 8 is now would make any sense to be looking at it or considering that but it could change.

Sure. Um [clears throat] the uh the other letter we have is from uh Dave and Deb Heater. Um they're concerned about this. Uh they they're concerned that the the setback being less than 10 ft. uh that that that's not sufficient for routine services such as mowing or landscaping for privacy or for safety uh with respect to neighboring properties at this space itself. U petitioner or anybody else want to speak to this concern? Yeah, I can speak to it. Okay, come up the microphone if you would please.

Steve Harold with Herald Construction. Okay. And what was your question? Uh well the the heaters are concerned that that a setback less than 10 ft might not be sufficient for routine services like mowing or landscaping if they want to put landscaping between I guess privacy and safety. Those are that that's a direct quote from I would hope that they're not trying to mow the Messa's property for one thing. I mean, the property line is the property line and they have concrete, they have a retaining wall that runs down the property line. So, if the heaters were going to do anything, they would need to do it on their property, right? So, I

north. Yes. Yeah. That just doesn't make sense to me for why they would say that. Okay. besides they just don't want to look at it possibly, but you know,

well, they do mention uh views. But yes, so views around the lake are if you buy back in a cove, you're going to save thousands, tens of thousands of dollars. And everybody has the right to build what they're capable of building. And if it blocks your view, whether it be a house edition, a boat house, then that's the chance you take by not spending the money to be out on the main lake where no matter what anybody does, they're not going to block your view. So, location, location, location, and location is pretty much the situation on that. I mean, nobody would want a highrise built next to their house. But if it was legal to do, then everybody should be able to do what they want to do on their own property, right? Just like the heaters would want to be able to do whatever they can.

Well, no, that's that's a noble sentiment, but actually it's not true. The heaters can't do what they want to do on their property. Well, no. No. No person can do whatever they want on their property within their Thank you. Right. That's that's what I meant. That's less that I think we could the regulations rules. I think I heard either you or the petitioner say that if this variance isn't granted that doesn't mean you're going to pull back to the 10-ft setback. Instead, you're going to detach this from the house and leave it at the same 6 ft from the property line. Correct. Is that correct? Yes. Or 3 ft from Oh. Oh,

yeah. Or we could extend it to 3 ft and get it even closer to Yes, you could. Yes. Yes, you could. I assume that if you applied for a permit to do that, it would probably be granted because it's within the ordinance. Correct. Right. All right. I understand. Okay. Thank you. Jane, how are you feeling about this? Um, how are you thinking about it? Let me say that. I I don't have a problem with it.

Okay. I mean, I think it's if uh if they were going to make that a living space, they'd have to have water and sewer and we have to have it hooked up. But, uh I think the likelihood of that is is okay. All right. Anybody else thoughts that been expressed already? I I would I would make a motion if you're ready for that.

Why? I I'm actually in agreement with Randy that I think it I would like if I approve this, I'd like to approve it with that condition that this not be used for living space. The petitioner agrees not to use this as living space. That would be a condition that I would I I really wouldn't want to prove if we don't have some kind of written documentation declaration that you are not going to be using it for um residence and just storage as you've indicated with that I I have no but would would that be acceptable to you?

Yeah. Okay. What if sewers are brought in or something? Does that go away or what? What? I'm sorry. Sewers eventually come to the lake. Then what happens, right? Well, I guess. Do you want an on there answer off the record? Well, whatever works best for you. There's so many good ones I could say. [laughter] Leave them alone. I mean, this is a big investment for us. Yes. And we're just trying to get a crush built. Trying to do the right thing. We thought we were doing the right thing. Yeah.

No, I think you have been doing the right thing. I I think you have as far as from your perspective, you've done everything you're supposed to do and you've gotten the permits you're supposed to get. I understand that. Three times. Yum. So, I guess I didn't understand you that you would be willing to go ahead and provide a statement or declaration that you do not intend to use it for um residence or occupation. It's storage, correct? It will be storage. Okay. All right. Will be done in the motion. Well, it'll be Yes. Yes. All right. Well, can I ask a question?

Yes, of course. Um, I'm just following up with what Jerry said with like sewers or a different septic system in the future. How would you undo the the what would be the procedure and would anybody even care? Well, I think a lot of the houses in Brown County and Sweetwater are limited right now bedroom capacity by septic. If sewer is brought in, then those I'm sure could be looked at and could be petitioned to to change back. Or in this case, I don't even know that you would need you could file a petition to vacate that condition.

Yeah, that it would be a relatively simple. It would be less simple than getting three building permits to have that removed. It may need to go before the board though, I would think. Right. Right. Really? [clears throat] IC rules would change with being a Sue, right? But then at that point, you're also going to have to put in windows that eress. You're going to have to have a closet. You're going to have to have code stairs that are meeting code and handrails and like there's so much more that goes into it at that point. Yeah.

Okay. uh if that type of service wasn't to come available out there, I mean, you can always come back and for reconsideration uh as to if you wanted to turn that into a a second story list. Okay. So, it's not it's not an ideal at that point of what we're what they're going to sign, you know, you can you can always ask and come back. We're just saying until that time that what we're looking at and reviewing, we've been told is just for storage. So it we want to make sure that that is is what we're acting on. Okay. All right. Well, I I'd entertain a motion from either one of you, gentlemen.

I would, but you figure it out. I would be willing to make a motion uh with regards to 25-v8 uh to approve as petition with uh additional by line that states the finished space above garage will remain storage and not living space. Okay, I'll second the motion.

Okay, we have a motion to approve document number 25-08 with a single condition, which is that the second story be used for storage and not be used for living space. Roll call vote when you're ready. Okay. Darla Brown, yes. Randy Jones, yes. Jane Bourne, yes. John Dillberger, yes. Andy Boils. Yes. All right. Petition's been approved. Thank you.

Dave, you have any uh any you guys have a merry Christmas? You too. Thank you. Uh no reports. That's good. Yeah. Thank you. No news is good news at the end of the year like this. What's your time? All right. Anybody else have anything to uh is this an appropriate time to this planning commission issue all the case we have? Sure. Is this appropriate time to ask about that? Uh [laughter] depends on what the question is. Well, the next case.

Yeah. or is it are we we haven't haven't done anything on that yet. We haven't or they We haven't We haven't. Yeah. I I don't know that they've done anything. I don't think they I haven't heard um I just heard that the neighbors Joe Nixon and one of the neighbors had a discussion about the property line the other day. I'm sure that Okay. Were there [snorts] referees involved? Were the police? No, I think I think everybody uh behaved rather well, but uh I was going to ask you the other night planning commission meeting and it slipped my mind. So, I was just wondering where the what the status is on.

I did I did get a call from an attorney and a different attorney that's representing the neighbors and wanted to know the an update on what what had happened and so forth and what the the county's position was. I told her that we're expecting something to be done uh which could include Mr. Nixon filing for a subdivision which would be the easiest thing for him since he's already he already basically has his plan done and if he meets the requirements you know he would get his approval. That's it totally up to you. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. I guess Randy and Jane have already heard me say this, but in case this is my final meeting, it's been an honor and a pleasure. I've enjoyed serving with you guys. So, do you mind if I ask if you ask the commissioners to reappoint you or express an interest in being right? Yeah. Oh, great. Okay. you know, I'm I'm interested as long as I'm needed and, you know, but I'm certainly not I'm not unwilling to step out of the way and let somebody else do it, too. I hope [laughter] I hope you are. You've been very good at it. No doubt. Is that on the record? Yeah. [laughter] Merry Christmas.

Yeah. Merry Christmas. You definitely give a local mint to it, Andy, that I have. You even know people's dogs and names and everything. I was going to say, yeah, you know the county like you know the back of your hand, right? Everything. Everybody. All right. Well, um I move we adjourn this meeting. Sorry. All those in favor. Oh, no. Sorry. Roll call vote. You can do whatever you want to. I was falling into old. Okay. Rea Jones, yes. Jane Gore, yes. John Dillberger, yes. Andy Boils, you. Darla Brown, yes. This meeting is a jury.