Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]

[music] [music] [music]

[music] [music] Yeah, if you could. Um, Ly, can you turn your camera on? I'm working on it. Okay. Did he get sworn in by somebody? Uh, he was sworn in at city hall. Okay. That's what I thought, but y make sure. Okay. We'll get technology sorted out as on the fly.

All right. Good evening everybody. We're going to open the Columbus City Board of Zoning Appeals regular January meeting this time. Roll call, please. Kathy Gardner, Hector here. John Kissinger here. Wild here. Dennis Warick here. All right, I guess next up is um I guess the introduction of our new member.

So we have Lyall who was appointed to fill Tony's seat. Tony's term was up. So Lyall is the new Tony. So, okay. Uh, he had a already pre-existing conflict with this meeting, so he wasn't able to come tonight, but he has been able to, uh, join electronically. Hopefully, you can get your camera turned on, but uh, welcome. Welcome, L.

Well, it gets that figured out, we'll have a face to a name. Okay. Next, um we're on the election of officers for 2026.

Chair Kathy is working on joining us. I make the motion for John Kissinger to be retained as chairman. Second. I accept. I move the nominations be closed. We have to adise. That's just one at a time. All right. That's fine. Uh we have to have a roll call vote. Yes. So Kathy, I'm here. Yeah. Hello. Hello. Finally. Hi guys. Hi.

Can't see anybody. Looks like it's coming up. Yeah. Kathy, can you turn your camera on? Lyall, are you still there? There's Kathy. So, I'm not sure why it's not.

Yeah, you're right. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I think we're ready for that roll call. We have a roll call, though. motion. So, John Kissinger has been nominated to repeat as chairman. I vote yes. Yes. Accept. Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Now, we have a a vacancy for vice chair. Do I have any nominations? I nominate Kathy. [laughter] I'm not sure what said I. So, we have Dennis. I would accept it, but I think Kathy was nominated ahead of me. So, if sheath was did not accept it.

I so much appreciate the nomination. However, since I'm um enjoying the sunshine at this time, [clears throat and cough] all right, we have nomination for Dennis. Have any other nominations? I close the nominations and call for a vote. I'll second it. Okay.

Sorry, my [laughter] cat. Yes. John, yes. Yes, Dennis. I suppose [laughter] I too many times. All right, moving on. Uh, for previous minutes, I don't think we have any that are ready.

Okay, so oath of the witnesses. So, anyone here tonight that's going that wants to speak, um, our legal will are you in? And so if you can stand up and raise your right hand. Anyone who's going to speak in favor or in opposition of the request today, please stand. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury? The testimony we're about to offer will be the truth. If so, answer. I do. You may put your hands down and sit down. Thank you, folks. Thank you. [clears throat and cough] Do we have any old business?

No. Okay, new business. We have 26- C-B1 Lisa Leer. Uh set side setback at 1388 East Side Mo Road.

Uh sure thing. So, bring up the slides here. I'm gonna turn my cameras off so the screen a little bit better. Uh so 26 CV one is located at 1388 East Cider Mill Road uh zoned R1 single family residential. This is in the extr territorial jurisdiction. Uh overall acreage for the property is just under five acres comprised of parcel a quote unquote a small acre subdivision which was reported in 1979 as well as a unplatted parcel of about the same size as that parcel A. Uh what is uh subject what is the subject for tonight is the construction of a 30x40 pole building uh which is under construction. uh permit was obtained back in August. Uh as submitted, setbacks were to be 10 feet from the south property line and five feet from the east property line. South south property line is a little odd in that it has a jog in it. You'll see in a minute. Uh but those were the proposed setbacks. Uh setback inspection and postal inspection at at that time. Uh building inspector based upon the information that was available on site at the time. Uh the sephex looked uh compliant after it was framed. It became apparent uh especially to the adjacent property owner uh that the setbacks were not as proposed and especially uh to their interest uh the property owner to the east felt that uh it was closer than the 5t that was proposed. uh that caused us to notify the

petitioner that a survey was necessary to determine uh exactly where things uh were located. That survey is done. You have copy of it. I'll show it here in a second. Uh the setback as it is currently is 1.4 ft from the east property line as surveyed and a negative setback to the south of two and a half feet. the property owner to the south uh is willing to swap land uh to rectify that uh encroachment leaving the variance request only uh for the east uh that 1.4 4 foot uh set back to the east. Uh keeps in mind that the code minimum for accessory structures in egg and residential districts is 5 ft. Going to reference materials highlighted in blue is the subject's property petitioner's overall property. uh closer view uh because it does come into play somewhat when I talk in the staff report about practical difficulty uh the topography of the land as well. And you can see uh this ridge running through here of um high ground and then you do have slopes either direction away from that ridge. The uh out building question is located here which I'll show you in a second. The slope going this way I believe this that report mentions that there is about that winds up being about 15% slope north northward east and west it's quite a bit flatter.

So this is the survey uh that was and thought plan that was submitted done and submitted. Um you can see the uh skewed angle of the uh building. Uh the northeast corner is the closest uh substantially closer uh than the southeast corner uh from that east property line. Uh and you'll mention that this does have a little bit of an unusual jog in it. Uh at some point in the past uh the property owner to the south acquired this area here, this rectangle from uh the petitioner uh yeah petitioner's predecessor in order for them to build this garage close to the property line. Uh and now as I mentioned there is a proposed land swap of these two parcels back to this uh southern land owner in order to reconcile this. uh best as I could do. I believe our GIS is a little off. Uh which is as you know not too unusual. Uh but the survey overlaid on top of the aerial and as you can see north and south you have a pretty steep uh slope. Um also affects this property the south. You can kind of understand why they wanted to push that garage to the north when they built it. East and west though much flatter. Um and uh sliding the building either way, east or west, uh is pretty equivalent. going into the review criteria. Um

the it was pointed out or a question was asked of me. Um exactly the review criteria. Uh the review criteria that I typically include in the staff report is that which is in uh Indiana code 3674 918.5. Uh the three items there at the top. uh that is taken straight from the Indiana code. However, it was pointed out that the zoning ordinance uh does have additional or alternative perhaps is the better word criteria in uh section 12.07A. Uh that those criteria, it's my understanding, actually come from a much older state statute. They date from the 1950s or60s. uh and because they don't address the same things that the current state statute does other than uh potentially substituting unnecessary hardship for practical difficulty. That's why I have typically used the Indiana code. Um however, because the question was raised, I wanted to make sure you guys all knew where we stood. Uh and so uh give you guys the whole gamut of what the code and state code both say. Uh so uh going through um well just take it from the top down. Uh approval will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals, general welfare. Uh staff doesn't feel that this would be particularly injurious to public health safety and morals. Uh while the reduced setback could potentially have some impact on um the light and air available

to the adjacent property to the east, uh it is not a particularly tight uh situation. It is wooded right now. The home that's on that property is about 200 feet away. Um wouldn't necessarily create a significant fire hazard. That said, general welfare definitely could be injured if we don't have a practical difficulty identified that is specific to this property or we'll get to this in a second, a hardship that is specific to this property. Um, and we've discussed that concept before. Use and value of the Jason property uh would not be uh affected in a substantially adverse manner. staff feels that uh um the use of the surrounding area probably would not be uh substantially and adversely affected. Uh it could be affected if there's uh a plan for a structure near that west property line. This being close to the east property line, if the adjacent property uh were to construct something uh near that line, uh this could affect that. um whether it's substantial or not I don't know definitely would be adverse though uh value again the effect on value as it is right now uh the reduced setback is pretty unapparent so value is largely based upon appearances so that's not likely however if the value is judged upon a perceived need to construct building near this uh reduce setback then yes it it could affect it again whether it's substantial or not definitely in question a strict application of the ordinance

will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property um that's what the state statute says it does provide in italics the ability to establish a stricter standard than practical difficulties Which if we jump down to 12.07, if we consider a stricter standard to be uh unnecessary hardship uh which many places do have that as a alternate uh stricter standard uh then we'd be looking at that. So to explain the difference between the two uh neither term is explained in state statute uh despite the state statute using practical difficulty. So I borrowed a couple definitions from my colleagues down at the city of Franklin. uh practical difficulty. Uh their definition, a difficulty with regard to one's ability to improve land stemming from the regulations of the ordinance. A practical difficulty is not a quote unquote hardship. Rather, it's a situation where the owner could comply with regulations within the ordinance, but would like variance from the standards to improve his site in a practical manner. For instance, and this is actually kind of a a good example since we have had cases similar to this, person may request a variance from a setback due to a large tree which is blocked from the only location that would meet the development standards for a new garage. So, it is something that is definitely related to the property that the petitioner did not create on their own. out of self-imposition. Uh but that precludes them from being able to uh meet the terms of the code in an efficient manner and a practical manner

that is as opposed to unnecessary hardship which is defined in chapter 3 in many words that I am not going to read because it's a very awkward definition but it's there. in chapter 13 of our code. Again, I however use the city of Franklin's definition for reference because it's a little easier to read. A hardship which is subject to relief by variance uh such as those that result from exceptional topographic conditions, exceptional physical conditions of partial land or other characteristics of the property that are unique from those of adjoining property in the same zoning district. hardships which are self-imposed resulting from errors in judgment on the part of the property owner or perceived or based on a perceived reduction economic gain shall not be considered unnecessary hardships. Uh so that's you can tell that's a higher standard than practical difficulty. You [clears throat] definitely have to show something that is exceptional and not just difficult. So going back to Uh my comments on this criteria either criteria uh you do have some difficulty uh because of the slope. Um that slope goes north and south. It seems that it likely did create a difficulty in citing the building farther north and likely was a a reason for the encroachment to the south. However, that encroachment is not subject of the variance tonight. Subject is the east west variance where you have a lot flatter terri uh terrain and I don't feel that that's a practical difficulty let alone an unnecessary

hardship uh because it could be shifted either way. Uh there is uh the entire site is very heavily wooded. Um there could be some practical difficulty in that you can't tell exactly where the property line is because it's woods. Uh but again that's [snorts] [clears throat] I'm not sure that really qualifies even as practical difficulty um in terms of what we're looking for uh again let alone the higher criteria of unnecessary hardship. Um do you feel that these difficulties uh or hardships could have been identified by the uh petitioner prior to the start of construction? Um should have been uh better identified by the time it got to laying out the building. uh maybe there were some um on the-fly changes that were made or something but in the end staff does not feel that this meets the criteria either criteria practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. Um so with that uh let me see I think that covers yeah that covers all of my slides. So with that, any questions for me?

I just have one guess I could ask right now. when um the petitioner came in and obtained the road permit in August as far as the site plan that they provided in order to identify the um setbacks. Was that as per a survey or was it um they use an aerial photograph or do you know what was to determine um this is the site plan that they gave when they when the permit was issued? Uh, I believe it was an aerial photo with uh the dimensions of the seax written on it. Uh, Amanda is looking something else up at the moment.

Um, so she can she can grab that, but I believe it was an aerial with dimensions [clears throat] uh indicated. Uh, yes. proposed building. Correct. What does that look like?

You want to get up there? So basically just the way it's I just curious if it was still the same angle. Okay. Okay. Does anyone else have a question for Nathan?

Hearing none open it to the petitioner. um kind of fills in any other information that they might have left out. Right here at the podium and please state your name and your address. I don't know if you guys can see.

You want to be Vanna and hold that board up? Really? Yeah. I never preferably over there where the camera is. Ah, I see. To to Miss Leler's left side would be awesome. Miss Leer's left side, which is aiming aiming towards the board. Okay. This camera. No, no, this camera. [laughter] What camera am I pointing these on? I believe this one's behind me. This one [laughter]

right here. Okay, just stand somewhere and I will get the camera zoomed in. Yeah. So, um Okay. So, my apologies for the technical issues here, but uh do want to make sure that they can see everything. Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. Okay.

So, my name is Lisa Leler and I live at 1388 East Cider Mill Road here in Columbia City. Um, the first thing I want to do is apologize everyone here tonight. Um, none of the situation was done deliberately or done with any kind of intention of causing any harm. Um, I bought the house four and a half years ago to start a new life. Um uh at the time I fell in love with the home but I did not foresee the challenges and hardships of living in a house located on a very narrow ridge. I call the front yard um the front cliff and the backyard back cliff. Um the back cliff has been slowly eroding away for years. The dirt is washing away from under the sidewalk driveway and patio area. We are currently working on with an excavator to bring in more dirt before the erosion gets any worse. A few few years ago, we did apply for and were granted a permit to build a full building and a pond on the north two and a half acres. Um, but we found out the soils considered muck and will not hold water for a pond. Um, not only is the soil muck, but the neighbors pond across the road kept flooding the area, making it unsuitable to build a whole building. Between us and our young adult children, we have five vehicles, a large work truck, a 14 foot trailer, a utility tractor, a small boat, and two jet skis. We have been parking in the grass. We have been parking in the landscaping. We've been parking on the hills, and we've been parking at the neighbor's house. Um, we just don't have any room on the hill. U we have steep hills on three sides of the house and flooding in the front and the only place left that we had was to build on the east side. It's embarrassing to come home at night and see that our property is littered with

our stuff and have nowhere to put it. the we measured I knew when we had that area we knew it was going to be tight and we knew that we were going to have to angle it. Um we measured 10 ft from from the east side to set the back corner southwest corner of the building. GI GIS shows that the east property line runs north to the middle of 150 East Road. We measured foot from that invisible line that runs north from the northeast corner of the building. The post holes were dug and approved. The building was framed with roofing and over half metal siding when our neighbor to the east, Michael Wright, questioned the property line. He thought the setback was supposed to be 10 ft. I told him that I thought the same thing, too, until the city planning commissioner said it only needed to be 5T. Looking at the property marker, he agreed that we appear to be 10 and five feet from the shared property line. However, during the discussion, it did appear we were over on the southern property line with Dave and Amy Chorus. The underground irrigation system for our house runs through this area and we were told by Dave Chorus when we first moved in that that area our pool barn is currently sitting on is our property. We have always maintained and mowed it as our property. I did agree with the city at that time to have a survey done to verify the actual southern property line with the cortis. According to the survey, we were over the southern property line property we thought we owned and in the five- foot setback on the northeast corner with the rights. We have spoken with Dave and Amy Cororus about the situation. We both have agreed to an equal trade of 496 square foot of land on top of the ridge

for 496 square foot at the bottom of the ridge. We both have signed a memorandum of understanding agreeing to the trade. My intention has never been to lie, deceive, or cheat anyone, especially any of our neighbors. I want to love my house, but with all the steep hills, erosion problems, muck soil, flooding, parking problems, and limiting space, I am truly beginning to hate it. We have been honest and upfront and have done everything we can to correct this situation. We recently had to pay over $3,000 to have a semi- delivery truck pulled up the hill after it got stuck on the property. I do not see how we can get any type of heavy equipment back there to move the back corner of the building a few feet without have to take out trees or severely damage damaging the shared driveway with the choruses. It is only the back northeast corner of the building and not the entire building that is in the setback area. It is still on our property and not across the property line. At this point, I do not know how much more stress and disappointment I could take. I am truly sorry about the situation. No decision was ever made to deliberately or intentionally cause anyone harm. I respectfully request that the variance please be approved due to the hardships of assessing the property, the location of the property, and the layout of the land. Thank you. I'm sorry. Does anybody have any questions?

Um, [clears throat] one I guess if he wasn't sure where the property line was going forward with with it, why didn't you ask for a survey to verify that? Dave Dave and Amy had a survey done. They just had acquired 0.19 acres from the farmer behind them. So we knew that this property the east property line was and that's what we measured from. It was already there. So then how did you get so close to it if you I guess that's I I don't know. I can't explain that.

Is there a reason why it was angled? Because if it was straight with the line. It would literally face the neighbor's place, not ours. So, we had to angle it so it faced more of our if the north I guess. Yeah. With that north north side of the building to be

this is where it faces our house here. So, if it was not angled, it was going to be you can see where it was already angled, but we had to angle it. face our property instead of facing theirs. So, we had it put it in there as best as we could. If you can see this picture here, this is the property before the project. Our house is here. So, if we did not want it facing this way, we wanted it more we can have the house there

or so you know what I mean. All right. Yeah. Yeah. I I mean I guess just uh rotating it enough so you did have the five foot would have been I guess if if the property line was there. Um so when they came out and reserveyed it, did they put another stake just north of that norththeast corner? Is that how you determine using No, they did not put a new stake. So, how did you determine? I don't know how they determined, Nathan. Do we know how they determined it was only one foot 16 in the

1.4 1.4 uh they're the licensed surveyor. So, yeah. Okay. They're the ones that actually Okay. GPSed it. Okay. There's a survey stage. That's okay. I know everybody will have an opportunity to speak once they identify themselves. Understood. [clears throat] Does anybody else have a question for the I have a question. Um so bought the property there. Is that correct?

That's correct. And I I looked at that the survey actually went and printed all the material off. So I didn't really look at it and read it and reading um all of the uh description and technical information of survey it referenced um the fact that they had referred to surveys. So apparently I don't know and it doesn't disclose exactly who surveys um that they were um you know looking at and making determinations um during their process um you know whether it was rights fores or exactly what it did the fact that they did um have surveys that they um you know that they were able to look at in order to help determine the location of the property. Um, another question that I guess I have is, um, at what point in the construction, um, Miss Le did you actually find out that there was possibly a discrepancy? At what point was it, um, after the posts were set? Was all the framing done? I mean, exactly at what point did you discover that there's a problem? When all when the framing was done, the metal was on the roof and about half of the metal on the building, a little over half.

The only thing they needed to do is where the cars pulled into the front and a little bit of the sides and part of the sides. Is there a concrete floor on this building?

Not. No, not yet. We totally um we um at that time they only had we had the the guys who were building it, they had about three hours worth of metal to put on it. I said just go ahead and finish it. Um at that point because they wanted to move on to their next job. Um the three hours of metal that was left to put on the rest of the building. Um but we had we plan on do plan on putting uh cement in it. Um but yes, we totally have put that off. We've stopped any of that at this point.

Okay. All right. Is there overhangs on the back side? Do you know do you know how how far they extend out past the building? A foot.

Okay. Does anybody else have any questions for petitioner? No questions. Thank you.

Is anyone else here uh to speak on behalf of the petitioner? Is anyone here to speak against petitioner. Please come to the podium and state your state your name and address, please. Good evening. I'm attorney Allison Wright from Hobaski LLP. The address is 110 East Berry Street, uh, sweet 101 Fort Wayne, Indiana 46802. I represent Michael and Anne Wright, who are the owners of the adjoining property of East at 1690 East Mill Road.

Thank you. Um we did submit a letter in opposition to the variance but should have been provided to all the board members as well as the petitioner. Um so I'll just touch on a few of those points as well as um Mr. Vilar also covered a lot of things so I won't I'll try not to be redundant. Um so just to touch on a few of the criteria and then afterwards Mike right would like to say a few words. First as to the first criteria uh the variance I would add is injurious to the public interest in the general welfare does not produce a substantially u just result um in this case there was a permit issued that permit had a 5ft setback requirement the structure was built and without ascertaining the location of the true the true location of the property line that could have been done with a survey at the time the surveyor was subsequently able to do so though that was impossible to do. And then after construction had commenced, after the fact, the variance is being sought. Um while sympathetic to Miss Leler's um position, approving a variance under such circumstances encourages property owners to build first and ask later when really the zoning code and this process is intended for people to do their due diligence upfront. Um, it would undermine the equal and fair enforcement of the zoning code and it creates a dangerous precedent that puts this board in a bad position going forward for future property owners who are expected to comply in advance um and ask these important questions before they commence construction. Secondly, the requested variance does affect the right property in a substantially adverse manner. As you can see from the drawing, it is very close to the property line. um and granting this variance would create a a very high likelihood of ongoing trespass for maintenance and access. There was in fact repeated instances of trespass during the construction which prompted Mr. Wright to to look into this matter and ultimately resulted in uncovering this issue. Um so that's an issue as

well as there is also concern over the rights having their ability to use and enjoy their own property impeded. They have their own plans for the property where they to put their building in that area. it's going to be very very close to this. Um, and of course they'd be expected to comply with these setback requirements. So I mean granting a pro a variance that forces the adjacent property owner to tolerate future trespass is certainly going to adversely affect the use and the value of the property both for the rights and for any prospective buyer. And lastly, um, as I know Nathan went into great detail on the, um, undue hardship and practical difficulties here. Um, I would agree there is neither is present. Um, the property lines could have and should have been determined prior to construction. As I mentioned before, um, this is not exceptional circumstances and even the topographical challenges do not pertain to the east west location u, but rather the north south. So there's really no practical difficulty and a self-created hardship cannot be the basis of granting a variance under the code or NDM statute. Um so of course had this variance been requested prior to construction, it undoubtedly would be denied. Uh we respectfully request that it be denied now as well. Um and so I will hand it off to Mike to say a few other words and thank you. Thank you.

[clears throat]

My name Mike Wright. Michael Wright. Address 1690 East Cider Mill Road, Columbia City, Indiana 46725. Uh my wife and I and own the property east d east of the lepers property and have for 40 years. Um, we're not here to object to her building a a building on on her property that's compliant. I have not a problem with that. Uh we're here because that building will affect the value of my property. And the biggest thing is you can't maintain that building, can't even build the building without trespassing. And [clears throat and snorts] not only have has that been done when they put the pad in took skid loader and on my property and just knock down the saplings. Uh, and it's a perfectly clear path. [snorts] So, you can say it was there there was no obstructions there. Matter of fact, it buried the survey stake that it was was existing that you could we you could go back. They just did a survey on the the other neighbors and you can go back and I can I can and Nathan did same thing. go back to that

survey fresh state and then when they located the existing survey state which I didn't know was there because it's it's basically basically the line there isn't there is an old fence there fence is pretty much history but the tost are still there and the tree line and the tost it looks to me like they were a little bit on their on their side not that far. I mean, and I always reference that that property line by them teos. Now, I didn't use it for anything legal, but it's like it was there when I when I bought the property. And so it was like, you know, I knew it was closed and uh so there is somewhat of a marking. Nathan went back there, he eyed it. Uh once the other once that the surveys stake up close to the building was identified, you could go back in the back and you could eye it. And by eye, I I said a foot. But before that when I when I seen this this you know this wasn't looking right uh I was going by the fence and I'm and that's what that's what where the flags came and and at that point the building's on my property. So it's like, well, we can all eye it. We can all guess, but there's that's not, you know, we got to do something. There was no survey, and that's what I was pulling my hair out about. It's

like, well, how can you lay out a building if you don't have nothing to pull from? I mean, you [clears throat] got to be It's like, what? I don't I don't that's the part I don't I don't I can't even grasp. It's like well you can't lay something out if you don't have a hard a hard line. You know how you even going to set up batters? How you It's like I it's like that's not my fault. I mean and and nothing has changed in that area. The only thing that's changed is what they've changed by excavating and whatever. So, it ain't like, well, something changed and we had to build it. Like, it's like, no, nothing's changed. Lived there for seven years. They they surely knew the property. I mean, I've lived there 40. I know it like back by hand. and and uh if there was any communication, I could have I would have been glad to, you know, say, "Hey, uh I think the property line's here." It would have came up way before this. And and and it's like I said, I do not have a problem with them building a building. I don't I I was it actually I would be happy that you got your building but not when no not when when it will for one thing they can't maintain it. You got to you got the building you measure that the corner of that building you measure it to my property line 16 and 12 in 1.4 four

one foot overhang brings it down to four. If they put a gutter on it, they're right on the line. You know as well as I do, you can't set up a ladder. I mean, it's a tall building. You can't set up a ladder on that building and not be trespassing, which it's not. It is that because then I'm liable if they fall off the damn ladder on my property. So it's like I got I I'm it just the she's got all she's got a ton of room to build that building. That's what really gets me is she has got a ton of room that that building could have been moved to the west. I mean there it's like so it's there's a little there's a little bit of something there that I I can't quite identify why why it happened. But the impact of of that building and the use, it's like that's where I would build my especially since there's a barn there now. It's a perfect place for me to build a shop because then then it's all you utilized. Well, if I I it's like if I util utilize my property, I'm going to put 5 foot off the off of the property line. You know, I I that's where it goes. And so now I build

a shop. I build it to code 5 foot off the property line. then their building is five foot for my building and it should be 10 ft. But it's not and that bothers me. I mean that that will affect the value if I if I were if what about if they sell their place and then I got a new neighbor that he don't know you know he's he's going to pay a half million dollars for a property and find out that he can't even walk around that property without trespassing. And we all know how that goes. First it's an inch and then it's the whole mower. And then it's like, well, kind of be nice if it was 20 ft up in there. And and that don't set well with me because I have I I like my wildlife. I bought that woods for a reason. It's deer haven. And there's the what they call grown up is food. [cough] It's berries. [clears throat] It's for the wildlife. And not that that building is going to affect the wildlife except it's now knocked down. And and it's I I it just bothers me. It's like what what they think wouldn't what what somebody else would consider well that shouldn't affect your property I think different and if somebody walks

walks that like I okay say we we sell the property our property somebody walks that line and you know not not everybody but if you got somebody with my mentality I'm going to be like well here's the property line that building's a foot off. It's It's closer if you want to add the overhang, which I did. I brought it up, too. And And uh so cuz the survey is saying 16 and 12 in. I'm saying, "Well, what about the overhang?" I mean, so what if I do that? My building would be touching their building. it it's like so I'm probably rambling. I don't want to ramble.

Appreciate your concern.

So that's that's where I'm at with it. That's why it bothers me and and and the fact that I can't control somebody trespassing really bothers me. When I went back there and I seen what was going on, I I And that's the other thing. I I do not I do not go I'm not over there bothering nobody, you know? It's not like it's kind of even wonder if that's how it all happened because I'm I'm not to be, you know, I don't go over there. I don't have no need to go there. I have dealt with the same thing that she has. If if you're saying the hill and the wash out and the muck, it was there. I mean, it's like it's muck. It's beautiful dirt, you know? It's best dirt you could dig up and put in your flower pot.

It's like, so that's an asset to me. Can you like sum up your your Okay. your rant. I appreciate it though.

Okay. So, this ain't a small issue to me. I I think you probably you understand that. And uh there's not there's not enough room with that building there to do maintenance. It there is not without trespassing. And I'm concerned with f the future, you know. I'm I'm con concerned with future owners. I'm concerned with if I would sell my property, what would you know if you It's like, well, what what's going on there? And uh and and the other thing is if if I build a a building, which I have I talked to my wife about that. It's like I I have options of where to build it, but it's like I told her it's like I I think I'm going to build it in back, which is out to the side, which you know, it's not that I'm going to build a pole bar. I probably won't. It'll probably be a it'll probably be a footing and a a stick frame and that I can heat, you know, and uh

Well, that's that's that's up to you, obviously. Right. But it's like You know, it's like I I've thought about this, right? But that's different. That's a different time and subject. Okay. Another thing, it didn't have to be like this. It didn't have to be like this. That's the thing. It's like there it didn't have there's plenty of room. If it was built correctly, we wouldn't be here. And I didn't read nothing. I would wrote that.

That's all right. You didn't play. I appreciate it. So, I'm just asking the board to apply some rules here that apply to me, apply to everybody else that's going to build a building or do any kind of construction and protect the rights of the joining property owners and and the way the code that's why the codes are there. I know that's why the codes are there. It's like that's why it's to protect everybody. And uh thank you for listening to me and

your time. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Is there anyone else here to speak on against the petitioner hearing? None. close the floor and open it for discussion or a motion. Kathy, you got any?

I do. So, you know, I I um you know, I empathize with Mrs. on the issues that she's having with the property that she purchased. Um I I have very big concerns about the fact that the um permit was issued and issued without um a proper survey. I've always been an advocate for surveys, people having surveys when they purchase their property. You couldn't ask for a more important document than a survey of your property to know exactly where your property lines are. Um it concerns me that a permit was issued based upon photograph with um drawing building and setbacks. Um I'm concerned also too about the fact that the builder in um laying the pad um encroached and um had to have seen issues when he was living and preparing the site for the really concerns me. Um it concerns me too that from that northeast corner. Um there is no room to maintain um the property there or to do any kind of repairs to the building. Um it's unfortunate however you know and know there's some cost involved. I I just think that the building size needs to be reduced taking off that north side of the building. ing the size of the building in order to those are just concerns that I have. Also too, I think that the um rights

attorney um did a good job in putting this out um in the letter as to um how this variance does not meet um the city zoning or requirements and um state codes. Ly, do you have any comments?

Um, being new to this, I I would also question the lack of a survey done up front just with that size structure. But, um, understand you know the difficulties as well. But that's something that I kind of wondered as I was studying [clears throat] this this varian request. So you know I've been around BGA for 34 plus years and I don't think Mr. Mr. Hakamire was on it for several years with me. I don't think we've ever run into a case like this. I I don't know what the solution is. I hope somebody's a whole lot wiser than me and says this is what we need to do to to straighten it out. It's not it's it's aside from the legal analysis offered by uh the ramonster remmonstrator's uh attorney and that's that's clearly for your discretion. Uh she's made the argument that this shouldn't be granted because because of the circumstances and that's and that's reasonable. I'm not going to tell you how to vote on this. Uh the circum And I'm sorry about that. That's and and Nathan's not I it is a situation that has been created and was not organic in the in in in the property. Uh it sounds like there's some

unique topography that may have made this a little difficult. Uh but I it is ultimately up to you folks how you want to handle that situation. Nathan, I don't know if I you can give any different take on it. Um I already said my piece. One I do have one piece of housekeeping business though. If you're before you make a motion, let's just do that. So

Okay. Okay. I guess some couple of my concerns is is it one going back to um not getting the survey done to identify exactly where my property was because obviously that is the structure of building anything knowing where what is your property what isn't. The second is moving forward, um, it kind of kind of put it out there. Well, I'll do what I want. I'll beg for forgiveness later. Um, if I do encroach on other properties because the last person did it, got away with it. I should say get away with it, but there was at the end result, they didn't have to relocate or or address the the situation that they put themselves into. So those those are probably the two biggest concerns that I have on this.

Is there anybody else in my gut says relocate the building, take it down and relocate it. put it within your own lot. You got your survey now. I guess moving forward it's I guess all our vote here tonight is just either to approve or deny the variance. As far as what we do at the building that's turns into an enforcement issue. Yes. Agreed. So that So you ready for a motion? I'm ready for a motion.

So before you make the motion, um since we were not able to get Lyall um Lyall's camera working, state law and our own rules of procedure state that uh members can participate electronically uh in the discussion and everything, but to actually take a to participate in a final action vote, they have to be able to be seen and heard. heard and seen. Uh so Lyall, you won't be able to vote in this unless you can magically make the camera work and that's two minutes. Uh but all of the discussion has been valid. We have so don't worry about that portion of it. Just can't have him vote.

My apologies. Oh, it's technology is the thing. Mr. Chairman, I make the motion to deny 26-1. I have a motion from business and a second from Kathy. Roll call for a vote. Kathy, yes. Patricia, yes. John, yes. We need to and Yes.

Extremely sorry about that, but it's it's just the rules we have. Nathan, we have any other business tonight? Uh, no. Uh, Amanda, what was your question? to robot compiance timeline for compliance um we'll yeah we'll sort that out if we need to we'll come back to you for some more guidance but we'll sort of these pictures for a while uh those should be entered as

so other than that um I don't have any other reports and Amanda did I forget Okay, I got nothing else then. I move we adjourn. Second. We got a motion to adjourn in a second. Thank you everybody. Thank you Kathy. Thanks La. Send send send us a picture. Send us some warm weather. Okay.

Yes. So it is very If I say let it diff. So hopefully while you can figure that out because my screen right in the middle of the bottom of the screen. That's where

my camera you're not. So, Yeah,

yeah. Yeah, it shouldn't be that way, but I appreciate the feedback. So, thank you. See you.

[music] [music]