Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

. . .

I thought we'd wait until everybody got signed in.

Hi, Kathy.

How are you?

I'm fine.

Good.

Whenever you guys are ready.

Well, Dennis is in charge, so. All right, looks like everybody's signed in. It's going to be here at this second, so... a August 4th, 2026, Columbia City VZA zoning appeal meeting to order. We have the roll call of members.

Kathy Gardner. Here. Patricia Hatcher. John Kissinger. Michael.

Here.

Dennis Warnick.

Here. The previous minute meetings, I think we had those. Okay.

If there's no corrections by anyone else, I'll make a motion to approve and estimate.

Second. We have a motion and a second. We need a roll call. Are we on the air? Are we, got anybody watching?

I think that's only if you have a participant. Okay. Virtual.

Okay, all in favor, raise your right hand. Those opposed, same. So moved. Okay, oath to the witnesses.

Would anyone who plans to speak at the meeting tonight please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury the testimony you are about to offer will be the truth? If so, answer I do. You may put your hand down and have a seat. Thank you, sir.

Old business, I did not see any. New business, 2060. Dash VAR dash four. So I heard properties side yard set back northeast corner Plaza Drive and Indiana North State Road 109.

Sir, your comments. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of course, I've got comments for you. I always have.

Why you pay me?

Oh, anyway, seriously, this is 26C VAR 4. It is located on the west side of State Road 109, east of Armstrong Drive, north of Plaza Drive, generally located north of Walmart. Importantly, for tonight's discussion, not to exceed that number, currently the The larger lot is roughly an R2 equivalent. I've got a table that shows you that in more detail in some comparisons. The south part would be smaller, more affordable lot. What larger home or what fits on a larger lot elsewhere, that's equivalent home onto a somewhat smaller lot. Again, with the idea of these being somewhat more affordable because of that being here versus the previous slide where the where the garage has to be narrowed in order to make a better aesthetic. You could have a two-car garage or code, but in a much different angle that they built.

Well, I remember, is this a good time for me to talk about this or do I need to do it a different segment? It's as good as any. Okay. All right. I remember, um, when Mr. Langlo came before us with the Timbers Edge for the five foot setback. I think it was five foot setback on that one. I personally was concerned about it because that just gives 10 feet between homes. That is a very small area. And I was concerned about it and I had also heard from people that had bought homes that had that setback, that loved their home, loved the area, but didn't quite like the fact that their neighbor was so close. Another thing is, too, is I really am concerned about fire separation because if I'm living in one of those homes and my house catches fire, I think the fire department definitely has an issue with the one right beside me. Not that it wouldn't if it was 10 extra feet. You know what I'm saying? But I did call the Columbia City Fire Chief and I did talk with him about it. And the fire department has to deal with situations after the fact. So when things are approved and things are reduced and changed, then they're the ones who have to deal with it. when the fire, the issue comes up. The city ordinance for open fires is 25 feet from a structure. So it's kind of concerning to think about that. That's just one of the things that I'm concerned about. The distance, not giving people much room there. Also, too, the fire protection is big as well.

Those are valid points. And I'm not going to say that those aren't valid points. However, the empirical evidence that I can supply here is virtually every subdivision in Allen County has those five-foot setbacks. And as I stated, they're not all utilizing the five-foot side yards. But it does give flexibility for when they are trying to get a house in, a special house. And it doesn't seem to impact the people living in those areas. So with that being that tight. And as I tried to point out earlier, we didn't do an apartment complex here, which is the other way where you have no distance. You know, it's a wall. You've got six inches between you and your neighbors. So we were trying to give them single family homes and the market seems to bear out that that works and that is comparable or people are willing to buy that, especially if they can get a home, especially if it meets their price range, which is what we're trying to do here. And every foot that we add to that, they're still paying that in the lot cost and they're not reaping the benefit for the house size. which allows it to be more livable. So, yeah, you do get your separation, but you're kind of penalizing that person by having less of a house than what they could have, I guess, if that makes any sense. And then the other way with the fire code, I'm not a firefighter. I do everything I can to make sure that our developments meet because there's a couple of things I tell the people at the office. I'm not going to have my name on those. front of the newspaper, hey, this idiot engineer didn't design it correctly and all these houses burned down, you know, or they flooded. So we're going to do everything we can to meet the code. And the building code at this first state of Indiana says that they're comfortable with the 10 feet separation from the foundation. So at that point in time, I think that they have done enough studies throughout Indiana that that means, you know, the fire apparatus and are able to service that correctly.

So.

That would be what I can suggest at that point. We have a development. I didn't bring this up, but there's one in Fort Wayne. It's on DuPont and Lima Road. Right behind is a Walmart right there. It's called DuPont Meadows. And those are rent, but they look like single-family houses. And those are as close to 10 feet apart as you can possibly imagine. And there are 250 homes in that. less than 30 acres so it's less than this size and there are 250 homes that was just packed in there and i just looked at this last week for a client of mine there are six homes for rent so out of that rental of that 250 homes there's only six homes that are for rent so it is packed so that 10 foot side yard and they're closer to the road and they really don't have a backyard those that's what people can afford right now and we want to give them a actual home with an actual rear yard that they can put up their own fence and run their dog in it or whatever so that's the intent and this is this is the that's the dupont meadows project so we did that developer they're a they're a company out of georgia that did this one um and they got they got bza approval to be close to the street um and then also um close to other rear yards and structures.

Do you know what the zoning is for that?

They have a different one, but this was an R3 designation for them. Their zoning goes R1 is single family. R2 is really unused. That was a duplex. Then R3 goes into apartments. So it would be apartments. It would be like they call them the yellow retirement community. Or if you're doing a three-story apartment, that'll have to be in the R3. So that's what this particular... issue is. And one of the things I didn't bring up, one of the things we are dealing with this development is we are putting sidewalks on both sides of the street. We're trying to tie this into Walmart. We're trying to give them a nice feel. They can walk to go have dinner. They can go to Walmart because their child needs to have whatever.

The rest of the property that's to the east and the north, there's a couple future roads. What's

At this point in time, we'll be coming back to Planning Commission when those go. The idea at this point in time, so real quick, we have a traffic impact study that's been approved through NDOT for the connection at State Road 109. That's in the middle of getting all of that improvements going on. But the plan was everything out there along State Road 109, the highest and best use at that point in time is a commercial of some sort. commercial moves slower. So they are marketing that trying to get other people in place to buy those particular properties. And when those come in, they'll come in with their own primary that they'll have to come in and show this is what we're meeting. So we're putting in the skeleton, I'd like to call it at this point. So once we have the roads in, we're going to have the water and the sewer extended, detention in place so that when these commercial buyers or investors want to come in, it'll be a more seamless process for them. You know, we have the bones in. They're going to come in with their actual plan, get it approved through primary and their secondary routing. So that's the intent on that. But right now, we know that there's a dire need for homes, and so that's where we were starting on the west end with homes.

Okay. not sure if it matters too much but in our discussion at heritage place i also occurred to me the other place in the county where we have very common five foot side yards and even less is up at the lakes and so we have even smaller lake lots up there um that's all many of them are ground feathered in but we do have a lot of new homes that are built with five five foot side yards um and they occasionally do have increased fire ratings because they go less than that five foot. Now that's a special case, but again, we do have that comparable area too.

Donald, some of those, at least some of them, they bought two houses and tore them down and built one?

That's not too frequent around Whitley County. Other lakes, yes, but for the most part, Whitley County is one-to-one. We have had a few examples, but most are one-to-one.

All right, any other questions? Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak on behalf of this petition?

Anybody else wishing to speak against this petition? Okay, I will close the public input part of the meeting and open it up to the board for discussion and or a motion.

Nathan, with this kind of concept, you know, has been presented here. Has the Planning Commission even considered possible different zoning designations so that a variance would not be required during the same? So if this is something that's up and coming, I'm just asking, has there been any thought or discussion about possibly creating

designation that they might be able to rezone a property to with so you're talking about a text amendment to create a new district that they then can rezone to sure um specific to this property no uh using this as a jumping off point for such a district i think would be a very viable thing um so seeing how this goes seeing what works and what doesn't and using that as a model for

future code I think yes but creating a new code specifically for this kind of flipping that no and I guess you know when when he's giving you know examples of all of these other counties that have are doing this you know are not so much that the district but are doing this with these setbacks and these affordable homes and that sort of thing It kind of makes me wonder about that and maybe the need for that.

I agree. Well, two parts to that. The comp plan, the newly adopted conference plan does talk about the need for a new district specific to our historic areas because we have R1 applied pretty indiscriminately because we want single families, but they're on lots that are 150 years old, the development standards don't match. So there's that component, but then there's a bit of discussion about cases like this and having a bit more. So I would say the natural thing to do would be see how something like this might go, learn from it, and then develop code off that, as well as using all the surrounding areas and so on. Look at the lakes, look at Cambridge Crossing and so on. So yes, it's a very good idea. I just would say that it may be more natural to do the opposite order of what you're suggesting.

I guess, you know, too, and kind of spinning off from what I just said, you know, I look at the Columbia City Zoning Organs. I look at Section 1207 variances, and it's what the Board of Zoning Appeals is asked to look at when approving a variance. So I'm looking at this, and one of the things that we have the power to authorize variances from the development standards, which include setback regulations. Of course, you know that. But then it gives us four that a variance may be permitted if all the following requirements are met. There are four of them. So I'm looking at these, okay? Number one, literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship with respect to the property? No. In my opinion, because we have 77 acres here in order for us to create a subdivision plat to meet the requirements for the lot sizes of this particular current zoning district, which is GB. Number two, such unnecessary hardship results because of unique characteristics of the property. No, because they have not presented anything that has said the topography, there's swales, there's creeks, there's cliffs. The topography does not lend itself for it to create such unique characteristics that are causing this hardship. The variance would not change the land use of the property or the character of the neighborhood. Again, a neighborhood under GB with the setbacks, we're asking for a variance of those setbacks, in my opinion, would change the character of the neighborhood by approving five setbacks for this particular district. Number four, the variance observes the spirit of this ordinance, produces substantial justice, and is not contrary to public interest. That's probably one that can be debated. But that's my opinion. you know, as a board member, I just wanted to give my response to how I feel about the petition. So, and affordable housing for young people, I most certainly think is wonderful. I applaud growth of this community, lived here all my life, and I have vested interest here, plus, too, I have a great heart for this community. So, having housing available for people to be able to move here, to be able to to enjoy what we have here, to be able to work here. I'm all for that. Honestly, I am. So I just have concerns.

And what you're hitting on is, and the reason that I have the two sets of criteria on the slide is, as we discussed with one particular case back in January, our current text is not up to the same does not use the state standards which is what's in the first half there and what i read off as a criteria it uses an older set of standards um now that doesn't diminish what you're saying unnecessary hardship versus practical difficulty that is a very vastly different um criteria in itself practical difficulty is a very low bar to step over a much higher bar. The wording of the two pieces, I mean, you can compare those. So I totally get what you're saying, and especially when you compare unnecessary hardship to practical difficulty. I would probably agree that unnecessary hardship is, it's always hard to meet the criteria of unnecessary hardship with a blanket variance such as this. Practical difficulty it's easier to do a blanket variance because of that. But again, it's differences in perspectives, as you said. And just to follow up then from my clarification, in my profession, if the Indiana code changes, then our school policies, for example, have to change that supersedes. What does this look like on this end? This is on our to-do list to get the Planning Commission to adopt this code change yet this year. It just hasn't gotten to the Planning Commission yet because of the very large difference between the languages. So, yes. But I can't say that they will adopt the practical difficulty standard either. That's something that they'll have to determine. They may adopt unnecessary hardship. Or... the state law does even allow a higher standard than even unnecessary hardship.

Okay, and we are two members short, so we have to have everybody vote. the same way if we were gonna get it passed at all this evening. Not sure if that's gonna happen or not happen. So, does anybody care to offer a motion?

Mr. Chairman, I would make a motion to approve 26C, variance four, as submitted.

Second. We have a motion and it's seconded as submitted. Okay. All in favor, raise your right hand. Those opposed, same sign. Motion does not pass.

So, so under the rules um and state law in order for an official uh you have to take an official action so you either can approve the variance deny the variance approve it with conditions or continue so you've had a motion to approve and that's not been got an official action so you've got a couple other options there okay since

Since I'm acting as chairman, can I make a motion or not? Yes. I would make the motion that we continue to the September 1st meeting. Second. We have a motion and a second to put this on the agenda for the September 2nd meeting, all in favor raise your right hand. So moved. September 1st. September 1st, pardon me.

No problem.

Okay.

We will add that to the docket for September then.

And we do have a August 31st training session.

Yes. So as DZA members, not you, Dennis, you have to come. The other two of you, it's optional. It's basically for you the same as any training session. For the plan commissions, it's an advertised public hearing being held by all four plan commissions as a joint meeting. In respect to House Bill 1001 that was passed telling us that we have to have a public hearing by the end of the year. um easier members you're welcome to attend and participate in the discussion and if you can we'll pay you just like we would for a training session um but with the planning commission the forum is necessary so we since discovery will be passed as one large group or will we pass this each individual oh there is nothing to pass okay so this is a hearing yeah um But we, yeah, Greg is right. It's a hearing without an item. Um, the state has given us a lot, a laundry list of, I don't know, about a dozen different items that have to be discussed at a public hearing dealing with housing related to your communities. I won't go into all that yet. Um, but the end result, the goal of the public hearing is to discuss those items. in relationship to how they may or may not benefit your particular community, then we have to take minutes of that discussion and submit them to the state.

So after we do all that, at some point, do we ever say yes, no, approve?

Never? We will see whether anybody wants to make motions during this. There may be things like I make a motion that we approve Uh, prioritize, uh, reducing lot sizes in our community. That could be possible. I don't expect that, but the discussions may go that way. And the reason besides the convenience on my part of getting them all together is also that everyone can listen to each other and what's a priority in South Whitley versus Bosco versus Columbia city versus the county. The municipalities are similar and the county has differences, but there are things that the county is doing now, secondary dwelling units, for example, that the municipalities may say, tell us how that works. Let's try and make that work as an ADU code, which is one of the areas. So that's another reason for bringing everybody together is to feed off of each other. Similar to any other trainings, a couple of the training sessions we've had before where it's been that open dialogue, But in this case we're doing an open dialogue because the state's told us we have to So the state told us we had to but this are they telling us we have to have a Forum for each group or a forum as a total I am doing that We have to have because it's a formal public hearing to conduct a formal public hearing You have to have a formal meeting to have a formal meeting you have to have a forum Yeah. Of each group.

I think it's each group.

So you'd have to have.

Otherwise, if you don't have a quorum of Columbia City, we will be advertising a second public hearing to do the exact same thing in November. Maybe October, but probably November.

Okay.

And I'm mostly looking at South Whitley because their attendance with the training sessions is pretty low.

It's been pretty bad. Yeah.

Let's go and Columbia city in the county. I think getting a quorum of those plan commissions here is probably not a big thing. Um, I don't want to knock on Seth Whitley. They have things going on. I understand, but I want to make sure that they're involved if I can get them to be here.

Okay. Now that, that meeting on the 31st starts at six.

That starts at 6, which is the normal training session time. It is open to the public as public hearing. I don't expect a vast number of just general audience. I am inviting, I haven't yet, but I'm inviting real estate agents and builders, developers. So heads up for you, 31st of August. whoever might be involved with housing in whitman county um and there may be others uh um mission uh 20 oh geez 25 21 25 i couldn't remember which one uh they might be interested as well habitat for humanity is trying to open a chapter So that might be another person I might invite as well. So I haven't given too much thought to the periphery invites, but the core ones I do have a list I put together to send out yet this week. But who knows, we might have a large contingency of general population here too if we somehow get that word out. I don't know. My colleagues who have done this public hearing so far, the general consensus is among the ones who did not do specific invites, they've had about two people in the audience, and those were there for other items on the agenda. So it's not been a very highly- Offer free martinis.

They'll show up.

Might be how we get the client commission members here, are you suggesting?

No, I didn't say that. In particular, there was a few I don't know.

Oh, yes. But also a few lessons learned from some of my colleagues. Even the ones that didn't have public participation The planning commissions did use it as an opportunity to do some self-reflection and so on. So if we're doing it individually, I would expect that. As a group, I would expect that plus that inner jurisdiction dialogue as well. Hey, what are you doing? What's different? How are we? What's working for you? What doesn't work for you that might work for us? And so on.

Okay. at one of the future training meetings for us old folks who are not as computer literate as we used to be. I'd like to get, I personally would like to get some training on the new BZA, how I get in there and find what I need to find to get ready for the meeting tonight.

Yep, we will do that. I think our last Because we have three training sessions this year, and the last one's, what, November or December?

No, I thought it was this one. I thought August was the last one.

No, I believe there's one in November as well.

Is there?

Okay.

Is there? We'll look and see.

November 30th.

November 30th. So that one, I think, is a good one, being kind of right after the holidays, a little bit lighter of a topic. So we'll, we'll just slate that in there might be, we might add a couple other things, but I think technology, some more kind of nuts and bolts sort of how to be nuts and bolts stuff.

I think we can do any other business on your part.

Oh, um,

Just to let you guys know, I spent the day up in Hammond visiting a data center up there for the county's benefit.

It's a very relatively small data center, which does give me some thought that perhaps Columbia City might have a potential viability as a data center location at some point. Not the hyperscale stuff, 700, 800, but this is one that's on about 20 acres or so and about 150,000 square foot building. So something like that might be something the city might be looking at, possibly. There's a lot of infrastructure needs that we don't have right now. Nobody's looking at us right now. So it may make sense once the county's got something settled out, for data center code for the city to maybe come back. And the reason, other than just mentioning it, odds are the VCA would be entrusted with some sort of special exception review of standards. Seems to be a pretty common way of dealing with distilling out the ones that are permitted by right, which are typically the accessory ones. Hyperscale are typically very zoning intensive and a lot of zoning commitments And then you've got the ones in the middle, like this would be potentially that might have special exceptions and so on. So right now we're not planning on a city data center code, but I'm kind of wondering whether we need to consider that, let the county develop one and then kind of backpedal into what might be appropriate for the city. So maybe that's coming, maybe that's not. I got nothing else, though. I'm getting tired. Amanda, was there anything else we need to tell them?

No, thanks.

Okay.

I'd accept a motion to adjourn.

I make a motion to adjourn.

Second. All in favor, go home.

Thank you.