Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

i think we are ready to begin good evening welcome to the june um 2026 regularly scheduled monthly meeting for the delaware muncie metropolitan board of zoning appeals meeting um i will first have everybody stand for the pledge of allegiance please Roll call, please.

Matt Billington.

Present.

Delaney Fritch.

Present.

John Hamilton. Stephen Hines.

Here.

Richard Ivey. Kristi Knapp. Present. Leslie Mathewson.

Present.

Five members are present, so we do have a quorum.

So I will make some announcements that will be the same throughout tonight's meeting. So number one, when your case is called or you're wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to a case, you'll step up to the podium and you'll give us your name. You will be providing us with information. We are the only parties that will be able to ask questions, so none of the people in the public will be asking questions. So everybody that wants to speak tonight will have an opportunity. So the applicant would come to the podium first, give us the information as to why they are here and what they're asking for. Next would then be anybody who wishes to speak in favor of that request, they would have an opportunity to speak. And then those wishing to speak in opposition would have an opportunity to have a say. And then lastly the applicant would be able to come back up and address any concerns or questions that had been brought up previously. Due to the large number of cases we have this evening, we will be implementing a timeframe. So Kayla will be providing, Ms. Ferguson up here will be providing information as to how your time is. I guess you could say everyone but the applicant would have a three minute. And I would ask that you not repeat things that have already been addressed by the prior members. There will be people here that might not have the same opinion as you, but I would just ask that everybody be polite and cordial, give everybody an opportunity to have a say, and not make negative comments towards those who are speaking in opposition. As indicated, we have five members present this evening. This is a seven member board and in order to have your case be fully decided upon or what we call official action, it'll take four of us to vote one way or another. If we don't achieve a four person vote on something, your case will be automatically continued until the next meeting. And then again, we just ask that if anybody has their phone on, if you can, please turn it off or put it on vibrate. So we are ready to begin and I guess we'll take into consideration the minutes from our April 2026 monthly meeting. I would make a motion to approve the April minutes as presented.

Second.

We have a motion and a second roll call, please.

Billington? Yes.

Rich? Yes.

Heinz?

Yes.

Knapp? Yes. Mathewson? Yes. Five yeses, so that is approval of the April 2026 meeting minutes.

We will move on to our old business.

BZA 30-26, Jurisdiction, Board of Zoning Appeals. Being a continuation of a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by the Housing Authority of the City of Muncie, Indiana, Requesting variances from the terms of the City of Muncie Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow ornamental trees instead of shade trees in the rear and side buffer yards for a new storage unit in a business zone on premises located in the 1500 block at the northeast corner of Madison Street and 9th Street, Muncie, Indiana as more accurately described in the application. um miss miss van ice will um do her presentation but i just want to let her know that the board member all the board members did get a copy of the new landscape plan this evening to look at so good thank you um good evening my name is kathy van ice and i'm from ashton land surveyor here in muncie um 325 west washington street

The couple of hardships that we do have on this one, the shade tree that I need on the far east side, which would be the northeast corner over there. If we place one on the corner, there is a building that sits right on the property line owned by the property owner to the north. We would have root damage that would destroy the foundation of that building. And so we decided to switch it over to an ornamental instead of a full-size shade. That means we're lacking one on that side. And then we have the same problem going to the west on the same north line. We have a retaining wall and another building. The building to the north, the north adjoiner is across onto our property. We have found out that the property owners to the north is a property that is going through an estate at this time. We do not have a true owner to have any communication with because it is going through the litigation. So We don't have anyone to contact, but we have no intention of trying to damage either building. So those are the two reasons we are still not in compliance of all the plantings. Now on the rest of the plantings, the interpretation of, that was, the interpretation of the, that was guided our way, was to go exceed the 10 foot buffer, making it a 15 foot, so that we could back the trees and plantings back outside out from under the power line and also not so close to the gas pipeline that's on the south. We do need to remember the trees need to be shallow rooted so that they will not cause any trouble with the gas line.

Did you restate which direction the gas line runs on the property? I can't hear you. I'm sorry. Can you restate which direction the gas line runs on the property? Which direction? The gas line. So you just were talking about the root structures of the plants?

Yeah, the gas line runs east and west in 9th Street on the south side. And the electrical runs north and south on Madison Street, which is on our west side of our property.

So I guess my questions that I have really are about the species selection. So for the actual shade trees on the plan, so I see a spruce tree, which to me is not what I think of when I think of a shade tree. And I also see maples and the majority of the city's tree inventory is currently maple. So it's not a very helpful species to have planted. So I'm curious what wiggle room exists within the plan regarding the species.

So are you asking me that you don't think blue spruce falls underneath the shade tree inventory?

I mean, I'm not a botanist, so I'm not going to say if it does or doesn't. It's not what comes to mind when I think of a shade tree because I would think of a tree that you would, in theory, sit under that provides shade.

I know. It says shade, and then it also says and or evergreen, I believe, in the code. So it does qualify that way. I call it all a generic word called shade, and I apologize for that.

It does show up in the list that we have.

And the red maple does also.

okay yeah it's more of just a concern about the general health of the city's trees that we have and the majority of them being maple so having more maples planted isn't really helping us diversify our tree inventory which is obviously a goal um that we should have as a city and county um also i see the ornamental trees listed neither of which are natives and i do wonder if there would be a native alternative that could be planted instead

That's true. We probably could. What I was trying to do was my whole goal was to keep them as short as possible because we did get an email from AEP that told us that we could not have them, the top part of the tree could not be within 10 feet from the line. And what I was trying to do was go with the shortest possible ornamentals that I could find. And we pushed them as far back, but we're still... We have, like, maybe a three foot grace area. And then the trees are within that ten feet.

Right.

So I'm very, very close to... That's why we were trying to go with the shortest ornamentals possible.

Yeah, I guess the species that are coming to mind that would be perhaps better native alternatives would be redbuds or serviceberries, some more shrub-like native.

The redbuds, they grow too high. They grow too tall. They can get, they said, as much as 20 feet. And if I hit that number, I have already crossed into the 10 foot of AEP's requirement to not have it in their utility line. I did check Redbud because I like Redbud. So, but I know that these are just some, we were trying very hard to try to keep these as short as possible.

Yeah. Miss Van Nuys did a lot of research on trees, along with our office as well. She was probably the most thorough in researching trees that we've worked with on a landscape plan. So. Yeah, we tried.

I'm just curious. We checked with the electrical company to make sure that they couldn't raise the wires.

um that is not usually their original policy um well and when we start doing this they start asking us phase one because if it hits into their what they consider their phase three there's no movement so when i originally addressed this with them their first statement to me was where is our we want to see what our rights um our easements are Then they came back to me to inform me of what their easements were and what I could or could not do within what they consider their easement. They didn't tell me whether I could move their lines. They're more concerned about pushing the trees back and making sure that I'm not.

Well, that's always their concern, of course.

Yes.

But I have had an experience where we needed the electrical to be raised, and they did it. So I'm just curious whether you went that route. Yes.

No, they did not even offer that because I was, you know, I was showing them my plan and trying to talk. And I have quite a many email dialogue with AEP trying to figure out how to get even these plantings. So... We tried our due diligence, but I didn't ask him to move the line.

Any other questions of the applicant?

Seeing none, you may have a seat.

Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 30-26?

Good evening. Mara Hoff to Fervor Ann, 400 South Walnut Street, Suite 200 here in Muncie. I'm here representing the YWCA. And like last month, I'm speaking at this time because we are not technically opposed to what they are trying to do. Now that they have presented us with the landscaping plan, we have reviewed that. And we would just like to maintain our neutral position and thank them for adding all of the landscaping to their plans.

Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 30-26? Seeing none, then

I just have a few comments here. So just in summary, because all the numbers aren't currently listed again, this new landscape plan does meet the requirement of the number of trees. It also meets and well exceeds the number of shrubs that are required. And this is kind of the meaning of the true hardship of not being able to... the characteristics and configuration of the property prevented them from literally following the word-for-word, species-for-species in the ordinance. We have the documentation from AEP as well. And the intentions of the ordinance is not to create a safety issue or a power disruption or anything like that. which could occur if, you know, the wrong size tree is planted. Our office is fully satisfied with the new landscape plan and supportive of this variance ask.

Then the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 30-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 30-26 as presented.

Second.

I have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Billington?

Yes.

Pritch?

No. Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines?

Yes.

Knapp? No. Mathewson?

Yes.

Okay, so that is four yeses, two nos. So that is official action of approval of BZA 30-26. We will provide you with that certification and you can move forward with your permitting process. And we probably need to state for the record that John Hamilton is now present.

And when your case is done, you are free to leave. Sorry I'm late. You're fine. See, we'll move on now to new business.

BZA 23-26, Jurisdiction, Board of Zoning Appeals, being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Holly Reed requesting a variance of use from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow two RVs to be occupied in a farm zone rather than in an RV park on premises located at 8904 South US 35, Perry Township, Delaware County, Indiana, as more accurately described in the application.

Hi, I'm Holly Reed, property owner at 8904 South US 35 in Muncie. As she said, we're seeking variance approval to locate our two campers on the property that are already there to enjoy through the summer months on just various occasions, weekends. with just my son, my family, his wife, my two grandchildren, on the property that we own by the pond that we share with two other property owners. I did get a petition signed by almost all of the touching property owners, surrounding neighbors is what I named that as, and then some just Delaware County members come into the shop and signed petitions for us also.

So are the RVs there year round and then only people living in them through the summer? Or do they take them back to their home and bring them in?

We leave them there. We just set them there at the beginning of this process before we knew about the variants that needed to be filed. So we had them set gravel laid. We got a permit for the electric meter through the Delaware County that was all permitted and accepted. So they will stay there through the year, but only enjoyed through the summer months or weather appropriate months. Thank you.

I know that you had gotten a petition signed by people. Were there anybody that you talked to that didn't or showed some concerns about what was taking place?

Not that I talked to face-to-face. I did reach out through Facebook Messenger when I had the list of the people that needed to get the notes or whatever um i reached out there not everybody returned those messages so i've just assumed that they were not for it or didn't have facebook messenger you know access to it so

So I just want to kind of expand upon Steven's questioning about what months the campers would be potentially used and I'm curious if you have any Objection to the board Enforcing that in the variance that they can only be used for specific months of the year.

No. No, I don't have anything against that But like when school gets out, so when the kids get out of school, that'd be late May early June maybe through October and

June through October.

We were at the Prairie Creek Reservoir for several years until that closed down. So now we just put them on there by the pond thinking it was ours and then it doesn't go that easy.

Any other questions of the board members? I think we have a seat, doesn't it? We have another member, so we have all members. So there will be official action on things eventually.

OK. Yeah. So for the record, Richard Ivey is present.

For the record, we accept. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 23-26?

Hi, I'm Michelle Milligan. I bought a property in Lowe Springs at 5730 East St. Lowe Springs, and I agree to support this. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 23-26? Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 23-26? I'll turn it over to you. Oh, I'm sorry.

Do I need to state my name, address, any of that? Yes. Okay, Jim Dragoo. I live in Daleville, 14211 West Catrine Drive in Daleville. I own 130 acres. They're close to this property. Don't know the people. I have nothing personal against them. I just, we have, the county has rules and regulations and obviously this is in violation of it or they wouldn't be here today. My question is where are the effluent going? These are parked right up by the lake. There's about a three-acre property, three-point something there. Almost everything is gravel or building already. I don't know what kind of septic they have, but how are we going to address that? Aren't there Board of Health or some regulations that would address that? I know if I build a house or I remodel a house, whatever, and increase the bedrooms, I've got to increase the septic. And so I can't think there's any room there. There's almost no grass on this lot right now, how we're going to address the septic issue. I know we've got a busy evening, so I'll try to keep it short of that.

Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak on this matter? Oh, yes. Yes. I'm sorry. Yep. Ms. Reed, I'll have you come back up. State your name again, please.

Holly Reed. We have addressed that with Lancaster's Dump and Haul. They will provide that service. We've talked to the Board of Health. They've come out and said that they would help us along the way if different rules were set up for that as far as getting it measured or monitored so and there's there's two or three places that we reached out to about the hall and dump the dump and hall of it all so for the record are you saying that they'll come to you Yes, they come straight to the campers and dump them. There's no septic. They're self-contained campers, just like you would see on any other camper. They go into a tank, and then there's a side tank or an extra tank that you can fill that up in, and then they can come and dump that.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. Okay.

The comments that I have, Tom Fouch, County Building Commissioner, does have some concerns with RVs being occupied outside of RV parks. Mostly safety issues since it is a structure that's not built to code and then also disposal of waste. I know the applicant is currently working with the health department. We did reach out to the health department. I do not have an email or anything from them. I verbally had a conversation with Jamie Bain from the health department, and he said that if it is a personal RV on personal property with a house located nearby, he did not see that as a big problem. um i do not have any elaboration on that in an email or anything um just didn't come in time okay would you like us to submit that into the record okay yeah we'll we'll submit it tonight

And then, now that everybody's read that document, then the chair would entertain a motion with regard to BZA 23-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 23-26 with the conditions that the variance be for the applicant only and not transfer with the property, that the applicant continue to work with the appropriate departments to ensure proper disposal of waste, and that the campers only be utilized through the months of June through October on the property.

second we have a motion in the second roll call please rich no hamilton yes heinz yes ivy yes nap no billington yes matthewson yes

Five yeses, two noes, so that is official action of approval of BZA 23-26. Our office will write up the certification of that approval and send that to you. BZA 29-26 Jurisdiction Board of Zoning Appeals being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Mark A. Weems requesting a variance of use from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow keeping an increased number of pet dogs kennel and a variance to allow an increased fence height beyond the front wall of the dwelling on a corner lot on premises located at 1208 North Country Club Road, Liberty Township, Delaware County, Indiana, as more accurately described in the application.

Go ahead, sir.

My name is Mark Weems. I live at 1208 North Country Club Road in Muncie. Yeah, I have an abundance of dogs. There's only one in pregnancies. Couldn't get rid of them. I tried to. And I don't see them going anywhere. They don't make no problems to anybody. They're not noisy. My fence, I replaced the existing fence that was already 5 foot, 20 foot from the road. I came in an extra foot and a half and put a privacy fence up. Big deal. It's a change. Sorry if you're used to it. People's got to slow down and make the curbs. So be it. As far as I know, that's about the only gripes I've really got. Keep the fence. All I did was replace the old one with a new one. It's back farther from the road. You go on down an extra block. You can't see over the shrubs. Take a left if you try. I mean, there's more things in the road that's impeding the road division, like telephone poles. Stop signs are too far back to begin with. You can't see past telephone poles as you pull up. And by that time, you've done third by fence. And if you can't see the traffic coming on down the hill or, eh, don't drive. But my dogs are, yeah, granted, I got an abundance of them. The fence is there to keep them all in. And they're all girls. They're not hurting, nothing. Like, I wouldn't come to your house today to get rid of your kids. Don't tell me to get rid of mine. Anyhow, what's your opinion?

Well, sir, we're going to have some questions. So if you can, please remain at the podium, if you would, please. So I think you acknowledge that there may be some visual issues with the fence.

There is actually none. OK. I've had multiple people come by. There is none. You know what I mean? You have to pull up anyhow. You can't see around. I mean, like I said, all I do is replace the existing fence. And I came back farther off the road.

But I also believe you went higher than... A foot.

I mean, and granted, it's not a chain link fence. It's a little rusty thing. I have Huskies. My Huskies could clear it if they really thought about it.

know right now I could keep them in my yard yes I know that I think you're you currently have 11 dogs is that correct yeah so I guess moving forward if we put a condition that says that when a dog dies that you would not be Excuse me, what was that? I'm sorry.

I didn't want as many as I have, but I do give them away. When I find people that actually want a dog, I give them away.

Sir, if you can't address us here, because we're the ones making the decisions, they're not.

I give them away to veterans. I knew a guy who just lost his dog, I give him away. You know, I don't charge people for that. And I mean, I give them to mostly veterans who need them. If I knew somebody would be good with them, I'd give them to them. Otherwise, I mean, I tried. I got them back. I drove 200 miles just to go rescue them. I was being starved in a cage. I'm not going to let, it wasn't their fault they were born. You know, I can't give them to the shepherds.

So you understand the basis of her question. That was like, if we said, okay, you can keep the 11, but when one passes away or you get rid of one, you can't put another dog there. I would not want another one. I'm too old for it.

And I just want to make sure that I understood what you said. There was a chain link fence there.

Yeah.

And you replaced it with a privacy fence that people cannot see through.

Well, technicalities. You really couldn't see the rust through the rusty thing anyhow. Okay.

I just want to make sure I understood.

Yeah, my grandpa put that fence up in Lake Sixth, you know. Like I said, I mean, I even brought it back. It looks a lot better in price, property value a little bit. It makes, you know, all I did was come up here and ask about a water.

Anybody else have any questions?

Have you seen this map, sir? This map right here where it has a red and a green line? So our board, what I'm told, is we're not allowed to grant anything outside of that red line. And so your wooden fence is over the red line. So no matter what, you're going to have to move that. So I've seen it through these laws, too.

Right.

Right.

Right.

But you understand what I'm saying? No matter what we decide tonight, we can't grant you to keep the fence where it is. We can't grant you that.

No matter what. I got to forfeit that. Yes. Okay.

So just to kind of further explain that the BZA, we do not have jurisdiction over county owned, publicly owned right of way. So that is the issue here that we could grant a variance only for the applicant's property, nothing that sits outside of the applicant's property. I do have some other documentation from county engineer that I can kind of read as well. And I'll go ahead and read it at this point. Um, so Dean Thomas, county engineer, he did, um, visit the site and he has been made aware of the situation. He has reached out. I think he said, um, he, uh, he's reached out to John Brooke, um, and we'll follow up with him on how the county typically handles this type of right away issue. But his comments now are, um, Even though it is county owned, this should be handled as if it was a typical concern that was brought to the plan commission. There are ordinances in place that should be followed regardless of who owns it. That being said, I do have a concern with the fence that is along Country Club. it blocks the views of cars turning left from hinds to country club i think that one needs taken down and moved further to the east the one along hind street isn't very far from being out of the right of way and it doesn't impair traffic so with that one i have less of an issue so he said he cannot speak for everyone else's views but that is his view um And then County Commissioner Stephen Brand agreed with those statements. So the issue of the right-of-way would be with you and Delaware County and nothing with this board.

Any other questions of the board of the applicant? You may have a seat then, sir. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 29-26?

Good evening. I'm Sandy Weems. I am Mark's mother. Guilty. But my father bought this property in 1962 and he put the fence up in 65 and I'm believed to be within And I, you know, agreed with him when he put it up, you know, if we went in just, you know, if it was good.

And then a third item in opposition concerned about safety and visibility and noise.

decides to do something other than use it as a personal garage, that he has the capability of setting it back further if need be, even though I take care of the ditch. We appreciate it.

Thank you. Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 34-26? Also seeing none.

So the only comment I have is that of that approval with the conditions listed as well. And you can contact us if you wish to move forward on the turkey. We'll work with you on that.

purchasing the property, we went around and introduced ourselves to all of our neighbors. So express to them what we were wanting to do so that, you know, we're not just these strangers moving into their neighborhood. Right. So that was kind of a preemptive thing for us just to make sure that they knew who we were, more so to open the line of communication amongst all of our neighbors. There was one gentleman that's two houses down. He stated that his brother didn't know me and he wasn't going to get into it. So with that, he's loading me his mower and tools. And, you know, so so we have I feel like we have been accepted among the community. I feel that we are taking care of the property. It is improving the property overall. And I haven't had any objections at all from my neighbors.

Thank you. Any other questions of the board? Okay, then you may have a seat then, sir. Thank you. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 34-26?

Yes, my name's Tom McGee. I preside at 10,000 West River Valley Road, Yorktown. I approve it.

Okay, thank you, sir. Thank you. Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 35-26? Okay, CNN, do you have anything with regard to this case?

Just kind of a reiteration of the former comment from building commissioner that had some concerns with RVs being occupied outside of the RV parks. And he was, I think that the time limit will help with that. County building commissioner was concerned that this situation would escalate go on longer than the requested time period.

So can I rebuttal that? We have a 10 month old grandson, another granddaughter coming along. We have full intentions of moving into the community. We've been church shopping. We've been doing our due diligence around. So The timeline that we're dealing with, that is, I do plan that as a worst case scenario, absolute worst case scenario. I just didn't want to put it too soon, run into issues, then we're all kind of back into this. And, you know, so the plan commission, as far as the staff, they were great with giving me the direction. So, you know, that's where we just felt like, you know, that's, That's kind of a worst case scenario. As far as the waste goes, technology with this has come so far. It's not, you know, where you just, you know, open a valve anymore and let it just go wherever. So I am absolutely on board with being a responsible steward as far as that goes. So there will be no issues with that.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

And the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 35-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 35-26 with the following conditions. That the variance be for the applicant only and not transfer with the property. That the applicant will continue to work with the appropriate departments to ensure proper disposal of waste. And that this variance expires December 31, 2030. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.

Billington?

Yes.

Rich? Yes. Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines? Yes. Ivey? Yes. Knapp? Yes. Mathewson?

Yes.

Seven yeses. So that is official action of approval of BZA 35-26 with the conditions stated. And we will provide you with certification of that approval. Page 3, BZA 36-26, Jurisdiction, Board of Zoning Appeals, being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by local union number 855 of the Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Incorporated, requesting a variance from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. to allow a reduced front setback for an existing structure for a building addition not to further encroach in a business zone on premises located at 4601 South Meeker Avenue, Center Township, Delaware County, Indiana as more accurately described in the application.

Is anybody here speaking on behalf of the applicant this evening? Okay.

You want to go ahead.

I guess just for the record, we've had staff go to the hallway and call for this case. And again, no one now has come out from the hallway. So we'll let Kylene address what options we have as to the same.

Okay, so I will just explain this a little bit and then Mr. Wisely can maybe advise us on what votes we could or could not take. So you can see from the aerial that there is an existing building there. They're wanting to put an addition onto the existing building. The addition would be 38 by 30. So in the ordinance, Since the existing buildings are there, we tried to look back for permits for those buildings. It appears that the building was built in 1991 and that the barn to the south was built in 2001. So we do not have records of those permits. The buildings could be labeled as non-conforming. Therefore, any addition to the building that does not further encroach is allowed per the ordinance.

So we don't have permits for those buildings because it was built in 91 or because they never applied for them?

Because we do not have records. So we do not know if... We cannot say whether there are permits or whether there were no. Tom is actively working with them. They are actively working to pull the appropriate permits. Tom has no concerns with the addition. And I can try to answer any other questions too.

because the representative isn't here, can we vote to move it to the end of the meeting?

I would second that if we need a second.

I'll make that motion.

Okay. So for the record, we have a motion and a second to move BZA 36-26 to the end of the meeting. So if you're here on that, you will have to wait a little bit further to be able to speak on that matter. Or I guess we need to take a vote on that, so. Does it have to be roll call or can it be just by? Okay, roll call please.

Billington.

Yes.

Rich? Yes. Hamilton? Yes. Hines? Yes. Ivey? Yes. Knapp? Yes. Mathewson? Yes. Seven yeses, so we will move that to the end of the agenda. BZA 37-26, Jurisdiction Board of Zoning Appeals, being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Stephen Smith, requesting a variance of use from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow an existing detached garage without a dwelling in a resident zone on premises located on the southeast corner of Oakville Road and Hoover Street, previously known as 625 West Oakville Road. Monroe Township, Delaware County, Indiana, as more accurately described in the application.

Good evening. My name is Stephen Smith. I own 625 Oakville Road.

So I guess, can you just tell us what you're asking us to do or what are you wanting to do?

Okay, so I bought the property in November. Mr. Fouch asked me to tear the house down. The previous owner gave him a lot of run around about tearing it down. I owned it several years and never tore it down. I had it torn down in January, so I only owned it two and a half months maybe. Cost me quite a bit of money. My ultimate goal is to put a living, a dwelling there eventually. Right now I'd like to focus on rebuilding the garage. Basically a three-car garage. Me and my wife go out there almost every weekend. We're in the process of improving it. It's my goal to make it better, but I'm trying to do this with no loans. I'm trying to do it out of pocket and through my own labor mostly. I have good intentions and I plan on working hard at it.

Could you describe your timeline for restoring the garage and then maybe adding the dwelling onto the site?

Yeah, so I paid $3,000 for this property and I've got close to $20,000 in removing the house. So I wasn't really prepared for that, but that came out of my pocket. So like I said, I'm trying to do all this with no loans. So ultimately, I would like the variance to be able to keep the garage permanently with the option to put a dwelling there, which I do fully intend to do. And I mentioned five years, but where I currently live in Indianapolis, I have a very small yard. And so this place, I get to build and I get to do yard work. And it's in the country, so it's peaceful. Not like where I'm from.

So the demolished dwelling that you've already done, would you intend on putting the new dwelling at the same location?

Yeah. The setbacks are a little touchy. The old house was... about five feet from the sidewalk. And I think they're requesting 25 foot from both streets. And I was gonna tackle that later with a new variance.

Yeah.

And just for clarification, I believe your application did mention that you just plan to do this for your own personal use and not to do any business at this location.

Absolutely personal.

Any further questions from the board?

Seeing none, you can have a seat then, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 37-26? Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 37-26? Okay, see, then you have anything with regard to this case?

Just as Mr. Smith mentioned, this was previously on the unsafe housing list. The previous owners had appeared at several of those unsafe housing meetings. The applicant, Mr. Smith, did speak with Tom before buying the property and demoed the house as he stated that he would, which probably saved the county about ten or twelve thousand dollars um so was actually a help to our unsafe housing list the chair would entertain a motion as to bza 34-26

I would make a motion to approve BZA 37-26 with condition that the garage be for personal storage only and not be used for business use.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Rich? Yes. Hamilton? Yes.

Hines? Yes. Ivey? Yes. Knapp? Yes. Millington?

Yes.

Mathewson? Yes. Seven yeses. So that is approval. That is official action of approval of BZA 37-26. We will provide you with the certification of that approval outlying those conditions.

Thank you.

Not sure about that one. That one seems to be

I'm going to go ahead and read the introduction while we're working on the presentation. BZA 38-26 Jurisdiction Board of Zoning Appeals being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Benson Motorcycles Incorporated and Wawa requesting variance from the terms of the City of Muncie Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow an increased driveway width. A drive-thru along the front of the building. Increased sign face area for two ground signs and an increased height for one ground sign. All for a new gas station and convenience store on premises located at 6410 West Magaliard Road, Muncie, Indiana as more accurately described in the application.

Hello, everybody. My name is Mimi Hurwitz. I'm with Hurwitz Enterprises. We are the contract purchaser right now of Benson Motorcycles and are the preferred developer for Wawa. I've got Pat Moon with Wawa here to answer any questions that you guys may have specific to the operations of the business. And then also Colin, who's with Kimley Horn, who's our engineer on this site. For anyone who's not familiar, this is the aerial of the subject property. We are currently under contract with Benson Motorcycles for the approximately three acres at the corner of Galliard and Nebo Road. We are proposing a Wawa convenience store on the 2.3 acres with approximately about a 6,300 square foot convenience store. We are zoned business variety, which allows for a convenience store with gas operations. And here we can kind of see what Wawa's site plan will be proposed. We have an eight stack in the front. We are proposing to utilize the existing curb cut to the north on Nebo Road, which is one of the variances that we're asking for tonight. Additionally, we're working with NDOT. We have a traffic impact study that has been in with them for quite some time, but we've had meetings with them. They are in support of um at least verbally while they're reviewing the study of keeping the existing curb cut and then hopefully adding the second access point to the south here is a blow up of our variance requests we are our first variance is to keep the 40 foot curb cut that's in existence um from Nebo Road, which lines up with the access point across Nebo to the Toyota dealership right across the street to the west. We are asking for the 40-foot versus 30-foot curb cut because that is what is in existence right now. But additionally, because of the way that the property lines jog down to the south, in order to keep the alignment across Nebo to the Toyota dealership access point, The truck turns in order for safety and circulation need the extra width So that they can make the direct turn south to come into the site Here are two proposed sign locations we're proposing a sign height and size variance on the corner to be consistent with the current signage up and down McGill yard and in this vicinity of ford and toyota and meyer and then also a monument sign by the northern curb cut here's basically some street views of the toyota sign the current harley sign and the meyer sign of what is directly in the proximity and here's our proposed signage um This monument sign is what's proposed for a size variance. We are proposing this size because truthfully, when it gets smaller, it causes hesitations with vehicles approaching, not seeing clearly what the advertisement is as far as gas prices, because obviously everyone is worried about gas prices as well as Wawa is always under the market and gas prices. And then also we have our signage that will be proposed on the corner, and this is a height and size variance, but we designed this to be more consistent with the height and sizes of the current configuration of the businesses in the area. So if you look at what Toyota has across the street, what Meijer has, this keeps the sight line of vehicular traffic all in the same kind of linear view. We will be working with NDOT as it relates to our site triangles. So we felt like this was really the best design in order to keep it consistent for vehicular traffic. And then we did ask for the fly through to be on the NEBO roadside. And our fly through is not a traditional It's a pickup window, not a drive-through. We do not have stack. We do not have a menu board where you order. This is when you order from an app. You then can knock it out of your car. You can just pull around, give them your number, and they'll give you your food. So it's not a traditional drive-through. Any questions?

I have a few questions. Yeah. So where are the underground tanks located and

So your underground tanks are right here. You can kind of see it on the site plan. The canopy is right here and the tanks would be right in this area.

And then the tankers will pull in and they'll be right on top of those and pump in?

Yep.

Okay. Was there ever any consideration or ask of you guys to have a drive linking you guys in the Meijer parking lot?

So Meijer... We've reached out to Meijer, and they don't respond.

Okay. The reason I ask that is just, like, one concern I have is traffic possibly pulling out and trying to go west on 332.

you understand what i'm saying like if they're trying to pull out and go across two lanes going one direction two lanes down the other to get in the far lane yeah um so this current configuration right here um is we've studied the queue we've studied all of those movements and this current configuration up here works without any impediment impediment um this one Truthfully, we'll probably end up being a write-in, write-out based on our traffic study. But that's based on in-dot.

Okay. And the reason I brought all that up was because I know the location really well. And so if you guys could get a hold of Meijer and they would let you combine with their parking lot, you could... push all that traffic trying to go westbound on 332 to the to the exit there by the discount tire and All that traffic just goes right anyway, so that would just be a more natural flow of traffic And so that's one suggestion.

I would really like you guys to so here's the other answer I guess I we pulled title to see if we had any legal rights or easements reserved and there are none so unless Meyer decides to participate, we have no legal access to their property.

And there's currently no pull-in, pull-out on 332. No. These are both on Nebo Road.

That is correct. I'm just saying, people trying to leave the gas station to go west on 332, they're cutting across a lot of traffic.

Yeah, you're talking about turning left at the light out of the Wawa to get back up? Yes. Yeah.

Yeah, so there's no turnout on McGalliard.

Correct, but... Yeah, Nebo right there gets very dicey sometimes, oftentimes.

But it's just a suggestion, I don't think.

Yeah, I mean, I'm absolutely happy to continue to reach out to Meijer. Please do. Yeah, but we'd love to have cross-access if they'd let us, but unfortunately we have no legal way to force them into it.

Am I hearing you, you will not have access... The existing opening across from the furniture store.

Can you repeat? The furniture store?

Yes, that's the one.

The dog hospital or animal hospital. So we. You will not be accessing that road? That's a problem.

We are accessing NEBO only.

From your lot or from the.

Yes, yes. This access point right here is currently in existence.

I can't find it. Is it the rear one? Hold on.

And it will stay. It will stay.

So this access point that is in this, I'll blow it up as much as I can. This is in existence and we're just asking to keep it exactly as it is. Just rather than shrink it down by 10 feet. That's the ask, is to keep it, yeah.

One of the asks.

Yes.

Any other questions of the board? Seeing them, then we may, I'm not sure if anybody else on your, I'm not sure where we are on timelines, or I'm not sure if anybody else on your end wanted to speak. If not, we can move to see if, move on. Okay. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 38-26? Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 38-26? Also seeing none. Have anything with regard to this case?

Comment from Adam Leach, City Engineer. He has no concerns with the driveway as the applicants are currently working with NDOT and conducting traffic studies and will be required to continue to work with NDOT. Richard Rawlings, City Building Commissioner, had no concerns.

So the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 38-26.

I'm going to make two separate motions on this case. My first motion is to approve the allowance of the existing driveway width.

Second.

That would be for to allow them to have a 40 foot.

Yes for a variance of 10 feet.

We have a motion and a second roll call please. Hamilton.

Yes.

Hines. Yes. Ivey.

Yes.

Knapp.

Yes.

Billington.

Yes.

Rich. Yes. Mathewson. Yes. So that is seven yeses. So that is approval of the driveway request of BZA 38-26.

And I will make another motion to allow for the ground monument sign to be 27 feet tall rather than 8 feet for a variance of 19 feet and to allow for the ground monument sign to be 88 square feet rather than the maximum of 25 square feet for a variance of 63 feet. I think I got it all, but I'm not confident.

To be clear, you're talking about one sign.

Oh, no, I intended to put them all together.

Yeah, one sign has square footage and height. The second sign only has the square footage. Okay.

So I guess there's also the drive through lane.

Yes. I don't know if you want to address that in this particular one or otherwise we will. I'll make a third motion on that one.

My bad.

OK, we're doing both signs now. Delaney made a motion. I did not catch if we had a second. Second. OK.

Roll call, please, then.

Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines?

Yes.

Ivy? Yes. Knapp? No. Billington?

Yes.

Rich? No. Mathewson?

Yes.

Five yeses, two noes. So that is approval of the sign portion of BZA 38-26.

And the third thing we need to address is the drive-thru. Is that correct?

Yes. Drive-thru in front of the building.

Okay. I make a motion to allow them to have a drive-thru located along the front of the building facing Meepo.

A second.

Hamilton? Yes. Hamilton? Yes. Yes. Heinz? Yes. Ivy?

Yes.

Knapp? Yes. Billington?

Yes.

Fritsch?

Yes.

Mathewson?

Yes.

Okay, seven yeses. So that is approval of the drive-through in front of the building portion of VCA 38-26. We will provide you with certification of those approvals and you can move forward with your engineering and planning process.

Thank you. Everybody doing okay?

Richard, do you need a break? I can do one more. One more? Okay. I know, this may be a little bit longer.

By order of the president, let's go.

We're good or are you breaking now?

He wants to break.

Okay, I guess we will take a 10-minute break. So we will reconvene in 10 minutes. started if you haven't already turned your microphones on if you can please do so So we are reconvened at our meeting, and we will move on to BZA 39-26.

Jurisdiction, Board of Zoning Appeals, being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Stephen Massey requesting a modification of a previously approved variance of use, BZA 65-25, from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow the operation of a tree service business, including the storage of work vehicles, brush, and trees in a farm zone, on premises located at 11801 West County Road, 400 South, Salem Township, Delaware County, Indiana, as more accurately described in the application.

Yeah, this is Steven Massey, 11801 West County Road, 400 South. I'm the owner of Steve's Trees. I operate the tree service basically on the backside of my property. We met in December, had some neighbors that had some concerns. We've been very proactive on correcting and You know, addressing those concerns, Jason and Ashley read, which kind of surround my property. They had at the last time questions about the property lines. They we checked the property lines buildings in the past. that were built before I bought it. The property line actually went through the building and went over. Jason and Ashley and I have worked together with and we have straightened up the lines to where there is not a conflict of interest. They've taken 15 feet off the front of my property on the west side. We straightened up the property on the on the east side. Not bringing in really any brush. I've cleaned up the property. We've got the front part cleaned up, working on the backside. Backside, since it was so late getting the new property lines, I've purchased the 50 giant Arborvitas. Anybody driving by can see that we've greatly improved the property. We've got the Arborvitas. We are working now to... moved the propane tank only two feet but the old the propane line actually was on their property we got it dug up you know we're working with jason and ashley they're more than happy we're ready to plant that um Jason and Ashley, they texted, hey, we're on vacation. Sorry, we couldn't be there. Greatest luck. You know, we're working with them. Not received any complaints from anybody else. So we would just like to move forward, you know, like we have and continue to improve the property like we have.

So I don't know if this needs to be addressed now or after, or maybe it should have been before this, but we did get a request, um, from Jason Reed asking, um, that he would like the case to be continued. He stated he is out of town and has multiple questions and concerns.

Okay. And that would be fine. I mean, I just met with Jason. And I don't see, you know, a reason to do that. I just met with Jason and I can show you text messages, you know, that he came over with the property line and they were perfectly fine with everything.

June 15th.

well and it's like no we we hashed it out and like i said he came over he's perfectly happy we straightened it up we're moving some of our property in the back taking you know a small pine tree down making it to where they can you know harvest with their their crops and from you know two weeks ago three weeks ago there was concerns but we've hashed it all out and they they seem to be very happy and i am too i guess

What we do at this time, Alan, we have somebody that has written an email and we also have somebody who is here as counsel for that same person asking for continuance. I guess we would have the right to grant a request for continuance if the board so chose.

Yeah, the board always has the option to continue a case whether or not there is a request to do so. So that's to the board.

Ms. Hoff, were you planning on speaking this evening?

Okay.

Okay.

I guess then based on that, then does the... I haven't heard anybody make a motion to continue. So from the board, does anybody in the board have any questions of the applicant?

I was thinking at the last meeting that we give you a six-month variance, you were looking into some commercial property that you used in the past. Is that?

And that is still tied up in courts. OK. So, and even if that was not tied up in quartz, the convenience of having the business right in my backyard, and once again, I'm surrounded by cornfields. I have reeds plumbing next to me. It makes it more convenient. Yes, it would be nice to have that storing equipment and an overflow, but that's still tied up in quartz, so.

And since the last time you were here, there's been no burning of the wood on your property? Correct.

And even personal or processing for firewood, we have taken... probably 15 loads out that while I was finding places to take it, I finally found, you know, we were taking it to a certain place, they closed down. And so then until we could find a new place in the future, yes, I may have a small little personal fire pit, you know, but we're not even bringing brush. We're not bringing mulch. We're not, we've just been cleaning up.

Okay. Thank you.

I guess I do have some questions. There were some questions on an email that was submitted by the Reads. The question was, is there enough room to do your business if you expand your business?

So unlike traditional businesses, tree service is dependent on weather. So we're like the Reeds, where I came to the same meeting and said, hey, I'm all for you having a business next to me. He had two, three trucks. Now he's added a barn. He's got 10, 12 trucks running. they can operate with plumbing all year round. Our business basically shuts down from December until March. And it's really hard to operate and hire people and say, hey, you're gonna be laid off for four months. So we bring three trucks in a day, go out with three trucks. It's too hard to try to manage high risk with that. So we have no plans. to expand upon that we do have the commercial building once it is out of litigation that if we did want to expand we're not going to want to do it here in this area yes portland anderson indianapolis we would obviously be like other companies and have other buildings in the area but we don't see that we're ever going to get within our capacity

Does any other board member have any questions? You can have a seat then, sir. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 39-26? Hello?

Before I start, I just wanted to ask, my name is Corinne Westerfield. Did you receive the pictures that I emailed? I made sure I got them into you guys plenty of time. We should be five.

We do have pictures, but I just want to clarify that we are hearing anyone wishing to speak in favor right now. So if you're in favor.

I'm making sure that you have the pictures in front of you before I speak. That's all. Yep, we have them. Yep.

And then I just wanted to verify, it is $200 for the permit, correct?

Correct.

The variance request application is $200.

Okay, thank you. My name is Corinne Westerfield. I live at 11900 West County Road, 400 South. We moved to the home in 2021. Steve is our neighbor. He lives across the street. He's been a wonderful neighbor. I'd like to paint a little bit of picture for you guys. Living on 400 South, uh it's kind of active it's a very busy road because it goes from 167 to the other end of 67 so a lot of people like to cut through our road um they go anywhere from 50 60 miles per hour in doing so and the pictures that you will see a couple that are in the yard if you were to look at that that is corn stalks complete corn stalks that comes from the farm that's right across the street from the reeds, I know for a fact that you can't control the wind. But every year that they have corn, this is something that always happens. And so I keep in mind that you can't control the wind, you can't control that. But the choices that the farmers make to not till, that's their choice, and I end up dealing with it. It is what it is. But the other things that I have on my road is we have Lifeline choppers. My house is directly in line with Lifeline. So on an average, anywhere from two to three times a week, I have the chopper that flies over. And if you've ever had a Lifeline chopper fly directly over your house, It's almost like a pulsating sensation, like a heartbeat, but on the outside of your body is what you feel, the woo, woo, woo as it goes over your house. Holidays aren't always the funnest because usually you can see anywhere from six to seven go over your house and it kind of puts a damper on the holidays when you have your friends and family over and you constantly see lifelines hoppers. But I also know that the common sense is I can't call someone and say, hey, could you please send the chopper over a little bit farther because it's about saving lives. So we have to use common sense in the situation. What I keep seeing repeatedly is them having a problem. And when I say they, I mean fellow neighbors about smoke. And it confuses me because I deal with a lifeline chopper. I have a train that runs a mile behind my house and I listen to anywhere from six to eight times every night, the train that goes through and whistles and constantly wakes us up. We refer to him as Larry, the conductor. We usually say some other choice words, but he's Larry. The train has to run. It does what it does. So we know that there are things in life that we can't always control, but they're going to happen. I see Steve as someone that wants to have a business. He's done everything that he's supposed to be doing to have this business. But the biggest deal is, is people complaining about smoke. At least that was the last meeting, was just smoke. This is a $200 permit. It's come to the point that he had the fire department called on him several times, wasting emergency money and taxpayer dollars. It's frustrating to see people wanting to control a situation just because they don't like something. But it's okay for neighbors a mile away to do it because it's not right next to their house then. We can't pick and choose just like the life chopper. It's saving someone's life. It's someone's business, what they make their paycheck with, what they pay their employees with. So today I want to stay in support of Steve. He does what he needs to do. The building looks wonderful. The house looks wonderful. He keeps it clean. When you look at the picture, um that i have of the two properties one is when i walk directly out of my garage that's what i see the trees and the house behind it i can't see anything else and that's directly across street i'm the only one directly across from here okay okay one more thing but if you look over you'll see the reeds house and it's the exact same thing so i have a thing when it comes to things where we're comparing and contrasting i'm trying to understand thank you with everything that they have What's the difference between what Steve's doing? So thank you for your time. I appreciate you listening to me, and you have a wonderful night.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 39-26?

Hi, my name is Brittany Holloway. I reside at 11801 West County Road 400 South. I'm here in support of Steve, using our home as his business address. I don't have any issues with a man trying to make an honest living while helping people in his community. He gets up every morning, leaves for work, and comes back at dark like most working people. I was unable to attend the last meeting, but I was able to watch it online and listen to our neighbor's concerns. I think it's safe to say that he has acknowledged and has addressed those concerns. If you look online, Steve's Trees LLC has excellent reviews, and those reviews are a direct reflection of Steve's character and the positive impacts that his business has on the community. That's why I'm here speaking in support of Steve.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Ernie Westerfield, live at 11900, right across the road from Steve. I'll be respectful of you guys' time. I'll make it short. Steve has done a great job improving the property even since last time. You guys asked about burning. I think he's the only one on the road that hasn't had a fire here lately. Everybody else has been burning like crazy. Other than that, man, he offers a good service. He's a great guy. He's done everything you guys asked. I think it should move forward and quit wasting everybody's time.

Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 39-26? Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 39-26?

Good evening, board members. Mara Hopp with DeFervoran, 400 South Walnut Street, Suite 200, Muncie, Indiana. I am representing tonight a couple of the current neighbors to Mr. Massey's parcel, the Melanders and the Reeds, in opposition to his variance requests. We respectfully request you deny this petition or at least place significant conditions upon its approval. The Reeds are unable to be here tonight, but I believe in your packets you do have their email and some pictures. I did print off just three copies of the pictures in case you needed more to share. I am not privy to the other pictures that were provided tonight that may be more recent. I will state that these are from March and April. So the property may have been cleaned up since then. But when you give a temporary approval to someone with conditions and they're not followed, it is important to document that. This very large swath of land that is between 67 and the limits of Yorktown is basically all zoned farming. As we know, parcels in the farming zone should have five acres to be built upon. So the Massey parcel is somewhat of an anomaly. If his request were for reduced setbacks to a garage, for example, the neighbors would not be opposed. Seeing as how a 1.25 acre parcel does have some space limitations. However, we are talking about a variance of use, not a development standard. And running a commercial business from this parcel in the middle of acres and acres of residential farmland is not the right answer. Particularly when the recommended use is one that would only be approved in a limited or intense industrial zone here in the county. Further, if you were going to approve a home-based business, there are requirements that there is no visible change to the outside appearance of the dwelling or the premises. And as you can see from the pictures, when lumber comes in, that's a significant change to the front of the house. There is a reason that our zoning ordinance requires a variance for this type of use. It is not the norm in a farming area, and it should only be approved after careful consideration. In fact, when you look at the unsightly piles of tree debris, Lumber is included in the definition of junk in your ordinance. Junk is further part of the definition of solid waste. And if anyone were to have a solid waste refuse disposal site, that would require a completely different application procedure and approval. On behalf of the reeds, I have the current beacon map with the property line highlighted in red. So as you can see, it is accurate what Mr. Massey stated before, that the property line runs right through a building. The parties have been negotiating to fix that, and they hired Ashton surveyors to come up with a survey that would describe one piece being added on one side and a piece being taken away. basically a land swap, so that the building actually is on his property. There is a verbal agreement to do that. No deed has been reported, so that is not finalized. Thank you. I will wrap up quickly.

Yeah, the bylaws do state that.

Burning was addressed prior. It sounds like it's not currently happening. Should you approve it, that is one of the strongest conditions we would like to see on there is that there is no commercial burning, that if wood is brought onto the property due to commercial activity, that it does not then become personal and get burned. I know that the Board is very aware of the standard of proof for a variance, but it does beg reiterating here. Under Article 32, Section 5 , it is the petitioner's burden to conclusively prove that he can't secure a reasonable use of his property without this variance, and that the hardship he is claiming is not the result of his own actions. Respectfully, he has failed to prove either point, and so the application should be denied. Should the board be inclined to approve the use, my clients respectfully request reasonable conditions to block all visibility of the business waste, ensure compliance with regulations on burning, and make the approval relative to Mr. Massey's tree service only, not any other future business or owner. Happy to take any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 39-26?

My name is Deborah Klingman. I live at 11760 County Road West, County Road 400 South. We've lived out on our property for about five years. And at the time that my husband and I bought our property, Mr. Massey at that time was not running a tree business, too. the effect that he is running it now and has been running it before even coming to get rezoning. We were here last six months ago when we all came in to meet. We came in because of the excessive burning. We were talking about him burning for periods at one point, which was for three weeks solid Non-stop. It was day and night. You couldn't go outside. You couldn't open the windows. Now, he has not been doing that during this six month period. He has also worked very diligently at trying to get the massive brush piles and stuff cleaned up that were out in front. Everybody out in our neighbor area, when limbs are coming down and stuff, we do get out there and burn those limbs. That is our personal stuff that is right there. We are not talking anywhere the size of the burn piles that were going on at the time. My big concern about all of this with Mr. Massey is when he started this and first applied, he said that he was not going to be doing any burning, but yet he was. He talks about just a few, three trucks, I think he said, going up and down that road. I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. He has got a large bucket truck that goes up and down that road. He's got several other trucks with trailers, and these are not just little box trailers. These are big construction trailers that he is pulling up and down every day. I am all for people doing their own businesses. I truly am. But my big problem with the burning is when I moved out there, that's not what was going on. I knew that the Reeds had a business there when we bought our property, but we did not want to move into an industrial area. I have less than my full lung on my left side of my chest. I can't get out when it's smoky. I didn't ask for this, and all I'm asking for is your consideration when you are going along to grant this or not grant this, that you look at all aspects of it. I would ask that each and every one of you drive out to Mr. Massey's property and look at the place yourself before you make an educated decision, not just for us as his neighbors, but also for him himself. I don't see where 1.26 acres is enough to do the business that he is wanting to do. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. My name's Nick Melander. How are you folks? I just wanted to make a few comments here and I'll make it quick. I'm a small business owner. Excuse me. We've had two small businesses over the years. We've sold those businesses. I am not anti-small business. Steve has, to his credit, done what you've asked him to do over the last six months. And for that, we're very appreciative. We have to remember what brought us here. Six months ago, the man had been burning nonstop, even during a Delaware County burning ordinance request, no burning request. He went ahead and burned anyway, okay? Any of us that live out in the country, we all are entitled to burn our waste. Tree limbs come down, you gotta take care of this stuff. Steve was in violation of a state ordinance. You don't burn product from your business. And the product from his business is stumps tree limbs, logs. And he was doing it routinely. I ceased to do it, and I give him credit for that, and we appreciate that. And like Mara said, we would absolutely ask for that to be a condition, if you so choose, to grant him a variance that he can't be burning them. Everyone else out in that countryside, if they have to burn something because they've got a limb down or whatever, that's the reality of living out in the country, guys. So... No burning is our request. Heavy equipment, you guys asked that he put all of his heavy equipment back behind his building so that it wasn't apparent. If you look at any of the pictures or if you go out there, this man at 1.275 acres cannot possibly run a viable street service. And put all of this equipment behind his house without encroaching on front of his house, which is where all the stockpile of wood and what have you that we asked to have removed and he did it. Give him credit for that okay but 1.27 acres does not it's not an appropriate amount of acreage to run a tree service business. So if we do, in fact, grant immigrants, if you so choose to grant immigrants, I would like for those stipulations to be made. It's a tree service only. It is not transferable. He no longer is going to have a business here. If he's going to go somewhere else and move his business somewhere else, we would like for it to go back zoned residential and agricultural. I want Steve to be a successful businessman. I think everybody out there wants Steve to be successful, but he doesn't need to be encroaching on other people's rights. And that's what we're asking the board to consider. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak? I guess I'll have you address some of the additional items and have Mr. Massey then be able to address all of the concerns that have been addressed so far.

Okay, so the board did receive a copy of Mrs. Klingman's email in your spot this evening. There was also an email from Nick Melander who spoke as well. We also received an email from Dan and Nancy Moody. Their original concern was for the burning. And they are extremely happy that he has kept his promise for not having any burning. We are asking that the board to stipulate his continuing compliance with no burning. Also, an email. Let's see. We looked at the reads email. Just another comment. Eric Brown is the City of Muncie Chief Inspector for the Muncie Fire Department. This is not his jurisdiction, but he did provide some information regarding open burning. So, to his knowledge, well, the City of Muncie and to his knowledge all other municipalities in Delaware County follow the State of Indiana Open Burn Guidelines. Those guidelines can be found on the IDEM website, but for a business, open burning is prohibited for burning for disposal. um i have a flyer here if you guys want to look but it specifically says no wood waste or tree parts and that businesses are not allowed to open burn one of the items is vegetative debris or clean wood waste from land clearing tree removal tree trimming or land clearing So just for board's information, everyone's information, IDEM does have laws in place and rules in place for open burning for the entire state of Indiana. Yes, and I do have the old file, but in your case analysis, we did list the previous conditions. I would ask that if the board considers the previous conditions, there was one that was fairly vague. Number five, that the applicant cleans up materials brought into the property. That one's just very hard to measure.

Mr. Massey, this is your opportunity to address some of the concerns that have been brought forth. And that's great.

The burning, which I had stopped at one point. When I did burn, I called the fire department. They said, hey, you're okay to burn. Since the last meeting and even before the last meeting when the crops were getting dry, I did not burn. The way the property lines were that Jason and Ashley and I agreed, I was actually burning on their part of the property. So where I was burning, it's gone. I haven't even been bringing in wood. And so when you've got some people saying, hey, look at these pictures from March. You gave me until today to get everything cleaned up. We've got to work. We've got weather. If you drive out there today compared to six months ago, you'd be like, wow. I mean, we got the front cleaned up late April. finally and the last month we've been working on the back half getting the property over getting it cleaned up people's concern hey you can't possibly run a tree service with your equipment we've got a bucket truck that trails a trailer we've got another truck that truck trails a skid steer and we've got another truck that trails a dump trailer and where we have been working to get the property cleaned up everything in the back one two three we've got room for six or seven more trucks in a line if we want it so the concerns about that it's concerning to me to where people are saying we don't want to see your property we don't want to see your equipment in the back i've just invested five grand in arborvitas to appease them, but it's okay that me and my friends, we've got this acreage, you can drive down 400 south, you can see Reed's Plumbing, 12 trucks in the morning. There are pumper trucks, there are trucks with the trailers, two skid steers, two, you know, they've got four times the amount of equipment that I've got. We will never grow that big. But for somebody to sit next to me and say, oh, I don't want to look at you. But don't tell me what to do. A lot of our concerns came from things that we were complaining about them on their operations and what they were doing. And it's just like, we're doing everything the board asked us to do. We've got plenty of room in the back. We've cleaned everything up. And I don't see any reason that you guys would object to it.

So you said you bought those green, sorry if I've mispronounced the abravates or whatever they're called. I have. Where did you put those and did you buy them as like a tiny tree they need to grow? They're four foot tall. They're four foot tall right now.

And they are right now sitting in the back in the jugs. And now that we've got the property lines marked, we're getting it five foot in and I've got somebody set up. The slowdown is the property line comes in just an angle in the back and we're filling that in, in agreeance with the reeds so we can plant those. And so they're four foot tall. They grow two to three feet every year. Putting up a fence that is wooden to me is silly because it looks ugly. And if you're trying to cover a 20 foot bucket truck, The arborvitae, and I wanna do it more around the property, it's gonna be a nice, clean, long-term instead of a fence that's gonna go bad in a few years.

I know it's not cheap, but how long do you think it'd be before you could completely enclose the back with those trees?

They're gonna be completely enclosed Within a couple weeks. I mean, they're going to go bad sitting in the pots if I don't get them planted. So, you know, they're going to be planted. As far as getting up to the height, it's going to take a couple years for them to grow.

If we do... Does that, when we said you couldn't burn last time, was that a problem for you?

No, I'm not even bringing anything in. I'm not even bringing in firewood because I have enough firewood to last me for the next year. So the only thing that I would be bringing in is firewood short term. So as far as the commercial burning, it's not even an option now. Like I said, that was over on the side, which is not even my property now.

Yep.

Anybody else have any questions? Thank you, sir. You have a seat. Yes, the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 39-26.

I'll make a motion to approve BZA 3926 with the conditions that the previous conditions with the exception of the six months only from BZA 65-25 remain and that the variance of use is for the applicant only. I will now transfer the property and that he works with building commissioner to satisfy him on the unclear part of the cleanup. Does that make sense?

Are you referring to condition five of the previous?

Yes.

Yes. Can we additionally add that the state code is what?

Yeah, the no burning was a previous condition.

I mean, but it's got the teeth in it. We didn't have that.

Yeah. Actually, we do. We do? There's a delivery account.

Yeah. Number six, that no burning will take place on site was a previous condition. So if we keep that in there, no burning will take place on site.

It's a document we've now acquired. I'd like to be a part of that, okay?

Okay.

Well...

I'll amend my motion to that.

Okay, and I just want to make sure I'm following. So, Stephen, your motion is that the applicant will work with the commissioner on defining the cleanup of materials brought into the property. Did I hear that right?

To satisfy.

To satisfy.

So, I will add that my recollection is that related to... the brush that was existing on the property that he has now disposed of. So probably a better way to do that would be to restate Section Condition 5 that he is not to store any tree waste on the property because there's nothing to clean up now because it's gone.

Do we need to define tree waste? Or is tree waste anything removed from the tree?

Well, and I think what they're concerned about is that more will be brought in.

So I think the fact that it's cleaned up is not the condition that needs to be addressed. The fact that there should be no more, none brought in to the property.

Yeah, that would be my recommendation to make it clear. And I believe it also better captures the current situation.

What Ms. Knapp just stated? Is your recommendation that that be how the condition is stated?

That no business weights be brought to the property. That's my motion.

Can you read what you got cooking over there? Yeah.

Okay. So our previous ones that would apply, number one, is removed because that was the six months only. Number two is that the use will be for the applicant only and not transfer with the property. Number three, that business materials and work vehicles be screened from view. The fourth one previously was the operation will stop after 8 p.m. Number five stated that the applicant cleans up materials brought onto property that will be changed to no business waste brought onto property. And number six is that no burning will take place on site, which will condense our conditions down to five.

Mr. Wisely, could you clarify if the usage of the word business materials in what was condition three conflicts with number five in referencing materials? Are we defining business materials of a tree service and could that be considered brush or tree debris?

the specific would trump over the general so the specific prohibition on business waste would crump over the more general okay we we have a motion do we have a second i would second that roll call please heinz yes ivy

Knapp? No. Billington?

Yes.

Fritch? No. Hamilton?

No.

Mathewson?

I will have to abstain.

Okay, so we have three yeses, three nos, one abstain, which means that there will be no official action at this meeting, and the case will be continued to the next BZA meeting, which is July 30th, 6 p.m., in this room as well.

And what does that mean for the current situation? Because... The current variance has expired.

This generally speaking, this board has variance has been filed. Generally, Mr. Fouch does not take enforcement actions against these properties while the variance is pending.

Usually because enforcement actions take sending a letter, giving them a time period, revisiting that to then do enforcement, and ultimately the final is to end up in court. So that takes a period of time. So normally that enforcement wouldn't get very far in 30 days anyway.

And that will conclude this matter until the July meeting.

Thank you.

PCA 40-26 Jurisdiction Board of Zoning Appeals being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Scott and Militia Miller requesting a variance of use from the terms of the Delaware County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow the keeping of hens, roosters, chicks, goats, and rabbits on less than five acres and to allow a decreased distance from the animals to the closest dwelling premises located at 7313 South Cowan Road Monroe Township please note that in the agenda Perry was listed but it is actually Monroe Township Delaware County Indiana as more accurately described in the application hi

We are here. Could you speak into the microphone, please?

We are here to request that we are able to continue with the animals. The primary purpose has been 4-H and has been 4-H and continues to be 4-H. we do use the eggs we do eat the chickens um so i i guess we do use them for more than just 4-h but the primary reason that the animals came on the property and are there is for the kids 4-h experience and to continue that um we were zoned farm and we truthfully just did not realize that um two and a half acres put us in that category for that ordinance and kind of realized it when we decided to build a new barn for those animals to live in. And so we can build a barn, but now we just need to be able to have the animals to continue to keep the animals put in the barn. So that's kind of why we're here today.

I just want to make sure I'm clear on something that I'm seeing in the application that you stated. So you do sell some of the animals, correct? No. Okay. None of them are sold as pets?

No. Oh, okay.

I'm just trying to define if there's a business aspect to the operation of having the animals.

No. When the kids more specifically breed the rabbits, for for a show even though we mainly need sorry even though you may only need three rabbits sometimes they don't get the notification and they might have four or five rabbits so we will take them to auction and sell them or if we know someone who is meeting it or we will give the rabbit away um we do that with the chickens as well um or They go into the freezer. But no, so we are not selling in that way. It's just if, like I said, if they don't get on board with how many we need that year for show and we get a couple of extra, we'll sell them. Yeah.

Okay, perfect. Thank you.

I guess there was a question somebody had submitted with all of those animals. Can you tell me what you do with all of their waste and how often are you doing that?

The biggest thing that we do, well, is we compost it. It goes back into the garden. Our garden, you can probably see it on the map, is that big area that's under the weed mat in front of the barns back there. That weed mat will get rolled back and we bring it up. there's been occasion where the field behind us that farmer has told us we could once he takes it out spread it out because he will just till it in the next year when he does his thing and we know people who will come in and take it if it ever becomes something that we get too much to utilize for our own purpose. It really isn't as much as you think. I know it sounds like it, but it's not like cow, like, I mean, they're little tiny pellets, even the goats. So, I mean, it really doesn't amount to a lot. Mostly it all just stays for our use or, you know, yeah.

Have you ever had any of your neighbors complain about any noises or the vast number of animals that you have on your property?

No, no.

Anybody else have any questions? You may have a seat then. Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 40-26?

Good evening. Randall Crum. I live at 7401 South Cowan, which makes me their immediate neighbor to the south. Just here to say that they've been great neighbors. They're excellent at taking care of their animals, and we've never had any negative interactions in regard to any of that. Or any, actually. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Emma Miller. These are my parents. I just really wanted to bring to the forefront that these are for 4-H and without my animals, I would have not became the young woman that I am today. I'm actually going to Purdue to study vet science and without these animals and the opportunities that they've given me through 4-H and FFA and like that, that would have not happened. And not only with that, but they've taught me responsibility, the time management. You know, it's one thing to get up for school and just get yourself ready and go. It's a whole other story to go take care of something that depends on you and then get yourself ready and then go to school. And I am grown up now, obviously, but... My sister and my brother, you know, they haven't really had the opportunity to start taking off with their own stuff in the 4-H world, in the FFA world. And I would really, really love if they had the opportunity because, I mean, they're young. They need it. They need the experience. And I would just love to see that grow within them. So thank you.

Thank you.

I think a lot of us are here for them, so that's always making sure.

My name's Katie Nixon. I'm the 4-H Council President. I'm familiar with Emma. A lot of us here are 4-H volunteers. I also farm in Yorktown. I've seen people that own a lot more than two and a half acres treat their animals poorly. I think if the animals are well taken care of on two and a half acres, as well as obviously there's no neighbors here in opposition, I don't see why they couldn't keep them. And yeah, I'm obviously pro-4-H and keep the kids doing something that teaches them some responsibility. So I think as long as the animals are safe, people are safe, I think it should be approved.

So thank you for your time.

Hello, I'm Elizabeth and my husband Tom Ison. We live at 13901 East County Road, 150 South Parker City, Indiana. We are also the poultry 4-H leaders and we've had the privilege to have the Miller kids as our members of our poultry club. And they take extremely well care of their poultry and their birds. And they're probably working on next year's project for the poultry project. So we are for you guys letting them keep all their animals.

I just want to make one statement as far as the selling of animals. every baby that's born is not a gold medal Olympic athlete, right? So the same as the way in agriculture, you may breed the goats and have three goats, but maybe only one's good enough to take to the fair and show. So you take the others to the sale barn. So you're not doing it as far as a business to make money. You're just basically calling the ones that don't make the great, but yes. they do take great care of their animals we do blood testing at the fairgrounds prior to the fair everything's always clean neat and well taken care of thank you

Obviously, they have a lot of support. My name is Susan Nassar. I live at 16661 North State Road 3N in Eaton, Indiana. I am a former 4-H leader. I'm retired from that now and have been seven years in 4-H, also middle school, high school, and FFA with the Miller family, along with my five children as well. I can say my children benefited personally from interactions with the Miller family. specifically the two older children, Emma. She gave one of my daughters a rabbit that then won showmanship. And she only learned how to do showmanship from Emma. And Emma took care of making sure her animal was properly registered. The older brother who is unable to be here tonight, he worked with my kids as well to help show their goats. And when we had multiple entries and events, Emma, Luke, both stepped up and helped. And then we were able to then have my middle daughter go on and work with Olivia and Horse and Pony. They don't have any horses out there. They used ours, just to say that very clearly. Clearly, Emma spoke about being able to go to Purdue. She learned that and wants to be that from being raised on a farm with these farm animals. And I can tell you our community needs vets. We have very few large animal vets. It is a scramble and everybody looking for, hey, which vet can we get a vet? To have that opportunity in our community is a godsend. And also just to say their interaction with everybody across the board in 4-H and FFA, they do a lot for every single livestock participant, through their contributions at the auctions for those animals. And those contributions come from their involvement and their understanding of the importance of the auction funds to the 4-H'ers for maintaining their own animals, for learning, and for scholarship as well. So I'd like to say, please support their variants. Thank you.

My name is Robbie Mikeslile at 6660 South County Road, 900 West. I'm here to help you guys to hopefully give them their variants. The Millers helped my kids get started up into 4-H the last several years. They gave them chickens. Jacob gave them two chickens that they could get started. So they have taught my kids how to take care of chickens and how to raise chickens, plus give them the responsibility of getting them up in the morning. which is a challenge for mine. To have that responsibility has been huge. The Millers make huge contributions for the 4-H. So I'm just speaking that hopefully you guys give them their variance for their ordinance.

I'm Jennifer Crum. I live at 7401 South Cowan Road. I am also their south neighbor. I just wanted to speak to the other part of the variance that they're seeking with the barn that's near our property. It's not 200 feet from our residence, but from our detached garage, and we are in support of them having that.

Anybody else wishing to speak in favor? Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 40-26? OK. Seeing none, is there anything you want to address with regard to this particular case?

Packets contained eight written letters of support. This process started when the Millers applied for a permit for an addition. Tom Fouch, County Building Commissioner, advised them they needed to come and do this process and they have followed through on that request.

Then the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 40-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 40-26 as presented with the condition that the variance be for the applicant only and not transfer with the property.

I'd second that.

We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.

Ivey.

Yes.

Knapp. Yes. Billington.

Yes.

Yes. Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines? Yes. Mathewson? Yes. Seven yeses. So that is official action of approval of BZA 40-26. We will provide you a certification of that approval and you can proceed with keeping your animals and applying for your permit for your addition.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

My goodness.

Yep. Yep. Cool.

Okay.

we are at bza 41-26 jurisdiction board of zoning appeals being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by ryan and jennifer reef requesting a variance from the terms of the city of muncie comprehensive zoning ordinance to allow automobile sales business in a community business zone on premises located at 1026 west jackson street muncie indiana as more accurately described in the application

Good evening, board members. Thank you for hearing my request for a variance of use for automobile sales at 1026 West Jackson Street this evening. It is currently zoned for community business, and I'm asking you to allow the variance for automobile sales at that location.

I guess one of the questions I had So all of the automobiles that you'll be here at this location, they're going to be operable, not salvage or anything like that taking place on this particular property?

Absolutely. There'll be no repairs being performed on this facility. There'll be nothing that is... not up to standard. I am a 29-year business owner in Delaware County. I adhere to very high standards and my reputation represents that.

So what you're referring to is you have the other location on Kilgore?

Correct.

And are you going to keep that location as well as this one?

That will be my active location. I'm actually going to be renting this location to another person that has been carrying a dealer's license in Muncie or Delaware County, but his current location is not visible. When I purchased that property, it was originally for possibly my son who graduated with a business degree. However, he is currently working for me. He's not quite ready to go on his own yet. So that is my hope for the future.

So your location there on Kilgore, you sell, I've been by there many times, and you sell very quality vehicles. Thank you, yes. And that's what you're saying is the intent of this location.

I feel like this location will represent me, and I won't stand for anything other than that.

Thank you. That's right there at the river?

Yes, correct.

I've seen it several times. I do business down there.

Yeah. Yes, sir.

And it has had greatly improved site and sewer for that area.

I'm still working on it, but I appreciate that. Thank you.

So the vehicles are going to be displayed along Jackson and then I guess where are all the vehicles going to be? I'm just thinking about this is quite a tight lot. So I'm curious how many vehicles are going to be on display at this site.

But that's a good question. It's hard to if you could see the map, it's basically there's already parking designated for the past occupant of Wink Electric, who operated, you know, an electric company that that house sell several employees and different vehicles what we're looking to do is have a niche facility which basically is kind of like my place on Kilgore it's not going to be a high volume place but it's going to be quality pre-owned eight to ten vehicles there's designated parking spots already there we've actually put concrete barriers up While I have been working on the property, there's been people driving through that property at a high rate of speed. Prior to that, they were trying to avoid the stop sign. Some of my workers even almost got hit numerous times. So that's why we added the barricades to kind of provide the parking areas for that. Along with vehicles, there may be a few, you know, side by side or some golf carts parked and a small amount and zero turn mowers but it's what we're looking for is a clean niche automobile place you know not to have high volume where you've got 200 cars you know it's eight to ten is what we're looking for right and i and i think the property um given my background i think the property will represent that well

Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none, you may have a seat then, sir. Thank you. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 41-26? Well State, I'm 4511 East County Road 450 North.

Ryan's been a friend of mine for probably 20 years at least, and he does excellent work. I went in in March to have my car cleaned up, and he said, hey, I just bought this property. Let's go take a look at it. And we walked through it. I made some recommendations, and he ran with those recommendations, and the property looks immensely better than it used to. um one of the fellows i referred to him to do some work there called me and said thanks for about getting me killed in the side yard or side drive and so he we talked about putting the barricades in there and try to do some protection for the vehicles and the people that are going to be employed there and looking at vehicles there so My mom worked at the Meadow Shopping Center, so I'm real familiar with that area, and this building stands out in that area now. And across the street with Townsend and what that developed into, I think this speaks well for that area. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of BZA 41-26? Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 41-26?

My name's David Nelson. I live on West Jackson Street, have it for 60 years, and I'm not really opposed to him having a used car lot sitting over there on Jackson Street. But my question is with concrete barriers around, the middle of the sidewalk on West Jackson Street and the others appear to be on City Easement and I don't think that's quite right and that's a blind intersection if you're going west on Main Street and it's kind of hazardous because the people coming over the bridge going toward town That's a high area, and you can't see that way very well. And then if you look to the east, down Jackson Street, if they have their cars there, they had a bunch of stuff there three or four weeks ago before they cleared it all out, and you can't see at all. And those concrete barriers are in the middle of the sidewalk. But that's my only thing I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 41-26? Do you have anything on this particular matter?

City Building Commissioner Richard Rawlings stated he's actively working with the applicant, will continue to work with the applicant to address any concerns of impeding corner site so that that does not become a problem.

Could you also, Kylene, confirm that the business is not permitted to have objects in the right of way on the sidewalk? Is that correct?

Well, I'm not sure. The aerials don't have those in there yet. And without a survey, it's very hard to tell what is right of way and what is not right of way. There's many restrictions, regulations, guidelines. We do end up with a lot of things in right-of-way. And property owners pretty much understand if you do put something in right-of-way, if the electric company comes through there, if anyone comes through there that has rights over that easement, your property does not. stay um i i cannot say one way or the other whether these barriers are in the right away or not i've probably been by there 25 times since they added the block and did the repainting and

I have no visual impairment because the blocks are fake code. They only make 36 inches. So if you're in a car, you can definitely see if you're on anything else. I didn't observe that.

But it very well matches.

It's no higher than any one of the blocks anywhere else in town. Now, I did not get out and measure the right of way. But right away, I was never concerned when I came by there. And my ability to see going left off that turn, which is probably to be the most impeded direction, had no impeded

Yeah, and there is a small section on the lower western corner that is owned by county commissioners currently. So all of the applicant's property, there is a space there where there's that blank triangle there, if that makes sense.

I'm not sure if you have any, I guess that's the only thing that has been addressed is the concrete barrier.

In regards to that, we do have them set back off the sidewalk. We want to be a good steward to the residents and that's my goal. That's what I do. I want to work with folks and do what we can to do things right. I have been in contact with Richard Rawlings and we've discussed those.

didn't object to to the situation currently okay thank you sir thank you appreciate your time okay then the board chair would entertain a motion as to bza 41-26

I make a motion to approve BZA 41-26 with the conditions that there be no salvage activity, including non-running vehicles on site, and that the variance be for the applicant and the applicant's leasee only and will not transfer with the property.

Second. A motion and a second. Roll call, please.

Billington?

Yes.

Rich? No. Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines?

Yes.

Ivy?

Yes.

Knapp? Yes. Mathewson?

Yes.

Six yeses, one no. So that is official action of approval of BZA 41-26. We will provide you with a certification outlining that approval and those conditions.

Thank you.

BZA 42-26 Jurisdiction Board of Zoning Appeals being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Rachel Suskovich as Luxera Properties LLC requesting a variance of use from the terms of the City of Muncie Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow group housing in a student social services zone and to allow reduced parking on premises located at 1100 West Riverside Avenue, Muncie, Indiana as more accurately described in the application.

Hi, and thank you for the thoughtful review. I know it's 9 o'clock, but thank you for your time tonight. I am the owner of 1100 West Riverside Avenue. Before purchasing this property, I was working with Greek Life at Ball State and have continued to engage with that department as well as work with Student Affairs. We are all excited about the property. It's historically been fraternal housing. And just to give a little bit of information about Greek life at Ball State, almost all of the fraternities have a house on Greek Row. There is one that is interested in the house, and I do work with them, and we'll see if they end up leasing this house. But currently, the fraternity that is living in it moves out at the end of june and they purchased a house three doors down so this house will be vacant for this coming academic year and sororities are actually very interested and sororities have always i think wanted to be on greek row or have some sort of presence there among the greek life and greek housing it just hasn't happened for them i think this is an opportunity for them to do that But because of the timing that we acquired the property, most students had already secured leases. And so the sorority that wants the house cannot fill the house. So we're proposing shared housing with other students that are not part of that sorority. Sorority is happy to do this and excited to do this. But we need to do a variance to see if that's possible.

So I know that you want this to be for, I guess, the 26-27 academic school year. Correct. So it would end probably beginning of August of 2027.

For the applied variant? Yes. Yes, that would be fine.

And then you're also asking to have a reduction of six parking spaces. Is there I guess a reason why you're asking for the reduced number of spaces?

Yeah, to be honest and completely transparent, I think it's a little bit of a gray area. So we just included it in the application in case we saw that there was a need for that. I think the house that we're talking about now has more spaces than the majority or maybe all of the other Greek houses on campus. It has 25 spaces and two of them are ADA. And as far as the students that live in the house, there's going to be plenty of parking for residents. It's really just making sure that we are compliant with anything that might be. To be specific, it's because we're applying for two uses, group housing and sorority. So if we are to be compliant with both of those, we need to add the two needs together, which comes to a greater number than what we have, if that makes sense. Sure. Okay.

Does anyone else have any questions of the applicant? Seeing none, you may have a seat then, ma'am. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 42-26? Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 42-26? Also seeing none, we discuss this.

So you have several letters of support already in your packet, but there was one letter that was given to you this evening that was not in your packet. And this letter is from Zachariah Brumfield. So this is also a letter of support. Zachariah Brumfield is the associate director of student life, fraternity and sorority life at Ball State University.

And sorry, can I add that that was also on behalf of Ball State Student Affairs Department? Rowan, who's the vice president of Student Affairs, is out on vacation this weekend, so she delegated. So that is on behalf of Ball State Student Affairs.

Yeah, we had a different letter as well from Ball State University. That is Keisha Warren Gordon.

Yes, from a different perspective as a professor.

um yeah also president of kappa delta zeta kappa yeah she's adorable she's amazing um just a couple comments for the board just to kind of clarify the parking the parking is a little was a little tricky um for group housing the requirement is one parking space for every two occupants so for a group housing with 28 rooms there would need to be 14 parking spaces. However, with the dual use of the sorority, in the ordinance, the requirement for a sorority is one parking space for every three active members. So there may be 60 active members that we had to kind of take into account for with the parking.

I do want to just say where I think some of the gray area also comes in is it says verbatim parking for sorority requires one space for every three active members or dormitory residents, but it doesn't necessarily say, you know, the number of sorority dormitory residents or is that one in three for the dormitory residents? It's just a little...

Yeah, and we kind of took away the eight members that you currently have that are sorority members. So we did the parking spaces for just 20 group housing and then the rest for sorority. So we kind of did a little equation there.

Yeah, and we're close on spaces.

Yeah. Let's see what else. The applicant is actively working with Richard Rawlings, City Building Commissioner, in his office. She's had meetings with their office. She's had meetings with Eric Brown, Chief Fire Inspector. I've had conversations with a couple of people from Ball State that were in support. And we did also contact them. And I know that Mrs. Suskovich has contacted them as well with emails that we've been included on. So she has reached out to a lot of people in preparing for this.

Yeah, I'd like it to be collaborative with Ball State University being on CREEPRO.

Then the chair would entertain a motion with regard to BZA 42-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 42-26 as presented with the variances being that it be for the applicant only and not transfer with the property and that the variance of use will expire in August of 2027. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.

Billington?

Yes.

Rich? Yes. Hamilton? Yes. Hines? Yes. Ivy?

Yes.

Knapp?

Yes.

Mathewson?

Yes.

Seven yeses, so that is official action of approval of BZA 42-26. We will provide you with certification of that approval.

Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, BZA 43-26, Jurisdiction, Board of Zoning Appeals, being a public hearing on the matter of an application filed by Atlas Tower and Muncie Redevelopment Commission, requesting a determination under the terms of the City of Muncie Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance, to allow a new wireless communication facility and to allow reduced setbacks from dwellings and to allow reduced planting and landscape treatments for a new wireless communication facility in a resident zone on premises located approximately 140 feet north of the intersection of Elizabeth Avenue and Euclid Avenue. Muncie, Indiana is more accurately described in the application.

Hello Commissioners, thank you for having me. My name is Parker Bingham, representing Atlas Towers from Boulder, Colorado. So, quick project overview. We are proposing a 125-foot monopole telecommunications tower. This is a tower in partnership with AT&T Communications. They would be installing their antennas at the top spot of the tower upon construction, should this be granted. The facility itself would come equipped with adequate space for AT&T's own equipment, as well as additional carriers, ground space equipment as well, all enclosed in fencing. This is a purpose-driven tower. We worked with AT&T. They identified a coverage gap in the greater Muncie area, particularly around Ball State and the surrounding residences, which is why we are proposing this. And as mentioned, we are asking for two variances, technically three, but two of which are setback related to local residences, and then one pertaining to landscaping. I have the aerial here and you all have the packet. But this is going to be located next to the existing Ball State electrical facility, which is that large gray area there. This is a rendering mock-up of what it would look like. I will get into the specifics of kind of the ground facilities and why they look like that, but it is mainly due to the FEMA floodplain that is identified that runs through the area. So some more site specifics. These are the general plans. These are the general plans. It's a 50 foot by 50 foot general area that we have an option to lease with with the Muncie Redevelopment Commission. The tower itself, as shown, can support up to four total antennas, so three additional to the AT&T ones to be installed at the top. So as I said, this is needed to improve the wireless coverage. As the capacity grows and expands in the city, there so needs to be more coverage granted by towers. Current towers are nearing capacity or are at capacity, such as I will show in later slides, one tower cannot even feasibly take any new antennas as it is already at max capacity. With more smartphones and more smart devices connecting to these networks, it's imperative that these issues are addressed now rather than later before they become more issues, particularly around emergency communications and keeping those channels clear. So this is to serve Ball State. It's to serve the surrounding area and the residents, those who live here and those who don't, who are just traveling through or maybe even here just for a few years to study. So the coverage map that was initially identified by AT&T is shown here with the large blue region kind of to the left side. It's a little hard to see, but there is a red dot, which is where we're proposing. And once the facility simulation is ran with the antennas at the 120 foot mark, We can see a dramatic increase of coverage. Now you can clearly see that red star where the tower would be and the surrounding area now has the very good rating of quality for cell service. And that is for indoor or in-car cell service. So we chose this property in partnership with the Redevelopment Commission as it was identified to be a unique parcel unsuitable for most other uses. The unique size and position of it and also being right next to the electrical facility does not allow for many other uses. So in partnership with the commission, we found that it would be an adequate use to install a community infrastructure

on this parcel.

There aren't a ton of other great spots like this one in the area, especially because of that coverage gap, we need to be within that certain area. It is also located far enough away from existing towers. The code states that there has to be a search radius of 750 yards to see if there would be opportunity to co-locate. As I will show in another slide, the nearest tower existing is 1500 yards away. So here, here is the... existing towers. So us in the center with a 750-yard ring, there is nothing there, and there's no additional buildings or tall enough structures to support these antennas, hence the need for the monopole itself. At the 1,500-yard mark, we have a 140-foot existing monopole. I drove by it to confirm, but it still today has four carriers on it, meaning that no additional carriers can be installed for safety and capacity issues and concerns. Going further we have one down at the south, a 150 foot lattice tower, also has three carriers, and one to the northwest that is a 155 foot monopole which only has one carrier on it. And it is too far away again to cover this particular area. So going into the variance particulars, the planning commission has identified two particular properties that were close and requiring a variance, one to the north, which is approximately 156 feet away from the fence line of our facility, so about 25 feet additional from the tower itself, and then one to the south, approximately 115 feet away, again, from the fence line. So we are proposing to deviate from the required 200 foot setback to go to the respective proposed setbacks here. I also did include a ring in orange of the 125 foot radius around the tower center. And as you can see, it does not even, should any dramatic effect cause the tower to fail, it wouldn't even touch the property. But that being said, It would be designed by professional engineers with a concrete foundation to ensure that it would not fail. So the tower would still entirely be on this property. It is out of the site constraints, like I said, with the unique parcel and this is not out of preference. These are measured, again, from the fence line and not the tower itself. So coming from the tower itself, we would be adding approximately another 25 feet to those distances. And we believe these are reasonable. There's minimal site traffic. We would be expecting per carrier only about two trucks a year to go for regular maintenance, unless, of course, there's a more severe outage. But on average, it is only two visits a year per carrier. We wouldn't be displacing residences or their uses. There's not really a comparable public benefit, like I had mentioned, to this parcel, hence the need for this. And there is no impact to public safety or health. As for the landscaping variance, this is in a floodway. identified by FEMA. We have been working with Indiana DNR to work through these and as of today I actually received the permit of approval from their department on this particular design and compound. So we are asking to essentially get rid of the landscaping requirement, as it would put more in the floodway. It would cause more cloggage, essentially, if anything should come down the floodway. We've already worked to minimize the amount of infrastructure in the floodway pertaining to the tower. Adding with the landscaping requirements and trees and shrubbery almost goes opposite of that intention. Our goal is to not create further issues or further flooding problems. So we believe this would be appropriate. It would only provide limited screening benefit. And given the area next to the electrical facility, it would not be a particularly dramatic change to the view anyway. It would further support the floodplain function in keeping it clear and free of any debris. We find that it would be compatible with the floodplain management, as DNR has told us, and again, mirrors the already. And overall, this facility would improve the coverage, the wireless service reliability. We would obviously have enhanced emergency communications, and those would not be bogged down by residences that are also using those networks. We allow the tower to include ground space as well as the tower space itself for additional carriers. This would reduce the overall need for additional towers in the future as then like they could all just go into this one. And we find that it's an efficient use of city owned property that could benefit the residents. So since there is nothing within the 750 yard setback of existing towers, we find that this is a reasonable ask and that the coverage gap that was identified by AT&T is another reason of support for this. We find that everybody that we have spoken with within the Redevelopment Commission is in support of this project. And we would kindly ask that this zoning permit gets approved with all the variances included. Thank you.

Thank you.

And I can answer any questions.

And maybe you can maybe elaborate, because I know that you said that you have gotten approval of a plan for landscaping. What agency was that?

So we, rather, we spoke with DNR. We were working with them. I had asked them if they had any particular... requirements for landscaping in the floodplain. At this time they had not said whether or not a landscaping plan would be desirable or not, however it was kind of in my own way interpreted as they would want as minimal obstruction in that floodplain, hence why we had worked to lift the compound itself above that flood zone, that base flood elevation. But we do not have, I guess, particularly a landscape plan, as you've mentioned.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? Seeing none, you may have a seat then, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody wishing to speak in favor of BZA 43-26? Yes, ma'am.

I'm going to refer to my notes. My name is Jeff Howe. I'm going to represent the city of Muncie and the Muncie Redevelopment Commission. We were approached by Atlas Towers to talk about the need for the tower because of the service or lack thereof in the area and included the university, the hospital, and the residents. We looked at a couple of other sites, one being our fire station site on Tillotson, but not doable because we'll see upgrades to that fire station and just didn't make sense to do that. So we started doing a little bit of looking, see if we could find something. We found this lot, which is behind the, I think they call it the district energy building at Ball State. If you're not familiar with it, right adjacent to where the tower will be is a very large transmission pole. I mean, not a not a telephone pole, a big pole in many I don't know what the count is, but many large satellite dishes. The the barrier between the houses to the west are there is the creek and then trees on both sides of the creek. I was actually in the creek taking pictures for the DNR. So I can tell you it's pretty thick through there. So we did have the property appraised, and we also found that the independent appraiser told us that the property had a value of about $2,500. But he also at that time, which is the important point of this, there's no practical development of this. You can't do anything there. You just can't. flood zone access, and there's just nothing to do. I think it just had a $25 value because it exists. So we work with Atlas Towers to see if we could put something together. Atlas had been working with DNR, but we kind of on the fringe were kind of helping with some pictures because Parker's located in a different state. And one of the things I learned in talking to Adam Leach as well is the modified, the construction of the tower, because if there is a flood, We don't want the fence on the ground because it's where things collects debris and things get caught. And the same thing happens with a lot of excessive landscape back there. In fact, I think when I was back there, I think there had been a storm. And it was really kind of a muddy mess back there. So we think about the benefit to the city. Beyond the utility of access to wireless communication, the lease of this property provides about $280,000 to the city over time, over the term of the lease, which is pretty good for a property that has really no value. And we think that their approach to this has been pretty thoughtful in modifying the plan. DNR ultimately had to sign off on the design, but I did pass it by the city engineer and the building commissioner, who both were supportive of the design for the purposes that we needed, especially as it related to the floodplain. So we, I think we also, and Mayor Ridenour also submitted letters of support. Hopefully you've seen those. But I would just ask you to support this. I think it's a good use for otherwise an asset that has no value to us. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of the BZA 42-26?

anybody wishing to speak in opposition to bza 42-26 i'm maggie hoy and i live at 1712 north colson drive i've lived along the ditch for 52 years and there's a severe flooding problem and i know that when they built the halfway house on tillotson they raised the level of well the elevation by a couple feet And I'm concerned. That's why I'm here. I'm concerned that you're going to put more fill in. And it's already a severe problem. And I think when they put the home in, they did not have to put in any kind of tension pond or anything. So I'm thinking if they do raise the elevation of the ground, they really should be made to compensate for that. and My neighbors on the other side of the creek, their house flooded. And I know there are other homes that flooded. And I helped them. And it's a terrible thing. They only had a couple inches. Everything had to be taken out. I took carpet cutters and helped pull up the ruined carpet. And I know that there are a lot of homes that just are right on the edge of flooding. So that's why I'm here, so that you will consider that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak in opposition to BZA 43-26? I'll let you address what you have and then I can bring the applicant back up.

Okay, so you had a couple of letters of support in your packet. You got this evening a email with just some questions on flooding as well along with a picture i will read mayor's letters he's not able to be here this evening dear members of the plan commission i am pleased to extend my support for the atlas towers proposal to construct a wireless communications tower on the 700 block of north colson drive Reliable communications infrastructure is essential to modern life, supporting residents, first responders, and businesses throughout our community. This project advances that critical goal. The location proposed for this facility has limited potential for other forms of development due to substantial flood zone constraints. and the adjacent electrical substation. By hosting this tower, we are putting otherwise unusable public property to work in a way that benefits residents and provides a modest but steady revenue stream to support ongoing economic development efforts in Muncie. i encourage approval of the necessary code variances focus use of land that strengthens infrastructure and provides tangible returns to our citizens sincerely dan right now our mayor city of muncie and just my other comments um the applicants have went through all the proper channels they have received clearance from federal aviation i'm currently working with dnr and fema our regulations do not trump dnr or fema so that is why we are asking for the requirements to align with what dnr and fema request we do not know what that will be still at this point there is already very dense vegetation and a tree line on the site and you can see in their plans they already have plans for trees around the building if that's going to be allowed by dnr and fema Richard Rawlings, City Building Commissioner, has no concerns, states that this is a good use for a property which cannot be used for much else with the existing size, shape, no road frontage, floodplain, and the existing AEP substation energy station on the adjoining parcel, or the adjacent parcel, sorry.

That's all. Yes, maybe if you can just address briefly, and I think maybe for clarification on the DNR permit, are you required to present plans and do things so that you're not causing additional flooding for surrounding properties?

Yeah, absolutely. So thank you for the concerns of the flooding. So as I said, we have worked with DNR. We actually do have a permit of approval. It is in everybody's packet. We did receive that yesterday. But essentially what that is permitting is they did review the site plans of the elevated platforms at the base elevation to extend them approximately three feet above the ground. that being said the compound or the uh the foundation for the tower were not elevating the ground service at all there's no additional elevation being gained here any sort of obstruction was calculated to be i think it was 1.4 percent increase to the floodplain which by dnr's standards is enough to warrant an approval without necessary modifications or compensating as was you know mentioned um so this permit does allow for the currently proposed design in the packet they even provided it is compliant with their with their needs okay thank you anybody else have any other questions seeing none you may have a seat then please

Then the chair would entertain a motion as to BZA 43-26.

I would make a motion to approve BZA 43-26 with the condition that the applicant continue to work with the DMMPC and DNR and submit a final landscape plan.

I'll second that.

We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.

Ivy.

Yes.

Knapp? Abstain. Billington?

Yes.

Pritch? Yes. Hamilton?

Yes.

Hines?