Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

I drove by the whole man that's really weird you know when I come back from show that whole thing just the trailer was just blazed I mean blaze to them the trailer started you know went up huh oh I mean yeah that trailer was gone it big trail too you know they're sitting at independent must been living in working on those things weird house go in by Yeah. So they got to see what they think it is. By the time I got towards fountain town, you know, it was probably 15, 20 minutes. Saw a truck headed that way. Yeah, it's going to be totally gone. Oh, it was definitely going to be totally gone. I don't think they could stop, especially the trailer. I had a new guy mobile guy in the field matlock [Music] just burn just kind of says what they think. He said once it got going then both of them just content wise I said well I got a planning commission okay so there is a All right we'll go ahead and call our meeting to order for the uh June 24th meeting of the area plan commission. We ask that you turn off any cell phones, electronic devices, any noise makers. Um, our first order of business this evening will be the adoption of last month's meeting minutes that were submitted electronically. Move to approve last month's meeting minutes. Second. All right. Moved and seconded to uh to adopt last month's meeting minutes submitted electronically. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. All oppose. Same

sign. It looks like the this evening we have uh Mr. Eden and Mr. McDaniel are absent. So, we've got a seven of nine member board. So, anything that is voted on this evening would will always require a five five votes to approve or five votes to take any action. So, if you don't like your odds with only seven people here, then you can uh look for a continuence or um actually just request a continuence if you if you would like to do that. That would be an option. Uh I'd advise you that all testimony is being recorded and is taken under oath. We also are under video recording now for the new state statutes. Um we request that if you're wishing to speak, you wait to do so until you're called upon and then when you do step up to the microphone um you'll be sworn in by our attorney prior to speaking. We ask that you give your full name for the record and spell your last name for accurate meeting minutes. Our planning director, Miss Brooks, will give a staff report and then the petitioners are given 10 minutes for their presentation. That's followed by a collective 10 minutes for remmonstrators and then we give five minutes to any government officials that would like to speak and then the petitioner gets a five minute rebuttal period. Our attorney will offer a two-minute and a one minute warning while you're speaking. I'll ask that everybody conduct themselves in a civilized respectful manner. And if you can't do that, we reserve the right to ask you to leave. And with that, uh we will begin with our hearing items. Item number three, uh, George and Donna Robinson has asked to be continued. Is there anybody here, um, for that case? Oh, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Gibson, we'll go ahead and swear you in if you're going to ask for a continuence. Truth and I do. Mike Gibson, Gibbs SO. uh we ask for a continuence to to the July hearing uh just to gather more information and prepare our case. We brought in brought in a zoning

administrator to help us with the project. Okay. Move to accept the continuence. Second. All right. Been moved and seconded to accept the uh continuence to the July meeting for George and Donna Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying I. I oppose. Same sign. All right. Thank you. So with that we will move to item number one which is a minor subdivision appeal. [Applause] for our First item tonight is an appeal of a minor subdivision, SJH minor subdivision. Uh this is located in New Palestine on US area in on US 52 near Shieldire uh Woods and Village subdivisions. It is near the intersection with County Road 700 West. I know those of you familiar with this area have a name for this barn that I am not thinking of currently, but it is um it has been used for many years as a single family residence. Um though it is currently zoned uh commercial neighborhood. Um 7103 West US52 is the

address and it has recently been purchased by Angela Huffman. So, a little history on this minor subdivision and how it came to be appealed here tonight. Um, on March 13th, this was approved and reviewed and approved by the technical committee with comments from planning, surveyor, highway, and auditor. Uh, those were addressed and it was given uh an approval by the plat committee. Uh also in March uh 4A's 1 no with conditions that the county and state come to a resolution on ride-of-way dedication and covenants address driveway access easement and maintenance uh agreement. Um however there were remmonstrators uh who appealed the subdivision's approval uh namely Aaron and Tyler Mansfield who did submit a uh an appeal. They were joined by several other neighbor neighbors um in the in the neighborhood uh immediately adjacent to the west on side drive. Um and I believe some of them are here this evening. Here's some photographs of that site. uh traffic concern um was a primary reason uh for the appeal and the busyiness of US 52. This is a INDOT facility. So driveway permits would go through um INDOT uh for any permitting and they have been queued into this. Uh so just to run you through a little bit the the process that accompanies an appeal like this and a minor subdivision like this and development on a site like this. Um first of all when a minor subdivision is appealed the plan commission acts as the plat committee.

So we kind of hear it again here tonight uh with uh given the the presentation. Um the subdivision control ordinance does give you some guidance. Um so an approval is recommended uh if the following criteria are met. Uh that the subdivision will not impede normal and orderly development of improvements of the parcel and surrounding properties. That necessary and adequate utilities and drainage facilities have been or are being provided. Uh that adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress or egress. Uh that the subdivision will not be detrimental to or endanger public health, safety or general welfare. and that the subdivision will not create more than one lot served by a private drive. Um, and upon finding that all pertinent sections of the zoning and subdivision control ordinances have been met, the plat committee may grant primary approval and the final plat may be administratively approved. There are 12 months that the petitioner has to get the plat recorded then and that must happen in order for the uh in order for the subdivider or the owner to pull a building permit. So the minor subdivision truly splits the property into two. That's what it's doing here is it is dividing land. Um zoning does not change in this case. It is zoned commercial neighborhood. Uh the lots created must meet lot standards for the CN zoning district. Uses must comply with the land use table. Uh if you want to get a building permit or an improvement location permit uh for commercial projects, those do get reviewed by the technical committee as well uh before that building permit is issued. And all projects on INDOT roadways must be re reviewed by INDOT

to get a driveway permit. So based on that, the recommendation here, and I guess I say this with all faith in my department and its ability to review um plans for development, uh is to approve this plat for subdivision. Um but I understand the petitioners concerns for sure. Um and uh and definitely I appreciate the attention they draw to uh traffic problems at the site and and others. And that's basically what I go into on this last page of my staff report, which is um that my appeal uh that the appeal references concerns about traffic safety, storm water flooding, water and sewer availability uh and privacy among other concerns. Uh while these concerns are valid um and are they are handled by existing county and state ordinances outside of the subdivision control process. So, in the ways that these are being handled, traffic information is reviewed by INDOT prior to driveway permit being issued. Uh, we also have the highway uh the highway commissioner who sits on our um technical committee and and takes this all in. Um, a traffic it could be potentially that a traffic study or something like that could be required. um drainage review is performed by the county surveyor to make sure that adequate uh drainage ponds and things like that are taken into consideration also that uh the floodway and the creeks ability on this adjacent to this site are not damaged to take on storm water. Um sanitary sewer has been addressed. Do creek utilities is actually extending uh its utilities or sewer line to the site to handle this uh development. The proposed development would be um the barn is being converted to a commercial site. Uh used to be determined, I

believe. Um and then the uh a new facility for um a small clinician like a and I'm probably messing this up so I'll let the petitioner if they have any more to add to this go, but a do I think it was a dentist's office or an optometrist, one or the other, um would be at that site, a small medical office. And so if a use is proposed, if one of those uses is propose propos proposed is a special exception, it would be required to go to the BZA uh for a hearing there and neighbors would be notified once again. If not, it would go straight to ILP review in front of the technical committee and getting that approved would basically equal a building permit. In that case, a public hearing would not be required because this is already zoned commercial neighborhood. Certain concerns like commercial develop like uh the landscaping, uh building materials, exterior lighting, dumpster enclosures, parking lot details uh would have to be included in construction plans. So those would be addressed as well by the technical committee and also through administrative review. Failure to meet any of these regulations would result in the denial of the permit or its continual holding up. Once again, failure to issue it. U so these are things we handle in our department on a daily basis. And I am I've included minutes from the technical meeting from the technical committee meeting for the subdivision plat as well as the plat committee. Um, but I'm happy to turn it over to um the parties appealing this subdivision plat or and Rhonda, let me know if I'm wrong here. Is this where we should invite Mrs. Huffman up? Um, okay. And and let me know if you have questions for me. I have a question for you.

When it comes to and it's a technical question, when it comes to the following criteria being met, obviously they're not all met in my opinion, and I think all of us will probably agree. Does that automatically reject it or is it just a prepoundonderance of the majority of those five criteria? But my interpretation is more in a more of a prepoundonderance of them. Ask me the question. So there's five criteria that need to be met to approve. It says recommend approval to apply committee if the following criteria met. I think we're all going to see at least one of them is a no. If one of them is no, does that mean we have to automatically reject it or does it just have to be a majority or can just one be yes and you vote yes? Find one to be no and all required then. And that's the question. I don't know if all are required. Okay. You're saying that section Okay. Section 150. So, the subdivision control ordinance gives the following guidance. 155.021 technical committee review of the minor subdivision plat. Recommend approval to plat committee if the following criteria are met. That the subdivision will not impede normal and orderly development of improvements of the parcel and surrounding properties. That necessary and adequate utilities and drainage facilities have been or are being provided. That adequate measures will be taken to provide e ingress egress. uh that subdivision will not be detrimental to or endanger public health, safety, or general welfare. And number five is subdivision will not create more than one lot served by a private drive. And I guess maybe we need to doublech check and I can do that while you guys talk about this more to make sure there was not a and or an or at the end of number four. Would you like me to check that?

Okay. Was there not an actual plat? The very first pages of my uh staff report show the plat and I I saw that. This one might have a couple markups on it, but because it's been, you know, reviewed and approved by techno committee. So those five items are those five five items that you read are not for the plat committee. They're for the tech committee. And the tech committee is saying that all five of those are met. Oh, they are. They all have to be met. They approved it on the 13th of March. Four to four to one. I'm sorry. the tech the tech committee approved it on March 13th and the minutes are from the tech committee or the plat committee? Both. Both. Yeah, both at the 4:1. I'm sorry. The four to one was the plat. I'm sorry, I misread that. It's the 313. It just said it was reviewed and approved by the technical committee. And those minutes were in our packet. I thought I I don't see the minutes in the packet. They're on the packet. They're not in the packet that we were emailed. Oh, they might have been. Maybe I just read it because

we I subscribed to all the minutes. So, I might have I might have picked that up on on that email. Lots of paperwork. I'll pass it down. Is she looking at the tech committee minutes or the plat? I think she's looking at the plat. Yeah. So B says B says that all have to be men. Now, the plaque committee has receives signoffs before they receive it, and we don't necessarily get we get an approval or a disapproval or or a list of things that need to be corrected beforehand. [Applause] So, we're we're going a little bit beyond what we normally, you know, if if the tech committee sees it and goes over it all and approves it. It's not like the plaque committee reviews the tech committee unless there's something they've written. Sometimes if they have a problem with something or they state that they had to look into a matter further is the way it's normally addressed. So is there typically these five things you're talking about we don't necessarily see those on the plat committee seen by the tech committee it it historically platt when coming or when we see them I mean has been pretty

unanimous this was a 4 to one um is that typical these days or no uh sometimes okay what was were there any dissenting comments Mr. Holden. Okay. You don't need just that's okay. Um um I think the major discussion for me during it was there was issues of or seemed like a little bit different way they were going to park on this. you know, like it was almost I'm could be wrong, maybe I don't remember right, but it seemed like it was one partial I kept trying to figure out how there was going to be shared parking and there was going to be designated parking for each business and that was my biggest uh spent a lot of time trying to figure that out. Thank you. Can I have one one more question for me on zoning history? So, this is commercial neighborhood. We have a bunch of residential which is we're going to always run into conflict with when we have some of these mixed areas. Um what's the zoning history? This has been CN and was it administratively changed or this is just what it's been? I believe it last time there was a zone that would take it all the way back. Can I ask a quick question of the board? Which is the one that we're not going to do? Number three. Are you talking about the continuence? Uh, which of the five items from technical committee if this is an and would be a no? Oh, there's I think you're going to I think when you listen to everybody, I think you're going to find there's several. There's definitely a concern with the you know, having living in Sher Creek Township myself, I can tell you that. I've I've been at the house across the street many times back

when uh the Hendri Hendrickson's were there and uh I can tell you I would never pull out left. I would always turn a right, turn around at Chammire Woods and go that way. It's just too dangerous. There's it's just there's an incline there and I think you're going to see the ingress and egress. There's it that's going to be dangerous. Maybe if you change it to right turn only in and right turn only out. Maybe if INDOT, which I doubt INDOT's going to do anything. They came and do US 40 and 600 East correctly. So, I doubt they're going to do US52 and 700 West correctly. So, it it's just unfortunate. I don't you know, I don't think there's a problem with the CN. It's just the problem is is there sounds like they're going to bring a lot of traffic in and that's not going to work in this area. So, I think you're going to see multiple ones of these. I think they have other concerns, but I don't know if they'll meet parts of those five. I mean, obviously, public safety is a concern. Um I don't think health or general welfare will be that that far and then I don't know about um if the subdivision will not create more than one lot. I think there are just uh one private drive. I think the endot would probably require just one drive. I think that would be and then also the adequate utilities and drainage. That's also a concern because they don't have that yet but it's coming that way I believe through Palestine. They're so if they waited if they waited it would it would possibly be there. So that one would be met met at that point. Dough Creek is coming from the Marian County side. Okay. And they've reserved the whole back portion of the lot for drainage. It's an easement. We do we don't have the the actual drawing though. There. That's it. Okay. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. That's the one that I was thinking. Yeah.

But I guess procedurally though, typically the plaque committee, which we're acting as the plaque committee this evening, you you wouldn't consider the five items under the tech committee. No, you receive their approval and then you move forward from that. So these five items wouldn't be under consideration. But there a lot of times she may give us a list of things that they were concerned about that they would have won taken care of before. That makes any sense. You've seen it, right? Yeah. You share that with them. Is it possible for me to not yet? No. On their approval. Did they have any questions or concerns? I don't think so. [Music] But they were addressed. That's the way she explains it is. Yeah, but he has no power. It's in that way. Gary has no power. That's the problem. I know, but that's the problem for him. He went that way. No, that's the comments. When I gave you the minutes, would you do that? I passed it that way. They're still at it that way.

I see it. So, this is you talk about those items that we're looking at very much. Are the building setback requirements correct? Things like easements, are there typos? size. That's just all right. So with these actually work backwards a little bit. So our we would hear first from the from the petitioner, right? Not the person that filed the appeal. Or is it the person that filed the appeal gets the petitioner's time? I think we've done it both ways on accident. Yeah, the petitioner. So, okay. Are you guys ready to hear from the Right. Yeah. As long as time is equal, I don't care which one goes first. Okay. Uh the petitioner then is Miss Huffman here. Is that the petitioner? Yeah. Come on up. Be sworn in. Angela Huffman. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, I do. Angela Huffman. Hu FF M. Okay. Thank you. Um, sorry about that. I just felt like I could answer maybe some of your questions. Um, I had emailed um some of the mon we've talked about things. Um, we are a localowned business. Um, Kayla was correct. My husband is an optometrist. We've been a

New Palestine for 25 years. Um, and I actually grew up in New Palestine. My parents went to New Palestine High School. We're very much about keeping hometown feel. And when this came up, we had been at the the barn when I was younger. They were great contributors to the community. Um, and we just really thought this was a way that we could keep a piece of history because probably without commercial, and believe me, with the cost we've already incurred, um, you know, it would be torn down. So, we just really feel like this isn't a corporate entity. Um, so that that was one of the that's the reason that we bought. Um the other plot that we're looking at we're did discussion with is a um new Palestine graduate dentist already has an established practice. His family went here. Both of his wife and his family were just both longtime community. We've been longtime family friends. Um so we felt this was a great way to give back and it being small commercial. So you have a op optometry office and a dental office. um 3500 ft for my husband's and his would be somewhere between 3500 and 4,000. The main thing that I would did want to address is all of those items have been and are being addressed. So the main one is INDOT. I understand the concern there and that actually we have to do a traffic study. It's actually ongoing right now. Um tens of thousands of dollars to get that um um a site engineer who does that has already met with INDOT. um things like it would be just one driveway. We'd have to move the driveway down. It would have to be across from the other side of the residence. Um they're doing traffic studies and all that's involved with that. Um one of the reasons as far as commercial also with ours is being small commercial, you're not talking you're not talking, you know, a McDonald's or a

fast food or anything like that. you know, my husband probably sees 20 patients a day spread out through a 12-h hour day, you know, maybe more than that. So, um, we've got zip codes. Again, that is all being addressed. So, all of those areas are we have a a site plan engineer who's drawn that up. We've already spoken to Do Creek Utilities. He's drawing up everything um appropriately and working with Do Creek to do the septic. Uh, same thing with the detention pond. Like again, we're not just those are all on the site plans and we have engineers who are doing that. Kind of going back to what Kayla said, all of those things have to be in place before we get the building permit. Also getting we have to work with the Department of Homeland Security because it's going from residential to commercial. Have a site uh structural engineer on that. Um we're not we want to do this right. We want to we understand again our neighbors. We have friends who live in Chillmire Woods, very good friends, lots of actually a few different sets. Um, I do think probably the biggest thing is is the traffic. Um, but again, that's that's what I endot. Um, and we're still, you know, waiting to hear hear back from that because they said our study will be done by the end of July. Um, but I I don't feel like there's really any other it was we didn't we're not asking for a change. We wouldn't have bought the venue or the the land if we we would have never bought it if we obviously if we thought, you know, if it wasn't already commercial and we're not developers. So, we called they said it was commercial. So, we were like we're community commercial small. We're good to go. Again, knowing the driveway, but had already checked out all of those and have site engineers um on the on for that. So, I'm I would also kind of concur that I feel like they they looked over that the the

committee before and they were good to go with that and any of those other things, the five things actually knowing that and our engineer was at that meeting. Those were all addressed. So, we feel like we're doing everything that both the county and state requires um to be done. I don't know. Yes. What is your husband's business again? I He's an optometrist. It's the best inside I care. How many How many parcels are there and how many drives? How many private drives? There would be How many are there now? How many under this plan? How many parcels? Just one. Just one parcel and one drive. No, no, no. I'm sorry. Two parcels. We're trying to do it into two parcels. So, it would be the dentist. We're looking at about an acre. 1.1 1.2 for him. Um and then we would keep the rest. And there's one drive and and that drive again has to be moved as far as possible across from the other one. That's all stipulations of INDOT there. In fact, right now there are two drives which is even more. I know it's private residence, but there are actually two drives and we would have one and push it down away from you delete one more. There would be you would get rid of. So there are two drives. Correct. and we're going down to one and in a different location that will mirror the um the land the house across from us abandoned one of the two and you'll only have one drive correct both parcels correct okay so it comes in I don't trying to see if you don't have that plan I'm sorry I didn't bring that but you would come in and then you would turn and to address the parking it's just there's there's parking just in the middle so like if if this is the land His building would be here. The barn is right here. And then we just share the parking in the middle. So we're shared lot agreement between the two. Pardon? There's a shared agreement of parking

between the lots. Yes, there will be. I mean, we're I mean we're shared maintenance. We've discussed that. We again because we can't we don't have that finalized. He wants to proceed. We're waiting on traffic study for numbers and to make sure we can even divide the plot. So, but but pretty much his he's got his parking that will facilitate and the engineer drew it up that way based on state guidelines for his building and we have ours, but there's they're like right next to each other. So, they're in the center and the buildings are on the outside. So, there's no parking between us and the neighbors. Like, does that make sense? I I I'm just worried about how the lots you have two separate lots with one entrance shared parking shared parking and there's an agreement for access or correct whatever. Yes, we will have easements. Yes, that's all. Yeah, for have you any of the work due to the appeal? Pardon? Have you paused any of the work due due to the appeal? Paused any of the construction or work? No, actually because we're just doing the the roof and the framing. We still we should be back with our um engineer engineer stamp drawings within the next couple weeks that we would then um submit to the Department of Homeland Security. How many total buildings will there be in the in the plan? Two. Forever and ever or just two? Yeah, that's all that we're planning on. I I actually we're we're too old. This is our last one. Our our daughter just graduated from optometry school. She's joining the business. So, you know, we're wanting to expand, but yeah. Okay. And you've you've mentioned you have been working with our demonstrators, the the those who submitted the appeal. What have you done with some of the privacy concerns? What conversations or what? So, the concerns were that they had addressed was the tree line um that not to, you know, disturb that or anything. And I want to keep as many trees as possible.

There is I would love to keep that tree line. We're not planning on taking anything down. the and I had told them the only thing that we would if if the sewer ran someplace and they had to put a sewer, you know, to connect to Dough Creek, but that would even just be at the front. Um, absolutely don't want to take anything down as far as that. Again, I I would say it's a small business. It's not a, you know, we're open till 5 or I mean, our office one night, I think they're open till 6. The dentist is the same way. We're not Yeah, I don't I think that was I mean, you obviously hear from them, but I think I think the the the way you probably look at this is it's in a lot of ways it's like an integrated center, which we don't really have that sort of designation, but it's it's a building with an it's an outlot in a way. You could kind of look at it like that. These two buildings are sharing a parking lot. um kind of similar to the office condos that are down the street I think that Dr. Hilton has uh there. But yeah, so it's that sort of thing. Um and and tonight what we're looking at is the it's the it's just the plat, you know, I think that's like what Brian was saying. We're we're looking at upon the approval of the tech committee. I mean, it's commercial neighborhood. It's CN. So, does it fit the comp plan? Does it fit the zoning? Is it a proper use to divide up? I know it's kind you might have her tell you all the signoffs we got, you know, drainage, tech committee. I mean, there's a whole list uh highway. I mean, there's a whole list that have to sign off. The planning department, they have to sign off and we don't really technically make a decision

normally unless the signoffs are there or going to be there for sure. So, well, you've heard my concerns with INDOT. I won't repeat them over and over about how they're not really doing what they need to be doing. Would you be acceptable to right turn only in and right turn only out? Because I mean, I drive that area probably once a week and I don't want to say yes and then get hit by somebody coming out of there because that is very dangerous. I mean, I mean I mean I mean that's your concern. I mean, so for me, I'm like, if you did right turn only in, right turn only out, I think that's that would pro, you know, save some of those really bad accidents. Um, obviously Gary P doesn't come to these beans. Otherwise, I know he lives not far from there either, so he'd be like, he'd probably see what I'm talking about. Yeah. I mean, do you feel like that's still a concern with the driveway moved all the way down? Yeah, it's still I mean I like I said uh the who used to live there I sometimes would drop off signs for campaigning and they put it in the yard and then I would never turn left out of there. I'd always turn around their driveway, come out, turn right, turn back around because it's just so dangerous. I mean there's a certain area it's like I mean it's like US 40 and 600 East which I mentioned earlier. It's so dangerous there and yet INDOT's doing nothing for till 2030. And so that's the problem. I can't if this was a Gary Pool project, I wouldn't be as worried because I could talk to Gary and we could, you know, fix my concerns, but and the public's concerns, but here we can't. Our hands are tied. I mean, person with the most power would be Senator Krider, who's on who's in charge of the of the transportation committee for the Senate. But, you know, that's the problem we've got here. I do respectfully hear what you're saying. I I I mean right at this time at this moment I wouldn't I I think that's very highly likely based on the traffic

studies that that's what the INDOT comes with. Um I guess my I would like to see what the what the traffic studies show I guess. Okay. And that'll be done at the end of July. You said yes they said that would be done at the end end of July. So, um I would also comment and I respectfully I hear everything again that you're saying, but I I I do feel like isn't isn't that what the other committees are they're are for? And if if all of the guidelines are met and we're doing everything correctly, I mean, I'll I Yeah, it's just hard because we um we we were wanting to do something very good and it's definitely cost us more than we thought. We were trying to save that. And um you know I would also put if anybody if anybody want to buy it for what it it's just it's well you could do it for one you can do it for just for your husband's business. Um I mean you could do it right I don't think there's anything to stop they can't it's the same exact things. One quick item. She does not have to subdivide this right the same plan. subdivision is irrelevant. That is because they want to do it that way for their business planning. Okay, that's what I was saying. All right. body else have any other So the two bu okay the two buildings much like an integrated center the two buildings could exist on the on the one lot together but then it would be for us it's just it for businesses we're getting older they're getting older once you start

entwining it I I understand yeah I just wasn't sure if we had that I was a little confused on the ability to have the two buildings on on one lot so Doesn't it show everything on that drawing right there? The other drawing the Not this drawing. Well, it it's on this drawing, too. But this one does. Yeah, it has there's more detail on the one. Mhm. Cuz it shows parking and everything on that other drawing, I believe. Okay. This one doesn't show parking. No, does it? No, it just shows the easements. So just to confirm everything that we see on this plan and all the uses, everything will be by right and it's just the subdivision into two parcels that is causing the issue for an ownership interest and they haven't considered a leaseold interest or any other conveyances that might be available under the existing zoning structure. I would have to look at this but I believe one of the special exception in C. So it would end up at the yeah the BZA possibly. Okay. Any more questions for Well, remember it has that horseshoe drive in front of it and it's got a drive here. that INDOT's going to have to the actual drive. You guys good? Yep. All right. No more questions. All right. We'll have the um the appealant come up, please. We have a How many people do we have want to speak against the petition? How many? Two. Two. Okay. Well, you'll have you'll share your 10 minutes then. So, all right. So, come on up and be sworn in.

She can swear you're both in at the same time if you're going to tag team. Both of you. Yeah. Aaron Mansfield. M ans f i l dorn. O SB O. Um uh so thank you for hearing our case today. Um we you might step up. Make sure you're speaking into the microphone there so we catch your So just we are neighbors both on the south uh Creekide Drive right behind this property. Um and I think like Mr. Waldridge um said, "One of our biggest concerns is the traffic in that area. It's extremely dangerous as it is now, the way the land is right in front of this um barn. Um there's been several accidents. I've only lived in this neighborhood for less than 2 years and just last summer someone was killed right outside our house from the exact thing that he's talking about with turning left and there's not much um in the way of visibility especially um there's corn fields there so of course then when they're when the corn is high it's even more difficult um the kind of uh changes they're uh proposing the amount of parking spaces there. Um looking at putting in, you know, all the additional traffic there is a big concern for us. Um again, we also have concerns about the water retention flooding in that area with the creek. It's the storm water. It floods very frequently, especially in spring and fall. Um several of the neighbors on the adjoining adjoining properties have problems with water in our houses already, and we're concerned

about how it will be impacted. Um, again, you know, privacy. Um, and another thing that we are concerned about also is just the barn is humongous. Um, there's more than enough space just in the barn by itself that, you know, both of these businesses could be in the same building. We're not sure why there seems to be a need for a second building. Um, especially with the parking that's going to be right on the property line. Um, I don't know if you guys saw the um I'm sure you guys have this one. Um, but that's a lot of parking spaces. There's over 50 there. This the space that they're this doctor is in right now only has, you know, a couple more than that and they're in a building with four offices. So, we don't quite see the need um for this much space for these two businesses. Um, you know, we the the the county um their future Hancock plan um anticipates that the traffic on our road is going to quadruple in the next few years with no plans to change how many lanes are there. So, we're just I mean it's too much. It's a dangerous area. Um I think those are our biggest concerns with this project in particular. Well, I've met Angela and she is very nice person and I love that they're redoing the barn because we've lived there for 44 years and looked at the barn and and been at the Hendricks for many parties and I love that that's getting redone. Um, my concerns are um like her, it's such a large building and if you can't have something

like a like a big wedding venue there because of the traffic. Why can't both offices be in the same building? Um, our neighborhood, our whole neighborhood, all the houses are on a well. So, I didn't know if this these offices were going to be on a well, would that affect water table or if they're going to be connected to water? That's just something I don't know. Um the second building seems to be pretty close uh to the neighborhood line which is right behind Aaron's home. So it would be like she comes in her backyard and she's got a building and parking spaces behind that building that is on her drawing and on the drawing that we have. Um, another thing would be the lighting. Like what lighting would be required there? Because if you come out and there's like building lights, it's going to deter the the niceness of the neighborhood of coming out on your own yard and looking at the sky and and all of that stuff. Um, and the detention pond, I don't really that would that seems to be more behind where my house is. And I don't really understand what a detention pond is. I haven't gotten all the information on that yet. So, I do understand it's commercial property. I do understand that maybe something horrible could go in and a doctor's office isn't necessarily horrible. I just think the amount of room and how close it is to the property lines of the neighborhood are and and also somebody told me that they were speaking with somebody at the county where they that person had said there was a possibility of a third building being added which isn't part of this and I understand that and you'd have to go through all this again but I I just don't know what the future holds for the property but I it's better than a McDonald's to have a

doctor's office in your backyard and I understand that too. So I just whatever your consideration is that would be great for lighting and traffic and all of those deterrents. So thank you. So remind me on the other side of shower Woods entrance there is there also like a dentist or wasn't there a building there? Was it Well, the restaurant's across the street, isn't it? But isn't there like a um Yes. like it used to be a dental office or something there or doctor's office. There's a whole strip of there's a whole strip of offices there. So obviously so obviously it's in everything's in that place obviously uh a retention pond if that's what the surveyor thinks. I mean every time our surveyor gets involved luckily we've had some pretty good ones. They they actually improve the area where the flooding if there's flooding it usually gets better, right? And so that's always a positive. Um, I think the only thing I really see is the traffic issue, which I mean, once again, it's INDOT. It's not Gary Pool. If it was Gary Pool, they can't really widen the road there either because I was thinking maybe they'd get put a turn lane in. They could, but that's not what INDOT's doing as you saw on US 40. They restricted it. Made people very upset in our community in Cumberland. They made it one lane each way instead of leaving it two lanes. So, they're not in that business, it looks like. Yeah. I guess that's a question I want to make sure I heard or understood correctly. So, I think I heard you say that the comprehensive plans that traffic is going to quadruple. Did Did I hear you say that quickly? Yes. So, I looked at the future Hancock report from the website and right now it's listing this section of the road as 1,000 to 5,000 volume per day and um by 2050 expecting 20,000 to 40,000. Right. So, I guess that's that's my question and your question. So, it's going to happen. It's proposed to happen, right? So, wouldn't it be I mean, I guess my question is like it's going to happen. So, we're not

going to be able to prevent it from happening. So, wouldn't it be better if we start thinking about it now and preparing for it? Like, this kind of development is going to happen. So, like let's get ahead of it and work with INDOT to prepare for it because this kind of development like we like you're saying is a lot better than the McDonald's, right? Yeah, this traffic's a lot better than a McDonald's traffic. So, if you have somebody that's it sounds like to me that by and I don't know this person, so but it sounds like they're vested in New Pal. They're connected to New Pal and I think I heard you say that um you're aware of them or um they've been involved in New PAL. I mean, it sounds like those are the kind of people that we want invested in our accounting, right? Absolutely. So, like why don't we figure out a way to work with N DOT and get in front of INDOT and say like how do we make this work with this traffic situation that creates safety and security because according to our comprehensive plan, people are coming. It's gonna it's gonna get worse. And we don't want a McDonald's buying up this land or right this these people selling it to McDonald's because good grief that's going to be what we don't want, right? We don't want that much traffic where like if we can work with INDOT and be really um stern and committed like we need to figure this out because we don't want what Scott said. Yeah. It's a it's happening like it's a great use. I think you guys said it right. It is a great use. need to work. It's a good use of the property having a doctor's office there too. It'd be nice if both offices could be in the same building. I think you could, you know, well, and I mean, kind of what you were saying is we we understand this is a commercial neighborhood owned um property, but it has never been utilized as such until now. Yeah. Um

it's always been a residence, so or it has been for years. So, I guess kind of what we're hoping is that, you know, it's going to get approved. We get that it's, you know, that's how it's zoned. That's how the neighborhood is going. But what we're kind of hoping is that at least we could make it or um postpone it until um the petitioners are able to do their traffic study to determine what kind of driveway, how they can make the road safe. Um, you know, can would INDOT even say that they could have that many parking spots? That kind of thing, you know. Well, they would they would they would have a say on that. Yeah. But, you know, the the amount of traffic and how how we can make it safe, you know, we have little kids. Like, they're going to be four tomorrow, you know. So, I'm worried about the traffic, how we're going to be able to play in our backyard with this with a parking lot 20t from my backyard, you know. It's it's a lot. And I mean, we've spoken with a lot of the other neighbors that are on this line and we had no problems when we knew that um the Huffmans were buying it and remodeling the barn for themselves. That was not a problem. It's when we're getting into adding all the additional buildings, all the additional parking spaces, the amount of traffic that they're proposing by having two businesses in this spot. It's just it's overwhelming and I I we all kind of feel like it's too much for this spot. And I I absolutely hear what you're saying and I hear what the petitioner is saying, but feel like there we could figure out a solution that could create a really win-win here and work with INDOT. It seems like we just kind of what we're saying, you know, I mean, I just feel like we could make it we could figure out a way to make it all all work. It's just going to take some We'd like it to work, right? you know, but I would hate for them to, you know, to sell it in a McDonald's or

some other kind of user that's not from our county to come in that's not going to care about all the things that you just said and we have no choice at all and a developer might not care about all those things that you just articulated. So, it's like it seems like this is an opportunity like to figure out how we could possibly maybe not get everybody everything that they want, but like how could we come closer to figuring it out and so that your kids are safe, the petitioner can get what they need to make it work. Um, I don't know. I don't have the answer, but I feel like we could get closer to that. And I guess from what you said, they're still doing the study on the highway, right? So, they're still doing that. So, we haven't even heard that um final part yet. So, okay. Any more questions? Nope. All right. Thanks. All right. So you get five minutes, Miss Huffman, to for rebuttal if you've got anything else you want to say or react to any of those comments. So Kayla, I have a question. Could you remind us of if this is approved the other hurdles they have to jump through after INDOT gives them approval and you don't just sign off on everything at this point? No. After the plat is approved and recorded, then begins the development plan really. Um so Mrs. Huffman would um submit a plan to develop the site. Um if the uses she proposes, if either of them are a special exception, then that would require a public hearing. The neighbors would be notified and have a chance to come to the BZA. Additional commitments might be placed on the use at that point. If they're permitted by right,

then no further public hearing is required. Um, once the improvement location permit or building permit is submitted, a complete drainage plan needs to be signed off on by the surveyor. That is a multi-month process. Dough Creek would need to extend a sewer line to the site. Any requirements from INDOT would need to be uh included on construction plans and then fulfilled. Um and of course review by the planning department for things like the building design because this is in the corridor overlay in addition to landscaping review, parking standards and also phototric plans. So that's lighting and we are a dark sky friendly community. Um all of that would be taken into consideration. And so then once all of those things are addressed and once again that would go back to the technical committee then we would issue a building permit. Your traffic study that was required by INDOT, right? They required it. Yeah. Okay. All right. You get five five minutes. So I just wanted to answer real quick on the um INDOT. Um, we're already anticipating, I mean, our our traffic engineer who works with INDOT all the time, that there will be some type of turn lane widening um, already. I'll be honest, and I and I've told the petitioners, there could be a chance if they come back and they say we need immediate like all kinds of stuff, we can't do it. We would be out. And to be honest, to to your effect, it's not going to go as a residence. Nobody's going to pay what we've got invested into it as a residence or what was purchased and what you had to do structurally. We're still doing foundation and so it would probably be sold to someone with deeper pockets which would be probably corporate number one. And then I did want to address we

want as little of parking as possible. So, and then what I'm saying is when he drew those plans up, that was just based on whatever a site engineer, like if you've got this many square foot, he was saying that was more based on like county and what they require because let me tell you, asphalt's expensive. And so, both of us that would be the maximum. I don't even see that being the case. We're really doing whatever they say we have to do. So, that that's not us wanting to do, you know, any more as far as the parking. That would be like minimal. Um we're my husband has another office on Arlington Avenue and we just have we don't have big lights. Again, those would go through all the things. They're just lights on the building just like he is at the Hilton Park right now is where he's at. Um so, and as far as the two going into one, I'm going to be honest, if you've not been a business person, when you have to share with another, it it just makes it hard. We're friends now. We want to stay friends and you've get family involved and it's just complicated. Um we've kind of actually went that route before and it's just easier to have two two buildings. We're hoping and again to even maybe be able to expand our office, you know, further into that. That's why we were using that space. So So do you know the exact number of parking spaces you're going to have or that was one of my questions. I'm not sure what's on the um basically the parking from the the drawing right now went from the back of the barn to kind of the front of the barn and then there was and then there was like double. So I mean he's got you know if he's got six staff or so they did have another parking for and they were talking about enclosures. Those would all be dumpster pads and enclosures. Um, so again, we don't both of us and the dentist, we would prefer because right now it's it's going to take a lot to get

in right now. And this question won't dictate anything that well, it could dictate, but I mean, so typically we have a choice of yes, no, or continue because we don't have a full board. Um, would continuing it cause a problem for you is a question for you. like we would continue to the end of the July meeting or to the August meeting. Um I I don't I mean we'll have our state plans and stuff by then. Is it because of like seeing INDOT? I I guess I would still Well, it's a part part could be that could be part of our decision or the other part could be if it's a 4-3 vote then it doesn't go anywhere. We had that five for yes or five for no. So then we would continue it. I'd prefer to vote tonight and then if we need to continue we need to continue. I'm there's just a little mental stuff I need to get off my head or if we need to go a different route and if we need to go a different route just financially we need to do that. So, well, it's a good project. It's just it does take time and you have to go through a process and everyone's got to have the right to be heard. Oh, absolutely. And hear everybody's concerns and to get out uh to everybody what what and and you get to find out what their concerns are. Then you say, "Okay, let's put in these type of trees that grow fast and cause more barrier." So to be a good neighbor and I would say I reached out to everyone and I've spo spoken to a few in person because I did an email um the one person didn't reach I'm sorry I forget your name ma'am and yeah didn't reach out we didn't make I felt like I talked to everyone else because I really do want it to be a win-win. I want to make this work both ways and thought I kind of addressed all those. So I'm definitely understand that. I understand the concerns. Um, but that's that's kind of where we're at. So, thank you. Yeah. Can I ask you a question about the traffic study? So, INDOT probably directed you as to how they wanted that done. Correct. And did

was that based on the two uses only or were there other uses that were being considered? No. And they they already told us if we ever did any other use, you have to go back and get a whole new driveway permit and stuff. So this traffic study and he made it very clear is just you know for whatever this use zoning the two medical offices correct cuz the the one that's going to have the optometry business in it that's that's large right I mean that's 10,000 square feet well it's actually the bu the bottom probably wouldn't be the upstairs is 6,000 and we're taking we have plans for that about 6,500 I think okay or not 6500 3500 Um he's in a 4,000 square foot building. He knows another practice again where Okay. Hopefully with the growth of New Palestine being able to Okay. So the traffic engineers report is going to address improvements required for two medical office uses. That's what they said. Whatever that and I don't whatever the zoning whatever is. And they said if you not the zoning because it's zoned but kind of what the use. Yeah. Yes. The use. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And so the use of the current barn will be all medical office and it'll be fully occupied only by you or you're leasing it out? No, right now we're not leasing it out. We're we're hoping in a year my daughter's coming on um actually have two daughters that Rob Thomas one's in Ohio. We're hoping she comes back in a couple years. Um, so we're just and she wants to live in New Palestine and expand from there. So now I'm going to be honest. If there was if there was another medical that we could lease that out, I'm want to be very honest. I'm not saying that we wouldn't in the the front of the space. We absolutely have no plans on doing that. But I don't want to lie to the

committee. I mean, if somebody came in a year or two and said, "Hey, I you know, I don't know. I I want an orthodontist or I want an eye surgeon wants to see patients two days a week or something. Um so just to confirm, you have a purchase and sale agreement for the second parcel that is that this is contingent upon. Is that what's happening? Same purchase and sale agreement with the dentist for the second parcel. This is a contingency for the purchase and sale agreement. Oh yeah, we haven't. We're just we're just like I said our big contingency is really the traffic study because we've talked to person that they do developments and they've kind of put some numbers out there and if if they if it's a big ask then we've kind of just put some of those numbers down and it so that's is all contingent which is why it's contingent on splitting which is as I'm finding out with all this stuff everything's contingent on everything else. So, yeah. Well, I guess the basis of my question is I just wanted to make sure that any anything that you're directed to do from an improvement standpoint is for the uses that you intend. Absolutely. And then the concern is that a facility like that, if you started using it for other things like parties, wedding venues or whatever, now all of a sudden the traffic dynamic is very different and then you've put yourself and the county in a predicament then for safety issues. My understanding if we wanted to change any of that we would have to we would have to go back and they could approve or disapprove at that time. That's was my understanding. Okay. Okay. Any more questions, comments, things like that. All right. Thanks. I have a procedural question. Did we have a an affirmative declaration of who the petitioner is? I couldn't. I only asked for appeal time. We should offer appeal time to the appellent. That's the only reason I ask. So the yeah I if we have an official

determination time I think offering it might be a good idea procedurally just if right we didn't have a determination of who who would get the appeal that's the whole difference see what I mean it's just the appeal time that's yeah so um Erin you you wanted did you want to have anything else to say you had some time left if you guys either of you wanted to say anything else. You're sworn in if you have any more rebuttal time. About four minutes. So, you've got about six. Yeah. Come on up to the microphone. This drawing. Make sure you're at the microphone. You're not going to get picked up if you're not in there. I just didn't know if you had this drawing. So, it's showing here and it's written 54 parking places for two doctor's offices. And that just sounds like a lot. and the the building not so much, but this these parking places they're putting behind the second building are like right up against the property lines of the people in in um Shilmire Woods. Have that and they don't have the I don't think we do have that. They're saying just the middle, but it's not just the middle. It's it's all the way around the back of that other building. I do not think we have that drawing, but that was the drawing I was telling you earlier. I spent a lot Did you had it? You had it at the other I was trying to figure out the park. She Yeah, she can't. So, no, you can't. Yes. I'm sorry. You No, we can't take it because of our rules. Describe it to us. You can describe it under oath. I don't So, I think that's kind of what we Yeah, but this this is a drawing from the packet, the a packet. So, we didn't get this drawing from the packet, right? But you seen this at your when you were at the tech committee. I mean, that's why I said I spent a lot of time looking at this drawing, but I don't think it was in our packet. We don't have the parking part. I don't think I saw the site plan in the packet.

But it wasn't in ours today. Yes, that's where they got that drawing is from the But just for clarification, aren't parking dict spaces dictated by the size of the building by the state? There's uh well the county has a we have a parking county one space per 250 square feet for minimum or per minimum 50 square feet and they could request a variance to that. Yeah. So that's kind of what we were talking about before is the way they have it drawn is um 54 parking spaces. The location that they're at right now is a shared building with four medical offices businesses. And with the four businesses, there's only eight. I mean, it's like a couple more. So, we I that's kind of what we're saying is do we need this many? I mean, this is a lot of impermeable structure behind our houses again with the water and the drainage and everything right on the property line. Um, you can see from the drawing, the edge of the one parking lot is only 21 ft from our property line. Um, which I know is within the setback limits. Um, but that barely it doesn't even clear the root of the pine trees that are there. So, I mean, all of these things are kind of going to affect our privacy, um, our, you know, the how we see our backyards, you know, our kids where our kids can play, all that kind of thing. So, Okay. All right. Any more questions? All right. Thank you. So, I think that So, our our course of action on this this evening, we've got So, it it is appeal. So, we'd be looking for an emotion to grant the appeal, which would mean to

overturn the plaque committee, or to not grant the appeal, which would mean to agree with the plaque committee. We can also um continue the item. You're standing in the shoes of the Mhm. So, we're not really overturning the We are the PL taking the same steps that they would take. So it would be it it would not be a motion on the appeal. It would just be a a motion to approve or deny the plat. Okay. All right. So I'm correct. So it would be a motion to approve the plat or a motion to deny the plat or a motion to continue the plant. Can we can I just get one more orientation question? So if there wasn't a second parcel involved here, the building, the parking, the end, everything would be done. It's the second parcel that's turning us that is coming to here. Otherwise, it would everything would be done through the permitting process. It's the second parcel that's causing us problems. Yeah. Okay. Because yes, it's CN, but it's the parceling which is a preference for business purposes that's putting us into the into the remance situation. Yeah. Otherwise, it would have just Yeah, it wouldn't have come to a public hearing at all. Approval by the they did that was that last month. In this case, the plat committee approves the primary, it would be the primary plat approval and then the uh secondary or final plat is administratively approved. One of these dates.

So they and they did not impose. So on March 20th, 2025, the plat committee approved this with two conditions. One, that the county and state come to a resolution on rideway dedication, which this did appear at a commissioner's meeting. The commissioners did not sign off on the right ofway. So that was kind of that. And two, that covenants address driveway access, easement, and maintenance agreement. So your you might consider your motion can also those two conditions if you those on because you're and then just um statute allows you as a condition of primary approval of a plat. The commission or committee may specify the manner in which public ways shall be laid out, graded and improved. Provision for water, sewage and other utility services. Provision for lot size, number and location. provision for draining drainage design and a provision for other services as specified in the subdivision. Got some consideration in Can you just repeat the number one right-of-way dedication? What was the find? Was this already been have a finding because I don't want to the condition that the county and state come to a resolution on right-of-way dedication? that has been completed or not completed. The county did not sign off on the dedication of ride of way for in this case. So that is a dead condition. It's already been considered and and if we put it as a condition, it would be I can't act act on that at this point. There's no action. They they've taken no action. I don't know what else to say on that exactly. So they try to dedicate 35 ft or something and there was some um so basically if the

board of commissioners signed off on the dedication of right-ofway in this case they would be uh owners of a strip of rideofway on the edge of an INDOT facility and there was some concern about the legality of that. So we we shouldn't put it as a condition because it's not available to seek. We've addressed it with a setback that takes into account what would have been dedicated as right of way. Okay. An additional setback beyond what we're seeing on these on this paperwork. It was the 90 ft building setback from center line. Um, so the the secondary plat or the um that was page one of the staff report, it has the correct plat. Is DO creek utilities going to be there when they build they will have to be. It's their sanitary sewer territory. Yes, that doesn't need to be a condition. How to do a manner in which public ways shall be laid out, graded and improved out subject to INDOT. So yeah, we I was thinking a right turn issue. We would have I I guess they'd have to comply with all INDOT's. Yeah. I mean I don't does indot going to come back if they say they could say no, you can't do it or you have to do these certain things. Is that typically how it works? Maybe Michael Long knows this better. There will be recommendation. There will be mandates and recommendations. Okay. All right. Yeah. And I'm not not 100% sure how that goes, but the traffic engineer is independent, I believe. And so they submit the report, and do reviews it,

and then they determine what they want to impose on the developer. So, so just as a standard of review, our standard here is as a plaque committee, technical committee, all the other committees have approved it and then we make sure that they've approved it and followed their rules and make sure that um we're we're to addressing any other zoning or comprehensive plan concerns. That's all right. because there's a standard of care that we can have that's more expansive and in our different roles. Sure that all the subdivision control that apply to them are boxes have been checked. Okay. Then you can apply these conditions as well and and landscaping has to meet with a commercial next to residential. Yeah. Use to use. Yep. All right. Does anybody have a motion? It's appealed. So what what's the motion again? So you're basically doing it for the first time. It's as if the plaque. So you'd have to start over. If you wanted to incorporate one of the conditions that the committee already um approved, you would want to add that to your motion if you want and you can impose other conditions. Allah I'll give it a shot. It's a list motion to approve with the following conditions. uh the conditions from the plat committee number two covenants address

driveway access easement and maintenance agreement and amend that to include parking. Uh another condition would be that the endot study be completed and all mandatory items be complied with and any recommendations be reviewed with planning staff. uh that any required appearance before the BCA on use occur, which is just normal, but that um they would consider seeking a variance in order to reduce the total number of parking if they're going into the VCA anyways. Comply with all utility and landscaping and any other um buffer requirements to ensure the privacy concerns of neighbors. I'll second that. How'd you do, Don? Did you get it all? All right. When you're When you're ready, call the roll, please. Yes. Olden. Yes. Mr. Yes. Miss Mr. Walridge. Yes. Mr. Yes. Yes. Okay. Seven seven to zero. All right. Thank you very much. We'll see you again with um next phase development plan. All right. Thank you guys. Thanks for coming out. Um,

item number two, got a reszone for Frank Miner agriculture to residential. Oh. Here's [Applause] [Music] This is an interesting um petition. What we have tonight is a petition for a reszone from agricultural 21 for the subject property located at 10257 North Alfred Road to Fortville address. So Vernon Yes. All right. So this would be a reszone of 4.3 acres from A to R1. Uh and this is an order for Mr. Miner to pursue a major subdivision. What he has found himself is is the fourth uh basically his lot would be lot four. Um he wants to build a new house on a nonconforming lot or lot of record. Um, so what you're allowed to do there without platting is you're allowed to add on, you're allowed to um to build a new barn. This is our little old farmhouse rule. Um, so it allows the the farmstead or the home to

be cut off and something else to happen on the rest of the property, be that continued farming or further subdivision or whatnot. Um, this was a later amendment to our ordinance. Uh, and it threw me for a loop to be quite honest. Um, looking so um I'll get into that. But what we have here now is Mr. Miner's lot at the front of this lot uh at the front of this um agricultural field. And then behind him we have Brooks Edge 1, which is a three lot minor subdivision. Look at the history of this lot. Um, in 2002, it lost its lot of record status when the 14 1/2 acre field behind it was separated from the from the home site. Uh, due to that commissioner's rule, um, this leaves basically just a non an illegal non-conforming lot. um because it's not platted once the home itself um is demolished or would be demolished. In 2024 25 what we saw was um yeah what in 2425 Brooks Edge one a three lot minor was approved um on the remaining 14 and a half acres um and I go into some information on this but uh basically this really would have been splits 2, three and four just because it is exempt and I went down the rabbit hole on this particular um subject. subject, but Mr. Miner's lot should have been considered the first split, meaning that Brook's Edge one should have only been allowed to have two lots. That is a mistake on my part.

We missed that because we just saw a 10acre plus farm field exempt from platting. We didn't go back to see what the original tract was as of 2002, which is that January 1st, 2002 is the magic date we use to determine is this a lot of record or not. We saw 10 acre 10acre plus lot exempt from platting. Go for it. Plat it. Not thinking about well what did this look like back at that lot of record or original tracked date. Um seeing that well Mr. minor lot was actually part of this as well and should have been considered the first subdivision or first lot would have only allowed then two more to max out your minor subdivision maximum. Anything beyond that would have required a major subdivision which is where we are tonight instead. And Mr. minor now who bought the old original homestead up at French is left with the brunch of uh basically my department's error. At least that's how I feel about it. I feel very very bad about how this has worked out, but I am very glad that I've had the opportunity to do the research um on this particular topic. So, uh and we talked to Mr. Miner about what his options were with this parcel. Um, and he's got a beautiful 4acre parcel. He wants to start fresh with a new house. Um, and so he is moving forward with the request to uh demolish the house and do whatever he needs to build a new home on this site. All right. Now, I'm going to walk you through uh the reasoning uh that led me to tonight's uh staff recommendation. Um so our subdivision control ordinance has this section up at the very

beginning called classification and compliance and it reads as follows. Plat required all land to be to be divided shall be categorized and platted either as minor subdivision or major subdivision consistent with the definitions in then it goes to our subdivision definition section. Uh B, building permit. No lot in a subdivision shall be sold. No permit shall be issued to erect any building upon land in a subdivision. And no building shall be erected in a subdivision unless and until a final subdivision plat has been approved and recorded and the improvements required by the plan commission in connection therewith have been constructed or guaranteed as here and provided. The provision C, the provisions of A and B, so plat required and building permit must occur on recorded plat or on recorded lot uh shall not apply to accessory structures and building alterations. That's why you can remodel your old house and you can add a barn. Those are your two things you can do. So if we go to then it the a plat required refers to 155.04 O4 definitions we get into the definition of subdivision. So subdivision is defined as the division of a parcel into land into two or more lots parcels sites, units, plats or interests for the purpose of offer, sale, lease or development either on the installment plan or upon any and all other plans terms and it goes on including reubdvision. subdivision uh includes the division of land zone for residential and non-residential uses.

Following kinds of division of existing parcels of land are herein called exempt divisions. These divisions are exempt from the platting provisions of this chapter. Exempt divisions must be one of the following types of division. a division of land into two or more tracts, all of which all of which are at least 10 acres in size. So that's what gets your 10 plus acre parcels out of platting in order to pull pull a building permit because they're exempt then from A and B above. Um and then it goes through a number of other situations that may apply. Then we go down through major subdivision and minor subdivision. So, and major subdivision just says any subdivision not classified as a minor subdivision. So, minor subdivision, the division of a single lot, tract, or parcel of land or part thereof, into not more than three lots, tracts or parcels of land, including the remainder of the original tract, any one of which is less than 10 acres. or the purpose whether immediate or future of transfer of ownership or construction of residential, commercial or industrial purposes. However, this definition shall not include division of land for agrop agricultural purposes only. A minor subdivision shall not involve any new street or extension of local government facilities or the creation of any public improvements. Then we go into what's the intent of our agricultural uh district. So a uh district summary is agricultural district is intended to provide locations for a operations and related land uses uh reduce conflicts between residential and egg uses, preserve

viability of a operations and limit development in areas with minimal infrastructure. Single family dwellings are permitted in the A district except that major residential subdivisions are not permitted and that is why we're here tonight to see if Mr. Miner can get a reszone to R1. So that's the the backstory of how we end up here because platting is required in order for him to build a house on his lot which is um while it was really the first split is winding up as the fourth. All right. Now 155.09 in the subdivision control ordinance is waiver of requirements. The plan commission is hereby authorized to wave any or all requirements of this chapter when a literal enforcement of the chapter would result in unnecessary hardship and when the waiver will not be contrary to the public interest. So, uh, I don't usually plead with this as an option, but tonight, uh, I am. Such a waiver would allow Mr. Miner the ability to build a new home without and I would require, I guess I would request a waiver of the requirements of SEO or subdivision control 1556 classification and compliance. This would allow Mr. Miner the ability to build a new home without platting. So, such a waiver would allow Mr. Miner the ability to Okay, this exactly what I just said, uh, build a new home without requiring that his lot be platted. Uh, which would in turn mean that his lot does not need to be reszoned, allowing him to withdraw his reszone petition and

pursue a building permit, which is his actual goal here. Requiring Mr. Miner to reszone and plat as a major subdivision is an unnecessary hardship, especially when we did not catch that his lot should have been counted as the first split from the original track. Allowing Mr. Miner a waiver from the subdivision control ordinance uh and permitting him to build a new house in place of this old one is a beneficial to the public interest for the following reasons. The new house will meet setback requirements off of Alfred Road, protecting the thoroughfare and making driving safer. The new house will be nicer, adding to the assessed value of properties in the county and also fitting in better with the other homes that are behind this or will be very soon. A new septic will be will be compliant with health department requirements. Other options if the waiver is not granted. The zoning ordinance gives guidance uh for reszone petitions. Um possible actions would include a favorable recommendation, unfavorable recommendation, no recommendation or continuence. And decision criteria should be based on the comprehensive plan and any other applicable adopted planning studies or reports. Current condition and character of current structures and uses in the district. Desired use. the most desirable use for which the land is adapted, property values, the conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction, and responsible growth and development. Staff would recommend an unfavorable recommendation to the board of commissioners of the proposed reszone for the current uh from the current zone, which is agricultural um to R1, the area behind this that just got subdivided into a minor subdivision and the land to the south of that, which is now also a minor subdivision. All of

that is still zoned agricultural. So it seems unceone to R1 for this reason. Um also any further reszone of this area invites in more reszone of an area that is shown as future reszone area not ready to go right now reszone to suburban uh residential. There is no utility in this area yet. This is all still on septic. Reszoning to R1 kind of opens the floodgate. So it is not representative of responsible growth and development. Reszoning of the area should not occur until utilities are available. And that's the end of my very passionate presentation. I was going to say, can we just vote on the waiver now and and move or do we have to go through the process? Let's go through the process. All right, let's make it quick. Yeah. Um, so the advertisement was done for the reason, right? Not done for a request on the waiver. I was my understanding was that that is my recommendation as staff and that basically the waiver would mean that he did not need to do the reason all which would pull that whole petition is that and I might be I I think we have to act on the reszone right so we have to do we'll have to do at least I don't know how we deal with the waiver request there's a recommendation that's if it's unwaverable it goes to commission application

unless we have a specific binding that an application can be we would wave it. We can have a in the motion we can wave it right to wave the time frame if we have a motion procedurally if we um anticipate that we would wave the time frame and then we make a recommendation with the unfavorable that the waiver occurs um the the that um with the actual subdivision ordinance. The notice can the not that the notice is my concern too like what notice is required under 155.09. Well, we can we can hear from the petitioner, but it seems like we have to do something with the reszone and then they and then they get that. It's the you come back with the with the waiver though, but you're saying that they it's still the same case, right? I mean, the the waiver is different enough they shouldn't have to wait a year to Right. Right. But I'm seeing The the problem is there's nothing in 155.09 that identifies the who the requester is. It could the planning commission can can at at the request of of planning comm. So it it doesn't require it. It's not within the normal provisions of notice was like a suronte back again with a different I I think the question is do we have to provide notice about the waiver of requirements? That's the question. Yeah, that's what I I I don't know the answer to that.

That's why I was kind of wondering if the petitioner likes the idea of the waiver. Maybe they withdraw and then readvertise for the waiver next month. Maybe. I don't know that I would like to see an interpretation if you can notice on a waiver, but you can't request a waiver. The planning commission is authorized to wave. It's a not a hearing item necessarily. Yeah, that's what I mean. It's a And does that need to appeal? It's not It's not a favorable unfavorable recommendation. I don't I don't even know that it's a hearing item, but it's probably an agenda item. So, it probably shows up on our It needs to show up as like other business or something, right? So, it like I think that I think Mr. McDaniel was here. He would want to he would want to see request for waiver on the agenda, I think, is probably what he would say. I the preference is there, but but does the does their ordinance require it? That's the question. Oh, yeah. I I don't know that it does. Yeah. Yeah. It's probably silent on it, actually. Yeah. Probably even does. I don't know that I ever have either. Can't be a staff recommendation at a regular hearing. I mean, as I mean, I think I guess that's what I guess that's why I'm confused about what you're saying. It's like so we're having I mean the staff is making recommendations so she can't recommend that we can't accept that as an option. I think that if it I think that if they had come in and there wasn't the confusion on the resoning, I think that if she had thought of this earlier before it was advertised as a resoning, she would have said, "I think you need to get a waiver from this section from the plan commission. It would have shown up on our agenda night tonight as other business." I did and the understanding I got from it was that it was not basically that public notice of it was

not required because I asked about this last month. So once again that's a little I feel like a little bit on me if it this is not done right. This is the one we talked about last month. What's the What are we We have to know what the waiver what we're asking for a waiver. Are you asking for a waiver from having to reszone? No, I'm asking for a waiver from 155.6. And that is the classification and compliance section specifically. Um yeah. Well, A and B, which is plat required, requiring that all land to be divided, um, shall be classified as either a minor sub or a major sub, and then B, that a building permit not be issued if it's not classified as a major sub or minor sub. So, basically allowing him to um just like if you had a non-conforming lot, um, let's say Mr. minor's house burns down, he would be given a year to build that house back on the same exact footprint whether or not it complied uh with our zoning ordinance so long as he could still pull a a septic permit or something like that. But planning and zoning would allow him a year to do that whether or not it was compliant or not. Um, so this would kind of put him in that same situation where, hey, you can demolish your house, you can build a new house, but it just has to be according to the setbacks and pulling a new a new septic permit and a new driveway cut through the highway department and a a lovely nice new home and all the benefits without having to plat as a major subdivision after he goes through the trouble of reszoning.

So, how far did this this our our agenda reads reszone 4.349 etc etc um and waiver from subdivision control ordinance. That's what our agenda says. Oh yeah, good point. Yep. So it is on there. That's posted that's noticed. So in lie of a finding on the noticed action for reszone, we would take a concurrent action on the waiver because of the same it's the sameness. It's the same, right? We're we're we wouldn't independently handle one without the other. We could do a waiver independently another meeting if we wanted to. Okay. But is this proper notice in the agenda? No, because it was sent out more than a month ago because he was here last month. Um, yeah. So, the wa I'm sorry. So, the waiver was in the not the the waiver was in the agenda, I believe, at my request. Don included that in the agenda because we knew that would be talked about. Okay. Mhm. Correct. Yeah, that's very correct. It's before us, so we probably have to take action. But maybe we should just go ahead and proceed through the normal. Yeah, I'm just Yeah, I was just trying to decide if if the petitioner needs to be thinking before they come up if they want to withdraw their petition and if

they would withdraw their petition, have they withdrawn the ability to request this waiver? What if we preserve it? We say we'll preserve your ability to withdraw after we've heard. We will preserve your withdrawal, you know, ability. I mean, we would need to also preserve it because we're not a full board. Mhm. We would need to also pre preserve their ability um in consideration of the subdivision subdivision control waiver. All three of those we would proceed with our normal agenda letting them know that at the end of the agenda they can still withdraw for those reasons. Can they can they withdraw after we've completed the hearing agenda? Vote. Okay. All right. Just because I couldn't hear you. Oh, I I can hardly hear you. So So I just want to make sure. So they would withdraw their their reszone and then we would put them at the end of the agenda tonight so that they could receive the waiver. Is that what you're saying? Nope. My re my my recommendation is that we proceed with the hearing on the reszone request with the assurance to the petitioner that at the end of the normal hearing for this agenda item but before we vote they can withdraw either the reszone application um because of the procedural issue or because we're not a full board and um I I would I would say that because the waiver of subdivision control ordinance was put into the agenda and considered um we would have proper ability to consider the waiver. Um but we would have to have that separately considered than the reszone application. So it could so reason is

different than subdivision. Mhm. Separate action. Okay. All right. Keeping it lively tonight. So all right. Uh is somebody here Mr. Miner here to speak? Okay. and Kayla, it always makes it difficult because we used the old code for years and years and years, even after we did the new code. And so there was a lot of confusion there. All right, come on up. Let's swear you in. Oh, you are sworn in. Well, Kayla's made it easy on me, I think. Um, first of all, I'm here representing Frank and Jenny Miner. They're with us tonight. They live in Fisers currently have two children. Uh, they purchased this 4.359 acres in hopes to build a home on the existing property that has a house now. So, bottom line is whatever is the best way for them to get a building permit to build a new home, you want to do that where we're at, right? So, I mean, whether it's reszone, whether it's waiver, they're all in agreement to that. We've already discussed that. So, whether it's withdrawing the petition, I just want to do it the right way. And I'm not legal counsel, so I don't want to ever think that I've an attorney. Um, so this lead us down the right direction so they can get a building permit. The existing house that they have now sits within 40 ft of the center of the road. And if we go to platting, which was recommended, that house would sit in the rightway of the road. So, a new house seems logical to build further back and to meet the requirements. Um, I I would say, Kayla, I I don't know that she's it was a mistake. I think the interpretation of the ordinance that

we're interpreting now is whether a 10 acre tract was an exempt tract or not. Um there's been several cases where 10 acres have been divided maybe even off of an 80 acre field you had eight tracks and those have been divided into three lots. So that's been the normal and the case for the last 23 24 years and all of a sudden it's different now. And Kayla does after reading this I think her interpretation's correct but I hate to think that we've done it wrong for 23 years because there was another interpretation. And I really believe that's where we're at. So, um, not getting into a big long discussion. You guys have been here a long long time tonight. So, I think there is some, uh, thought process out there that the land use is residential. So, to zone to residential is not the worst case scenario. Um because I know that one month down the road, you guys can't use a precedent because it's case by case. Reszonings are case by case, not by precedent. So just because this would be reszoned to residential doesn't mean the next guy coming in could get residential. I mean it's case this is if there was a case in the county, this would be the case to say we're going to reszone this to residential because that's what it is. It's been there. This house was built in 1941. So, there's a part of me that says, "Well, let's take it to the commissioners and find out what they would say, but I don't want to wait a year to file a waiver if that's the case." So, um I'll just answer questions at this point. I think it's a it's a slam dunk if we can get to the right way to travel to get to I guess the only question I have is if we do the waiver

then we have a a lot. Okay. So what kind of lot is it? You know I mean if later on somebody comes in and says I want to add a barn. they go well well you know there have to there would have to be some commitments made and I don't or um suggestions made that it's a lot of record at that point maybe a nonconforming lot of record I I would argue the fact that it's a lot of record that's what I'm asking right now I would argue that but I don't want to get into a long drawn out argument tonight over it because that's what I was trying to say there was 19 acres to be a lot of record on the record. I I really don't believe we should be here anyway, but it was 19 some acres beforehand and 10 acres was sold off. But now that Kayla's brought that to light, should we have been able to just get a building permit three or four months ago? I feel that's the case. But interpretations are made for different times. So Byron, you make a good point. Without platting it, is it a lot of record? Uh with the waiver, it sounds like it can be a lot of record with a waiver. So any more questions? You would you would you're okay with a waiver and the waiver only applying to the We'd be more than happy with a waiver and 155.06 is the only sub. subdivision ordinance section that would be waved. So if I need for purposes of this per permit, this permit got it. And so that would protect us longer term would be for purposes of this permit that applies to the classification of a plot required building permit. Okay. Right. All right. Okay.

Right. No more questions. All right. Do we have anybody wants to speak in opposition to the resoning? All right. We have no opposition. So any discussion did we learn anything part of the motion of the lot of it would also be a lot of record or not? I can't I believe so. I don't know how we would if the motion includes that it's a lot of record. Can that be effectuated? Can can we make that happen? like what you said about the waiver applying to this permit only and would that be as a is that officially what we call the commissioner's rule lots is lots of record and that would still protect his ability to modify the structure or um build a barn that would still be protected under sea. So, so prior to my client withdrawing the petition for reszone, will the waiver be voted on tonight? Yeah, that's that was the next question was uh if they withdraw their application, they would have to do that prior to us contemplating this waiver. I think we but I think we can vote on it tonight. We can do the waiver first and then it could be withdrawal without us voting on those reszoning and it doesn't have to go to the the planning or it doesn't have to go to the commissioners if it's withdrawn and our motion on the waiver could allow for a shortened time frame for reapplication if something happens with the waiver. Yeah, I mean I just everybody watching is probably wondering what's Scott doing looking on his phone the whole time. It's like I'm reading the whole code section. Um

yeah, it's silent on um whether whether it has to be um I don't see anything where it talks about notice to the public. Um that would make common sense to me that what should have been done was uh from my interpretation, I don't know, she may disagree with me, but other attorneys may disagree with me, but it's it seems like what should have been done is they should have said, "Hey, thanks for your application." um I don't think I think the best way to do this is to do this waiver and then you would have said okay that sounds great. So then she would have advertised it and said we're coming in to just do this waiver. This is my recommendation. We as a plane commission have to go through it and then we would have voted on the waiver and that probably would have been the best and cleanest way to do it because it is silent on notice and all that. It doesn't talk about it. I I I would suggest that you ask if there any other if there was remmonstrance tonight. I did ask, didn't I? Have you? Did I ask? I thought I asked. Okay. There's no And there is none. So, they've been notified two months in a row obviously because we failed to notify them in time last time. So, yeah. And I think as for board discussion, if we're if if you are wrapped, I think there's a policy statement that we need to make that any decision that we make here would be based upon the the facts and prevailing criteria and not about any staff action. I think there's a policy that we are not using a waiver for correction of what we perceive or do not perceive to be staff action. That's inconsequential. It's that this is a result that just doesn't make sense and we're utilizing the waiver format. Um because there's five criteria that we can rely upon. Just a statement. Okay. Yeah. All right. So, I think would you entertain a motion? Yeah, I was going to say let's uh take a motion on the waiver. I move that we wave the sub

subdivision um ordinance 155 uh.6 06 uh for purposes of the subject permit and have any um result be the um record or the commissioner's rule. And that should the petitioner withdraw their application for the noticed and subject reszone that we would wave any uh waiting time for reapplication. Get it all. There's a lot of record in there. Lot of Oh, yeah. That's the the commissioner's rule. lot of re I believe that's what there just an amendment to my motion a lot of record in a commissioner's rule is the same thing and it and it pertains just to the building permit for the new home right we're done with it I'll second that motion okay all right it's been moved and seconded to uh wave the requirements of uh 15506 of the subdivision control ordinance. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I. I oppose. Same sign. Okay, that motion carries. So, to withdraw, I'll just ask the petitioner what they want to do with their reasonzoning petition. We would like to ask the planning commission to withdraw our petition for reszoning for the Frank minor reszone. So moved. Second. All right. It's been moved and seconded to accept the um withdrawal of the reszone petition for the Frank minor subdivision. All those

in favor signify by saying I. Opposed. Same sign. Success. Good. All right. Thanks. Looks good. All right. Um, item number four is Mr. James Ellood. That's This is a uh this is a Shirley petition. So, what we'll be dealing with tonight is a recommendation to the Shirley Town Council, not to our board of commissioners. And this is a reszone petition. [Music] Guess we're getting our password. We took so long. I'm on my best behavior. So, tonight we have a the Elg Good reszone. James Elg Good is requesting a reszone in the town of Shirley. Uh subject property is located at 212 South First Street. Uh, the petition would reszone approximately 43 acres from our 3.5 to CN commercial neighborhood, which would then allow for a small appliance repair service business to occur in uh what was a church. [Applause]

Algo has included a uh statement of intent. um which I'll allow him to discuss more if he would like to is um there is a listing for this site online. Um but you can see the interior of this is it's a church. It's a one big open space. [Applause] got kind of a a cool um wanza hut style roof and I believe his specialty is pinball repair from what I was hearing. So feel free to ask him questions about that wrong thing again. Did you find it? District intent of CN neighborhood commercial zoning district is intended to provide convenience goods, services, and amenities with enclosed proximity to residential areas. This district is further intended to permit the development of traditional mixeduse neighborhood centers which would include secondstory residential above commercial. This district would be protected from non- neighborhood serving land uses such as big box or more regional retail uses. So this is really an ideal reszone for what is a residential area um in Shirley, especially one that already has a church structure on it. The decision criteria again once again taking into consideration comprehensive plan conditions and character, desired use, property values and responsible growth and development. Really this seemed like a a great reuse of the site as it is and a fit into this

neighborhood. Um so for those reasons uh staff recommends uh to the town of Shirley uh favorable recommendation from our 3.5 uh 2 CN commercial. This is still in the town of Shirley overlay as well. I believe it is already actually I know because I met Mr. Elg good at a town of council meeting so I know it has already been to the Shirley. I will take any questions or turn it over to the petitioner. Questions? Okay. All right. Somebody here with the petitioner. Yep. Come on up. We'll swear you in. That the You're about to give us Yes, ma'am. Uh, my name is James Christopher Eliga and it's E L L E G O O D. Yeah, great. By the way, everybody calls me Chris. My Yeah. My father's name was Jim and my mother didn't want me to be little Jim. So, there you go. That's so um So, yeah. So, in my statement of intent, basically this is a uh 2400 ft² building. Um it's not a house, you know, it doesn't it's not a house structure, right? But I believe it was encompassed when the uh when the zoning was actually set up. This building was built in the 30s, so probably predated, I assume, the zoning that was there. Um anyway, um I've met I've talked to Mr. rigs and send him my letter. And we have a

purchase agreement in place contingent on it being uh reszoned as commercial neighborhood. Uh the facility is really kind of great. Basically, it's got a nice double door in the front, so it'll be very easy to move a pinball in and move a pinball out whenever we need to. And then the intention is because it's a nice large facility um I want to basically kind of expand my uh modification business where I you know basically make modifications for pinballs. That's a big thing. And uh you know like new lights um also people build little houses to go inside their pinballs. It's it's a whole thing anyway. And uh and I think this would just be really great. The building uh doesn't have adequate electrical. So I have a whole laundry list of things that need to be done to it. Uh it has some deferred maintenance. Um but like for example the electrical is um my electrician friend said that basically a lot of churches are like this. They have you know splices where they shouldn't and they have uh you know the the box is not great. And uh so I've actually already talked to him about uh going in and running a whole new service conduit and putting outlets in the places where it needs to be. I'm planning on not changing the structure at all. Uh with the exception if I need to uh once we seal the brick, if we need to, we may need to paint it. And uh the only consideration I have there is a nice gray, you know, something that doesn't pop out of the neighborhood at all. Um so any questions? Yes. Super. Is it going to be open to the public so we can come and see this how this works? So let me say actually a great question. Uh it is not going to be open to the general public. Okay. But of course by uh by appointment you could come anytime. Oh, okay. Yeah. So yeah, it's not a retail store. Um it's not going to be fixing washers and dryers. It's going to be basically um like I

said, basically, you know, I'll bring in a pinball, work on it. I I do this at my own house already, but I have outgrown all of my space. And um so this would be like a way for me to kind of extend my hobby and basically build a business around it. Are the neighbors going to be complaining about the ding ding whistle whistle? Oh no. Actually I don't expect that they'll actually hear that. Try to be serious. It's a it's a structure. And um you know presumably people were singing in it before. Um but no I don't think you'd be able to hear it in my own house. I can if I'm on the third floor, I can't hear somebody playing in the basement. Okay. Yeah. And uh any tools or anything we use would be uh this is all essentially desktop manufacturing, you know, so 3D printers, a laser cutter, uh no u no giant machinery or anything like that. Um maybe I'll use a drill once in a while, but nothing that you would uh find offensive in a house. Okay. It's really especially art, you know, it's like coming back and people are trying to find people like you. Yeah. So, actually, it's kind of funny. Uh, basically, pinball repair people don't make house calls anymore. Yeah. And I'm not sure I really want to do that either. Um, but if someone will bring a machine to the place, I'll certainly uh shop it and fix it up for him. Yeah. Uh, most people are like that now, like Doc Pinball in here in Greenfield. And uh you know, you can bring something to him, but he traditionally doesn't come to the house anymore. He used to, my father-in-law used to have him come to his house and fix up his pens. And uh well, now I have to do it, right? Because it's my father-in-law, you know. Congratulations. Yeah, actually, it's really kind of nice. I've been doing pinball and arcade machines. Uh arcade machines are the gateway drug to pinball. Um I can remember when I thought $50 was a lot to pay for an arcade machine. Now, if I could find one for 50 B, like you'd buy

sight unseen, right? The market has dramatically shifted. We're kind of going into a a post peak where they've produced uh Stern produces new pens every year. They've kind of saturated the market a little bit, but um but no, it's I've been doing this for about 15 years. Um I'm one of the co-founders of the Hooser Oh, this is so bad. The Hooser Arcade Coin Op Collector Society because we wanted to say hacks is what we wanted to say. Uh anyway, but uh we probably have about four or 500 uh members now. And then I go to I belong to another group called Indie Pinball, which by the way, you should look up on Facebook. Come play pinball. It's 10 bucks. Play for hours. And it's in a wonderful Masonic building down in Indie. And uh anyway, it's a uh but you you know, it's a really great hobby. You meet a lot of nice people. Most of my friends are pinball people now, you know. So anyway, but that's kind of the plan that I have for it. But like I said, there's a list of improvements that need to be made. The roof needs to be remediated. The electrical basically, we're going to start over uh and make it uh up to code more most importantly, but also with the electrical where I need it, and we're going to improve the service from 100 to 200 amp. Um and then there's just a whole litany of uh deferred maintenance that needs to be done. And uh but Mr. rigs and I have uh come to an agreement as soon as as soon as this gets reszoned. Yeah. So So Kayla, with the reszone, anything like um landscaping, different things like that would only come in if we had a building permit for an addition or something like that to the building, right? So, as long as he's not adding on, he shouldn't have any any requirements that he needs to upgrade the site, upgrade the parking, upgrade the landscape or anything like that. As he changes the site, he needs to bring it into compliance with current code. But if he's not changing anything on the outside like parking or remodel

or whatever, as he goes through that, then he'll comply, apply for permits, and that'll go through all the departments. Yeah. All right. Hey, although there's although this is a great use and I don't think anybody has an issue with it, is there any um uses in commercial neighborhood that we should be concerned about with this around this area that we should exclude? We discussed originally the commercial community um reszone category, but that had a lot of uses that were concerning. So, for that reason, we did find this use category in CN that worked really well. and a lot of the other uses in CN like the use district explains are very much meant to be in a neighborhood setting. So, um I don't have any additional comments, but if the town of Shirley wants to speak at all about that, I would definitely defer to them. Um yeah, my experience meeting with the town council, uh they very they seem very enthusiastic and they very quickly passed u like a like a resolution, you know, that they well that they supported uh my use of it. Okay, any more questions? No. All right, thank you. Thank you. Do we have anybody that wants to speak in opposition to this reszone? Anybody from town of Shirley that has any comment? Okay. You got the same shirt on as Wendle. They might know each other. I do. Teresa Hester. H E S T E R. I am the clerk treasure for the town of Shirley. Also Wendle Hester's wife. Uh we got lots of questions. Uh the this was brought before the town council uh last month, two months ago maybe. Was it last two months? Was it two months ago? I think so. I will say I

thought I thought it was two months ago and uh council was very uh for the the reasonzoning and all of that because uh to be quite honest the neighborhood is if you look caddy cornered across there was a car wash there at one time uh which has now been bought and made into a garage but so which is still com is that commercial neighborhood or community commercial CC. Yeah, it's CC across. It's kind of a diagonal across from where this location is. But, uh, to be able to have a use of a building and another person in, uh, the community that would bring other people in, uh, even if it's just to bring a pinball machine, it's still bringing someone in to look at our community. And that's what we, you know, the council would would like and appreciate because we want people to come in and see our community. So that it was very highly recommended and uh approved. Council was in approval. Okay. So okay, any questions? No. You get some rebuttal time as well if you want that. If you got anything else to say. Nothing else. All right. So what we have again it's a this is our um recommendation is favorable, unfavorable, no recommendation. Continue. But this is to the town council of Shirley. I'll make a motion for a favorable recommendation to the Shirley Town. Second council. Okay. Moved in a second in for a favorable recommendation to the town of Shirley. So Don, when you're ready, you call the role, please. Yes. Mr. Yes. Yes. Yes. Mr. Yes. Mr. Yes. Miss. Yes. 7.

All right. Thank Thank you. Thanks for hanging around so late. Y that concludes our hearing items this evening. So we'll move on to we've got two other business items. A UDO update and a quality of place plan update. Oh, we can add that to other business. Other business. I just don't know that I want to know the answers. Is Wendle this quiet at home? That's the question. I've got this vision of Wendle in my mind. I don't want to change. So, Shirley's also getting a hat shop. I just got the change of use for it today. And uh Teresa just mentioned that it's for also has some online use and also some office space. You said a hat shop. Hat shop. Yeah. And it's like in some of the downtown uh core building that is currently vacant, I believe. So that's awesome. And um also if you haven't tried out their new pickle ball courts, you should. It's amazing. And I've played twice there already. So the plan commission is gonna have a pickle ball tournament. I know. I think that's a cool idea. New new pal has New Pal just did theirs, too. They just finished pickle ball courts and new, right, Mike? Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, I just wanted to Shirley is doing some cool stuff. It sounds like everywhere. Yeah. All right. Have we moved on to UDO update? UDO update. All right. I have given you all a document from Vanderwal and Associates that I've been hanging on to in hopes that I would get a little bit more polished version of it um to hand to you all. But this is a findings. Excuse the

draft form. Hopefully Meredith, she'll probably send me the finalized beautified version tomorrow. Um but uh just an quick it's just an overview of our UDO draft and how it aligns with the comprehensive plan. Um, so, uh, this was called for several months ago at this point. Um, and just goes over the the good, the bad, the ugly, things that could be tweaked a little bit or things that are great. Um, I'm just giving it to you guys to read over and um, kind of answer any of your questions about the direction we're going with that UDO. So, Vanderwal drafted this. Yes, Vanderval drafted the UDO. No, Vanderwal drafted plan. Okay. And they were they were on our evaluation. They were on our evaluation for engagement for the UDO or no? No. Got it. Okay. Thank you. No, they reviewed this once the draft was complete. This different from what you were working on. I know, but you were going you were I thought you said you were working on something that you were looking at the state. She's doing a legal review last month. Legal review. Legal review. Okay. She was looking at the statutes. Legal review. That's different from Yes. this right? Yeah. Okay. They were engaged to do to see a plan. Yes. Okay. So, yeah. So, that's I think kind of one of the plan commission's jobs with the UDO is to make sure that and to certify that it adheres to the comp plan. And so, that's what this is. No, I just want to make sure because I I remember hearing. So, we're giving this to the UDO preparers to say, can you incorporate these and tell us yes or no to each? I really would like the chance to go through it a little more fine-tuned, but I did want to share the findings with you guys so that you are very aware and

yes, I do plan to share that with uh GRWTS. Okay. C and just so so by example, are we going to preserve the ability of the planning commission to I don't know wave a subdivision ordinance 155.06 in the new document? Is that who does that? Is that this? Is that you? Is that us as a planning commission? Like that's my favorite new thing. So, how do we make sure it's in How do we make sure it's in somewhere? Well, I I would prefer that um GRW do kind of tell us what's in and what's that at our request, but how do we they're kind of like saying It's up to you if you tell us. So the you brought up a good thing with me last uh last meeting too that an AI um that's a lot to go through to try to figure out what what is in and what is not. So, the review that your office was doing, my understanding or what's been weighing on my mind that was concerning, what I thought I was hearing was that there were things that were done over the several years, ordinances change, things like that that never really became like codified. Like, they weren't online. There's things that you if you went on to American Legal, you wouldn't find certain things that we changed in our zoning ordinance. And so GRW maybe didn't know all of those things and all of those things maybe didn't find their way to the UDO draft. So um is passed like there would be some ordinances that may not been codified yet in between stage that haven't made it to American

more recent. Yeah. And that was my concern and I I just want to make sure that we didn't miss any. So the approach I believe but instead of starting with our current code and updating it with all they started with a fresh and said we will put back in whatever things you want. That was my concern was how do we know probably lots of things we lot of time how do we get go through that process to know what irresponsible again whose job is it to go through and kind of like say do you want this in I think yeah and I think that the direction to them is that They they need to make sure that I'd rather be subtractive, right? I I'd want everything that is on the books to be in to start with and then we could take out if we needed to. Yeah. So, yeah. So, it' be subtractive rather than additive. Is that possible or are we too far gone? I think my question to you would be, do you think that the steering committee accomplished that? So that's yeah that's a good point. That's where it got a little confusing is the steering committee might have given them um a different direction maybe than what was there. But I so I think we need to just I think they probably need to make sure that everything was there and then highlight anything that the steering committee might have asked to change

maybe because that's where we were kind of getting before is like highlight the changes and they were like we can't highlight the changes because the format's different. It's like okay well give us a list of the changes. Well you have the list of changes. It's like no I don't have the list of changes you have. So, we were getting this all this back and forth. So, I don't know if we even need to start we need to do a new agreement with them or something where they can just say this is the UDO. This has everything in it. This is everything we heard in the steering committee. So, these are the decisions that need to be made. I don't know if that's I mean, can I ask a new agreement? I mean, they should be experienced in producing these and know that it has to go in front of a board and they have to coach the board on exactly what those are. So we're reconciling the comp plan, the steering committee, existing ordinance, their template ordinance, new laws, and so all of those things there needs to be they should be experience in a mechanism to give us an indication of what we should. I mean, if we have a favorite thing we want to preserve, we should be they should be able to say, hey, you know, this is where it was and this is where where it is now. I mean, a new agreement seems like we were paying for something that was not quite expertise. Have you taken a look at the draft ordinance to see if it's user friendly? I don't I I could I mean, for me, yes. And I could care less about user friendliness. I care about Does it agree with actually Yeah. Does it agree with the comprehensive plan? Um uh does it uh capture all of the pending ordinances and existing ordinances that we want to preserve? Does it listen to the steering committee and um any new laws? I I mean and and fine if they use their own template, but they have to give us a mechanism to understand those. I mean, it's more of the content. Um, because today's world, we'll just put it through a scan. User friendliness is is something different. It's content that we might be missing. I I'm kind of along with that is like

the content piece is what I'm concerned about is because um I know I sound like a broken record, but we have different segments that are still super concerned and and I don't mind naming them. The agriculture community is still concerned. The development cons are concerned. the trustee fire and safety are still concerned about the content that's in from and I say from when they came and did the open house because they couldn't know what exactly the changes were and they want to be able to have a public meeting to be able to discuss that but they wanted to see what what the changes were and they couldn't tell what the changes were from the existing copy to the new copy and I'm not saying that they totally disagree with that but there are pieces that they disagree with that they have seen and so they want to be able to have an opportunity to talk about that and so whether that's a public meeting or platform or whatever that is but they want something concrete they've expressed that to me I've expressed it to you guys so I know I sound like a broken record but until we see like the before and after should I just go ahead and post the draft on a website and just get the mystery off of it. But I think it's I think the draft part doesn't mean anything unless you see the before. The is lost still. It's there still. But it is going to be I mean this is unified so it's but see that's what I'm saying. They want to see the before and then what was changed kind kind of what you were saying. Maybe what it is is that they can tell us what they rejected. Did they keep a registry of what they rejected from our existing ordinance from the steering committee minutes? Did they because the it's interesting when you publish something is what's below the fold that is very telling what what they leave out and and what did they purposely leave out because they were

directed by someone that there's got to be something that they give us more than here it is because there's got to I mean if if they're experienced in doing this they should know they need to present some sort of context. Yeah. still stuff I'm trying to look up in the draft, but they're blank pages. So, I think that we, you know, I guess we're all a little bit guilty, but I I think that we allowed them to go to to use a process that probably wasn't the best for us because it's like what Rhonda said. They they said, "This is a format of a UDO that works." And then they just started editing it by reading our zoning. So they would come to a section and like what should this section be? And then then they would go to the steering committee and they would take all that input and then they would work on that section and they would get that section done and the staff would check that off and we'd move on. And so then what we're now what we're faced with are these two very different documents. And then we turned around and said give us a sideby-side comparison. And they're like, well something like that doesn't really exist because we just created this brand new zoning document, you know. So, we're that's why I made the comment of a new agreement. Maybe that's probably not the right thing because they do owe us something better, I think. But, um I think we just we need them to do more work is essentially what it's come down to is to make it so rearranged it obviously to make it more user user friendly different from what was before. So yeah, a list of things that the steering committee asked to be changed, I think would probably do what needs to be done and that could just be from the minutes of this of the steering committee meetings. They could just, you know, because Holly and Darla were keeping notes as they were going and so there it should be able to be pulled from from that I think.

Um, is it possible to give the planning commissioners access to all the minutes from the steering committee, those who were not involved? Yes. Anything? Great. Thank you. through anything wise working off of a draft. So, I'm kind of hoping that when I do a review, legal review, that it's in its final form. Last thing that happened. I don't think we're quite there. our current code incorporated in. Don't want it in [Music] the last version, you know. Sorry about that. So yeah, so I think we just need to get another another run at that um a list of the of the changes the steering committee changes I think and then we can also since Vanderwall's in front of us Kayla when do we do like a I don't know what you want to call it another touch on our comprehensive plan where we kind of say okay like we've done this for a little bit. When do we kind of look at it again? Say, were they right? Are there things that we need to take another look at to see if there's anything we need to change or update or

I believe once every five years is suggested. So, this process on our last one, I think started in 2020. So, we should probably start planning for that. So, 2028 officially would be when we would adopt I guess or aim for adoption of a update. Um 2027 would be a big work year then I would probably envision. Um meaning 20 we should probably start planning because my 2026 budget goes before council thinking about far away. It's it's not and there's already been things have come up. It seems like that the comp plan and there's a little little massaging. Yeah. What year was the comp plan? It was adopted in January of 2023. One of them comes to mind is the thinking about trying to get ahead of is this whole 200 uh corridor because with Amplify being um developed and all the things that are going to happen with the um interchange there, it seems like it makes a whole or I should say proposed interchange off of 70. Seems like that makes sense that we should be really thinking about that now. Um about what we'd like to see that whether that's an overlay or whatever, we should be thinking about that now. Um or talking about it or whatever that needs to be and planning um if you're going to do an overlay be do it quickly because Greenfield just took it and ran with it and they're doing a comprehensive plan for two West if you haven't seen it. They've got they've got everything designed out there what they think it should be. Oh, okay. So, good. Might want to speed that up then. Yeah. As part of their comp plan. As part of their comp. So, or the regional center uh for that whole two west interchange. Yeah. All the way up in that area. Oh, including Amplify. Whose jurisdiction is that

right now? It's the counties. That's the counties, isn't it? That doesn't mean they're not going to start annexing them as fast as they can. Yeah. Right now, they're thinking 31. What I think is they're planning on stuff coming up 200 and then going in 100 and they plan on annexing all the way to 200 west. So, do we need to start putting stakes out there or what is that what you're saying? I don't know. I guess planners are a very peaceful crowd and we like to get along and if if somebody's done good planning, there's no reason we can't go run with it. Yeah. Just like we would hope that the towns um and the city would take pieces of our plans that are good, maybe we look at that and see what they've got. Yeah. Okay. But seems like we should be having conversations about that, right? Yeah. Well, yeah. Let's get a look at that and see what's going on there. So, all right. What's uh up with quality of place plan? So, um, part of speaking of all of this, um, part of our, uh, comprehensive plan, as you guys know, is an economic development strategy that HDC is the lead on. Part of the economic development strategy is actually a quality of place plan. And that quality of place plan establishes that communities that attract uh good business, big businesses um and keep uh growing u existing businesses have something we would we call in this plan quality of place. and that is distinctive uh amenities, um unique uh entertainment opportunities, um things that really make this a place we want to go to. Like kind of like what Shirley's showing us

tonight with, you know, pinball and a cool hat store. Like even things like that that if you think about this as okay, we take it and run with it. Um, you know, we could say, uh, Hancock County as a whole has things going on, um, like we've got this great, um, small agricultural, um, vibe going on in the northern part of the county and in other areas where we've got lots of orchards and um, the piny acres and things like that. These are quality of place elements. Additionally, things like the depot, uh, that's a quality of place element, too. the max. You've got an existing structure that has now a restaurant in it. So, it was an eyesore. They've turned it into a a tourist destination. It's now got ice cream and a beer garden and they're building a parking garage and also they've got an amphitheater right there. Just one these things all grow things together. Um, and they attract quality businesses to your community. So, that's how it fits into that quality of place plan. Um so what this plan is is then a whole kind of inset to our comprehensive plan. Um it includes uh suggestions not only for the county but also for the towns um and gives a list of uh suggested uh steps to move forward, an implementation table. Um, and it really highlights ways that Hancock County is already awesome and could become even better. Um, I've got letters of support from all of the communities in the county except for Wilkinson. Um, so I've never quite talked to somebody on the town council in town of Wilkinson. Someday I will, I'm sure. Um, but so everybody except

for Town of Wilkinson has provided a letter of support. Um and anyway, adoption of this would then um become part of our our planning documents. It would go in our book as well. I know it's a hefty document. Um so if you uh need additional time, I totally understand. Mary Gibble at the community foundation and her team worked really hard with HWC um to uh come up with this document uh for HEDC um and uh held I think probably many of you were at the p at the public uh open house for this um u so anyway I'll kind of leave it to you guys to look through it um unless you have specific questions but we can definitely Uh the result should be um or I would hope for I guess uh a favorable recommendation to the board of commissioners for a resolution adopting this as one of our comprehensive planning documents. Are we allowed to change it? because it seems to me looking at from a council perspective, I'm concerned about taxes on from it, additional taxes coming for people and spending. That's very concerning in that document. That's what I got from it. I mean, there's other parts are great like here's what's would be great for quality of place. I mean, that's not an issue. It's just how you pay for it. And I don't want to put anything on two. We we're already, let's be honest, we can't even fund the planning department well enough over the all these years. I mean, I don't want to put something else that burdens the taxpayers and burdens the county making these tough decisions in the next month. So, that's my question is, can we make changes to it and redo parts of it? certainly just like we can the whole

comprehensive plan I would say but at this point um I guess I don't have a good answer for you about how we would change this in particular um since it is I would have to talk to Mary Gibble a little bit more about it but it's kind of been through it I think the answer is who has jurisdiction to approve that and it's us I think we always let's not let's not mix anything up I I think that'd be overextending that something given to us is either a go or no go because if we can't make changes is is a big risk of no-go. Right. Correct. Okay. Couple questions for me. Um when we we we see the most conflict in mixed use scenarios, which is the number one bullet from Vanderhill Vanderwall. U promote mixed use in commercial and residential districts. We saw this tonight. We're just going to see a lot of concern. how the the quality of of life, quality of planning, quality of place has a lot of is is that mostly mixed use? Um, it talks about these downtown areas a lot and existing structures. In fact, that's one of the things that highlighted was existing structures that we already have. Okay, good. All right. So, it's in existing structures or existing developments. It's not kind of encouraging. Okay. And my second question is what will what reliance or what references will we have on this when voting because the sidewalks plan was great and we reference that a lot. I do. Is this going to have the same? Yes. This would be referred to as part of our comprehensive planning package right along with the Mount Comfort corridor plan and the things like that. Would we would we then also have a difference where there's conflicting references in the existing comprehensive plan? I know um to this That is a good question. And then last question, um, what in there is also talked about in the UDO because now we just are passing a UDO with a

comprehensive plan and we have an assessment of how they work together and then we got this thing. So, so what those would be my questions when if if presented those. Yeah. So I I guess I have a lot of questions about this quality of place plan and I worked on this plan. Um but why she's asking us to adopt it. It's really something that the foundation did and I question the comprehensiveness of it because of the makeup of the people that were involved in that plan and about the touch points of the areas of how it was surrounded. And so I just wonder like why she's asking the planning commission for the adoption of that when it really seemed like it was being driven by the foundation and the implementation of that. The things that they were asking to be driven it seemed like it was being going to be funded by the by the foundation. the funding and sponsorship we should celebrate. We should love that the fact that there are participants in our community who are helping us uh in a lot of ways. I think that's a wonderful thing. Um we're contributing to community health and wellness. We're contributing to economic development. We're contributing to um a better tax base. There's there's tons of things that that is benefit. I just think that there's a like we have like the buck stops here but we have to evaluate what's been given and understand what the sponsorship um mechanisms that have come to us and understand what the stakeholders are there. That's all that's all as long as we just remember like it we're not just going to rubber stamp something that we have to take a look at it right that we're not going to be held accountable for implementing the the endorsement of

the plan. That's what I guess I'm just saying is if we're we're either that or we have asurances that the implementation plan will be separately funded when that would need to be a condition. I guess that's what I'm just saying about I'm just want to make sure that it's not going to say like we're we're endorsing it that it becomes our responsibility to make sure that it's implemented. We'll have to vote according to it. So it'll be our responsibility. Yeah, that's been my concern is that if it becomes a part of the comprehensive plan, much like the Mount Comfort Corridor, it becomes another guiding document and it's just it's a lot to Yeah. take to compare and to watch over. Um better that it's incorporated and unified than floating out there though. It is. But at the same time, I one thought that I had and it was something else I was going to ask about this evening is uh if you remember um Gateway, they they wanted to be what what they call an interested party or whatever. They wanted to be notified about all this stuff, you know, and we're working towards that. And I wanted to get an update on that tonight, too. just like where were we with making sure that we get everything uploaded to the system so that everybody can get their emails and you can you can sign up to get the emails and be notified of what's going on in your community. So if the community foundation wants to be the the keeper of the quality of place, they can much like Gateway sign up for the emails, get notified of a petition, and then come and speak at the plan commission meeting and say, "We don't think that this meets the quality of place guidelines. you guys should take another look at or apply to be one of the community um hubs. I forget what we called it, but we had the ability for any organized institution to create sort of the precursor to an appearance here to kind of work it out as a benefit to us, right? And so they would it would just, you know, follow that's a great opportunity for for maybe some preliminary input before it comes here

as well. Structured remmonstrance, I guess. would be an option. I guess the other thing that concerns me to be honest, Lacy, like when we had the meetings, there's only 300 people that participated collectively in this quality of life, quality of place. Sounds like a ton to me. That sounds like a lot. Three 300 people. I don't think that's a lot at all. Oh, not compared to the remmonstrators in the other month. No, I don't think that when you're talking about a quality of place thing for 300 people to decide what the quality of place is for Hancock County, I don't think that's a lot of people to determine about what quality of place is for our for our community. I understand that. But but from government involvement and volunteerism, not when we're talking about I mean they had all these different touches. And so that's I guess that's the other piece that concerns concerns me. Well, that's the thing. It's it's just an ongoing problem in in in planning. You know, it's like we did all that comprehensive planning stuff and we get two or 30 hundred people to come to an open house, but as soon as somebody proposes a data center, we can fill a comp we can fill an auditorium auditorium with 500 people. You know, it's like they you don't it's always reactive. it's not proactive with with and so I don't know how you ever solve that but things like what the community foundation did is kind of a step in the right direction but if they they want to proactively use their document and come speak to the plan commissioner or the commissioners based on that um I I just don't know that we need to formally adopt it necessarily because it would go it would go to it we would adopt it and then we'd give it to the commissioners to adopt so then you're saying hey we're committing to this and that's and that was the concern with the funding and money and I'm like no we can't make sure that this organization gets another employer that organization gets I mean that's up to each organization not right I think we

need to understand some of the what is compelling the components of this especially if if if with economic development I I do think we should hear on the purpose and see what what if this is no doubt there is a benefit there yeah right and and when hearing we we often see an opening of of a multitude of opportunities to engage engage in a plan like this, maybe not comprehensive plan or maybe excerpts could be. But I think when hearing and going through that process and hearing remmonstrance related to it, it's um it's healthy. It's it's just kind of Okay. Anything else? Quality of place. Did um Mitchell Kirk say anything when he was here this evening? said he likes it, but he was probably on the committee, wasn't he? Works for economic development. Well, I know that. But I mean, I was just wondering about that. Yeah. I don't want to be misunderstood about not liking or not thinking. I think we just have to be careful about where about our commitment, what role we take on our responsibility about that. I don't want to be misunderstood about liking it. No. So, I guess what what do you what kind of direction do you want from us? Do you want to see what the community foundation feels like as far as maybe becoming an interested party or do you still think you want us to try and adopt it in some way or what's uh what's the ask here? I do believe that the ask would be to adopt this as a part of our comprehensive plan since we do have the economic development strategy and the thoroughare plan in here as well and this is called out as a theme in our econ economic development strategy and also something that we are severely lacking in any direction on across our

county. Um, so I I guess my ask tonight would be for just continue this for the next month and let's really read it and if you want somebody more versed in this than me to be presenting it to you, let's see if we can find that person to come and talk to you. But I think the big thing is make changes and we want to make changes because I mean if we're going to approve it then it's going to be this the nine of us or majority of the nine of us deciding and then you got three commissioners and you're going to have to have at least two of them that like it. So otherwise it doesn't it's just a waste of our time. All right. So homework read it. No watching Ninja Warrior until you get it read. Byron. Yeah. So, it's almost like we want to adopt our own quality of place plan. Yeah. Oh, so is this been emailed to us? It was part of your um packet. If you clicked on the quality of place plan in your agenda, this came up. Yeah. Anybody can look at it. actually the whole public if they you can notify the public and say people watching they can go click on the agenda and click on it and they can read the whole plan and then give feedback to the commissioners and to I don't know I guess through you to us through everybody email Kayla or read the 97 yeah read the 97 pages questions I have about the clicking agenda and how that process is going um does is everybody working for everyone Can you get to the agenda? Because I think that'll alleviate Don having to mail out email out and then you think you what do I have because some things are coming just provide you the link to the which you get to on the website. I think that would be easier for you, Don, and then

everybody would know whenever there's something from this meeting it's going to be. But are we gonna So either that or we're going to have to be on our our devices. If nothing if not everything is printed for us. So I just that's the that if not everything is printed here, then just know we're all going to be looking on our devices. I didn't really do what I was saying like ahead of time. when the agenda comes out. Oh, I get you. I get you there. I get I get you there. So, but but we we reference things in that all the time. So, it's either got to be in front of us or partially in front of us and then know that we're going to be referencing on our devices. Yeah. Well, so I think what she's getting at, so what they're trying to do is get all of the submitted documents compiled and in a folder and linked onto the agenda by what is it 10 days or something before the the meeting. So then these interested parties that are getting notified, they'll be able to look at the agenda and look at everything and be up to date. This is on the county website so they know if they want to remmonstrate or not. Yes, this is on the county website under agendas. So the benefit to them is they get to decide do do I want to remmonstrate against this or not. And the benefit for us is it's all right there and we're not getting 15 emails or whatever. So I I think maybe when the if something is added to the agenda, Don, you could send out an email saying the agenda has been revised and you could always give them the link so they don't have to go to the website. Send them the link to agenda on the county website. Update has been made. I really didn't think that you wouldn't also do the printed ones for when unless it's a massive 500page document and we're all told please bring your devices to review this

updated subdivision appeal with the com. Yeah, that was not part of the I printed for you all. I didn't probably easier to do. I think that's about it. I I like it. I know any uh any other discussion. It is good for the public. I mean, it's good for for for everyone could see it and All right. Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I oppose. Same signed. So this is on the website. Is this This isn't on the website. This is plan. Yeah, it's on there. So you the email with the agenda, there's a the thing in blue will say packet or record or whatever. You just click on the blue link and it'll take you to everything. And you know what? I might have been there.