Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Eids here. Gibly. Longer here. Milner here. Pinkerton. Ruptto Schaer here. Secor here. Sellers here. Webster here. Wendell here. Peace here. Clott here. All right. So, we have anybody online that I have to worry about? Uh there is one guest. Okay.

It's a new system, right? All right. All right. All right. Do we have a motion for the minutes from the last meeting? Make a motion we approve the minutes of the last meeting. Been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Oppose. There being none, we will move on with our first one. And it looks like it's PC 2025-13. That's right. And pie could not be here tonight, so you're stuck with me.

So PC 2025-13, Crossroads Church, Crossroads Evangelical Free Church of Plymouth, Indiana, Inc. 1650 North Oak Drive, Plymouth, Indiana 46563. an abatement of development standards to wave and abate the requirement to install sidewalks parcel 50-42-32-301-128 [Music] triple019 located at 1650 North Oak drive Plymouth Indiana 47563 zoned C3 corridor commercial district uh the request uh the applicant is seeking to a waiver and abate the requirement to install sidewalks on the property as part of their building expansion project. This is an image from the Beacon website showing the parcel right on North Drive. And these are some photos Tai provided. This, I believe, is looking to the south right along Oak Drive. And this is the other direction looking north. Uh for analysis, the city anticipates an expansion and enhancement of pedestrian facilities throughout and around the area. Is intending to apply for grants to develop sidewalks along Oak Drive just north of the subject property. The applicant would like to waiver and obey the sidewalk installation requirement until such time plans are developed along such streets. For the applicant, they would participate as needed. The subject property is located at 1650 North Oak Drive. similar memorandum of understanding for pedestrian easement would be executed. And he's referring there to the previous agreements that were approved um specifically for Collins for their property there on North North Oak Drive, pretty much right across the street from this and Plumbley

Dentistry, which is a block to the south of this location in the bank. Uh and that's a little different. Um when my understanding is that when you're talking about Beacon Credit Union Cent excuse me and then what's the next Yeah, Beacon. Okay. So, I'm not familiar with any agreements for Centier. What I recall and and I was not involved at the time, but I believe the agreement for or the approval for um the credit union and for the storage units, right,

was that they did not have to install sidewalks until an adjacent property installed sidewalks. Whereas the agreements for Collins and for Plumbley Dentistry specifically said that they did not have to install sidewalks now, but when the city did develop a project along Oak Drive, they agreed to uh give a 10-ft easement along the curb so that the city would have space because that's the biggest problem right through there is there's not enough ride of way, right? So David, we

I remember ask we asked for right away plus we said that they would have to pay for the sidewalks when it went in is the way I remember it for Collins and for not for Collins Plumbley. They were not required to pay for right the sidewalk. The city would take on the expense of installing it

in exchange for the 10-ft rideway easement so we'd have space to do so. And that's what would be proposed for the crossroads application is a similar agreement, which is that they would not be required to install the sidewalk, but they would grant the city that uh 10-ft rideway easement when the city is ready to proceed with our project. While while we're on the subject, where is the safe streets committee with is that the correct one? The the complete streets committee Yeah, Kablo, where are they with this?

Well, it's it's not really in the hands of the committee anymore. It's actually in the hands of the city engineering department. And would you like to update us? You want me to? Sure.

Um, okay. So, the city has uh inquired at INDOT about um funding opportunities and we the city plans on applying for a grant uh next month, November. Uh we won't hear anything whether we receive the grant or not till early spring. Hopefully we get the grant and we can pursue that project. What's What's the estimated cost of this thing? Uh five foot wide for however long you got to run. Well, it would actually be for sidewalk on both sides of the road.

Okay. Um a lot of cost involved in rightway acquisition which some of this some of this helped. Um it would be from US30 to um Lake Avenue and estimated cost is around 4 million. Okay.

Yeah. and and the process we've gone through is the complete streets committee did um hire Troyer Group to give us some u preliminary concepts of both a very simple uh cost-effective version and a very detailed very expensive version and Dan has actually taken both of those and combined elements from each to create a more realistic uh middle of the road version I'd say and the particular grants that the city will be applying for would also include engineering and design work so that we can take those uh preliminary concepts and develop a full complete design

is uh using those funds. Keep in mind that any grant that we get is going to have a long lead time before they have to show up. Yeah. Yeah. Well, they're probably going to have to have a match with them, too. Correct. Yes, we have a matching. Now when it comes time for the match, is the city uh got any ideas about going back to Holland's and the church and Plumley's and asking for donations for this in lie of they didn't have to put any money up now.

Right. So one of the major expenses with a project like this is ride-of-way acquisition. So that's the benefit of agreements like what's being requested tonight. And I think it's the city's intention then to also approach other property owners and try to negotiate um um favorable agreements for that rightway acquisition. So that would be the the primary contribution of businesses along that route would be the real estate where we need to build it.

I think I'm concerned that it feels like we've given exceptions to what we wrote. You know, the vision was we would require new development to have sidewalks and it feels like we keep on saying, well, in this case it's okay or in this case it's okay and and I hear loud and clear that, you know, the plan is to pursue a grant, but as you rightly noted that that time frame is very long, right? And there's no guarantee that we will get that. Whereas if we stick to what we wrote in the ordinance, we could have sidewalk at least in front of this church. And I I just I feel like

it it's somewhat frustrating that we keep on saying, "Well, let's just wait. Let's just wait." Um the bad thing is we've set a precedence now and we can't do for one that we haven't done for the other. And I think and I I certainly understand I understand where you're

the position from from the administration's perspective. I would say that uh if it was purely speculative then I would probably agree with you. But in this case along Oak Drive um we've identified the project. The city council has made clear that uh this is a top priority. They want the pedestrian infrastructure along Oak Drive um second only to a fire station on their priority list. So, there's a strong motivation among both the I would say the mayor's office and the city council to move this project forward and a sidewalk in front of the church would be great, but we would anticipate that they're not going to build it to the width and the specifications that we want for that corridor. They would build it to probably what's the minimum requirement in the ordinance. What's the minimum?

The minimum Yeah, I don't like the sidewalk on Gibson Street. What's that? So, a lot of places in town, let the developer

build the sidewalk and a they put it on their property instead of the city's rideway and that creates somewhat of a legal battle if somebody gets hurt or something, liability issue, I guess. And then they don't build it to the proper ADA standards. They don't build it to um be uniform for the entire road. Um you get how are they not held to that? How why aren't they? So really this needs to be we need to have preliminary engineering done.

The grant would pay for that and that would help us move forward. But the issue is there is no rideway along Oak Road or um property room is there to put their sidewalk in. So we need to acquire that for use by the public. I hear what you're saying. I guess I'm I'm a little confused. Are are some of our sidewalks not ADA compliant that are being put in? They should be. Okay. But when you have private development pudding, the city does not have enough control. Does

the city have standards for ADA sidewalks in our in our nice little thick book? We have sidewalk standards and those standards do meet ADA requirements. We also have an ADA transition plan. We need to change that. Then for sidewalks that were developed or installed before the ADA requirements or under old requirements, we have an ADA transition plan for the for the new sidewalks. Yeah, I I think

I don't know what the ADA requirements are, if they're different on private property than public. I don't I don't know that. Uh, I think the bigger concern is even if it meets ADA requirements, um, if the church were to install a sidewalk now, like Dan said, it would be on their private property. The city would not have control over that ride ofway. um when the project on Oak Drive moves forward, the city would have the expense of first of all acquiring that ride ofway and then the expense of removing that existing sidewalk in addition to the installation that would be planned

by doing it this way as we've done with again with Collins and Plumbley. they would be donating that ride of way to the city so we wouldn't have the expense of acquiring the land and then it would be uh fresh ground that all we'd have to do is install the lease expenses for acquiring the rightways is that b already baked into the 4 million or is that on top of the that is in the 4 million okay so I mean keep in mind it's just an estimate yeah I understand so

and that's assuming that the owners would be willing to uh sell that right ofway to the city. Uh we've been working with on the Harrison Street trail and I I think we've come to agreements or tenative agreements with everyone, but we had some holdouts that threatened that we would have to condemn the property and and go through a court process. Right. So, I'm 99% sure that we told Lansfeld and we told the credit union that they had to put the sidewalks in when it came time. And then that may be and that's very well the way it is. And and and and

what she's saying makes a whole lot of sense because what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you have somebody downtown that has to pay for a sidewalk because they're putting a new building in and then all of a sudden it does not look good to the city if you're putting in free sidewalks for everybody else down Oak Road. It's just not consistent. It's just it's not consistent. And and this happened several years ago. We had a new development in Plymouth. This has nothing to do with this administration. and and it was several years ago. I my mind I've been here too long.

Anyway, we put sidewalks in for a development and the city paid for it and then somebody that had lived in the community for 75 years and their family was all around here. They wouldn't pay for sidewalks for this individual. And that stuck under my craw because that's not consistent and that's not right. And I think that's that's how we want things to be upheld and that's that's Doug's theory. So you could take it or leave it, but that's that's my

and I understand that and and I don't want to diminish any of those points. Um, again though, looking at this from the planning perspective, from the administration's perspective, we're looking at what is the most coste effective way to get the entire project installed. Like Dan said, it's it's planned to extend all the way from US30 on the north to at least to um I think we're going all the way to Hillrest, right? Stairway 17.

Um, Lake Avenue, right? with a project that big and a price tag like that. Uh we're we're looking to make it as cost-effective as possible and having the rightway donated and having less expense of demolition for existing infrastructure is going to make it more efficient from a city planning perspective. Well, I've got a question. We have the city councilman here and we have mayor and we have somebody from the engineering department. This is a big long project. If things don't work out as well as they should what work out as we move forward with this,

would the city be opposed to doing this in sections, dividing it into four different sections? Okay, this year we're going to do this section even if we've got to kick it out of the general fund or wherever else we've got to grab it. and then maybe next year or two years down the so we can at least make some progress on this.

Right. So my understanding and and Dan can step in and correct me if I'm wrong, but that estimated $4 million price tag puts us right in the sweet spot for some of these grants that we're looking at. And the the big grant round is in November when we'll be applying through IND. And they have several buckets of federal money to pull from. They will look at the application and decide which of these federal grant programs is the best fit. If we are not successful, there is another grant opportunity with an application deadline next June. If we're still not successful, that November call for projects is an annual grant application and we will keep working with partners at INDOT. We've been in consultation with INDOT to try to make this the best application possible. We've been working with MCOG to get their experience to advise us on preparing the application. We think we're in in the best possible position to apply for these funds and we've made it the most ideal project for the available funding. But you're right, it's not guaranteed. And if it's not successful with this round, we will keep making those tweaks, whether it's splitting it up into multiple projects or reconfiguring it, but we'll keep working on it until we're able to find funding for it.

We're also not guaranteed everybody's going to give us the easement. Well, there is an eminent domain process. We can guarantee that we can get the easement if we're willing to and that could draw out for a number of years. It can if they put if they want to fund it that way. Yeah. And and there are ways the potential to redesign and reconfigure if we end up in that situation. Ideally, we'd have a nice straight sidewalk. When you start hodgepodgeing things, gets Yeah. Right. I'm saying I know what you're saying.

I I have one last thing if I can say on this. Okay. If if I can put my words together tonight, there's there's enough younger people that sit on this board and on other boards and everything that they have to remember the next time we got somebody that wants to put a we're going to widen a street. And if we don't have sidewalks, we need to put those sidewalks in at the same time you widen a street. Why would we ever widen the street? Well, if we did Oak Road, they don't widen streets. They they make them smaller. smaller front windows. But you you you need to think these things through. I mean that

of course it's easy to sit back and say now, you know, because it's like putting the cart before the horse. It's it's happened. Now we need

and and Jefferson Street's happened. So there you go. He was waiting on that. I I think that if you look at some of these different projects the city is is working on at a conceptual stage, one of the big differences is having a full-time plan director and having the complete streets committee. There's a lot more forethought that's going into it. It's not just what is the best thing to do right now. It's what is our future plan for this part of the city? How does it connect with the rest of the city? what is the uh long-term goals. So there is I I think a lot more planning that's going into some of these decisions than maybe was done in the past.

Uh somebody here representing the council. Well, why don't we go through the rest of the uh presentation? I have a question then followup question. So yeah. Yeah. And we kind of skipped around on that. Ty would have uh uh been much more disciplined with you. Um I just reminder that your decision criteria are the four items here. You have to consider the general welfare, unique property conditions, the physical context of the request and the plan intentions.

There we go.

Uh so under criteria number one, these are TI's um recommendations. So under criteria one, the granting of the variant should not be detrimental to the long-term public safety, health, and general welfare. Criteria two, the conditions upon which the property is being developed, which include but are not limited to the city's long-term plan for pedestrian improvements on Oak Drive. This makes the applicant situation unique because the timing of these scale projects take considerable amounts of time to both plan and construct. Criterion three, the owner could be under hardship should an undersized or less compatible sidewalk or path be constructed and need to be replaced to complement a future municipal project. And criteria four, the variance as proposed would meet the long-term intent of the zoning ordinance because the application is intended as a temporary matter. The comprehensive plan supports an increase in accessibility and the coordination of these projects makes for greater fiscal responsibility on public and private parts. Uh so the recommendation from the planning staff is based on information provided and reviewed by staff is recommended to support and approve the proposed variance with the condition that the provided terms be acceptable to the mayor and city attorney and thatou would be um identical to the one that was approved for plumbly dentistry. So up for commission determination now. Do you have any questions for me? Any more questions for me?

Uh yeah, it it's also goes with the they've applied for this. Has anybody talked to them about uh uh granting a rightaway at the same time? Yeah, I I was not involved in those conversations. I know that Tai spoke directly with them and they reviewed the memorandum that was uh created and approved for Plumbley Dentistry and that would be the agreement. So if you approve the request, I would recommend that it be approved subject to them agreeing to that identical memorandum and uh having a a notation being recorded evidence that memorandum

which is again exactly what we did with Plumbley dentistry. Do we have anyone here from the church? Oh okay. Do you have any anything else to add sir? No, we would we would want to partner as best as we could with this. Sorry, you need to come up to I'm sorry. Yeah, please come up and state your name and address and we can go from there. Thank you. Social security number, your mother's name, all the usual stuff. Jason Stiger, executive pastor. Uh, do you want the church's address or my home address? The church is fine. If you church 1615 North Oak Drive in Plymouth. Okay. Do you have questions?

So you have been in in when you brought this up, you have discussed that the right away. Is that correct? It is my understanding that we have agreed to the same terms as what Plumbley Dentistry has. Yes. Yeah. We would want to partner with the city as best as possible. I don't have anything other than that. Anything else for you? We have to open it up to the public. Make a motion we open it up to uh for a public hearing. Second. It's been moved and second. All those in favor signify by saying I I oppose. There being none, does anyone from the audience have anything to ask or in favor or against?

Do I have a motion? Make a motion we close the public hearing. Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying I. I post. All right. I thank you, sir. Thank you. Uh, do we want to vote or make a motion, please?

I'll make the motion to approve the request as presented. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Just for clarification, was that a motion to approve your request uh contingent on executing the memorandum of understanding to be recorded? Correct. As presented.

All right. There's any other questions? There being none, we will vote by roll call, please. Someone second. Yes. Okay. Longer. No. Milner. Yes. Ruptch Schaffer. No. Seor. Yes. Sellers. Yes. Webster. Yes. Wendell. Yes. Peace. Yes.

Okay. The next item on your agenda is resolution number 2025- 1170. an order of the Plymouth Plan Commission determining that a resolution amending the declar declaratory resolution approved and adopted by the Plymouth Redevelopment Commission conforms to the confidence of plan and approving said resolution. So this we we've been through this fairly recently. Uh in order for the redevelopment commission to spend TIF funds, the expenditure has to be part of their TIFF spending plan. Uh the particular item that they are considering is a contract with R squared Solutions which would do an efficiency analysis for the Plymouth Aquatic Center to determine what could be done to save on utility costs. Essentially um R squared has indicated that they feel they could save uh as much as 50% of the current utility cost which would be substantial but they need to do a deeper analysis to before they can uh uh finalize their recommendations. And in order for the redevelopment commission to approve that $16,000 contract it has to be added to the spending plan. U that process is several steps. The first is that the redevelopment commission passed a declaratory resolution. The second step is it comes to you. The plan commission simply reviews it to make sure it conforms with the comprehensive plan. If you agree that it does, it goes to the city council for them to make the same determination. And if they approve, it goes back to the redevelopment commission for a public hearing and final consideration. So again, your role is to determine if the proposed expenditure u conforms with the Plymouth

comprehensive plan. So in reviewing the comprehensive plan, uh this particular project was not uh specifically contemplated. However, the aquatic center is called out as an example of collaboration, which is one of the three tenants of the comprehensive plan. specifically says that um Plymouth engages in strategic infrastructure development actively participating in the construction of vital community facilities like the Bardwell Aquatic Center. These endeavors underline Plymouth's dedication to innovative partnerships for the collective benefit of the community. So although the comprehensive plan does not identify any specific projects related to the aquatic center, it does highlight the aquatic center as an example of the collaboration that's called for in the plan. And I believe it also can tie with the various well-being improvements that are specifically geared toward some of the park and green space areas, but certainly apply to a community athletic facility like the aquatic center. So that's my explanation. Um, if you have any questions, happy to answer them.

Uh, who actually owns and controls the aquatic center? if you know it was original then they had to reorganize. Where are we at now with everybody? Who's on the board and who applies to? It's not finalized but we are nearly complete with the final documentation. Um a new LLC was created Plymouth RDC Center LLC and that LLC will own title to the real estate and the facility. That LLC is wholly owned by or will be wholly owned by the Plymouth Redevelopment Commission.

Do they make the appointments to the board then? So, there is still a master lease. The LLC that owns the property will continue to lease it to Marshall County Health and Wellness. And that board has three members. One appointed by the city, one appointed by the school corporation, and one that was formerly appointed by Ansilla, but they will likely not be participating. So that third one will likely be selected by the two others. Is this going to all start like January 1? Is that what you're shooting for? Um, actually, we should have it wrapped up here pretty quickly.

Okay. Uh so this the the uh redevelopment actually controls the the whole building and everything. Is that correct? Indirectly. They they control the LLC that owns the property and has the lease. I mean the the lease gives certain rights to other parties. Okay. Are there are there uh meetings in this pool open to the public? I'm sorry. Are the the meetings the board meetings they have are they open to the public? Are they posted somewhere when they have their meetings? I walk in the library, the first thing I see when I walk in the door is the dates and times of all every meeting they're going to have that month,

right? Um, this is a technically I don't know how they're conducting their meetings currently. They will not be legally required to open those meetings to the public. City taxpayer. I mean, I'm as a city resident, I'm paying taxes as a city resident and I'm also paying taxes on as a Plymouth Community School Corporation resident, right? You know, and my and I can't go in and sit in a board meeting. Didn't say you can't. I just said that it's not legally required and I don't know how they're going to conduct it. Do they have to post their their their meetings and notify the press?

They will not be legally required to do that. And we're just giving them blank checks. Is that what we're planning on doing here? Nobody's giving anybody a blank check. The payments made by the school corporation and the city are based on the lease agreements that have been in place for who's overseeing the board. Who's overseeing which board? The the board that's going to be running the pool. So, do they have a do they have audits come in? Anything else? I mean, you know,

we've already had one problem out there already. the the actual pool operations are being done by We Love Swimming, which is a independent nonprofit. Um they are the facility operators. They also are part of the master lease agreements. It's there are several entities involved. So the RDC owns the real estate. That is their role. And I know that the We Love Swimming organization will continue to update the city council and the school board and the redevelopment commission, but they're the ones who are operating the facility, not the RDC.

Well, and the reason I'm asking is I had a lot of people, you know, they they had their problems. We had to reorganize everything. Well, what's going on out there? Nobody seems to know what's going on. Who's doing this? who's doing what, who's even on the board, you know, so they can't even go talk to a board member and say, "How you what, you know, how you guys doing out there and stuff?"

You know, I I think those are legitimate questions. There there is a lot changing and I know that there's going to be a lot more um press about it in the coming future. They want to get their marketing out. They want to be very public about what they're doing. Uh I'm not sure that's really relevant to the consideration of the comprehensive plan. Well, it's it's relevant to uh giving them another 16 approving the to give them another 16,000. It's it's not giving anyone $16,000. It's hiring a company to do an energy analysis to determine how they can save money on utility costs. But it's coming out of the tiff district, right? It

it would. Yes. They're they're asking the redevelopment commission to pay that contract price. So, it is money that's coming out somewhere. I mean, it's coming out of the tiff district, right? Yeah. But it's not writing a blank check, right? Right. I'm not I'm not agreeing with the blank check part. I'm just saying that it's coming out of the tiff district. Who's financially responsible? Who the authorities? Right now, it's the the operators, the we love swimming. Yeah. I guess my thing is it it will continue to be that they are the operators. They're responsible. We're spending the 16,000 to help them. We're not spending 16,000 to help the city save money. Basically,

16,000 to help them to make sure that they can keep operating a public good for the pool. Does it make more sense to have this conversation after the pool is organized and and all of whatever you guys are working on agreements wise are finalized so we kind of know what we're what we're dealing with as a finished product? Realistically, it makes more sense to have this conversation at the redevelopment commission meeting because they're the ones who have to decide whether or not to spend the money for this. So, what are we tasked with for the planning commission?

You are tasked with the simple question of does spending money to determine cost-saving efforts for the Plymouth Aquatic Center conform to the comprehensive plan? So, I would argue I don't know the answer to that if I don't know how the aquatic center is organized, right? I mean, I I I don't know. I I don't know if I could answer that question unless I know how the aquatic center is is being run. I I I thinking out loud. Sorry. Go ahead.

So, no matter what we say, yes or no, it still has to go before the city council. It still has to go before the city council and then it still has to go back to the redevelopment commission. Ours is a recommendation. It is nonrecommendation. It's a it's not a recommendation. It's a determination of whether or not it conforms to the comprehensive plan.

Well, it's got to be a recommendation if we're stopping it. If if I if if we say no and it gets stopped right here. It's not the same when we're talking about a recommendation that's for um updates to or amendments to the zoning ordinance. The statute for amending a zoning ordinance says that you make a recommendation to the city council and they approve any ordinance amendments. This is not the same procedure. This is a review of an amendment to a TIFF spending plan for the redevelopment commission. And because you are the body that uh creates and adopts the comprehensive plan, you are the ones who determine whether a certain action by the redevelopment commission conforms to the comprehensive plan. But

does it still go to city council if we say no? It still goes to the city council. Well, no. If you say no, it can't be completed. That's what my question is. Right. If if that's your question, um you you can you have a hard stop. So these people they came to the redevelopment and their spiel both the newly formed board RDC and also E squar which laid out their proposal to do the study. Correct. Right. So, they're not doing it behind closed doors or

No, they worked with We Love Swimming to learn about the facility, try to identify ways to create efficiencies. Um, We Love Swimming would like to contract with them to do their analysis, but because they are newly reorganized and they're still trying to catch up from some previous financial problems with the aquatic center, they don't feel that they can spend the $16,000 right now for the analysis. So, they came to the redevelopment commission and asked redevelopment if they would make that as an investment within the TIFF district. uh similar to some of the other investments redevelopment has made for other entities throughout the redevelopment commission is willing to consider it. They've not made a final decision. They can't make a final decision until they have a public hearing. But they did adopt the declaratory resolution to start the process so that it can go through these steps and go back to the redevelopment commission to hold a public hearing and make final determination. Right now to me it sounds like we're going to spend money so that they could spend more money so that they can save money

a little bit. How the world kind of how the world works. Well, my my biggest gripe is they're not open enough to everybody. That's my gripe is they're not they haven't ever been since they started the thing. Nobody ever seems to, you know, we we never get any updates. We get a little bitty press clipping once in a while maybe it's all fluff and that's about it. I I there's enough the city the city either through redevelopment or whatever they're spending a lot of money out there and they're going to they're on the hook for a lot of years. You know, let's see a little responsibility from the other side to at least make sure everybody's informed. Have you been out there in the last few months?

Yeah, I was just out there before I came because I wanted to look at the parking lot. I talked to Greg Hillbrands today and I asked him because at one time MCEDC was pass through corporation for that. They still own the parking lot and and the lot next door, right?

And I'm looking at this thing and I'm looking at solar panels and I'm looking at where are they going to put them? Are they going to put them in the parking lot over the cars? They don't even own the parking lot. Are they going to put them in the grass field farther to the west? You know what? How are they going to work this out? I'm I'm not against anything. It's just I look at this and it's I I realize it's only $16,000, which isn't a lot of money for what everybody else spends, but you know, how are we going to do this? That's my question. I I realize the importance of cutting their utility bills down because they're through the roof. I get that, you know, and I'm not against them saving money on anything. The follow-up question for that is at what cost, of course, are we going to spend have the knowing to save a little bit each month or how are we going to do this?

Yeah. So, I think the short answer to all of that is like I said, I think those are legitimate questions. And I think the appropriate place to ask those questions would be at the public hearing in front of the redevelopment commission because those are the things that they have to consider in deciding whether to contribute $16,000 to cover this contract expense. So redevelopment holds the purse string so to speak of the tiff district funding. Yes.

We are tasked with looking at this proposal and deciding whether the expenditure of the 16,000 out of the tiff district conforms to the comprehensive plan. So not necessarily looking at the proposal but looking at the resolution adopted by the redevelopment commission. So if you take out R squar completely and take out the details that are included in this proposed contract, the question before you is if the redevelopment commission chooses to spend $16,000 to have an analysis done to determine how the aquatic center could save money on utility expenses. Does that

would that action conform with the comprehensive plan? It's a weird question. That's just a weird question. I don't write the law. Okay. Well, unfortunately, uh, this is the only opportunity we're going to get to ask the questions that were asked. We're not probably not going to get it anywhere else. Come to the public hearing of the redevelopment commission. That's that's your plan. That's the forum for those questions. We beat all to death. Okay.

So, you're asking us to say that doing a study on saving utility cost conforms to the comprehensive plan? Yes. partnering with the aquatic center to do the study to contribute the funds to do the study to hopefully save on utility costs I believe does conform with the comprehensive plan and your job is to determine whether or not you agree with that and you believe that because the aquatic center contributes to the health and well-being and it was a collaborative project. I believe that if you look at the text of the comprehensive plan, right,

the aquatic center is only mentioned in one place and it's mentioned as an example of the types of projects that the city engages with in for collaboration. I believe that although the aquatic center is not specifically mentioned in the list of goals, what's on these poster boards back here, there are several of them both in the collaboration and in the well-being uh headings of the comprehensive plan that are focused on recreational facilities throughout the city. and that even though it's not an outdoor park space, that the aquatic center also is a recreation facility within the city and is very similar to the goals that were expressly stated

and the council has to approve the appropriations for this. Not an appropriation. No, the council essentially makes the same determination that you're making. Does this conform with the comprehensive plan? The redevelopment commission then decides whether to actually spend the money. They already had the money for right. We have anybody here by any chance? Not tonight. I know that they are planning to be at the redevelopment commission meeting.

Okay. So, we don't have to open this up to public. No, it does not require a public hearing tonight. So, do we have a motion? I make a motion we approve the 16,000. We'll kick it down the road. So, approve it. Technically, you can't approve the $16,000. Okay. What you can do is approve the resolution that says that the declaratory resolution motion we approve the resolution. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Uh, any other questions? Kind of beat this one to death, too.

Yeah, we are doing that tonight. All right. So we'll vote by roll call, please. Aids, yes. Milner, yes. Robchuk Schaefer, yes. Longer, no. Seore, no. Sellers, yes. Webster, yes. Wendell, yes. Peace, no.

Really? That sorted. Okay. Next item on your agenda is I don't have control again. Thank you. Building commissioner updates. Anything for us? I don't know. J want to jump in here?

Uh next item is comprehensive plan update. Um, I don't have anything specific. Um, I know that Tai has been working with the various subcommittees, but uh, he's been pulled in a lot of different directions lately. So, some of those meetings have been delayed um, after the next full complex of planned committee meeting. I think we'll have a more detailed update for you. Any other business from board members? Commission members? Anything else you want to do? I move for adjournment. Been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying I

oppose. There being none. Thank you. Yeah, you're over 28 minutes. Okay.

Mr. Mayor, you know that wasn't for me. Okay. You have Yeah. Yeah. All we need and following the September 7th, 2025 meeting of the board of zoning appeals to order. We'll begin with roll call. Garner's absent. Cort here. Gley, he's absent. Richie absent. Wendell here. Jacobs here. The minutes of the last regular meeting of August 5th, 2025 were distributed uh to the board members via email or mail. Are there any corrections? Nope. If no, I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes as presented. If make it, I'll second it. I make a motion.

Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. Thank you. Um, first on the agenda is BCA 2025-9. Jeff, would you present for us?

Yes, I would love to. So BZA 2025-9, Johnson, Gary, and Heather, joint husband and wife, owners of 12515 Meadow Drive, Plymouth, Indiana 46563. The variance of use to permit backyard chickens on the property at parcel 503294 triple0000930018 located at 12515 Meadow Drive, Plymouth, Indiana 46563, zoned R2 suburban residential district. So the request is a variance of use to allow backyard chickens on that parcel located at that address. Here is the Beacon website map of that parcel. Uh you can see it's at the very end of Meadow Drive. Um this shows the highlighted the green highlighted sections are platted subdivisions. So what this map is intended to show is that that particular parcel, although it is adjacent to those subdivisions, is not technically part of a Platted subdivision. Whether that has any bearing or not is just a fact to consider. Uh this is the site layout map that shows the various setback distances from uh property lines for primarily for the house uh which is the primary structure on the property. Uh so here are some photos. This is from the very end. Meadow Drive is a dead end and this is standing at the end looking back east toward Michigan Road. Uh the subject property is on the right hand side in this picture. Uh here is uh same location facing the other direction west and that is the city's truck that the plan director uses in case you're

curious about that. Electric. This is the subject property from the street. Um, here's another view toward the kind of west southwest showing the backyard area or looking toward the backyard area and another shot from a different slightly different angle. Uh, here is the back of the property showing the retaining walls that are referenced in the request and a existing chicken coupe. Uh, it appears to be. So, here's the analysis. I want you to know that I did not write this. Um,

the applicant is seeking to permit and approve the use of backyard chickens on their property. They are proposing to have up to eight chickens and specifically and the eggs and chickens would not be for sale. The site plan provided indicates that the variance would be located between the two retaining walls on the west side of the house. Chickens will be used for their personal egg consumption along with an education opportunity for their children. Uh you can see quotations from the application. No desire for a rooster. Uh the applicant is committing to proper waste management, odor control, and noise abatement to ensure the chickens are not a nuisance. The chickens will be confined to my property at all times. That is another quote. The waste is planned to be used in their garden that they are in preparations for and estimate to be about an acre in size. Uh the Johnson residence is approximately 3.31 acre parcel at the dead end of Meadow Drive that includes a pond for the Beacon Mapping System subdivision layer. The subject parcel is outside of the Oakrest edition and Webster's Hillside Manor subdivision. Property is also found outside of but partially adjacent to the city's corporate boundaries. parcel is zoned R2 suburban residential district like many of the adjacent properties around it, but the adjacent properties are approximately 0.4 acre lots. The R2 district is characterized as low to medium density residential areas developed beyond the core neighborhoods around Plymouth's downtown. Characteristics of development in this category are comparatively larger lot sizes, curve linear streets, and the use of culde-sacs. These areas are dominated by single family residential development but may also include schools, parks, and small-scale churches or institutional facilities. New residential growth will occur in this category as Plymouth expands outward into existing rural areas. There is a county tile that runs along

the southwestern corner of the property on the opposite side of the bond. So your decision criteria are the general welfare, the adjacent properties, the practical difficulty, unnecessary hardship and uh comprehensive plan. So under criteria one, the proposed use of backyard chickens in notation and using best practices should not be injurious to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Criteria two, the use and value of adjacent property may be impacted depending on the amount and care of the chickens. Criteria three, the strict application of the ordinance would not permit the proposal based on the base zoning of the parcel. Criteria four, the strict application would not permit the proposal. And under criteria five, the comprehensive plan for the future development character map supports suburban neighborhood. That land use classification preserves Plymouth's charm while accommodating the needs or preferences of property owners. It also promotes a balanced approach. The suburban neighborhood character area ensures that Plymouth's character thrives while catering to modern preferences, seamlessly blending comfort and community. So, here is the recommendation based on the information provided and reviewed by staff. Staff recommends approval of backyard chickens but up to only six ends on the three acre parcel with the following conditions. Let's get a little tougher. Uh the use is limited to female chickens only. No roosters. The keeping of the chickens shall be limited to non-commercial purposes. Uh chickens shall remain confined by either a coupe or run. Coupe shall maintain a minimum of two to three square feet per chicken and runs shall maintain a minimum of 5 to seven square feet per chicken or as best practices suggest for both structures in the industry.

Uh confinements are recommended to be set in a permanent location but may be mobile provided in any instance that they meet the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district are not permitted in the front yard. Manure storage shall maintain adequate covering and shall not be any less than double the setback distance of the zoning district requirements. The confinements, excuse me, poop and run shall be designed and constructed in a way that works to prevent animals from getting in or out and confinements shall be open to periodic inspection by the city of Plymouth zoning administrator or designator. So, well, those are the staff recommendations. Now, it is up to you for consideration.

Thank you. Questions, Jeff? Yeah, I know that we've we're going down this this be full of chickens. Was there a minimum size lot that we had? Didn't we throw around five acres at one time? Mhm. So, there are provisions that were added to the zoning ordinance a couple of years ago that do allow for chickens in um is it the R1 R1 R1 zoning classification? And I don't remember what those area requirements are. Okay. But I know that it was definitely different for chickens than it was for other livestock. Thank you. You're welcome. All right.

Um, just to give you a heads up, when you get to the public hearing portion, there were a few emails sent that I will read into the record when you're Okay. Thank you, Jeff. I appreciate it. Will the petitioner representative please step forward to the podium. Please state your name and address for the record.

My name is Gary Johnson. the 12515 Meadow Drive. Anything you want to add to what he has said? You already have them there. Were you not aware that we needed to have a zoning there? Yeah, I was a little I guess. Um considering that I'm not in the city. I thought I was following, excuse me, county rules. Um, and it wasn't until I talked to someone else that I'd dug a little deeper and I was within the 2 mile radius.

Um, there's also about a/4 mile down the road some cows. So, I figured same size lot, chickens, you have a easier to maintain the paddles, but Gotcha. within the two-mile zone, we have to get the permission. So, anything else you want to add to what he's already provided? Um, if the the location that I would I would like them to be needs to be farther away, I'm more than willing to locate them wherever in that property. Okay. And you're did you uh you seen what the staff was recommending to be a minimum of six and stuff? Well, was that a minimum of six or a max of max? Excuse me.

Thankful correction. But anything in there that would create a problem for you that you want to address? As you saw, I have them already. Yep. But I mean their staff's recommended they only allow six. So I have eight right now. I only ordered six. They gave me eight. So yeah, I will have to get rid of two of them. If Well, if depends how the vote the three of us vote. We've not decided anything. If it's possible to get that'd be great, but if need to be, I will go down to six. Okay. Well, we don't even know if we'll be able to. I'm just trying to find out before we get going into everything else.

Any questions anybody has with the petitioner? Everything looked this property is much bigger than what we've had brought forward before as well. There's very few people in the room where we've had this room filled before checking. So, appreciate it. Thank you. Um board members, any I'll entertain a motion to open up a public hearing hearing. Let's I make a motion to open a public hearing. Second. I have first and a second. All in favor say I.

I. All oppose. Same. I now declare the public hearing open. Is there anybody in attendance that would like to speak in favor of the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium. State your name and address for the record. Is there anybody online or is there anybody that wrote in by email that would like to be in favor of the emails that I have are all posted? Okay, we'll wait. Nothing online.

Okay. Nobody else. I don't see anybody else out there in favor of. So, is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak against the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium, state your name and address for the record and it's 5 minute limit. Yeah. Come on up. I'm Kevin Burmeer. I live at 12520 Hillside Drive. I'm adjacent to the property next door. I've lived there for over 15 years. Lived in that neighborhood for probably 25 years. Um, my concern is coyotes. Coyotes. Cats are attracted to chickens. I have cats. They're outside cats. They keep the mice away from my house. The coyote population over the past 5 years has really declined out there. And we have a lot of small deer. Rabbits are back. Wildlife is back. Uh, I don't see coyotes running through my backyard picking up little gosslings that were just born weeks ago anymore. I mean, five years ago it was every year they were just coming in and snatching up all the geese, all the baby geese. They were killing all the deer. And that population is gone. And I don't I'm not sure how long this person has lived at that house, but that little area back there where he's at is full of all kinds of wildlife, but not coyotes. The coyotes have left that area for some reason. And the deer population has picked up, good or bad. Some people like it, some people don't like it. But I love it. Uh I have like approximately 67 acres back there, and it's all wildlife. I have a 5 acre pond. I have a pontoon back there that I enjoy on my little pond and I like the wildlife and I really don't want to see the coyotes come back. They will take all of our wildlife away. It's kind of like its own nature preserve back there and I think

putting chickens back there would be a detriment and bring the coyotes back. That's all I have to say. Even if they're confined, even if they're confined, they're going to find them. They're going to find them. But if they're not if they're not getting the the ducks in that that are running wild, why would they come looking for confined? They'll come back. They'll come back. They'll smell them. They know they're there. I was just trying to decide how that different than ducks and deer and everything else.

They're tame animals and chickens are desired by cats and coyotes very much so. So, if one of your cats went over and killed one of those chickens, would we have a problem? Probably. I mean, but my cats are outside. They're confined. My cats aren't confined. Well, I'm just saying the cats post such as the same amount of danger as the coyotes do. How do we know the chickens are going to be confined all the time? Well, that's would be one of the stipulations. Yeah. I mean, I just I'm just I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

Understand? I I just opposed to it. I don't think, you know, if we if we allow one chicken to come in or six chickens, the guy across the street's going to say, "Well, I want chickens, too." Well, I want a cow. I mean, it's a nice residential community back there, and I want to keep it that way. I mean, that's that's all I'm saying. I mean, I've been a stipier. I've been a staple in that community out there for a long time. You know, as a just a statement, it seems like people are really adearing to chickens because every subdivision we have, I think, in Plymouth has a chicken in it now. Really? Even in the city of Plymouth. Yeah. They're not supposed to. Yeah. I didn't know that. They're in the city. It is. I didn't know that till I got the letter in the mail.

Yeah. It's We've had This is not the first. And it's It's not totally illegal for them to do it, but they have to get approval for it. But they're all over now. Okay. and say, "I I don't understand it, but people like chickens." Yeah. Well, they're good. Well, they serve purpose. I mean, they're good to eat and they lay eggs. Yeah, that's right. Well, thank you. Thank you. Yep. Anybody in the audience would want to speak against it for this is against it. Okay. Thank you. That's right. Go ahead.

I'm Dan. and I believe live at 10643 Dennis Drive. Um I have more questions than I do comments regarding anything else in regards to that and I agree with Mr. Birminger on a number of things when it deals with the coyotes. Probably should add raccoons to the issue there too and other attack. The questions that I pose are dealing more with indicated manure, excuse me, manure disposal. um spreading that on a garden, I assume it'll be tilled in and not slate on the top. So, we would have an odor control problem. And what are you going to do in the winter time? And from that aspect of it, too. Now, chickens normally have a production period of 18 months. What's going to happen to the chickens once the production period is done? Are we going to butcher the chickens? Are we going to let the chicken population grow? Are we are you asking us?

I'm asking these questions here for for here to consider. So when I go through and I say, "What's going to happen to the chickens? Is the population going to grow beyond the six that are recommended?" Or are we going to hear chickens being slaughtered in the backyard and disposed of by being buried in the backyard and not buried deep enough that the coyotes and other critters will go and try to dig these up? We'll see carcasses laying around. What are the restrictions on that? Well, Dan, do you realize people hunt back in that area? Even on his property back here? Sorry. People hunt back there, too.

No, they don't. Okay.

So, are the chickens going to be buried? Are they just going to be thrown in the trash? Are we going to have the odor from that laying around? So, that that's one of the concerns that we have. So, and controlling the noise. Again, you indicated there was some type of screen that would be put in to control the noise. And are the chickens, as you indicated, running wild? You look at his property there, and you'll see that the property is not wellkept. It hasn't been mowed on a regular basis. And if we're not maintaining the property, well, how do we know that we're going to maintain the chicken coops? wealth on that aspect. So, it seems like somewhere along the line neighbors are concerned. They're saying, "Look, if he doesn't have the respect to maintain his property, how's he going to have the respect to follow the ordinances and maintain the chicken coops and follow the rules the way I should?" And that's questions that are being asked and questions that I pose to the board here. So, without further information, I oppose. Appreciate it. Thank you. Anybody else in the audience feel like speak against? All right. I'll take a motion to close the

Oh, you got to read yours. That's right. Is there any mind check if there's anyone online? Also, you can ask.

Is there anybody online that would like to say anything against Debbie? Then I have four emails that were received by Ty Adley. Uh the first one is from Tammy Sherk. Uh no address is indicated on the email. It says, "I am sending this in regards to the letter I received from the city about my neighbors petitioning to raise chickens. My problem with this is that they have only mowed their yard about five times this year. There are weeds growing by the house. Things are not being kept up. They haven't made any efforts to be friendly. I worry with the way they take care of the property that we will have more animals, coyotes, and such coming up closer to the houses, especially if you add chickens to the mix. The former owners always kept everything mowed all the way to the pond and around the pond, and that kept most animals out except for the geese and deer. I guess my main concern is if they are not taking care of the property now, are they going to properly take care of chickens? I know chicken poop smells bad. I grew up on a farm. I don't want that smell when I walk out into my yard. Where will they put the chickens when or if they do clean the cages? I don't even know these people, but judging by the way they haven't kept up the property, I would have to say no on the chickens. Thank you for listening. The next email is from Melissa Shanks. Again, no address is given. This email to the Board of Zoning Appeals is in reference to a variance of use requested by Gary and Heather Johnson. Their request is to permit backyard chickens on their property located at 12515 Meadow Drive in Oak Crest subdivision. We are neighbors to the Johnson's backyard. We have two points to make. The first is that we do

not mind six chickens up by the Johnson home. The second is that we do object to having the chicken manure disposed of in their backyard right next to ours. If this is the plan, it is unacceptable to us. Bruce and Melissa Shanks. The next email is from Debbie Dunning. Uh subject is variance of use request 12515 Meadow Drive, Backyard Chickens. Dear members of the board of zoning appeals, I'm writing regarding the variance of use requested by Gary and Heather Johnson to allow backyard chickens at their property located at 12515 Meadow Drive in the Oakrest subdivision. As a resident of Oakrest for nearly 40 years, I take great pride in the care and appearance of our neighborhood. Our community is known for its well-maintained homes, manicured lawns, and welcoming environment for families. While the idea of backyard hens raised some concerns such as potential noise, odor, pests, and possible impacts on property values, I understand that many of these issues can be mitigated through responsible ownership. The absence of roosters would help reduce noise, and a clean, well-maintained coupe should minimize odor. My primary concern involves the attraction of predators. We already have coyotes, raccoons, and foxes in the area, and the presence of chickens could increase their activity. This could pose a risk not only to pets and chickens, but also to local wildlife such as the deer and fawns we regularly see in our backyards. If this variance would be approved, then how many more residents in the subdivision would also make this request for chickens? I would recommend that the board voting against this request to maintain the residential use of Oakrest subdivision. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Debbie Dunning 10440 Cheryl Court, Plymouth, Indiana, Oak Crest subdivision resident. And the final email was received from

Amy Gerard to board of works and Mr. Adley. I think she meant the board of zoning appeals of subject chickens in residential neighborhood Oakrest. Dear board members and Mr. Adley. I'm writing to express my concerns regarding the possibility of allowing chickens in a residential neighborhood of Oak Crest. Chickens are traditionally considered farm animals and are not suited for residential subdivisions like ours. Oak Crest has a long-standing reputation as a well-maintained and desirable residential area. Many of us take pride in our homes, landscaping, and overall property appearance, investing significant time and resources into maintaining this standard. If one household is permitted to keep chickens, it may open the door for many others to follow, potentially altering the character of our neighborhood. I do not support the presence of chickens in our residential neighborhood. Property values may be negatively affected. Personally, I would hesitate to purchase a home next to a property that keeps chickens. Should the board choose to allow chickens, I strongly urge the implementation of strict guidelines, including no freerange roaming, no roosters, no waste deposits near neighboring property lines, no odor or smells that impact nearby homes. Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Amy Gerard, 10641, Cheryl Court. That's all I have.

Thank you, board. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Yes, you sure can. We can have the applicant come back up. Back up. I'm sorry. No, I don't.

Um, you want to address some of the concerns that they had about the disposal of the carcasses, the disposal of the manure, what what's done when they're laying when life is over with. So, my plan for when they stop laying eggs, uh, I have family members that raise chicken up in Michigan. I plan on having them take care of the chickens for me. We'll eat the the meat and then ideally start over with fresh chicks. Um, in regards to the the manure, I plan on cows. Like I mentioned, I wanted to start the the garden. Uh we did soil tests earlier this year and there's no nitrogen in the ground. So this chicken manure will help remedy that. That's also why I've let the grass grow is because when you constantly mow it, you're just pulling those nutrients out and and dumping them. And if you want animals, having that grass there is going to attract more animals. You want the deer, that grass is going to bring the deer. um with excuse me with them confined. Uh I've seen cats just watch them. They can't get in there. Uh it's right next to my house with I got a couple dogs. I don't see coyotes being an issue. I've yet to see a coyote in the year that I've lived here. Um yeah, I I'm not sure what else I do. Anything else? You

Thank you. Yep. So now I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Motion to close public hearing. Second. I have a second. All in favor say I. I.

All oppose. Same. I now declare public meeting closed. Jeff, there is only three of us. I have no idea what everybody's thinking. What happens if we have a we have to have all three vote one way or the other or what happens? I I was afraid you were going to ask me that. Um I I believe that a as long as you have a porum present, a majority vote of those president is sufficient. It's different from the plan commission where they have to have a majority of the members, not just those present.

You'll be the one defending it. So I just want to make sure you understand what I'm getting ready to do. Um so with that if there's no more additional questions from the board um I'll entertain a motion approval denial or other recommendations as the staff alluded to the recommendations for or against if you or whatever at this time. So does anybody have a motion they want to make? Um, I'd like to make a motion to um deny his request based on the fact that the uh well, I hate to say this, but we've denied everyone else, but one um and especially in the subdivision, even though he's technically not in the subdivision. Um, and

that's not a true statement, but I'm okay with your um, and the the neighbors and people at the subject have made a a pretty good um given us a good hint of what their concerns were and I I think they're validated property property values and we've been down this road so many times. You got your motion? Yeah, I have a motion. That'd be a second. I second. I have a motion with a first and a second. Any more discussion? If not, call for roll call. Secor, am I

You just made the motion. Are you voting for your motion? You're voting. Yeah. C. Yes. Yes. Oh, sorry. I agree. Wendle. Yes. Jacobs. No. So, it passes. The motion passes, which denies the request. Yep. So, they'll get rid of the chickens. Okay. Okay. Uh, building commissioner, I don't think there's anything else we have. Do you have anything else for us? Nothing. Okay. Nothing, Jeff? Anything else?

All right. Let me make a motion to close the meetings. All in favor say I. All right.