Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Board of Zoning Appeals. I'd like to advise everybody that your testimony this evening is being recorded and taken under oath. Request that anybody wishing to speak only do so when called upon. Please come forward, face our attorney to be sworn in before speaking. All persons speaking will be asked to give their full name for the record and spell your last name so we have accurate meeting minutes. Please turn off all cell phones, any electronic devices that might make any distracting noises. The order for speaking this evening will be our petitioner will come first with seven minutes in which to make their presentation, and that's followed by a collective seven minutes for any remonstrators to speak. Any government official that wishes to speak will receive three minutes. And then an additional three minutes at the end for the petitioners rebuttal. OUR ATTORNEY WILL GIVE A TWO-MINUTE AND ONE-MINUTE WARNING AS THE TIME IS EXPIRING IN EACH INSTANCE. WE ASK THAT ALL PERSONS CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN A CIVIL MANNER AND WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST THAT YOU LEAVE IF YOU ARE DISRUPTIVE. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS THIS EVENING WILL BE THE MEETING MINUTES. BUT JUST BEFORE I GO TO THAT, Little blurb here. I've got that. Anyways, I think what I was looking for was I just needed to advise everybody that the meeting this evening is being recorded and by participating you are agreeing that your image there it is. The meeting is being recorded and streamed for public viewing, and by participating, you will acknowledge that your image, voice, and comments may be captured and made publicly available. This meeting has been properly noticed in accordance with Indiana Code 514.1.5.

Thank you. Wrong document here.

So with that, we have our first order of business is the adoption of last month's meeting minutes, and they were submitted just today. So if you didn't get a chance to read them and check them, we can... WE CAN VOTE TO TABLE THAT UNTIL NEXT MONTH. I DID HAVE A MINUTE TO LOOK AT THEM, SO I'M GOOD.

I WILL ABSTAIN FROM IT, BUT CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME SOME CONTEXT ON TCM AND DIXON FROM LAST WEEK? WERE THEY CONTINUED BY VOTE OR CONTINUED BY FROM ANOTHER MEETING? WE CONTINUED BOTH OF THOSE.

Yeah, I was thinking that they had, it was in the minutes.

So they were on the agenda and then just administratively continued without a note in the minutes. Got it, thank you.

I was thinking that we had a notice issue with one of them, didn't we? There was a notice issue, yeah.

Maybe we should postpone it. Did the minutes talk about the continuance or?

I'm not seeing that in here.

Kayla, I assume Maria partly prepared the minutes. Excuse me? Didn't Maria prepare the minutes? So she would probably be the one to ask.

Yeah, so why don't we get a motion to continue so that we can get that covered in the minutes.

That was a good catch. I'll make a motion to continue.

All right.

Until next month.

Second. All right, so it'll just be the three of us voting that we're here. So all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

Abstain.

Yep, so we'll take a look at those. UPDATED NEXT MONTH WHEN MARIA CAN GET THAT INCLUDED. SO WE DO HAVE A FULL BOARD THIS EVENING WHICH IS GOOD AND WE HAVE BEN, HOW DO YOU SAY YOUR LAST NAME BEN? VERLANE. VERLANE WHO IS THE ALTERNATE REPRESENTING SHIRLEY THIS EVENING. SO WITH THAT WE CAN START WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE. TCM properties.

Our first petition this evening was continued from last month. This is a variance request in the IL or Industrial Light Zoning District located at 6553 West 400 North in Buck Creek Township. It is a rear yard setback variance to reduce the requirement from 50 feet to 20 feet. Petitioner is TCM properties LLC represented here this evening by David Gilman On slide two you'll see that what we're looking at is both a replat as well as a building addition proposal for an existing industrial building and The petitioner would like to add on nearly doubling the size of the building, and they would like to match up with the existing rear line of this building, which was built in 2004 at approximately a 25-foot setback. Due to the way the building sits and the lot line sits, not quite parallel to each other, the building, as you'll see, crosses over that rear setback line, getting even closer if we were to continue that line to the east. That's why the petitioner is asking for that 20 foot setback instead of a 25 as shown on the plan. For the Industrial Light District, the maximum lot coverage is 75%. We're still meeting that. We still are meeting that front set backyard of 50 feet and the sides of 25 and the building height of 50 feet. Also a Google Street View showing what this building looks like from the road. I've included your decision criteria here this evening and variance procedure in general. The variance is to reduce the setback from 50 feet to 20 feet is favorable or approval with two conditions. Building permits must be obtained within 12 months of this approval date, tonight's meeting, and an occupancy permit must be obtained within 12 months after that building permit is issued or the variance will automatically expire. Second, the rear setback reduction only applies to the proposed building addition as presented to the Hancock County Board of Zoning Appeals this evening. The petitioner has already been notified that a replat prior to the issuance of a building permit is required. So this two lots currently will be combined into one lot prior to this building permit being issued. And I know that's been through tech already, so it might even be recorded already, the replat. Just wanted to give you a heads up on what that status is as well. And that's it. I'll turn it over to David Gilman unless any of you have questions for me.

I do have a question. Was the 25-foot setback, was that prior to or has it changed at some point since the building was built?

That's a really good question. It looks like there was a rear addition to this building. Let's go. So we looked back at this, and I guess this is the best picture. You can see that roof line on the south side of the building. There was an addition at some point to this building. It was permitted. I can find no records as to what the situation was at that time about that rear setback. So I'm really not sure what the situation was at that time.

It's yeah, I had a similar question because it looks like if it was 25. It looks like it was the existing building is even in violation of the setback.

Was there a variance there? But not originally see this.

If the addition would have been in would have been in violation of it But it was permitted at the time yes, yeah, there was building one and there was the addition to it and

The building one's permitted, the building two is permitted. And in the permitting process, if there is an identification of encroachment into a setback, would it have been handled in that process? No. No variance.

No. No reference to a variance being needed even.

Got it.

Okay.

Any more questions? All right. We can have the petitioner come up.

Do you swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Please state your name. Spell your last name.

Thank you. For the record, my name is David Gilman. My last name is spelled G-I-L-M-A-N. My office address is 211 Southwood Avenue, Suite H, Indianapolis 46219. I represent the petition at the property. Its address is 6553 West County Road 400 North. As mentioned by the staff, this request is for the approval of a variance to allow the expansion of the existing building along the same rear yard setback that's been in place since 2004. The property is owned. The business is actually NMW Inc. They do, for people that are in the concrete business, they supply concrete accessories for the polysynthetic forms that you may use, sealers, tools, tapes, and liners for swimming pools and things like that. And the existing building was developed prior to and this is including the addition prior to the ordinance update that increased the rear yard set back from uh 50 or 20 feet to 50 feet at the time of construction the building fully complied with the standards that were then in effect The business owners have always anticipated a future expansion as part of their long-term operational plan. The current growth in demand for their products now requires that expansion. The proposal is to expand 11,400 square feet, which is primarily due to increase their storage of their materials and their products. One of the things that we did, I discussed with Maria during this process was about the expansion and no variances were required, permits were issued. And again, we all agreed that it was either done in compliance with the ordinance because the permit at that time would not have been issued because it would have clearly, it wouldn't have just kind of violated the setback, it would have been grossly over the setback. And so she and I could not find any evidence where there were anything that was done that needed a variance that wasn't granted. So our understanding is those permits were all granted in good faith for the existing building in that expansion area. One of the things that we talked about at our staff meeting is to sort of help mitigate the request for the variance to allow the expansion is that we would bring the entire site in compliance with the landscape standards. So as one of the slides, I think that in the staff report, you'll see a lot of trees that are being planted on this property. That is enough tree planting in compliance materials to include the entire property and not just the expansion area. So that was one of the things that we offered to help mitigate the request for this variance. I would like to go on record and outline our three findings of fact. for the board. The first finding that the variance grant would not be injurious to the public health, safety, or welfare to the community. It's our finding the existing building on this property has been located at a 20-foot rear yard setback for over 20 years without any documented adverse impact on drainage, utilities, or the use enjoyment of adjacent properties. We feel the proposed expansion continues that long established development and the building will still be able to comply with all applicable construction safety standards. Our second finding about the reduction of the required transition or setback would not affect the use or the value of adjacent properties. It's our finding the property to the rear is not residential or is it sensitive in nature. In fact, it's an industrial outdoor storage area, a land use that is low intensity in terms of occupancy, noise sensitivity, and public interaction. We feel that because the adjacent use is industrial and has already functions with outdoor storage activities, maintaining a 20-foot setback would not introduce any conflict in land use character, safety expectations, or operational compatibility. We do believe strict application would be a burden on the owner's reasonable use of this property at the 50 foot setback. Our finding is the existing structure was purpose built to be expanded along its current exterior walls with utilities, structural load paths, and internal circulation designed around a linear extension. Forcing a 30-foot shift of the rear wall to meet the newly adopted 50-foot setback we feel would create a significant design and operational problems for the owner in the use, including misalignment of structural systems, disruption of our interior workflow, and inefficiency that we feel would undermine the building's intended function. I would agree with the recommendations that the staff has included in the report. As mentioned, we are going through a replanting process, and I believe that is nearly complete, if not already complete. This would allow this business to continue operating at this property. THIS EXPANSION WOULD ALLOW THEM TO MEET THEIR FUTURE GROWTH NEEDS AND WITH THAT, WE HOPE THE BOARD WOULD GRANT US A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO INCLUDING AS A CONDITION COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR OFFER TO BRING THE SITE UP TO DATE FOR LANDSCAPING STANDARDS? Would you be OK if that was a condition?

Yes, we actually submitted that plan and we would as part of the it's in the staff report. But yes, we would agree to that as well.

Would you say that with this expansion the industrial outdoor storage will increase or decrease or stay the same? Would the outdoor storage increase decrease or stay the same with this expansion?

No, everything that we're expanding is all inside. The outdoor storage is our adjacent neighbor to the South.

So no, you won't? We don't have outdoor storage, no. Okay, all right. And has the neighbor commented to you directly or have you negotiated any of those landscaping standards with them directly?

With the neighbor? No, we just, that was something that the petitioner was self-imposed to bring up to standards to sort of a good stewardship.

Thank you.

Yep.

So make sure I'm up to speed. So when the building was built, we had 20 foot side and 20 foot rear and that building complied. Then you did an addition.

But you don't have any record of... We have the permit that was issued. And I believe, and Maria's not here, I believe we looked at that. That permit was still predated. The change from a 20-foot setback to the 50. That was my understanding with my conversations with Maria.

So when did the... So it was 20, then we had an ordinance change and then the side yard setback became 25 and the rear setback became 50. But there's some confusion because these drawings were showing 25 for the rear. So somewhere we went from 20 to 25 to 50. Do you know where that came from, Kayla? Are you directing that to? Yeah, I'm sorry.

Not offhand, Mike. I'd have to look back at our zoning history for those lot standards.

But we're confident that we're looking at a variance from 50 to 20 for the rear?

Yes, currently, and with any additions that occur today, the rear setback is 50 feet in this zoning district.

Okay. And we are doing a replat?

THAT IS CORRECT.

TO JOIN THE TWO LOTS?

THAT IS CORRECT, YES.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER? THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS VARIANCE? SEEING NONE, ANY DISCUSSION? got some staff conditions and then we've got, we've discussed here a condition.

I can make a motion.

Yes, the condition for the landscaping we discussed and then we could make the replat a condition even though it sounds like that's in process, so.

Should this be granted, all staff conditions would attach, and there would be a third condition that the site will be brought up to landscape standards as reviewed and approved by the planning director or her office, and that a fourth condition that the replat as presented will be completed.

ALL RIGHT, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT SHOULD THIS VARIANCE BE APPROVED THIS EVENING IT BE SUBJECT TO STAFF CONDITIONS ONE AND TWO AND THEN CONDITION THREE AS STATED REGARDING LANDSCAPING AND FOUR AS STATING AS STATED FOR THE REPLAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

CAN I CLARIFY NUMBER FOUR, SORRY, WAS IT A REPLAT WILL BE PRESENTED? REPLAT WILL BE COMPLETED AS PRESENTED. COMPLETED AS PRESENTED. OKAY, THANK YOU.

All right, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. And with that, you can fill out your ballots.

Gotcha.

Okay, case number 26-2674, variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 50 to 20 feet is granted a vote of five to zero.

Okay, we're on to hearing item number two, Jesse Dixon, special exception and two variances.

Petitioner Jesse Dixon is requesting a special exception for a home occupation with two variances from the home occupation standards. One to allow two or more employees and another to allow storage of associated equipment. The location of the home occupation is 1768 West 900 North in Vernon Township. It is zoned R1.0. You can see here that this is near the intersection of 900 North and Fortville Pike. Irregulated drain goes along the backside of Mr. Dixon's property. I've included for you tonight a printout of the home occupation standards as well directly from our ordinance so you can read through that Two page segment of our ordinance and see what all it says Okay, you can see here nice brick one-story ranch mature evergreen trees on the site and an existing outbuilding and Two of those home occupation standards that Mr. Dixon is requesting a variance from. Number four, employees, that the home occupation may not involve the on-site employment or regular on-site gathering of any more than one person other than those residing at the location of the home occupation. Mr. Dixon's tree trimming business, I believe, involves a four-person crew, if I'm remembering correctly, three or four. SO HE'S ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FROM THAT. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, OUTDOOR STORAGE DISPLAY. THERE SHALL BE NO EXTERIOR STORAGE OF PRODUCTS, EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS THAT ARE RELATED TO THE HOME OCCUPATION. GIVEN THAT MR. DIXON RUNS A TREE TRIMMING OPERATION, HE WILL BE PARKING SOME VEHICLES, TRAILERS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE BEHIND THIS STRUCTURE. that are associated with that home occupation. I should point out that I did not require a variance from number six, business area, which states that the home occupation may be located within the dwelling, but shall not exceed a total of 500 square feet. The home occupation must utilize no more than 25% of the total floor area of the dwelling. So that may is important May be located within the dwelling but in this case it's not it is located outside of the dwelling and so I did not require that variance from item number six Special in exception is indeed Home occupation is a special exception in our 1.0 here's some of the items that are outside of Mr. Dixon's property right now. Mr. Dixon did have a home occupation at his previous residence. The certification letter is included with your packets, so you can see what that said. Alright, we've included the special exception decision criteria here. So the special exception must indeed be a special exception in that zoning district, which home occupation is. The special exception can be served with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities. The special exception shall not involve any element or cause any condition that may be dangerous, injurious, or noxious to any other property or persons and shall comply with the development standards. The special exception shall be sorted, oriented, and landscaped to produce a harmonious relationship of buildings and grounds to adjacent buildings and properties. The special exception shall produce a total visual impression and environment which is consistent with the environment of the neighborhood. The special exception shall organize vehicular access and parking to minimize traffic congestion in the neighborhood. The special exception shall preserve the purpose of this chapter. Additionally, we have other considerations. When considering a special exception, the BZA may consider the following items as they relate to the proposed use. So these are all elements that you can use to make your decision, include with conditions, things of that sort. Those include noise production, hours of operation, landscaping, screening, buffering, drive locations, topography, lighting, things of that nature. Also traffic generation and general site layout. So for that special exception to allow home occupation of a tree care business, staff recommendation is approval with the following conditions. Outdoor storage or burning of landscape materials shall be prohibited. The owner shall seek and obtain an improvement location permit for the change of use and annual occupancy permits. In this case, that will just be for the fact that there is a home occupation here. It won't be a change of use from residential to business. That's not what's happening. The home occupation shall operate according to the terms specified in the application for the special exception and according to the county's home occupation standards. The special exception shall be limited to and run with the current owner and shall not be transferable to any other person, business, or entity. And the BZA reserves the right to revoke the special exception at a public hearing if the land use demonstrates to constitute a public nuisance. Going to get into those variances as well. So you all just went over the decision criteria for variances in the last petition. So we're talking about general welfare, whether this will be injurious to public health safety morals and general welfare, if it will affect the use or value of adjacent property, Practical difficulty will the strict application of the terms of this chapter result in a practical difficulty If they are not granted So for variance number one to allow two or more employees staff recommendation is to approve with the following conditions a The petitioner shall be limited to only having a max of three employees on the site in addition to himself because he is the occupant of the home. And the variance shall expire when the special exception for a home occupation expires. Variance number two, to allow outdoor storage of associated equipment. The staff recommendation is approval with the following conditions. Once again, no open burning of tree limbs and yard waste shall occur at the residence. The petitioner shall install an evergreen tree screen along the area of the site visible from Fortville Pike, which in looking back at Mr. Dixon's application, he did commit to a 300-foot row of Arborvitas along that east side of the property. The landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by me, Planning Director. All storage and parking shall occur behind the house facade. So the primary use still definitely remains residential. There shall not be any storage within 75 feet of that regulated drain. And the variance shall expire when the special exception for home occupation expires. That's all I've got. Mr. Dixon is here this evening to answer any questions and give a presentation if you don't have any for me.

Have there been any violations of the current special exception notice?

This was brought to our attention by, I think, the Fortville town manager because of the limbs being really close to the ditch. So there was some curiosity about whether or not this was being like the ditch was going to get like limbs dumped in it or something like that. But that's where that stemmed from and they are going away. I'll let...

I noticed in the previous 2022 that there was a limit of one vehicle in the conditions. Were there more than one commercial vehicles in the old operation? But that just wasn't noticed as a violation?

I don't know about that. I believe the previous location was more suburban. Limited parking.

Thank you.

Was there a prior variance for more than one employee at the other? I didn't see.

Is that listed on the certification by chance?

I didn't see it on the certification.

I might not be the best person to answer those questions. I can turn it over to the petitioner.

Okay, thank you.

Any more questions? All right, we'll have them up.

Hello, I'm Jesse with Pro Finish Tree Care.

Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, ma'am. Please state your name, spell your last name for the record.

Jesse Dixon, D-I-C-K-S-O-N. Go right ahead.

You have seven minutes.

So all I'm really looking for is a place to park the equipment. No operation happens at the site. Guys come there, get out of their cars, get in the trucks, and we leave. I had a log pile piled up at the back of my property. It got a little out of hand. That's gone away. I have a small pile there, but that is for a personal Second Amendment purpose other than anything else because I don't want to go back past the cornfield behind me. There's a church and everything, so just trying to be mindful of that. Other than that, I'm willing to put up the 300-foot Arborvitae green screen. We're a good tree care company. We come out here, excuse me, I've been eating sawdust all day. We're a good tree care company. We come out here, we provide quality tree care for people's trees. We don't come out here and hack trees away in Hancock County. We provide healthy growth tips and pruning options and whatnot for our trees. our local residents, our neighbors. So I'm not looking to come out here and get rich off any of our neighbors. I'm just coming out here to look to do a good job, be known as the tree care company of Hancock County one day. I just need a variance for maybe a couple years in all reality, because as you guys see, property values are skyrocketing here in Hancock County. I can't afford $100,000 an acre, so that's kind of where I'm stuck at until we can get to that point, maybe 2027, hopefully. But just looking to, like I said, I cleaned the log pile up, wanted to put up an arborvitae green screen. If you guys prefer a privacy fence, I could do that as well, which would then house... You wouldn't be able to see anything from Fortville Pike. Just put it that way. From the south, you can't see anything because of the house, the barn, and such. So from the community standpoint, everything looks good, looks clean. A nice appeal to anybody driving through. It doesn't look like Hancock County's trash.

Couple of questions. Your hours of operation, Monday through Thursday, 9 to 5 still? Or have you changed that?

Every once in a while we do a Friday if we have a rain day. Fridays are our rain days. If we have like a rain day on Monday or something, we will flip-flop a Friday. So it's just to keep work flowing.

Besides wraps on your vehicles, any signage on site? Besides wraps on the vehicles, any signage on site? And your vehicles are all licensed?

Yes, ma'am. I just bought a new one just from Tennessee a couple days ago.

There was mention in the request for special this document about a barn. What's is that?

If it came down to it And I had to build a barn if that was like your guys is like only option for me to build a barn I'd be willing to do it, but I'm not trying to This house and property has been a money pit since I bought it And I'm not trying to build another $80,000 barn on the property that I don't plan on keeping a business It'll just be empty eventually and It'll look more commercialized than ever, really. So I try to go with a green screen effect, natural look. Personally, I think privacy fences are kind of, you know. Okay.

But, I mean, just to maybe clarify, a barn isn't in front of us, so we wouldn't be able to approve or deny that it hasn't been properly noticed. So, I mean, I was in the write-up, but that just wouldn't be something that we would consider. NOW, IS ALL OF THE OUTDOOR STORAGE LIMBS OR IS THERE OTHER?

IT'S JUST TRUCKS. JUST TRUCKS? JUST TRUCKS, TRAILERS AND EQUIPMENT. WOOD CHIPPERS, TRAILERS AND EQUIPMENT. THAT'S IT.

AND ONLY FOR A FEW YEARS?

ONLY FOR A FEW YEARS. I JUST NEED TO GET OUT HERE. I WOULD LOVE TO BUY I THINK IT'S INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL. THAT'S A PIECE OF LAND I WOULD LIKE TO PURCHASE MAYBE 10 OR 20 ACRES EVENTUALLY.

TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT YOU ANTICIPATE?

Apparently right now, do I have to count my personal truck too?

Business vehicles.

Be fair, four. Yeah, on a constant daily basis, but that's parked there overnight unless we have a storm job, which we do offer a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week emergency storm work if tree goes down on a house we'll crane it off and such like that as well so we I do want to let that be known as well yeah and you've historically in the current site kept all of the layout neat and orderly all of your equipment anything on site for the most part yes ma'am for the most part and it's gotten much better we've done some recent clean out and everything because I mean I get the BZA's point of view we want to keep our county looking good we don't want to look like trash and you know what I mean put in a couple more roundabouts we're almost carmel

My last question.

I'm here to play ball. You guys tell me what needs to be done, and I'll make sure it happens. I don't want to make any ruckus for any neighbors or anything like that, so if anybody has any neighbors that have any requests, I'm not opposed to that either, whether it's more everybody's or fencing or maybe later start hours for noise. That was an old complaint from my old... Variance was just noise from the truck starting. A diesel engine is a diesel engine. It's got a company logo on it or not.

No special exterior lighting? Nope.

What do you do with the waste, the limbs and trees?

Good question. We actually donate to all of our residents here in Hancock County for free. We donate all of our wood chips through wood chip drop, and we also donate our logs for people to heat their houses and such. So no charge, unless it's like anywhere else out of Hancock County, then they get a little charge.

So with this type of situation, what we try to prevent is to make sure that your storage of your vehicles don't start to look like a RV storage yard or something like that.

So if I hit the next button, the arrow button, so it'll never look like that again. Everything gets parked on the north side of the barn, facing the east, all dress right dressed. During the, I mean, that was pre-leaf out. You could see my tulip poplar right there doesn't even have leaves on it. But you see that log pile back there. Had my employees on that for about a week clearing all that out. So it's a very small, very small pile now for personal use at this point.

And will the vehicles be stored on gravel lot?

Yes, yes. So yeah, I can't zoom in, but that's all gravel. They're all parked on gravel. There's nothing on grass or anything like that. It's all on gravel parking.

Okay, so on the on the variance number two for the outdoor storage is probably one of the more important pieces here is item number three was all storage and parking shall occur behind the house facade. Would you be okay with a change of behind the barn facade? Sure. Yeah. And on gravel? Yes, sir. Okay. And then if we were to put a restriction on the number of vehicles, what do you think would be like with some growth over the next few years? I mean, you said you're at four now. I mean, would you ever be above eight? You hope to be over eight? I do.

Yeah, I hope to be a multi-million dollar company here one day.

Okay.

I don't have any plans of leaving, so.

So what do you think would be, would you envision the entire north side of this property becomes vehicle storage?

Oh, no. Oh, goodness, no. Okay. I hope not. I dread not being able to go home.

Okay.

I look out my back window and there's work all the time. It's my goal to get some commercial property. That's my ultimate goal. I just need some time to get there.

Okay.

Um, but, uh, I mean, reasonably eight, you know, but I'll always make sure to keep them all, any of them secure, uh, uh, obscured from Fortville Pike view. Cause that's, I mean, that's the name of you when you drive by. So, uh,

And then when the employees, when the three employees come. Basically, the car replaces a truck. You know they they get out of the car and take a truck, right? That's kind of the idea, correct? OK, any more questions?

I guess one more. Do you have any objections to all of the conditions that we've discussed, either for the special exception or the variances? Should we put them back up just so you can see them? Should be, it'll say staff recommendation approval with conditions. Or page, there you go. Any objections to these?

Number three was the one that we were discussing that we would change to have everything behind the barn.

I think that's number three. Number three on this? Or was that number three on the variance?

Oh, that was variance, sorry. No objection.

Okay, would you have any objections to us maybe adding a sixth item that kind of locks in your hours of operation because of the concern with noise with potential with neighbors? What was that? That the hours of operation will be in substantial conformance as presented?

I'm not objected to it. We've run 10-hour days. If I don't have to, that'd be fantastic. The trucks are parked between the building and a farm field, and where we pull out, we pass one house. We're out on the Fortville Pike where semis pass by every day, all day long. So that would be my only option. You know, I hear at 5 a.m. you hear construction going on on Fortville Pike on the new neighborhoods. So if I hear that at 5 a.m., I don't think my truck's starting. It's just leaving. It doesn't run. We don't run saws. We don't. We don't make a disruption. The guys get out of their cars, they get in their vehicles and leave. So that would be my situation. Just because I have two sons too. I try to get home by 8 p.m. so I can get them in bed. So the boys get off at 5 and then I go run my estimates. So I'm usually out there with a salt with them.

Two more pages, we'll get the rest of the conditions you should take a look at. If you go forward two more pages. Yes. The other side? There you go.

I'm not good with this. Okay, thank you.

There you go.

No objections.

And then we would add to variance number one, I believe, a limit of eight vehicles. And then number three here is where we would say the barn and gravel on number three at the bottom of the page. Eight vehicles, barn, gravel, good. Okay. Yes, ma'am.

WHERE WERE YOU ADDING THE VEHICLES?

WE CAN. THAT WOULD BE IN VARIANCE 2, RIGHT? VARIANCE NUMBER 2, THAT'S JUST FINE.

AND I WAS THINKING THAT WE WOULD JUST ENHANCE THAT NUMBER 3 TO BE A CURB BEHIND THE BARN FACADE ON GRAVEL AND A MAXIMUM OF.

8 LICENSED VEHICLES?

YEAH, I THINK WE COULD BUMP IT TO 10 JUST TO MAKE SURE HE CAN Grow a little bit and have a trailer here and there.

Thank you 10 10 would be plenty Yeah, if I have yeah, I'll probably in here asking for a rezone at that point That's what I was thinking as I could what's a I'm pretty sure that's my neighbors. Yeah objective Anyway, he bought a piece of property and he owns quite a few pieces around and then just waiting for him to knock on my door one day.

I

Yeah, the hours of operation thing, that is kind of a typical home occupation thing that we talk about, but your situation's a little different because you've got the 24-hour service, so it would be a little tough.

It's very rare. Storms, tornadoes, everybody's up, sirens are going off, hours out anyway. It's that kind of situation when we operate like that.

And it would be... You know, worst case, it's all of your vehicles drive out of your driveway kind of all at the same time and then back in.

So, yeah. Okay. Very minimal.

Okay. Any more questions?

I have one question. All right. So, if we're going to be able to bump the vehicles to 8 to 10, I mean, I know you guys are giving me some, I don't want to take a mile, but would it be... Feasible to bump the employees up at that point in time to if I'm gonna have be able to get eight to ten registered vehicles at that point I don't want eight to ten employee cars there, but Reasonably speaking to grow I would need that as well And it changes nothing but getting out of the vehicles and heading out just more employees for crews.

That's all the employees Would you think you'd need?

I? Currently have four full-time employees if I'm just being transparent with you guys I I'm not going to lie to you. So it's just how I have to operate right now. One guy is a part time. He'll be going back to the college and college time.

You had 10 vehicles. How many employees would you need?

Six, eight. Less than the number of vehicles.

Thank you. I'm just double checking if we didn't advertise the variance to be The average the advertisement was for two more employees, so we two or more. It was for two more, so the standard would be one, so two additional. Do we have to? We have an issue with our. Notice in that is that something we can alter it to.

It says two or more on my variance, but. We should confirm.

And the agenda says variance for two more.

My vote says two or more. What did we notice? Two or more.

Well, if it's two or more, then I think you're good because we don't have a condition, right? THE PETITIONER SHALL BE LIMITED TO A MAX OF THREE. IS THE NOTICE IN HERE?

I didn't mean to open up a can of worms. I was just trying to be productive and proactive instead of having to come back here and ask for more.

It's written on the special exception application Which is different from what we're seeing on the variants I think what we have to go with is what was legally noticed what was in the paper. Yeah There's two more employees yeah, that's the application I

Is that in your file what hit the newspaper?

backwards and it's two variants one or flip-flopped from what's in on these I don't think this newspaper notice is correct they copied instructions and doesn't

explain So I'm not sure It's like the instructions of how you fill out That is that is a copy of the notice that went in the newspaper yeah, okay, and it reads what they're saying is a copy go ahead and

affidavit of notice of public hearing Hancock County area board feels it's probably something taken out of this packet legal notice I we understand that a public hearing will be held by the board of zoning appeals to consider this petition and that I we will prepare and pay for let legal notice consistent with the requirements of ic531 for publication in a local newspaper The legal notice shall appear in the newspaper no less than one time at least 10 days prior. It's almost like the instructions. So they took something out of this packet and published it. It was like instructions to the petitioner of how to take a public notice.

That's what I found online here.

The last time or this time? Because I think we had a continuation from, a continuance from the last time too.

This one says May 16th.

That's the affidavit that says you will get it published.

That's the language. So really there wasn't public notice of, correct public notice.

Okay, so I would like probably to, we need to continue, yeah.

Continue and re-notice.

I WOULD BE MAKING A MOTION TO CONTINUE BECAUSE THE NOTICE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT. IT NEEDS TO SAY SPECIFIC THINGS THE EMPLOYEES, EVERYTHING. I WOULD SUGGEST MAYBE YOU WORKING WITH KAYLA, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND GETTING APPROVAL FOR WHAT YOU WILL PUBLISH IN THE NOTICE AHEAD OF TIME. SO SHE'LL SIGN OFF ON IT TO MAKE SURE. AND MAKE SURE AS WE DO NOTICE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHATEVER YOUR REQUEST IS FOR EMPLOYEES. YES, MA'AM.

THAT GIVES YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE EVERYTHING TO GET YOUR take you to the 10 trucks, the eight employees or whatever, and we'll update the notice correctly. And then unfortunately it's going to take time to get that all. And then we'll just hear it all again next month and hopefully do it. Yeah, I'm sorry about that. It needs to go the right way. I mean, I guess I'm glad I said something.

I mean, I'm kind of glad.

Yeah.

Everybody's got dinner plans. Yeah.

So normally what happens is in your packet, the notice of public hearing language that was handwritten in blue, which goes in here, but you need to talk to the planning department because it currently reads the handwritten writings. Even if you were to have published this, we were questioning whether that was right. It says two more employees. It doesn't say two or more. So I think we just need to get that verbiage right. Work with the planning department to get that.

Yeah, just put your number of employees in there and your number of vehicles and then Sir will be. Should go fast next month since we've already talked about hopefully motion to continue to the June meeting. It's been moved and seconded to continue this item to next month's meeting due to the notice confusion. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Thank you. See you next month. Thank you guys.

Sorry for the confusion. Ladies and gentlemen.

So no, we won't do anything. So just put your ballot, leave your ballot in the folder there.

What did you actually send out in the certified mail? Was the certified mail, did you do the certified letters?

I did, yes.

Okay. I just was curious what the notice looked like that went out into the mail.

Okay, okay.

RESEND TO THE NEIGHBORS AS WELL.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE SENT.

MAKE SURE EVERYTHING MATCHES.

THANK YOU.

I'M SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION. THANKS FOR UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. IT'LL MOVE US TO HEARING ITEM ITEM NUMBER 3, MR. DUTRO, SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN CENTER TOWNSHIP.

THIS IS ANOTHER HOME OCCUPATION. NO VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FOR THIS ONE. Keegan Tetro is the petitioner. He is residing at 5357 North 300 East in Center Township, zoned Agricultural. His home occupation request is for the online sales of firearms. All right. So this is a use that comes to us because ATF actually reaches out much like a, ATF and also the state, oh, one of the state administrations reaches out about car sales. These are two things that come out and require a zoning signature to make sure you're in an area that's zoned correctly for these activities. Otherwise, in this case, we would not know this was going on here. So that is why Mr. Tetro has come to us this evening. We also do not have a cutout in our home occupation standards for online businesses. In many different communities, they'll have a cutout for businesses that don't have any face-to-face sales or people coming to the home, things that occur 100% online or over the phone. will be exempt from home occupation standards. But our home occupation standards do not have that. So even the kind of activities that are online sales or single person kind of businesses that don't have people coming to the residence require home occupations, special exception. This is another reason that I gave you the home occupation standards this evening. So because Mr. Tetra's property is zoned agricultural and he is not in the single family residential zoning district, basically everything except A in the home occupation standards does not apply to him. So there's just no, there really aren't standards that he would need variance from. It is directly just a home occupation that requires a special exception, and that's that. All right, he's included a letter of intent, which I won't steal his thunder, so I'll let him come up here and explain his business to you. We did receive a letter of support and a letter of remonstrance, which are available to you. Our staff recommendation is approval with conditions. The petitioner shall seek and obtain annual occupancy permits for the home occupation. The special exception shall become null and void if the business ceases operations for 12 consecutive months or longer. The special exception shall run with the petitioner and shall not be transferable to any other owner or entity. The BZA reserves the right to modify or revoke the special exception at a public hearing if it determines that the home occupation constitutes a public nuisance.

Any questions for me? We have a copy of the application in the packet. I I don't my packet doesn't have it No, we don't have the application Would have the legal description and the notice Does anybody else want a copy of that Yeah it

I pulled the notice up. The notice looks to be consistent

I THINK MY ONLY QUESTION PROCEDURALLY IS THAT MAYBE LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE WE HAD A SIMILAR APPLICATION FOR ZONING. ARE THESE THE SIMILAR CONDITIONS THAT WE PUT IN PLACE FOR THAT?

WHICH ONE WAS THAT? OH, BOY.

WE HAD ONE. THE ONE WAS, THEY WERE, IT WAS AN ONLINE, I THINK LIKE AN An auction situation, I think, where they were bringing the materials, the firearms there and then shipping or being picked up or something.

That was, I believe, Mr. Addison? Yeah, I think that sounds right Yeah, I think that had more active like at things happening on the site And so they may have been a little more intensive, but I did not look at that because of that reason I think he was having I remember something he would say would only be like one vehicle Yeah, they were very specific times because it was like after an auction or something happened so

is controlled traffic.

Thank you.

So Dennis is bringing the applications in. and Should these applications be in the live links? They should all be part of that packet that we talked about?

Everything that's in the packet should be available to the public.

We are not posting front pages anymore.

Oh, that's right. Because of the identity.

It used to basically .

Yeah. OK. Here he is.

Thank you.

Online sales. That does match the notice that I'm seeing in the paper. Okay. Do we have any more questions for the staff on this? Looks good. All right. Thank you.

Hey there. Do you swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Please state your name. Spell your last name.

Keegan Tutrow, T-U-T-R-O-W.

Seven minutes. Go right ahead.

Like it was previously touched on I'm essentially just looking for permission to run an online business I'm expecting no customer or employee foot traffic. It's purely an online operation is all I'm trying to do Fire all firearms would be securely stored and security systems in place accordingly As she also mentioned, the ATF also will have a hand in approving all operational things, so storage and monitoring. So yeah, that's the plan.

I think the other one you were thinking of, Lacey, there was another one just like this. It was out near... Oh, it was east of new Palestine on 52. I think it was, I think the almost exact same thing. So you're, I'm not super familiar with the way that this all happens, but you can buy them and sell them and then you're licensed to then receive them, ship them. That's how that kind of works, right?

Yeah, so I can explain that too, if it helps. So essentially, having the FFL, which is the Federal Firearms License, I can have firearms shipped directly to my residence or whatever address is on that FFL application, which would be this address. And then I would have to be present to take ownership of those once delivered. Once delivered, I am then able to sell them and ship them to wherever the customer is. So they would ship to the chosen FFL of that customer. So let's say there's a customer in Georgia. They have a gun store near them. I would ship it to them. And then it's that store's responsibility to do all paperwork regarding that purchase. Okay.

OK, so essentially. You have to physically receive these packages. You they don't just get left at your doorstep or whatever you have signed for him, OK?

Alright.

We be selling the ammunition for the course of this. That's the plan. From my understanding, that part does not require ATF licensing, so specifically the part that requires the FFL would be for firearms.

I'm thinking about the business portion of it. I hear you say that you want to be able to do online sales of firearms. Would that be any sale as a business at your home, whether it's ammunition, firearms, cats?

Again, from my understanding, whether I sold sports cards or ammunition, it wouldn't be any different legally.

I think maybe what you're getting at, Ben, is that the special exception says firearms and we're expanding it to ammunition as well now?

I believe if that needs to be in there, then yes.

We have to look at the, how was it noticed?

It just says firearms, yeah.

Let's assume it's included.

I just, when you think about the sale of firearms, it's You know, it's wholesale firearms. There's ammunition. There's components to firearms, which all can be sold various different ways, require different permits, different things like that. So that would be my general concern is, you know, if you're selling wholesale firearms, that's regulated and all through that, and that would be covered. But just the amount of things you could be selling that is not just generally covered under that for the special exception would be my general concern. Okay.

I guess another question I would have too, ammunition, probably going to sell more ammunition than your firearms, right? Very likely. So that's increased activity over a firearm.

Yeah, from what I'm remembering of previous cases like this, the ammunition seemed like a bigger deal than the actual firearm because, you know, FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE. SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO KNOW THAT YOUR HOUSE COULD KNOW THAT YOUR HOUSE COULD HAVE EXCESSIVE AMOUNTS OF HAVE EXCESSIVE AMOUNTS OF AMMUNITION IN THERE AND THAT IT'S AMMUNITION IN THERE AND THAT IT'S PROPERLY STORED AND ALL THAT STUFF. PROPERLY STORED AND ALL THAT STUFF. SO IF THERE'S A FIRE THEY KNOW SO IF THERE'S A FIRE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING UP TO. WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING UP TO. SO THAT I THINK THAT WOULD NEED SO THAT I THINK THAT WOULD NEED TO PROBABLY BE A SEPARATE THING recorded separately, maybe. So I think what we're looking at here this evening would be simply the firearms. And if you want to expand, I think we should probably amend this later or do another one, or I don't know what the process would be. It would be amend it.

Well, I mean, he could, I would say the notice would, if he wants to do both, the notice wasn't correct to include that. So we could either continue, re-notice, come back, or Do the firearms and then?

Yeah, and then do one for this.

Come back and do another one for whatever else?

So to clarify, if I wanted to sell accessories, like optics, would that also need to be in the notice, or would that just be assumed under sales?

Do we define firearms in our ordinances anywhere?

State law does, but it goes on to say accessories in it. It's more than just firearms. It lists all.

Yeah, I would think that the accessories, I guess I'm speculating at this point. I think that the ammunition, I'm remembering the ammunition being its own separate thing, whereas the firearms, the accessories, you know, anything going along with that, it was the ammunition that was the concern.

And if it helps, I do have plans for storing that properly and fire appropriate things as well.

No, I'm sure you do. I just was... But the public notice would be... Yeah, the public notice and so that the fire department knows that it's there and all that was the concern that we ran into before on these.

So maybe just dealing with firearms for now would be... Firearms, yeah.

I think when we say firearms, the accessories go along with that, right? So... YEAH, THAT DEFINITION, FEDERAL LAW DEFINITION DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THE ACCESSORIES, I GUESS. OH, ANY MUFFLER SILENCE OR ANY OTHER DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE, YEAH. OKAY.

PISTOLS, REVOLVERS, SHOTGUNS.

RIGHT, BUT IT DOESN'T SPEAK TO AMMUNITION, SO I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT ONE SEPARATELY.

Anything else you're planning to expand the business into?

No, ma'am.

Firearms, accessories?

The maximum would be firearms, accessories, and ammo. Okay.

And you have a history of operating this in other locations? What's the...

I'm sorry, can you say that again?

You have a history of operating this in other locations? No, I do not. So starting a new business? Correct.

I'll be strictly online. I mean, I just think about a local business selling ammunition, the likelihood that people are going to know you and know that you sell ammunition and become, uh, or sorry, not employees, uh, customers would seems likely. So would they purchase it online and then still go through? Would you still have foot traffic to purchase things from your home?

Yeah. So, uh, specifically regarding ammunition, there is no legal problem with shipping that directly to customer. So there would still be no foot traffic at my residence.

Okay. All right. Any additional questions for the petitioner?

Do you have any objections to the conditions outlined? Do you have to put it in your right with them? Okay.

All right. All good? All right. Any more questions? All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Do we have anybody in the audience that would like to speak in opposition to this request? All right. Seeing none. Any discussion?

I think the only, I mean, I don't mean to bring you back up, but there was a letter of remonstrance that mentioned the tendency to attract bad actors So can you maybe address that?

Yeah.

So luckily, the ATF has all this information on their website, which I used. So there's over 128,000 FFLs in the United States. In 2025, there were 207 total instances of burglary or robbery cases at those FFLs. So that's about 0.16% of all FFLs federally. The ATF does not differentiate between an FFL like mine or a brick and mortar FFL. So those are the best crime statistics I have to go off of as far as that letter address specifically.

All right.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

Any additional discussion on the conditions?

Did we ask for remonstrators already?

I did. There weren't any.

Can I ask Kayla a question? On the conditions number four, I noticed that it says BZA reserves the right to modify or revoke. Sometimes the language we've been using on some of these other ones, just even here tonight, I think is revoke. So was there a reason why you wanted to allow modification and revocation for this case specific?

No, there was not.

I'M JUST, IS OUR STANDARD LANGUAGE NORMALLY REVOKE OR MODIFY AND REVOKE? I BELIEVE IT'S TYPICALLY REVOKE, BUT NOW YOU'VE GOT ME QUESTIONING THAT. SAY WE GET DOWN THE ROAD AND IT'S A PUBLIC NUISANCE?

THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE'VE ALWAYS KEPT IN THE FOLDERS HERE, IT'S A COUPLE OF YEARS OLD, IT SAYS THE BZA RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MODIFY OR REVOKE.

Are you comfortable with that, modifying the reboot? Yes.

Do you need any clarification on the conditions that this only applies to the notice, which is firearms? Let me just assume that.

Sorry, I didn't hear you.

Sorry. Do we need anything in our conditions underscoring the fact that this is for firearms only and does not extend to beyond fire? Or we should probably clarify that definition.

Yeah, I jotted down here some notes that we wanted to clarify. Firearms and accessories not including ammunition under this special exception. Got it. just because the definitions weren't real clear on ammunition being an accessory.

One of the things that we may not have done, but for the number one petitioner shall seek and obtain the annual occupancy permits for the home occupation and shall resubmit an active FFL license with that. I think we've considered that for other federal or other state level. There's an active license held. We've used that under other circumstances.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR IDEA. HE HAS IT, SO. THE PETITIONER SHOULD MAINTAIN AN ACTIVE FFL CONCURRENT WITH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY GO A STEP FURTHER AND SAY THE PETITIONER CAN OBTAIN AN ANNUAL OCCUPANCY PERMIT FOR THE HOME OCCUPATION WITH EVIDENCE AND SHOULD SUBMIT WITH EVIDENCE OF AN ACTIVE FFL.

OK, with evidence it gives us a.

Annual check in.

Is that an annual permit for you?

OK. Alright, so we want to have a motion on conditions.

We'll make a motion that should this special exception be granted, all of staff conditions will attach with a slight amendment to number one that the petitioner shall seek and obtain annual occupancy permits for the home occupation and shall submit evidence of an active FFL with that application. And add number five that this approval extends only to firearms and firearm accessories and does not include ammunition.

On number one, did you want to, shall submit EVIDENCE OF AN FFL?

AN ACTIVE FFL LICENSE.

DID YOU WANT TO DO THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS?

YES. WITH THE ANNUAL OCCUPANCY PERMIT APPLICATION. SO IT WOULD BE JUST A SUPPLEMENT TO THAT APPLICATION. OKAY.

GOT YOU.

OKAY. MOTION COMPLETE. okay all right it's been moved and seconded that should this special exception be granted this evening it be subject to the stated conditions all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed same sign motion carries you can fill out your ballots

OK, CASE NUMBER 26-2684, FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF A HOME OCCUPATION FOR THE ONLINE SALES OF FIREARMS IS GRANTED. A VOTE OF 5-0.

ALL RIGHT, GREAT. THANK YOU. ALL GOOD TO CONTINUE ON ITEM GOOD. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, RESIDENTIAL, SPECIAL EXCEPTION RESIDENTIAL, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE AGGER BUSINESS AND FOR THE AGGER BUSINESS AND RIDING STABLES. RIDING STABLES.

THE PETITIONER IS HEATHER THE PETITIONER IS HEATHER HALL-KAHNIG. HALL-KAHNIG. HER PROPERTY IS LOCATED, OR HER PROPERTY IS LOCATED, OR HOPEFULLY HER PROPERTY IS HOPEFULLY HER PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT, OH, GEEZ, I DON'T LOCATED AT, OH, GEEZ, I DON'T HAVE THE ADDRESS ON HERE. 5400. Thank you. North 700 West. It is currently two vacant parcels that total 10 acres. You'll see it is the subdivisions shown to the north in this aerial image is the current edge of the town of McCordsville. They've also annexed property across 700 West. So this is in the town of McCordsville's future growth area. Ms. Koenig has requested two special exceptions here this evening. First, for a Type 2 agribusiness to have a dressage stable, riding stable use. And second, to also have animal stable use for her own horses. So these are two separate and two different categories. And I point that out because the riding stable agribusiness use is really more of a commercial enterprise, whereas having your own animal stables is a special exception more for personal accessory use to the residence that she plans on building. So we wanted to make sure that she was, that we were considering tonight both the personal accessory keeping of animals on site as well as the larger intention to have a dressage facility at this location. Whoa. We've been provided with a plan overview showing how the site will be broken up with a house toward the front of the lot, nice buffer requirements, as well as some grass pasture areas, stables, and a few different pasture areas around a riding arena, along with some hay cultivation at the back of the property. Then this whole area is zoned R2.5. So I just point that out. Even though this area and the area to the north and south and really all around it have felt very agricultural up to this point. All right. And I won't spend too much time on the Heather's provided a nice presentation that I'll bring up as well And allow her to talk about that But I did include the intent statement of intent in the presentation We met with and discussed this a couple times to make sure it was going to be a well thought out business operation and I have no doubt that Heather's going to comply with whatever conditions we place on her this evening. I'm scrolling down. I included the agribusiness requirements in your packet as well because that's an ordinance development standard section we don't use very much. But it it can include this type of use. So an agribusiness type 1 is less intense than an agribusiness type 2, which includes riding stable as a use that is kind of mentioned as this is something we foresee as an agribusiness type 2. Agribusiness Type 1 is intended for smaller, lower impact ag activities. And actually, it says they don't require BZA approval in the first paragraph here. But in R2.5, they still require BZA special exception approval. So I just want to make that clear. Agribusiness Type 2 is for larger, more intensive activities that may have greater impacts, greater crowds. They require special exception from the BZA, which can review and may limit the scope, frequency and potential impacts of the operation. So we're notifying owners of the surrounding area, which did include a fair number of the residents in the subdivision to the north. as well, I believe. So this has been, everybody's been missed. Town of McCordsville also provided a letter that was live linked to the agenda. One thing I would point out is that the agribusiness standards do include buffer requirements that apply to areas within, I think it's 100 feet of residential homes that are not the applicants. So that will apply when Heather comes back with her building permit application. We will make sure that it complies with this buffer requirement as required in our agribusiness standards. And I can go through those in more detail if you'd like, but I'll go ahead and skip to the end here. Okay, oh, another key difference between an agribusiness and a traditional special exception is that a special exception granted to operate an agribusiness type two shall remain valid as long as the owner-operator continues meeting the requirements of the special exception. So I believe that is, Well, sorry, I might be speaking ahead of myself here. Rhonda, does that mean it's transferable?

Question again, sorry.

Agribusiness type two, is the intent of our ordinance that it's transferable so long as the owner-operator operates by the same standards?

That's a question I couldn't answer.

Okay, sorry. I had it in my head one way, and then I was like, wait a minute, maybe I'm reading this wrong, so I'll just let that be. So our staff recommendation this evening is approval with the following conditions. That first, the special exception shall automatically expire if the operation of the agribusiness ceases activity for 12 consecutive months or longer. Second, the BZA reserves the right to revoke the special exception at a public hearing if the activity is deemed to be a public nuisance. Third, the agribusiness shall go to the technical committee for site development review prior to the issuance of a permit. Four, the ILP for the agribusiness shall be issued within 24 months of the special exception approval. Otherwise, the special exception shall expire. Five, the agribusiness shall comply with the agribusiness standards that I just talked about in 156.081. And six, the agribusiness shall be limited to the riding stable use as presented this evening. So it doesn't expand to other uses.

I CAN SEE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. SO 156.081 SAYS THE APPROVAL RUNS WITH THE LAND. THAT'S OKAY. UNLESS OTHERWISE OUTLINED BY THE BZA.

OKAY. THAT CLARIFIES THAT. I THOUGHT THAT'S HOW IT WAS BEING READ BUT I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT. OKAY. YEAH.

I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THAT TOO BUT I GUESS WITH THE INVESTMENTS DEFAULT IT MAKES SENSE. OKAY.

And I guess just to clarify in my mind, I always get a little confused with when we do an, like in this case, this type of agribusiness where the residence is also there, does the agribusiness imply the home occupation rules? I mean, it's kind of a home occupation of sorts, right? But it's kind of all covered and governed by the agribusiness ordinance. IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS WE DON'T NEED TO JUNK THIS UP WITH A HOME OCCUPATION ON TOP OF ALL OF THIS, RIGHT, WHEN THE RESIDENCE IS THERE? AND THEN THE NUMBER FOR THE ILP THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS WITH THE PARKING AND THE LIGHTING AND ALL THE THINGS THAT, OKAY. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? Nope. All right. There's a petitioner here.

Yes. I'll bring up her presentation.

From the Planning Commission meeting.

This is not the right petition. If not, they have the copy.

Perfect.

Awesome, thank you so much. Affirm the penalty of perjury that the testimony you give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. Your name, spell your last name.

Heather Hall Koenig, H-A-L-L hyphen K-O-E-N-I-G. All right. Thanks for having me here tonight. Appreciate to be able to talk about this potential agribusiness. So what we have here, Kayla mentioned I'm looking at 10 acres. I'm the prospective buyer. I'm currently under contract through July 31st. So I don't own it yet, but we do have an offer out there. We are under contract. And what I'm trying to do is have a residence and also have a small side hustle horse business. We do have day jobs, my husband and I, but I want to do this on the side. I do ride professionally currently a little bit on the side. I'll go ahead and move to the next slide. My statement of intent, so we are seeking the agribusiness type two with writing stable exception, understanding that it would also be an animal stable exception for the personal side. This is on North 700 West, two five acre parcels. And what I'm looking to do is have maybe about six, seven acres dedicated to horse grazing pasture. That'll be about three paddocks. About 5,000 square feet of dry lot that's professionally installed where they come and take the topsoil off, put in the limestone and gravel and some, you know, making sure that it's nice and dry for horses. They're not meant to be in the mud, so in wet conditions we have that. Possibly two to three acres for a hay crop should I find somebody who's interested in farming the hay, and I can produce my own hay at the back of my property. That would be lovely. Maybe up to two acres is going to be needed to have the house, the arena, and the actual stable. So most of this I'm trying to go for most of the property is going to be grazing pasture and or hay. So I don't really want to be having much of a yard or anything like that. So what I'm trying to do here as far as what is the nature of this business, it's pretty low key. So I'm looking just to build a house, have a small horse stable, and I'm looking to do horse board with training. In particular, I'd like to coach people at shows. I'd like to get people to dressage shows, train young horses, different types of sport horses that are either going to go in the direction of hunter jumper, dressage, or other English sports. and really carry on the nature of equestrian sports. We have lost, I could list them for you right now, about 20 stables in the Indianapolis area. We are a dying breed. There's very little place left for us as most subdivisions do come and encroach us and we get pushed out wherever we go. I do want to touch really lightly on the McCordsville letter. That letter could be written for any place in this state. Unfortunately, no matter where I would buy, I would be facing that situation. And on my end, I've been doing this for 40 years, every place I've ever ridden ends up with a subdivision next door. It's just the way it is. I have the benefit of time and knowledge And I've seen this happen for so many years. And I've always been like, oh, I would do this or I would do that. This is what would make this work really well. And so for me, that's all about good buffering, which is actually in your ordinance anyways. But if it wasn't, I'd be doing that for myself anyways. So beautify it. If you've ever been to Lexington or Louisville, it's going to be a little 330 feet along the road that looks like that basically. It's going to be a lovely property. I hope it's the nicest looking thing within three blocks. That's what I'm trying to build. Let's touch really quickly on timeline, which I think Kayla had a really good suggestion, 24 months for the exception to expire. Here's why. I'm under contract for this property. I've got to close. Okay, I'm also waiting on a core consulting to do the sewer plans, connecting to an aqua sewer for a low pressure line to this lot. There was no drain tile, so no septic, unfortunately. So once we get those two contingencies cleared, I can close. It's gonna take four months for my builder to break ground. It's gonna take seven months for them to build the house, maybe as much as eight. We're going to move into the house. We're going to sell our house in Fishers. We're going to use those proceeds to build all the equestrian facilities subsequently. So I would be pulling the building permit for the stable after we move in and we sell our house. Our houses sell about in one week out in Fishers and maybe 30 days to close. It's all ready to go. Okay, so I do want to cover the little triangle on this page. I'm going to be training horses and having all that going on, but this is a working farm where these horses live there. They're grazing on the pasture. It is a working farm. I will be the only employee. That's why my operation is going to be small. There is no labor for horse farms anymore. That's another reason a lot of them close. Good luck getting a stable manager and good luck getting people to clean stalls. I personally love cleaning stalls. It's my favorite pastime. So, basically, overall, it fits the bill. We're looking for the primary... Two minutes. Yes? Two minutes. Okay. Let's keep going, because I got a lot to say. Okay. What else we got here? We've talked about the bill timeline. That's important. Let's talk about the number of horses, because there is a limitation I do want to cover. Currently, I retire in 2034, unless I get canned before then, and then I'd be doing this full-time. I'd be looking at seven horses. by 2034 potentially, and maybe two to three of my own horses, maybe four to five. Horses owned by clients, amateur adults, amateur young riders, whatever it may be, horses in for training. I'm looking at probably two to four horses between 2027 and 2033. I do want to address real quick that I do have a concern about the limit for me. Seven horses as a limit when I'm investing seven figures into this property. I would like a little bit of buffer so I have seven some room to grow. It is a business and it may want to grow a little. I'm not talking about a lot, a little bit, but seven horses on 10 acres would be the biggest limit I've ever seen. One minute, okay. Manure management, I've put that on there. I know that's a concern. I do prefer to have it hauled off in a waste bin, like waste management. And then if not, then a private hauler to collect and take that off the property. I don't really prefer to spread it. That would only be my third option. So I do plan to have that hauled off. Parking and traffic, don't anticipate much People that board horses usually come out zero days a week or four days a week, anything in between. My husband and I are the only people that we live in on property, no kids. I work from home, so you won't see my car driving that much. My husband leaves for work and comes home once a day. So you might have a few people that come out and see their horses, but I don't plan to have a lot of traffic because it's my home, so. Other than that, you can see my build plan. You can see kind of this is just an AI rendering of very close to what this is going to look like. It's just a house and a barn. It's going to have a lot of trees, a lot of evergreens.

Time's up.

Any questions?

Oh, go ahead.

I was losing you on the math. Is it... 15 horses or seven?

Seven total by the year 2034. And I probably would have two to four total before that because I work a full-time job right now.

Okay, maximum of seven horses.

Yes, I'm looking at max seven, but I would want to kind of rebut the fact of limiting me to seven, like so that if someday, because this is something I'm going to invest in and be there for 20 years, if I could grow a little or if that's something I could do someday, I would hate to go in with a limit today that's going to last me 20 years. And seven would be more stringent than I've ever seen any county or city have on 10 acres.

I think we talked when we were talking about this as a planning commission, we were a little concerned about trying to limit the animals because that was not, I guess there were other agencies limiting animals, right? The quantity, the number of animals per acre or whatever.

Yeah, Johnson County, I think they allow you to have four or five horses on the first couple few acres, and then they allow you one horse every 5,000 square feet. So seven on 10 acres is a pretty stringent thing. I'm going to be more stringent than any normal limit's going to be, but seven's pretty stringent. I may never exceed seven, but.

Well, during the training, were people bringing in their own horses then?

They would have privately owned horses that would be on training board at my facility. So they board there. They live there. The horses live there. So the clients, a typical boarder, which I've been one for 40 years myself, you go out to the stable. Maybe you have a 50-minute drive. It's usually not very close. Maybe you go out one, two, four days a week. Some people just send you the horses and they never come out. It just depends. But that's how it works. Yeah.

Just questions on the type two allows for signage, but it's only directional signage. Were you aware of that? Is that what you anticipated?

The signage? The signage at the...

It's all signage in the application. I've seen it. But for us, we can only approve directional signage. Is that what you're looking for?

Okay. So I'll explain what I was looking for. And it's not anything too critical. I was just looking to hang a shingle out there that, hey, this is HVH equestrian. You know, so people know it's there and they drive, oh, they can find me on Facebook or something. I mean, everybody's on Facebook now. But, yeah, so I don't know. It's up to you. I mean, if I can't say that I'm a business and I can't put anything, a sign out there, then it'll just be Facebook. Everybody goes to Facebook now.

I think it, I mean, it wouldn't be up to us. It's just up, unless we noticed it differently, we'd have to default to the standards, which is directional signage on site. Okay. Long term, and this goes back to the... According to the letter, how long does this operate for you? They're encouraging you to take a look at long-term planning that might not be here. So what is the length of the operation for this business for you?

The length of the operation, maybe until I'm 65 or 70. I'm almost 50, so like around 20 years. So that would be my thought. And then I'm going to be retiring and probably on the beach somewhere. Yeah.

Did I miss the hours of operation or are they just kind of anywhere?

The hours of operation would be 9 a.m. to 8.30 p.m., seven days a week. You know, I don't think that's going to end up needing to vary. That's pretty solid because I don't want people at my house past 8.30 at night.

And the agribusiness requirements, I'm a little fuzzy what to talk about on some of the procedural things, but it requires surveyor, engineer, and fire review. Is that... Is that recommended or is that completed? Is this procedural?

Yeah. That's why we recommended that it go to tech. Yes, to tech, okay.

And that's in the technical committee, got it. Will you sell this business? Because it runs with the land unless we otherwise outline it. Are you intending to sell it anytime?

Well, I mean, obviously I'm going to get old and have to move on at some point. So like I said, we plan to live there until I'm like 70. Longer if my husband will let me, but he says no. So yeah, of course. I mean, every property anyone's ever going to buy is always going to be sold, right? And to be bluntly honest, I'd love to sell it as a horse stable. I don't care to make extra millions on it. I'd love to hand it down to the next generation. That would be my goal.

What is your plan for waste and debris?

Oh, yeah, that's the manure management that I was talking about earlier, haul-off. So I really, my first priority or my first option would be to have waste management or Republic, whatever facility goes there, have a bin and have it collected in a bin. I have a couple friends that do that, and that works super well. It's expensive, but it works great. I don't really... prefer spreading the manure. Maybe my farmer would be like, hey, I'd love you to fertilize this stuff. But I don't prefer to do that. I want haul off. It's just nicer.

Yeah. I have a couple of questions about another portion of the type two. The primary operator of the agribusiness shall be the owner of the land and or have legal control of the land owned or rented. So you're under contract. Is this a contingency in your contract?

Yes, we have two contingencies. Number one, that you guys approve this. Otherwise, there's no need for me to buy it. That's number one contingency for me to close. The second one is approval of sewer plans.

We can only approve this for the owner of the property. We have a consent form. They would have to be the petitioner. They would have to be the petitioner. I've been advised otherwise. Happy to have just a question of mine, so.

AND IT'S ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE AND IT'S ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE APPLIED UPON PURCHASE, UPON APPLIED UPON PURCHASE, UPON CLOSING. CLOSING.

TECHNICALLY, I BET WE COULD BE TECHNICALLY, I BET WE COULD BE IN COMPLIANCE BY HAVING A IN COMPLIANCE BY HAVING A CONTINGENCY IN CONDITIONS THAT THIS CONTINGENCY IN CONDITIONS THAT THIS CLOSES. CLOSES. IT ONLY IS EFFECTIVE UPON THE IT ONLY IS EFFECTIVE UPON THE CLOSING OF THE PROPERTY. CLOSING OF THE PROPERTY. THAT SOUNDS LAYERED.

THAT SOUNDS LAYERED. THEY NOTED. I WAS CURIOUS. CHANGE OF ZONING WILL BE CONTINGENT ON NEW OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY. THEY DID A GREAT JOB.

ARE WE ALLOWED TO APPROVE TYPE 2 AGRIBUSINESS WHEN IT HAS A REQUIREMENT THE PRIMARY OPERATOR SHALL HAVE LEGAL CONTROL?

I WOULD THINK WHEN I CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY IT HAD IT.

I AM. WHICH NUMBER ARE YOU LOOKING AT? FOUR. NUMBER FOUR.

AGRIBUSINESS TYPE ONE AND THEN TYPE TWO.

PRIMARY OPERATOR OF THE AGRIBUSINESS SHALL BE THE OWNER OF THE LAND AND OR HAVE LEGAL CONTROL OF THE LAND OWNED. IF WE CAN JUST CONSIDER THE CONSENT AND THE CONTINGENCY OF CONTRACT TO BE I MEAN I GET IT YOU HAVE TO GET CONSENT BEFORE BUT FOR US WE'RE STUCK UNDER THE STANDARD AT THE SAME TIME UNLESS WE DEEM IT LEGALLY THAT OWNER CONTROL OF THE LAND IS THE CONSENT FROM THE EXISTING OWNER. But not currently. So we'd be approving a special exception pending, I mean, yes, it's contingent.

It's approved when I close on the lot.

The issue is that it runs with the land. And so we'd be approving a special exception that runs with the land under your application. But there's an application within 12 months that is just a timing issue that we run into a lot of times when this is a contingency of contract issue. Okay, couple other questions.

Well, I guess on that though, just so the ILP for the, there's an ILP required for the agribusiness, right? So it doesn't, it's approved, but it doesn't happen until the ILP is granted, right? I don't guess it's not really in here, but I know one of our conditions was that there was an ILP required for the, Agribusiness. So I had a similar question to yours, but then I felt like I'd satisfied myself when I read, the IOP for Agribusiness shall be issued within 24 months of special exception approval. Otherwise, the special exception shall expire. So if she doesn't close, it's kind of hanging out there until an ILP is applied for, whether it's her or current owner of the property. If she doesn't close, the current owner of the property could go apply for the ILP and do the special exception.

And he stated he doesn't want it.

But I guess in my mind, it was like, yeah, we approve it, whether it's her or somebody else that has to meet with these requirements, I guess. I MEAN, I GET YOUR POINT, IT NEEDS TO BE TIDY, BUT THAT'S HOW I KIND OF RECTIFIED IT IN MY MIND.

IT'S JUST, YEAH, AND CLARIFY THE HOME OCCUPATION INTERFACE HERE. I'M JUST, BECAUSE I GOT A BUNCH OF STATEMENTS ABOUT IT, I'M JUST, NO HOME OCCUPATION, BECAUSE THERE'S NO, THE PRIMARY UTILIZATION NEEDS TO BE FOR AGRIBUSINESS, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING WITH, NEEDS TO BE FOR WE DIDN'T DO THE REZONING BUT IT'S AGRICULTURE AND IT DOES NEED HOME OCCUPATION. MAYBE JUST OUTLINE THAT FOR ME.

THAT WAS THE QUESTION.

IS SHE PLANNING ON TAKING THE LAND AND MAKING A PARCEL JUST FOR THE BUSINESS OR IS THAT GOING TO BE SEPARATE FROM THE

WE HAVE NOT EVEN GOTTEN THAT FAR, AT LEAST NOT IN MY OFFICE. I KNOW SOME OTHERS THAT WE'VE DEALT WITH BEFORE, THEY HAVE REQUIRED THAT TO BE ITS OWN PARCEL. IF SHE DOES COMBINE IT, IT WILL BE MORE THAN 10 ACRES AND THEN IT WON'T GO THROUGH MY OFFICE. SHE'LL JUST GET IT RECORDED UPSTAIRS. IF SHE HAS TO DO A SUBDIVISION TO REDIVIDE THE LINES, THEN IT BECOMES A MINOR SUBDIVISION. IT WILL COME THROUGH MY OFFICE AS A MINOR SUB. but we can deal with that down the road. I would mention the home occupation supplemental questionnaire. She's filled that out, but that's just a helpful document we find in a lot of cases where we have use like this. It has good questions on it, so ignore the home occupation wording.

I guess I get the, there's a home on site, there's an agribusiness on site, we're not parceling, and we just have a, We have a determination from our planning director that a home occupation is not required in this situation. Is that what we're saying? Okay. Okay.

Let's reason that out as that typically a home is a part of a working farm, kind of the basis of this agribusiness. Okay.

What's the definition of – what's a stable? Is it the building or is it the stalls in the – The –

Any structure with animal staples, that's the personal use. Are you looking at the commercial use?

Well, I'm just curious because in one place we're using singular stable, and the other we're using stables. So does that mean multiple buildings, or is that the stalls within the building? How many buildings are we allowing, just to be clear?

There's only a limitation on many barns. So animal stables are defined as the use of structures with stalls or compartments and or land where animals, including dogs and cats, are sheltered. It's the land and the farm. That's for personal use. The riding stable use that goes agribusiness is actually is like a boarding riding facility.

So for the first one, we're using the word stable singular to mean the commercial stable. And for the second special exception, we're using stables. TO MEAN THE LAND AND, OKAY, SO TO MEAN THE LAND AND, OKAY, SO WE WANT TO USE A PLURAL WORD WE WANT TO USE A PLURAL WORD THERE, OKAY. THERE, OKAY. DOES THIS PROPERTY HAVE AN DOES THIS PROPERTY HAVE AN ADDRESS, AN ADDRESS YET? ADDRESS, AN ADDRESS YET?

OKAY. OKAY. IT DID HAVE AN ADDRESS. IT DID HAVE AN ADDRESS. IT WAS THE 54. IT WAS THE 54.

THEY PUT 54, I THINK, THEY PUT 54, I THINK, HUNDRED IN THERE. HUNDRED IN THERE. IT DOESN'T HAVE AN ADDRESS. IT DOESN'T HAVE AN ADDRESS. WE'RE TRYING TO APPROXIMATE, WE'RE TRYING TO APPROXIMATE, I BELIEVE. I BELIEVE. OKAY. OKAY.

Any more questions for the petitioner?

One more question, I guess, for Kayla. So this, the verbiage here, the special exception may be revoked if the property is deemed a public nuisance, and then it's in both of them. Let's see. The BZA reserves the right to revoke the special exception. Did you want to allow a future BZA to modify?

Yes. Let's add that back in.

Okay. And I do have a couple questions, if I could, about the limitation, because I just saw them today with the staff report that we've added, if that's okay.

Would you mind if I actually forgot to present the last page of the staff report? I'm going to just present that real quick.

That should clear some things up.

Sorry, I got ahead of myself. All right, that special exception to allow animal stables to personal use, we recommend approval with the following conditions. The petitioner shall seek and obtain an ILP, which is an improvement location permit, to keep and maintain an animal stable on site. Special exception may be revoked or modified if the property is deemed a public nuisance. And then we limited the stable to seven horses. So there was a limit on the number of horses, which is what we're talking about right now and what you can consider the math questions of horses. So, okay, I will turn it back over to Heather now.

On the back of your...

It's the second one. We don't have any limitations like that in our ordinance. We don't have maximum numbers or any...

Right. And we started to talk about that at the Planning Commission and... And that's why I was trying to look up McCourt's ville had animal math It was like one horse per acre or something like that so that would take you to ten I Was a little hesitant to limit animal quantities per acre because I was was it The Board of Animal Health that we determined kind of does that. Who limits that? Is that a rule of thumb or is there actually a limitation?

You know, I don't know who comes up with that at the different, you know, counties and stuff, but I can tell you I've read their ordinances and their ordinances are very similar in that you get so many horses per the first X number of acres and then like one per acre and then or one per every 5,000 square feet. So they're all very similar, but I can definitely tell you seven would, it's way more stringent than any County around here I've seen. So for me, if it would be okay, I mean, I would be comfortable with a limit of 10, like just so it would allow me, like, I think I only want seven, but it would allow me that opportunity because the definition of a business. And when you do your taxes, if you're not turning a profit, you've got to try some different methods and things. Right. So I don't want to box myself into a tiny corner from day one. Um, I'm also not going to be managing a huge business either. So.

Are you saying, then, that you'd be comfortable limiting the number of voices on the property between the boarding facility and the person? Yes. Okay. Yeah, I think that's reasonable.

Yep. I did have one question. So there was one of the stipulations here was revoke the exception if I can't remember the wording, pause the business for 12 months. So the first thing I... you know, thought of when I, what if I get cancer? What if I'm, you know, I've got two elderly parents in Florida and Cleveland. Like what if I've got to stop my business for a hot minute and take care of myself or my family? Would I lose, I invest the seven figures and lose the whole exception? Like that didn't resonate with me. I don't know what the purpose, what is the origin of that ordinance or the origin of that requirement for you? Why would you do that to me?

There's a lot of special exceptions. We have this conversation and this was available to us in our ordinances. What is the citation? Where does that come from?

So typically it allows for us to reevaluate the appropriateness of this use on this site. If it gets abandoned for more than 12 months, basically it becomes a non-conforming, not a legal non-conforming use, just straight up non-conforming. You would have to come back again for review if you want.

Okay, so if I paid my LLC and I still have my LLC going and I'm in cancer treatment or something, are we okay? Or if it's still there at the property and it's all taken care of?

Yeah, so what we have right now is if you stop utilizing it as a savings, then that use goes away. Okay. Yeah. So what you could do is ask the board for... different number of months if that would work better for you or you could accept that if that use were to be abandoned for at least 12 have to come back and ask for permission again. Okay.

And I would think if I got cancer or my family needed me, elder care, which is what most of us do these days, we've got to take care of our parents, I would assume I would be raising my hand and letting you guys know I'm pausing for a second. I'm just looking to cover myself. I can't imagine it would ever happen, but you know what I'm saying? Life happens. What if I get sick? Or what if I fall off the horse and I've broken bones? You know what I'm saying? It's a dangerous sport. So I was just curious the nature of that. Yeah. So, I mean, if that's what it is, I mean, you guys would know right away I'm in the hospital.

I guess I think the spirit of that is more that if you... of start doing something else there this agribusiness or you know this expires yeah so and i think you would deliberately be doing something else and you would be okay with the fact that it's expiring you know i think it's the spirit of it

Okay. Turning it into a car garage or something. Yeah.

I mean, if you're still residing there, you're, I mean, I don't think that anybody's going to care that your customers are not going there anymore, you know, but if, you know, it's dilapidated and you know, it's, you're not there or whatever, then you disappear. Right. Abandoned property. Yeah. It would expire. You're not showing up and paying your fees or whatever. Then yeah, I just, everything gets a clean slate and we can do it, do something different later. Yeah.

That makes sense. Cause I mean the LLC, if not in those like dire circumstances would always be current. Right. So yeah. Yeah.

If you were to sell the business, if you were to sell the land anyways, the, this would help that expire since there would not actually be a business there anymore. So the special exception wouldn't apply to whoever the landowners were post you being there.

okay gotcha um let's see one other thing okay so i i did get a little bit more information hearing this about the tech board because that's a requirement i wasn't tracking at all and it's not in my contingencies of this offer so i don't know what that is going to take to get through because obviously i can't if the tech board didn't approve i can't i can't buy it

Just to clarify, the technical committee sits up here and typically just reviews your plans for construction. And so it's very similar to when you apply for a new building, even a new single. It gets sent around to the different departments and they all sign off on it. That tech committee, that just happens in front of you and in a public meeting. So you can watch some of those on YouTube. Typically, they're more commercial projects, which yours is, since it's a new construction and it has that commercial element, we'll take it through that. And then you'll also have the county surveyor and the highway engineer, the health department. Everybody's up here. You can hear all their comments. or you can turn it over to whoever's helping you with your plans, and they can have all of your comments given back to you, like, all right, do these things, submit the revised plans back to us, and it should be fairly smooth sailing.

Can I say, though, that that's not the way that our agribusiness reads, because it says that the board shall consider the proposal. When considering the proposal, we should have recommendations from the survey or the county highway and fire department. It's not about the permit. It's when we get the proposal for the agribusiness. Is that true?

Would you like this to come back easier after that?

It would just, usually what we would do is we would have the recommendations and then they would have it as a, we would have it as a condition. We would allow that to be adopted as a condition. I think it's just a timing issue. It's not for permitting. It's for approval of the agribusiness operation. But we might think or anticipate that the surveyor, engineer, and fire department will not have any type of findings in this. If we anticipate that they will not, then I don't know. Procedurally, I'm just looking at, yeah, okay. Okay, maybe I'll ask, are you okay with all the other, any other questions on the conditions?

No, I don't think any other questions. I think the main one was just the number of horses and, yeah.

Okay, while you're up here, I'd like to go to the page before and just ask a couple of questions. The special exception should automatically expire if the operation of the aggravation ceases for activity for 12 consecutive months or longer. WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO SOMETHING OR THE CURRENT CONTRACT FOR SALE EXPIRES? I WOULDN'T BE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS HAD WE NOT HAD SOME STATEMENT FROM MACCORDSVILLE. I THINK WE HAVE TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE ADJACENCY OF THIS. KAYLA KNOWS I'M WATCHING THE ADJACENTS OF OUR BORDERS ALL THE TIME. WE HAVE TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THIS FEEDBACK. We have an excellent proposal from you in your history, which we can trust in that. But if this is a special exception that will be picked up by another for operation, we might not be respecting the intent of what we're getting. So would you be open to, or the current contract for sale expires? So can you repeat that last part, would I be able to? Oh, the special exception, if we grant it today, will expire if you cease to operate for 12 months or longer or if the current contract for sale expires.

Right. So you're saying if I don't close on the property that this doesn't transfer to someone else? Correct. Yes. That's fine. Yeah. Okay. All right.

That's a good idea.

Yeah.

Okay. And then the second one, if BZA reserves the right to revoke or modify the special exception at a public hearing, if the activity is deemed a public nuisance, Since we do have statements from Accordsville or upon request by Authorities, you know, I think this public nuisance is a pretty wide term that's available to us in our ordinance I would default if but or we could we would open it up to the it's a risk to put this in under special exception Mm-hmm. There's other procedures to do this to get this and I'm with more staying power. You're going to the special exception way and so We would just allow and recognize the fact that there's an adjacent jurisdiction who has concerns. And so they can come in and ask to modify or revoke as well. I think they can do it anyways under public nuisance, but we're being very clear to you that that is a risk.

Right, and for me, the definition of what a public nuisance is, that's a question for me. Is it just somebody who just doesn't like horses and I don't like the horses over there and I'm just gonna just complain? Or, you know what I'm saying? I can't imagine... I can't imagine a horse stable being a nuisance. Like I'm trying to figure in what ways would that happen?

So the statements from Accordsville were very clear about what they would consider a nuisance in the fourth paragraph. Normal neighborhood activities they would probably consider a nuisance. children playing near the fence lines, balls or toys entering the pasture areas that are in use, neighbors hosting gatherings. There's a dual nuisance.

So they're a nuisance, not my property?

They're yours to them, but there might be, I think there's just the adjacency. It's a dissimilar use. Okay.

Because I read that really carefully a few times, and so I did read, I could be worried about kids throwing balls in my pasture, and I could be worried about what's going on, people in pools, but nothing was mentioned about what they would define as a nuisance from me, me throwing balls, and I don't have any. I'm trying to think of what would that be, like my...

Horses getting loose.

Tractors making noise.

Lots of noise, lighting.

What do we get complaints about?

Cars in and out. It could be anything that annoys people.

That's my concern. Anything that annoys people because you have a lot of people that... anything annoys them at all.

It would hold up, but I mean, anybody could raise that, you know? Right. Yeah.

Expands. Right. I mean, if you have 2000 people that live around your farm, right. And you're in the center of that, people are going to complain about if somebody is coming to pick up hay and harvest that regularly. And I think what McCord's was trying to say is that's going to happen. And they want you to consider that before you make, as you were saying, a seven figure investment in that property, because it may not make you happy in the long run being there for that period of time. If that continues to happen, because you don't want to have to come here constantly and

right which is the circum unfortunately for equestrians it's unfortunately the circumstance anywhere because i'm not aware of any horse districts or any any places i could buy that are protected long term we're losing our agriculture unfortunately i kind of face this anywhere i would buy that's the problem and that's what i've seen happen to everybody i know and everything you know everything gets It's gone.

We might have different questions if we weren't zoned R2. Is that where we are? We're R2-5? Yeah. So we have a level of care that we're looking at. Okay, next question. The agribusiness shall comply with the agribusiness standards in 156.081. Since we've discussed it, would you have any objections to say including signage, ownership, buffer, and waste?

To include signage?

already here. So we don't have to say it, but you have to comply with this. And just Oh, yeah, yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Or we just were just like a double tap or underscore on those items that we discussed. Okay. And then on the next page, some of the items should probably some of the procedural protections we've discussed should carry over probably the auto expiration and Depending on how we handle tech committee, the second agribusiness or the animal stable should be subject to tech committee review as well. And the exception would be modified or revoked deemed public nuisance or application of the authority. I think, are you okay with those items that we discussed on the previous carrying over? Okay. Thank you.

I WAS TRYING TO THINK OF A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES FOR YOU WITH YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE NUISANCE AND THE REVOKE, AND IT WAS I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST AGRICULTURAL BUSINESSES WE HAD WAS PINEY ACRES. THEY OPERATE AS AN AGRICULTURAL BUSINESS, I THINK TYPE 1. NO, THEY'RE A TYPE 2. THEY'RE INTENSIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH PINEY ACRES. Theme park basically over there. I mean they have the Christmas tree thing the lights people come out with the trains they do the Halloween festivals with concerts and all that stuff and constant constant noises and noise complaints and all that stuff and There's a lot of back and forth for a couple of years with them and they still exist as an agribusiness so it's I don't think any action was ever, there were actions taken, but I don't know, I can't think specifically and remember what they were, but eventually over time, the BZA in a lot of ways acted as a moderator, a mediator to sort of speak between Piney Acres and the neighbors to make that a cohesive thing. So that was an example. The other example I was thinking of, and I don't know if they were an agribusiness, but they, family had a similar parcel where they were raising dairy cows. They were over south of 70 off of Mount Comfort Road and a neighborhood was built next to them and their barn was right next to the fence and they were just having a lot of trouble with the kids coming onto the property and they eventually moved their operation just because they I mean, there wasn't any agribusiness, I don't think, there. But those are kind of examples that popped into my head to kind of share with you what your concern might have been and some historical examples of that concern. But like I said, Piney Acres still exists. And, you know, if you have any concerns about how that all went, you could go talk to them because they experienced it. And they were at the BZA, it seemed like, every couple of months. Well, that was maybe before you. Yeah. Sounds like a nightclub. They kind of were during the Halloween time and stuff. They had like a haunted corn maze or something. I don't know. I never really went out and saw it, but it was in concerts late at night, and so the neighbors voiced a lot of the police come and all that stuff. We had all the fun things. So I don't think you'll get there. So I guess hopefully that's a little bit there, but, but yeah, to Ben's point, yeah, the neighbors are going to complain. That's what happens, you know? So, you know, they, they could file a complaint with Kayla's office and that's just the process and it could come back here and then we would have to do what we did there, which is sort of mediate that issue. Sure. LIGHTING BECOMES AN ISSUE. IF YOU HAVE A BIG SECURITY LIGHT, THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS. I'VE BEEN AROUND THE BZA FOR A LOT OF YEARS AND I CANNOT revoking. I don't know that we've revoked. I mean, I think we've got one or two that are, you know, maybe pending, but it takes a lot for that to happen. I think so.

As long as people talk and there's compromise and there's, there's an issue and what can we do about it? Usually people work things out. Yeah.

Yeah. Usually it's, you know, hopefully it never gets to that. If there's a complaint, they come to you and you resolve it as a responsible business owner and it, you know, it works out. So that's.

Yeah. No, I appreciate that. Cause yeah, that's, yeah. I mean, I would complain about that too. Yeah.

Cause I think with what I remember with Piney Acres is there wasn't a whole, there was a lot of elevated emotion on both sides and they couldn't really work it out themselves. And so it ended up back here and.

Ultimately, it worked out, I guess. I mean, they're still operating there.

So those are your examples, I guess.

Okay. I appreciate that.

Any other questions? None? All right. I think we're good. Do we have anybody here in opposition? Would you like to speak in opposition?

No? No? Okay.

Any other discussion on these... RECOMMENDATIONS.

A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR US. WE'RE ALIGNED THAT THE OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENT OF AGRIBUSINESS 2 IS MET. I THINK FROM LEGAL, WE'RE ALIGNED THERE.

I THINK WE DISCUSSED THE FACT THAT THE ILP WOULDN'T BE GIVEN. IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU IF YOU WOULD WANT TO.

I GUESS PERSONALLY I WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THE ILP BECAUSE IN MY MIND IN ORDER FOR THIS THING TO HAPPEN SOMETHING HAS TO GET BUILT SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET AN ILP AND IT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE TO THE COUNTY WHETHER IT'S HER OR THE CURRENT OWNER OR REALLY HONESTLY ANYBODY ELSE AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE TONIGHT.

I THINK AS LONG AS THE AGRA BUSINESS IS TIED TO THE WRITING STABLE, IT HAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED, THEN YES, I WOULD AGREE. IF THE AGRA BUSINESS 2 IS ON ITS OWN, THEN NO. BECAUSE YOU CAN HAVE TWO YEARS OF SOMETHING THAT'S APPROVED WITHOUT BEFORE ILP. SO IF THAT'S WHERE WE'RE LINED, GOOD.

AGRA BUSINESS TYPE 2 WRITING STABLE. SO WE COULD FURTHER DEFINE THAT IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH WHAT WAS PRESENTED HERE THIS EVENING, WRITING STABLE, IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE PRESENTATION.

OKAY.

AND THEN... DO YOU WANT TO ADD THE ILP TO THE SECOND ONE SINCE WE ADDED THE OTHER VERBAGE FOR THE MODIFIED OR REVOKED AND THE AUTOEXPIRATION?

I THINK IT'S THE NUMBER ONE. IT'S JUST THE TIMING OF THE 24 MONTHS FOR EXPIRATION THAT WE MIGHT MODIFY AND MATCH. ONE ON THE SECOND VARIANCE IS THE SAME AS FOUR. IT'S AS LONG AS THEY MATCH. MY OTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT TECH COMMITTEE. THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT WE CONSIDER IT BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO MANDATE IT. THAT COULD BE HOW WE HANDLE IT, SUBJECT TO THE PERMIT.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT. I WAS READING THAT AS WE WERE TALKING. THAT PROBABLY WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REQUIRE THAT TO HAPPEN.

Okay, they have some comment The only other big item is this and we don't see them here, but the town of McCordsville statement It's just a more of an indication not a specific instruction, but it's just a you know Take it's just that proceed at your own risk, which any any special exception is going to be And earlier Lacey you brought up the language that says the board shall also consider comments regarding the proposal

from the county surveyor, county highway engineer, and local fire department. How did you come down on, how is the board coming down on that?

Oh shoot, I didn't see the shell, darn it. I wasn't gonna ignore it. I was gonna say handle it with a permit, but it's for the proposal. I didn't see the shell. Thank you, council.

We haven't heard from them at this point. To make your decision, we don't have input from those entities.

But those entities will be part of the ILP review, though, right? So if the ILP is not obtained.

That's not coming back here. That's the problem. The board. It says the board.

Have they looked at it?

Have they provided comments?

Have they commented to you?

Or can we get comments? Put on any of the meetings we have.

and you and dennis no we have not gotten comments from the other department heads on this at this point like that shell also i did see the shell well i guess the i yeah they're going to see it with the ilp but then we're not

officially considering those comments, right?

It's because we have to incorporate into our conditions and that's the issue.

The only real way to do that would be to just to continue and get those and bring it back with those, right? I mean we can't really very well approve this contingent on us seeing those next month and liking them.

Because there might be material findings that we wouldn't be able to build conditions around. I mean, I wouldn't anticipate it, but I think that's why it's a shell.

Yeah, because, you know, the highway, they're going to look at things about the driveway, and yeah, there might be a condition about where the driveway needs to be placed. Turnarounds for fire trucks and things like that.

Yeah, those types of things. Especially with customers and clients on site.

Yes.

Okay.

Well, maybe we should do that. SO THAT WOULD BE A, WE MAY NEED A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS FOR NEXT MONTH AND TO CONSIDER THE COMMENTS OF THE HIGHWAY SURVEY AND FIRE DEPARTMENT.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE JUNE MEETING. ASSUMING THAT, WE CAN COLLECT THE COMMENTS FROM COUNTY SURVEYOR, COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER, AND THE LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENT AS REQUIRED IN THE AGRA BUSINESS 2 ORDINANCE.

I HAVE A QUESTION. IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS, CAN SHE EVEN GO GET THOSE COMMENTS? doesn't have the exception to be able to take that next step, right?

I mean, given where she's at with the design, it's more hypothetical at this point. That's where I guess it makes more sense to me for it to go through technical review once she has a set of plans that she can actually show the departments to say, hey, here's what's actually getting built. I guess another option tonight would be to approve one of the special exceptions and continue the other at least just to give them some way to move forward with it. But yeah, it's difficult without her having the approval for the general use to know what those departments are going to say except for very general things.

What if we required as a condition of approval this evening required development plan approval? So then she would have to create a preliminary plan and get development plan approval through your office that could come back here, correct? Would that be an avenue to get it back here? And then we could revoke it if we didn't like the findings?

I'm okay with that. Is Rhonda, are you... Does that wording go back to the law again? Okay.

I'm trying to think. We've required development plan approval on things before, and that was an avenue to get the project further along to take a closer look at it. So approval contingent upon development plan approval, I think is how we worded that.

It could go back here then at the time that she does apply for that ILP also, so full development plan review. So once it gets onto that technical committee agenda, it also comes back here. We could go with that. Because that gives her a little time to get her plans together. I'm just thinking. I wouldn't close. I wouldn't.

This is a contingency of contract. There's a PSA and there's a time frame. I mean, if we don't know, I mean, I just don't think that's a great, I wouldn't, if I'm in a business and I'm, you know, advising a client, those are some pretty material changes that might occur.

Well, that's what I'm thinking. It's like, I just wonder if, I mean, development plan, that's kind of far along type. I mean, I was spending some money on plans probably. I'm just trying to think how do you get to Scott's point, how do you get in front of these department heads to get input? I know like sometimes with projects, you'll send them around and get sort of preliminary comments. Maybe that's what we're looking for.

Would I would think that our file would probably when I have a letter from each one of those mentioned in this Just see what their feedback is Check the boxes that They've looked at it initially just their initial comments what they can tell us so far. Yeah that we have that paper trail the Surveyor County Highway Engineer and Fire Department

I mean, there's nothing to stop somebody from requesting preliminary feedback from any of those departments on a hypothetical project. Right.

I think you run the risk of should it get built and then the fire department finds out this is a real problem, we can't properly serve that, that children are at risk. And I mean, better to know that on the front end and what they have to say, at least give them awareness of.

You wouldn't know all that in the beginning, though. You would have to pass through all that.

Regardless, we are shackled with language in an ordinance that says that we shall. Procedurally, that's why I think we have to anticipate these things. Procedurally, this doesn't match the way we have procedures now, is the issue.

If we don't follow what we have in place, there could be a potential lawsuit that somebody There was a fire and that it didn't get put out correctly and that had we known that this should have never been built, right? And then we find out we didn't follow the ordinance. It opens it up to litigation.

Yeah, I'm trying to think of, I'm trying to imagine what, if she were to give this packet to those department heads and let them review it and comment. And this is a very thorough packet and they, I THINK THE HIGHWAY COULD LOOK AT IT AND MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT DRIVEWAYS AND SITELINES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I THINK THE FIRE DEPARTMENT MIGHT HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT THE STRUCTURES MAYBE. MAYBE I'VE SEEN THEM COMMENT BEFORE THAT THEY WANT TO SEE A CONSTRUCTION DESIGN RELEASE ON STRUCTURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THROUGH THE STATE. THOSE WOULD BE SOME OF THE TYPES OF COMMENTS THAT I THINK I COULD IMAGINE HAPPENING. SURVEYOR IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE PERFECTLY FINE WITH EVERYTHING FROM A SEPTIC PERSPECTIVE, OR THIS WAS A SEWER.

DRAINAGE. SEWER.

DRAINAGE WISE, I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE FINE WITH EVERYTHING.

IT'S NOT MESSING UP HER, I THINK YOU SHOULD FOLLOW WHAT IT SAYS IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT'S NOT CHANGING HER TIME FRAME AT ALL. YOU HAVE UNTIL, IS IT JULY?

Yeah, so I'm under contract until July 31st to clear the sewer contingency.

So we could, yeah, so we could continue, have her send this to those three department heads, get letters, like you said, and for the file.

I think that would be prudent.

Yeah, I think that would probably be.

Renew my open motion.

Yes, your motion is still good then.

Yeah.

So... SO THE MOTION WAS TO CONTINUE FOR COMMENT FROM THOSE THREE DEPARTMENT HEADS. SO WE WOULD NEED A SECOND FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO CONTINUE THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS UNTIL NEXT MONTH TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE THREE DEPARTMENT HEADS PER THE AGRIBUSINESS ORDINANCE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. Oh, you are a no? Okay. So it's four with one no. Mr. Rubel, one no. motion carries so we'll see this next month and you can help her to get this along to the right people then so that was for both special exceptions right yeah okay let them comment on both special exceptions would it be possible to amend the conditions just to catch us up to what we discussed this evening and if you need help we can thank you that'd be wonderful updated staff report with recommended conditions yeah

CONDITIONS THAT ARE ONLY IN MY LEFT-HANDED WRITING. DID YOU WANT TO GO OVER THOSE AGAIN? NO, BUT I CAN.

BECAUSE THE FIRST ONE YOU SAID, I KNOW THE 12 MONTHS AND THE 24 MONTHS, YOU WANTED THOSE TO MATCH IN NUMBER ONE AND FOUR. SO WHICH ONE DID YOU WANT TO GO OVER?

SO MY RECOMMENDATIONS, AND ANYBODY CAN, THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL MOTION, BUT FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THE FIRST ONE, THAT WE WOULD ADD A CLAUSE TO NUMBER ONE OR THE CURRENT CONTRACT the sale expires. That cures us of the ownership issue or, you know, pending utilization. Number two, add or revoke or modify an ad or upon request by area authority. You guys can work on whatever. This is the McCordsville piece. And number five, Including signage ownership buffer and waste those are just items that we discussed and then I would just recommend on the second set that we Match the conditions for the ILP the revocation the Tech committee etc Tech committee will probably change once we get I mean that that one would just just be open whatever needs to match from one to two and

That would be my summary So number one on the second special exception number one would match number three this agribusiness is four for the improvement location LP one on number two would match number four on number one And then we're keeping on number one of the first special exception at 12 months and

Yeah, that would replicate with the auto expiration. Okay. Number two. And then the modification language would, yeah, would carry over as well, modify or revoke.

Okay.

GIVE THEM A MINUTE TO TYPE EVERYTHING IN.

DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THEM ALL BACK OR ANYTHING?

I THINK WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WAS THAT ALL OF THEM? OKAY. OTHER BUSINESS. WE HAVE NO OTHER BUSINESS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID APPROVE OR MADE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE Yeah, on other business, we did have the Planning Commission recommended approval to the Board of Commissioners for the new fee schedule, and that new fee schedule had the violations updated. Zoning violation fees were updated to per day, not just per incident. So that was a significant change on the BCA side of the fees, fines, I guess. And then zoning violation reports, Dennis sent those in email. Did you want to review those? The fee schedule was violations were per day, right?

It is that way in the current ordinance now. We are changing it in the fee schedule so it's more clear.

Yeah. Because we kind of would flounder around on those a little bit. I know we have a couple of times we were we were doing that and posing that so. It was one that I did have a question on. Yeah, I think I got tripped up on number five. That's a separate U-Haul situation than what we had. That one's up in Fortville. That's different than our U.S. 40 U-Haul situation, right?

Number five?

Yeah. Yeah, that's in Fortville. Yep, okay.

That's a separate one. Yeah. So there was a complaint about the U-Haul business. An inspection was conducted and when we did research on the property we realized that in 2016 there was a rezone from AG to commercial community and the Rezone Attached conditions that the business would be The business would be exclusive to the diesel repair shop. and not anything else. And then in 2020, they extended the footprint of the rezone, adding .36 acres, and they currently have a U-Haul business operating from that property. So Mrs. Black came into the office to try and remedy the violation, and we're currently working on that right now.

Okay. Looks like number six, you're getting close on.

Interestingly, he has applied for a building permit, so that violation will be closed.

Very thorough, thank you. And number four was a...

Seems like we, I've noticed several, I think there's a lot of this RV stuff happening where they're almost getting used as accessory dwelling units, I think. So that's an interesting one to maybe take a look at in the future, these things being used as dwelling units. The issue with those, I guess it's where it's different, right, Kayla? I mean, it's the sanitary sewer piece of it, right? It's the health department issue of people staying long-term in RVs on their properties.

It's also a building code violation that an RV is a recreational vehicle. It's a tent on wheels. It's not a legal residential dwelling. It does not pass building code.

Yeah, OK.

There was one RV complete. That one. OK. Mm hmm.

Somebody camping in your neighborhood, no. Alright, that's it. I WANT TO ADJOURN. TALK ABOUT ANYTHING? PATIENTLY AWAY, DID YOU HAVE?

WITH ME.

OKAY. OH, OKAY. OH, OKAY, GREAT.

HE CAME BY TO WATCH, SEE IF HE REALLY WANTED TO.

THIS WAS KIND OF A TOUGH NIGHT THEN. Well, we're a little tough this evening, but we're just trying to get better, so.

Motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn.

Seconded? Second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Same sign. Motion carries. Thanks, guys.