Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] Okay, we're going to open the regular May 6, 2025 Columbia City Board of Zoning Appeals regular meeting to order. Roll call, please. Kathy Gardner here. Patricia Hatcher. John Kissinger here. Anthony Romano here. Dennis Hornet here. Do not have any meeting previous meeting minutes at this time. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Um, anybody wishes to speak tonight, um, please raise your right hand and our, uh, if you would please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury the testimony you are about to offer will be the truth? If so, answer I do. You may put your hand down and be seated. Thank you. Thank you. Old business, we have one tonight. We have 25- C-B2 K&HC Properties LLC. They want the ES variance for the side setback for primary structure and for the surface material of a driveway parking area. And that's it. 374 and 376 North Oak Street. Thank you. Sure. Um the summary of the staff report is identical to last month. Um uh helps if I click on that screen. Uh so just to refresh everybody's memory, this is on North Oak Street across from

the old hospital site. Uh overall acreage is about a quarter of an acre acre. Uh what is being proposed is construct a new two family dwelling. Uh the petitioner uh bought, split, recombined the property in uh 2021. Uh has constructed uh virtually identical houses on flanking sites to this uh proposed site in 2023 and 24. Uh additionally, they propose to install a 20ft x 40ft gravel parking area which would be accessed from the alley. Uh that's as per the original proposal. Of course, we talked about several different things last month. Uh the code standards two paved off streetet parking spaces per dwelling unit. Uh that would be variance number one is drill off or non-pavement. And then the setbacks you can see there bolded uh are um because this is zone GB uh you have side setbacks of 10 feet. the proposed R4 feet resulting in six vote variances. Uh and as a as you may recall, I also included R3, which is our uh least restrictive uh residential district, which allows for 7 foot um sideyards. So all of that is reference and I will just buzz through these aerials. highlighted there in blue is the subject site there in the center. Uh and then you can see to the north you have R2 zoned areas. You have GB around the old hospital site and you have R1 uh further to the east and south or east and west. Uh we do despite the

zoning have quite a bit of mix of historic lots and somewhat newer lots. Uh so many of the existing R1 and R2 and GB lots don't actually have fully compliant uh lot standards. So just so you know that uh aerial view closer up showing the site and of course the 2024 house uh duplex two family dwelling is located right here. Uh and then as you also recall, this alley back here uh doesn't serve anyone in the immediate vicinity, but does serve a couple houses a little bit farther south and farther south from that. And it is gravel. Uh photo from last month showing the site and the two existing dwellings. This is the uh dwelling to the south as well. And this is the submitted site plan uh showing the centered location of the house. And as was discussed, the petitioner uh centered it this way for aesthetics primarily uh as well as to uh set it back from the existing uh two family dwelling to south which is here. And then the one up here goes east west. The parking would be back here off of that gravel alley. Uh, and I sketched in the blue location there of the approximate existing house to the north. And you can see the the older one there to the south. Uh, I won't go through the review criteria again. Uh, I think we've talked about all of these last time. This was

continued from last month. Uh, in order to allow for Mr. Romano to add his input into this. Unfortunately, uh, Miss Hatcher isn't here tonight due to uh, another uh, commitment. Uh, but hopefully we can fully flesh out this discussion tonight and uh, answer any remaining questions that you all may have. Any questions from for me at this point? I have one question. Um, at last month's meeting, um, Dennis had made a motion. I second it to, um, deny, um, the gravel drive driveway and then the board voted on that. It was four to zero. Um, so that no longer is a valid, right? Uh, we did, so we did we took partial action on this. So, ignore the part about the gravel driveway. That was actually active fun. So, we're only looking at the side setback. Okay. Components. Yes. Thank you. And I guess I have one other question. So, um even though the minutes weren't done, um I communicated with man and she provided me with a link that could go back and listen to the to the meeting um from last month. I was just curious if Tony was able to do that. So that he was kind of a breast on what the discussion was last month. I did not and I was just cur I was just curious if I did send it to I did send it to everybody else yesterday. Okay. When I knew that it wasn't when it's weren't looking good. So Okay, good. Thank you. And since you brought it up, I'll just do a marketing statement. Columbia City does webcast all of its public meetings on their YouTube channel uh including ours which are nicely broadcast live.

Most of the others are uh recorded and then posted. So if ever you want to go back to about the last two years worth of videos they are on Columbia City government. The last thing I want to see is my YouTube site. You can do that while you're on a car show. Yes. So, anybody else have any questions? No. All right. I'm going to open uh open up to the floor and have the um have petitioner, please come to the podium, state your name and address and kind of fill us in on what we might have not had last week. Tyler Kofel, 1890 East 250 North City, Indiana. Keith Kofel, 1890 East 250 North City. We did watch back, so it's on there. You guys have any questions? Um, I guess do you have um just refreshing? Yeah. Um, so we proposed last time um about putting the house in the middle like it is versus turning it to where it will be parallel with the blue house or duplex. Um, but doing that you're going to have to do a variance. um he did talk to whoever the code person is that we would have to put up um different firewalls on the new build and um so we're aware of those um circumstances. Um one of the things that was offered is for us to draw up a whole new plan, find a builder that's going to build it, probably go two stories and that's just not feasible. So we are at the point now that we either need the variance or we're going to have to turn it sideways.

I know some on the board did not find it aesthetically pleasing. Um and so um it and then it's so I guess it's in your hands if you want it turned sideways. Um in my opinion it's going to it's not going to look right. And I know you felt the same way because you live over there. Um it's just not going to look right. But if that's what you want us to do, that's what we'll do. Um the driveway is another void. We already know that. Um so That's where we're at. Um, this is just a quick sketch of what that 90 degree turn uh which would be code compliant uh with the setbacks. Uh, but you can see what I I think that's what you were intending something kind of still centered. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so again, it would be code compliant. It would not need a variance for this orientation. Okay, I got I don't need I don't know. I'm going to ask a stupid question and I don't know if we can even we can even talk about it. What happens if you turn it all the way around so it faces the alley because that's where your parking comes off of anyway. Then would you have you wouldn't it wouldn't be as close, would it? Because it still would be because the setback wouldn't be as much. It's the side setback. Sorry about that. No, that's fine. And then we own both sides. So, um it's not like we're um you like this something that's already somebody else owns. I do. But so question and just because it looks like how close are the two the two structures to each other in the proposed

orientation because like the new the new and the existing it just looks really onet yeah I believe it winds up being a 14 foot separation to the south uh and then it would be a little bit more than that to the north. And that too, as we discussed last month, a 14t separation is approximately the same thing as if this was R3, which requires two 7 foot setbacks. So even though it's 10 and four, it's still equivalent to seven and seven, at least to the south. To the north, it's again a little different. And then someone proposed for us to go through the rezoning and all that and that's not feasible because we don't know if you'll change then either. Right. So yeah take a chance too. Yeah. All right. And these aren't stick built homes. They're not. Yes. It's not a modular of of No, they're stick built where where you're more stuck with actual size. So, when you said you talked to about the zoning codes for the firewall. Okay. Um, did you talk to Craig Wagner? Yes. Okay, good. All right. So, you're aware of what needs to be done to do that. My other thought is when I'm looking at it, can they can they legally combine those three lots to make them one parcel? No. I don't know if it's legal, but we're not doing that because if you ever want to sell it, just they're making us put in two two or tap sewer tab so we could actually sell half of it. Then we already So we don't want to put them all together. They're making me do that so I can sell it. So why don't mine have You can only You couldn't sell half of it. You didn't You could sell lot one, which

is the north. No, I can sell I can I can re lot it and sell in half of a building. That's what they told me, right? If I go through your building, yes, the subdivision code does allow for that, but it's also a function of if you built it uh with the uh rated wall in the center. Yes. Okay. It's got to be rated for because it's Yeah. So, to explain what he's talking about, the subdivision code allows for a lot to be split one time, basically for ownership purposes. Uh, and we use that uh for two family dwellings that are uh villas, if you want to call them that, elsewhere. So, I believe that that would apply here. Not 100% sure, but I believe it does apply. That's what you guys told me. Okay. reason I got put in two sewer tanks. Okay. And Kathy, the other thing about uh combining all three together, uh it could be done under GB because uh apartments essentially multif family is allowable under GB. They still have to come back as a special exception. Okay. I'm just kind of was it mulling around options here. So that's Yeah, it's always been three lots. We never combined them. We just took out an hour. Right. And I see that. Mhm. Yeah. I'm just looking at different options that might help your help your cause here to um plus two make it so that they meet more you know meet the requirements. I'm just I just struggle with the four feet. I really struggle with it. And I think as I mentioned last month, the thing that I struggled with too is when you came into the department to try to say this is what we're, you know, buying these three lots and this is kind of how we lay our tend like the one to the north, but then we talked about and they said we

could buy the alley, so that's why we decided to face them to the to the road. Oh, okay. Okay. So, originally it was all going to face to Yeah. Originally we're all supposed to face like a point to the north and then we decided, well, you know, if we take that alley out, alley was never used, was No. No. Cuz that was owned by one family and then the brother and the sister split. She got one, he got two and then they sold to us. So originally, if I'm getting this right, you were going to all three units were going to run east and west. Is that what you're saying? North and south. North and south. It's like the blue one. They're all like the blue this way. But they didn't have enough room there. No, we had enough room, but we did thought it looked better going the other way. Facing the road. The front of the house facing the road. Okay. Are you building those with the center wall to meet code if you want them to split them in half. I believe so. Yes, I can. I'll have to double check, but yeah, I had to put five each because it's a res even if you you know it's got to be because it's considered 200 houses now just not sold. You know what I mean? Mhm. We that wasn't we were only talking about doing that. I just something we could do. So, the original plan without vacaking in the alley would have been something like that. I'm trying to remember too, there are no windows on the ends. Correct. Correct. And if you're um going to run this unit um the way you that way you're proposing, you're still going to bring your parking area off of the alley. Correct. Because you kind of talked last month about possibly coming off of that

really isn't a discussion. We don't have to. We can go on front or back. No matter. The question was if it's stone or not. That was Thank you. Okay. Yeah. We don't we haven't decided on that yet. Okay. Depends on what you guys do. What we do? So, you're not planning on putting any parking in front of that? We don't know. Depends on what you guys tell us. He said he may go here. They may go here, which they can. We took there was a hill originally in front of that. We took that down. So, we could go in the front. So that you would basically take you'd remove the parking lot in the back and move it to the front or you'd have could we could Yes, possibly. So it' be like the be like the southern we were just here for the stoned or not, right? If it was going to be stone, it's going to go to the back cuz it's stone. Now I can go to the front cuz you know I got go either way. It don't really matter. Got it. That's not a concern right now. We're concerned where it's going to set. Yeah. It seems like it should be further back just visually, but nobody's looking at it straight down in real life. There's window. We try to put them where the doors are at on that one to the north. Get you more separation from the Okay. So, cuz there's like two windows on each side in the back. One's a bedroom and then one's a kitchen. Originally, there was a house on that lot and I think it's in the front of that house. We're trying to avoid that, too. West corner of the other one. Okay. Did it have a basement? Yeah, I think so. Yes. I can't remember. We don't know if they buried it or not. What they did. I can't remember that house. I grew up up there for a while. You should remember that. I should. I

should, but I don't. That tree that they used to have a map of it. You still got Does the county still got the picture of that? [Music] mailbox was by that tree and so was the driveway. There was a tree that we took down too. Yeah. [Music] 14 years. Was it? Yeah, it was. I'm going to trust I asked the question. building. I'm not sure. Does anybody else uh have any questions for petitioner? Thank you. Since the question raised, there's the Is there anyone else here like to speak on behalf of the petitioner? Is there anyone here would like to speak against the petitioner? hearing. Now, I'm going to close uh close the floor and for discussion. What do you think, Dennis? I make the motion for the approval of the variance. We have a

motion to approve 25- C-B2. Um, is that with recommendations from council? I didn't have any recommendations. Yeah. No, you had those presented. Yeah. You know, I I'll second that motion. And I'm just going to go on record of saying that um I'm seconding it because they um discussed the construction with um Craig Wagner who's the chief building inspector regarding the fire wall on the north and the south side um of the structure. It's obviously the best layout then to turn it. I just would suggest in the future any more developments that you might do that you might want to run that all past the planning and building department prior to any construction. So to avoid this happening in the future. So thank you. I have a motion from Dennis and a second from Kathy. All those in favor raise the right hand. Same sign. There you go. Thank you. New business tonight. We have 25- C-B4 Gerald Mary Lauer. Variance of the front setback and building line for attached garage. That's it. It's at 1092 West Point on Court. Nathan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, I actually have new slides for tonight for this case. Uh, this is located over in Deer Chase, uh,

on Fawnport, which is a handful of lots long, uh, culde-sac zoned on R1 or single family residential, uh, just under a half an acre total size. Uh what is being proposed is to construct a 46x31 foot attached garage edition off of the eastern end of the house. Uh with that addition, the setbacks of uh the nearest setbacks are 26.6 ft off of southeast corner and 29.3 ft off of the northeast corner. The other sides of this garage are compliant uh with the requirements of the platted building line which in Deer Chase is 30 ft despite R1 requiring a 35- ft setback. Uh by policy and precedent uh we respect the platted building line as the controlling setback. So the requested variance is 3.4 ft. Also, just for everybody's reference, when we have a variance of a platted building line, we notify the people uh the other homeowners, the other property owners in the subdivisions so they all have a chance to speak if and if they wish to do so. There are other ways to handle it. This is the way we've handled it historically. Um so again, the the requested variance is just over 3 ft. Uh going to reference materials highlighted there in blue is the petitioner's uh subject property. Also, in case you're wondering, the little pink lines there are the cladded easements. Uh some of those have been mapped by our GIS department, and this is one that happens to be mapped. Uh so, closer view. As I said, uh Fawnport is only a handful of lots long. Um, this lot is actually owned by

the property owner to the north as well. Uh, oblique view uh off of the end to which the attached garage is proposed. This is the proposed plot plan. You can see that the 29.3 ft is right here. Uh and then the nearest is where the culde-sac curve comes and clips off this corner of the proposed garage. So this is 26.6 ft. This is 32.7 ft. And then as you go farther back, of course, it's compliant. Uh overlay here showing the plot plan over the aerial again for reference. Uh and then because of thought it might be useful to show the oblique so I also overlaid the plot plan over the oblique area. So this is a little bit more doesn't fit quite so well but uh I thought it might give another perspective of how everything like lays out. Uh going to the review criteria, uh staff doesn't feel that this would be particularly injurous to the public health safety morals. Uh there is still plenty of room to move around. Uh this is not close to any other structures. Doesn't impede visibility despite it encroaching into the front setback. Uh this lot is technically a corner lot uh because you have the culde-sac bulb kind of curving up around the back side. So essentially you do have two frontages uh out of this um general welfare as always uh if you don't find a practical difficulty a sight specific difficulty uh you could run the risk of

creating a precedent. We don't have any other uh similar encroachments on corner lots into your chase. Uh so again whether this would create a precedent this is somewhat unique in that you do it's the only one that we have essentially three frontages uh rather than a more standard two frontage corner lot. Uh but again I I raised that for your concern. Uh the use and values again staff doesn't feel that the use and value of the area would be particularly affected. Uh this is a rather substantial garage that's being proposed. Uh so it may look out of the norm but whether that would substantially and adversely affect the value of the area uh as opposed to just looking out of the norm that that might be something to consider. So use I don't think this would affect the use of the area. Again it doesn't impede visibility or access or or the other measures that we typically look for for use. uh strict application. Um there could be uh something with again the two and a half or even three street frontages depending on how you view it uh specific to this. Uh but whether this is uh a situation created uh as a self-imposition, whether it be because of the size of the garage being proposed or the fact that they knew that they were acquiring a property that had this limitation to start with, that is something that the board should also weigh out as you consider this. Uh finally then uh we did receive one letter regarding this from the public uh which I believe was in your packet. Uh so I hope you've had a chance uh to digest that as well. So any questions for me? I believe so. Thank you.

Nic state your name and address. U my name is Ryan Pepper. I'm with Walker and Associates Land Surveyors. We um helped the Lowers with their survey and the plot plan and the overall feel for how to lay out the um garage. We went through several different scenarios on how to uh best fit what their needs were as well as um keeping in mind the feel of the overall neighborhood. And so this is many renditions down the road, but we um feel um this layout can meet their needs and um hopefully uh pass this board. Um I do have a couple if you want larger copies of what we did. That's the aerial view outlined in red is where the proposed uh garage would be. Okay. Um, the reason for that, there's a part that comes down on the east side of the proposed garage that was to uh make better use of the existing driveway. Um, so that it brings it down just a little bit, but that way they didn't have to cut into the existing driveway. They could add on to between the existing driveway and the front of the um the garage. So that's that's why it comes down just a little bit on that end. So they probably close the garage again. Um the dimension I don't have the dimension here. Um it comes down 34T is over 31 back up four back over just under 15. So So it'll have two bays then, right? I believe. Is it two or three?

Well, I'm sorry. Um, there'll be two garage doors. Okay. But it'll probably be it's going to be Miss Laura, were you sworn in? Yeah. Yeah. No. Okay. She stood up. She stood up. Well, she's saying she didn't. And if she's under oath and she's stand all I All I would need is to have somebody who took an oath say that what she said was correct and state and it's correct. I'm Sharon Gilbert and I am the closest neighbor to her east side. Okay. And she did see her next to me but I am dead and um what she said is exactly. Well, it's busy enough that she got confused and she got confused and I got confused and you're the only one that's right. So we now know. Yeah, we're [Music] Ryan, are the garage doors then or Mrs. Lowour? Are the garage doors on the north side? They'll come off. Yeah. Driveway. That'll be the north side. There'll be a single garage door on the 14.7 foot face and then a double wide, you know, double garage door or an extra wide garage door on the I don't I don't have the dimensions. I gave you my copy, but yeah, on the 217. Yeah. Yeah. It'll probably my guess would be like an 18 foot door on that one. And the reason for Yes. My husband bought a river boat on the trailer. It is 26 a panel river boat. A fishing boat, I think. Fishing

boat, but it's so long and nothing can sit out. Oh, I forgot that. So to we had to work and we to design this. So, we've got the depth where the big door will be for that um public. Uh yeah, they they need to say if they want to hear. Are you here for a petitioner? They will ask eventually have people other than the petitioner speak. It's really this was for the petition petitioner's agent. They'll ask who would support after that and if you want to talk and haven't been sworn you can be sworn. All right. So ultimately six days with the existing garage. Yes. You got three. There's three basic. Okay. You have any more questions for the position? Thank you. Thank you. All right. Is there anyone else here like to speak on behalf of the petition? And if you haven't been sworn in, would just approach this stand, raise your right hand. Do you swear or from an independence of period? The testimony you're about to offer will be the truth. If so, answer I give. And you put your hand down. Please state your name and address. I'm Larry Gbert. I live to the east of the hours. I'm at the 1066 West Court. Um, I have to say this

will not be just a typical garage. They will match the outside of their house. They're going to put brick on the on the facing part of the house just like the rest of the house is. They're going to have windows to that match the house also. So when you look at the house coming around coming around the the bend there, it's going to look just like it was always built there. It's not going to have just siding on it. It's going to look like the rest of the house. So, I think that's important for the neighborhood. So, um I have no problem with it whatsoever. Um so, that's basically what I wanted to say. You know, the the facade outside there is going to look just like the rest of the house. Yes. Yes. So, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Yes. I would like to see um I'm Sharon Gilbert 1066 West Fawn Court and the Lowers. I'm the closest house to them on the east side and this is really sort of a quality of life issue too. Um Mr. flower is has Parkinson's and he's in a wheelchair most of the time and this gives him mobility that he can go in and out and still live his life with some sort of idea that you know he's still out there right and um I think that's just been a great thing for them. I these people are my neighbors. They've done nothing but improve our neighborhood in the three years they've been there and um I would hope that you would see you know the need for this. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else here like to share? Thank you. I am Joyce Hopkins and I live at 1323 uh Glennwood Drive and I'm here on

behalf of the Dear Chase Home Orders Board. Um Jerry and Maryanne have been working with us for quite some time on this. When Jerry first called, he said he wanted to do an attached garage. And I said, um, he wanted to do a garage. And I said, it had to be attached. Jerry's response was he'd put a 2x4 up and attach it that way. And he's quite a character, and I've I've really enjoyed getting to know him and Maryanne. They have followed all the guidelines of our cabinets with the their plan with the matching brick as he said. Uh the windows will be the same. The stone landscape will be the same. Um I think Maryanne said they were going to take the siding off their home and reuse it on one side. So the HOA board uh will approve this if you approve the variance. So, thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else here like to speak on behalf of the petitioner? Is there anyone here that would like to speak against the petitioner? Close the close the floor and open the board discussion or motion. I would make a motion for the approval of 25- C-3-4. I'll second. I have a motion, Dennis. Second, Tony. All those in favor, raise your right hand. What is one of those? Passes. Thank you. Good luck.

All right, we're going to move on to the next order of do business. We have 25- C-B5 County Forester asking for a variance of the front setback and building line for a front porch. That is 614 West Columbia Parkway. Nathan, thank you, Mr. Chairman. So going to this case then uh this is at 614 West Columbia Parkway. It too is zoned R1 single family residential. It too has a 30foot platted building line. Uh despite the R1 standards, uh the size of this lot is just under a quarter acre. Uh again in Columbia Shore section one. Uh what is being proposed is to construct a 6 foot deep by 35 foot wide covered porch across the front side of the existing house resulting in a proposed setback of 24.5 ft. The existing house is just beyond that 30 foot platted building line. Uh as is most as are most of the homes in Columbia Shores. Uh they were uh at the age they were built, they were built without any sort of porches or even uh decks or patios out front. Okay. Don't want feedback here. It was actually you. I I heard this. I'm going to be technical about it. That's like the second time I've heard a recording of myself. It's the worst thing, isn't it? Oh man. Okay. So, the requested variance is 5 and 1/2 ft from the flatted building line or 10 and 1/2 ft from the zoning standard. very similar in some

ways to the case we just heard uh as well as very similar to a couple other cases in the same neighborhood that we've heard uh previously. So highlighted in blue is the uh subject site uh and you can see there if you uh have an opportunity or have had an opportunity uh you can see uh again that most of the homes are uh built to the plotted building line and especially when you look at the homes in the immediate vicinity uh you have a definite line there uh that everything matches uh right at that same building line This is the submitted plot plan. Again, the existing home is right at that 30 foot mark. And then this would be the uh porch that would be added on overlaid and oblique view. I did not do an overlay with the oblique view in this case uh just because it was uh the photo is a bit congested. Uh so in going to the variance criteria uh staff doesn't feel that there would be any injury to public health safety morals. Uh again this would not what is being proposed would not uh impede access or create any particular additional fire hazard uh that we'd be looking at. Uh general welfare again very similar to the comments from last time. If this was applied throughout the area, uh would this be appropriate? And so that is something to keep in mind. Uh some variation may actually be desirable, but again, at what cost would that variety come? Uh use and value staff doesn't feel would be substantially affected. Uh the appearance of it uh would fit into the in staff's opinion would fit into the overall character of the

neighborhood. Again, being the depth of it at six feet, uh while it would not line up with the other homes, it would still uh feel would appear to be in the same character and therefore wouldn't uh likely affect the value and again it wouldn't impact the factors that we normally consider in terms of use. Finally, practical difficulties. Uh this one's a bit more difficult uh to say for sure. Uh there aren't any obvious practical difficulties with this. Uh this is very similar to every other lot in Columbia Shores. Again, every other lot is built to the same front setbacks. Uh, one important consideration for why we have a front setback though is uh to allow for parking uh within between the garage and the street. That's one reason that we have such deep setbacks as we do uh in this area. Uh this proposal doesn't change the amount of parking, doesn't reduce that at all. It just takes on uh and adds or add six feet to the overall dwelling area. So if you're giving that consideration uh as one of the reasons for having a front setback uh then that would not be affected but that's just one of several reasons that we have front setbacks. Um and again finally whether this is self-imposed or not uh and the further implications that may happen are things for you as the board to uh consider. I did mention that uh we've had at least one other very similar case uh just down the street um on Holden Road that we considered I believe three years ago, maybe four years ago now. Uh again, a porch variance, different subdivision, slightly older homes, uh

but still in the same neighborhood. So, any questions for me? I believe so. All right. Thank you, Nick. All right. Would the petition like to come to the podium state name and address and kind of fill us in? Connie Forester and 614 West Columbia Parkway, Columbia City, Indiana. Um, the reason for this, um, when we first bought this, um, it was my mother-in-law's home. I've It's a Cape Cod, so there is You get package deliveries, they get wet if it's raining, unless somebody puts it in plastic. Once in a while they do, sometimes they don't. Um, snow, ice, it's not covered, you know. And my wish is that this is allowed. Um, I'm going to get a new driveway, new um, sidewalks. Um, and then there'll be an incline. There will be no steps at all. Um, when I brought my husband home in a wheelchair, just that little 4 inch step and then getting into the house, that pad was just big enough for the wheelchair. So, I'd get that wheelchair up and get that storm door open and then I'd have to back him up a little bit to get them inside. And it was it was so hard. And then if it's raining, you know, it it takes a little bit. Um, and it just I want to have um heated driveway, you know, for the for the um for the in front of the garage and the ramp. It'll be it I call it a ramp. It's not really a ramp. It's just it looks the same. It's built into the landscape, so it'll look It'll look

nice. Yeah, it'll and I won't fall. Um, done enough that done enough of that. So, um, my daughter says, "You need to set it up, Mom, so I don't have to worry about you." So, um, and that's what I would that's what I'm wanting. So, cuz when we first bought it, I mean, that was something I wanted to do, but he got the building in the back. So, um, now it's my turn. So, yeah. It will not be an enclosed porch. No, it'll be open, but it'll have a roof. Did they include a picture? Yes, that's what I want it to look like. Okay. Does it come under your current? Do you change the roof line at all of the house, Connie? Um, it should it should kind of flow just like that one there because that's a Cape Cod. So, I want it to flow. I want it to have the characters. You see how that comes underneath where the sopet and fascia is? How that character is there? It's not just going to be simple. It will not have railing because it won't need the railing because it's not going to be off the ground enough. So, um I want it as open and I figured 6 ft is plenty. Like I said, there will be no steps going up to it. It'll just kind of it'll kind of flow. So, that way and then going into the house, it'll just it'll just be easy. So, if you're if you're heating it that you won't have any snow to take care of. Yeah, that's my plan. That's my plan. Yeah, cuz I fell down the street a couple years ago. So, I was out admiring the snow drips and down I went. So, and my mother-in-law, she fell going down to get the mail the one day um and she broke her arms. So, that's why I'm like I'm thinking ahead. I just

So, any questions? Any questions? I I I feel I'm kind of Larry about um the building line issue. I always have a problem with the building line issue. It's established as subdivision just like I had a I have an issue with the previous petition. Um however, um with this one, I really feel like it's an open covered porch. It's not as um it's not going to um I think it's going to enhance yes the front of your home. I think it will look very nice and it's not going to cause any issues um with visibility or or anything like that cuz um I'm wanting to put new windows in upstairs cuz those are the original windows when the house was built. We're trying to get up there to change those that pitch of the roof. They'd have to put scaffolding up to basically really get to that safely. So, if we put the porch on first, then they'll be able to because when Mark redid that siding, he didn't redo that siding up there because he couldn't get to it. So, that's aluminum siding that's up there. So, um cuz when we had it insulated, when we had Guyers come, he goes, "That's that's aluminum siding up there." Because Mark never was able to get get to that to replace it with the vinyl. Street view of that. I will look and see real quick. I took a picture. It's It's not a extension out into that right away. A wall. No, it's I've got landscaping. The landscaping goes farther than the six feet. So, will still remain. And if you if you stand down here and you look either way either way, it's not it's not an obstruction. Yeah. front of the house is flat and it just it's flat and it's just it's I don't like it.

Well, my father-in-law wanted Mark to put to put a porch on. He's like, "Just put the porch on. I I'll deal with the consequences." Cuz you know Dick. Yeah. You remember him? Yeah. To me, it's just extension of the roof. Yes. It'll be the extension of the roof. Mhm. So, here's your Yeah. Do you have to remove the tree? Yes. That red tree will go. The big tree in the front will be this will stay. Yeah, that's a sweet gum that drops all those balls. Yeah. That you step on and it hurts. So yeah, I think it'll be nice. Does anybody else have any questions for petition? No. I'd like to make a motion if no one has any. We need to I need to make sure there's nobody in the office. Got to finish this round. Getting in a hurry. Everybody else can speak. Well, I got a ball game. I'm just kidding. Is there anyone here um that would also like to speak on behalf of petitioner? Is there anyone here that would like to speak against petition? Hearing that, I close the floor to open it to board discussion or motion. I'll make a motion to approve 25 C variance five um as presented um just with a notation that the porch um may not be enclosed in the future. Second. I have a motion for Kathy and a second for Tony. All those in favor raise the right hand. Pose. Thanks. You're welcome. So, how long has it been in your family? Um, oh, Dick and Betty bought it back in the 80s, I believe. Long time. They used to live in Sherwood

Forest, right? That is correct. I call them the Sherwood Foresters. Yes, that's where you know that. I did not know they had to. They built the first one live on. They went to Florida, I think, or Auburn. I can't remember. They went to Florida and then they came back and built the second one. Yeah. So, well, good luck. Don't give up your day. Yeah. That's his retirement job, right? Comedian. Shoot. Hey, I came up with that when I was in high school. That's right. That's been That's been a year or two ago. Anyway, you're only 29er, right? Yeah, I almost believe that. Nathan, you have any other business tonight? Uh, other business? No. But I do have a report for you. Uh the planning commission last night sent a favorable recommendation for a code change text change to the fence code or of the fence code to the common council. Uh and long the summary version of what the change will do. Currently uh in front yards uh fences are allowed uh any type of fence is allowed up to 3t tall in a front yard. Uh chain link fences are allowed four feet tall in front yards. Uh there uh was uh a situation which the council felt uh warranted more consideration and felt like there should be more fence types allowable in front yards and gave the plan commission the directive to figure it out. Uh and so that's always Yeah. Yeah. the planning commission uh wound up after considering

several different options including doing nothing which was not really an option but uh always kind of consider doing that. Uh the option that they forwarded to the council was essentially to say any type of fence or wall that is permissible and and there were some material changes as well to clarify some questions that uh administrative questions but any type of fence uh up to four feet would be permissible in front yards. Uh so it just makes everything very consistent and uh um there isn't any uh favoritism among types of fences like there arguably could have been. Uh it could have gone the other way. Just got to be you have to be able to see through it, right? No. No. No. Are you going to get any type of any type of fence up? Okay. I misunderstood that. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The transparency options were one and three. I understood it was not a unanimous vote. Well, you voted the wrong way. But I will say um there's people that change their votes too that so the border works lets them build a Yeah, I will not worry about board works. I'm not going to entertain that question right now because it's going to be really it's going to lead to more. So hang on to it. Okay. So once the border works to our book, what's that? Once the border works okay it will we get a new copy to put in our book? Yes. You mean the council? Yeah. Yes. Okay. Yeah. We'll give you the updated Okay. Uh the last code change we did was back in 2021. So I will also say that the 4oot standard is a pretty common standard. Um what we have currently and have had is also a common standard. To have three-foot and 4 foot varying just standardly at 4 foot is also very common standard. So we're going from one common

standard. I get that. I get that question. It's it's the types. So somebody builds into the ride into the street right away a 4 foot stone wall. Mhm. and then a kid runs into it with their bike and gets injured or car hits and get injured. Where does the liability fall? Uh let's say right now that someone built a three-foot stonewall into the ride ofway, which three-foot stone walls are already allowed in the front yards. It's into the ride ofway portion that you're getting at. That's because that's assuming that the board of works approves it. Okay. I guess I guess that was the qu next question because that like somebody builds a puts their mailbox out there in case the concrete gets hit, then they can go after the whoever installed it that way, right? So, if the board of works approved that stone wall, then potentially the board of works would be held liable. The board of zoning appeals is only has authority over the lot area because that's all zoning applies to, right? The right of way area is the board of wards. So that's why I'm not trying to nag on you or anything, but it's it's a complicated question because we have so many instances where both parties are involved. You have both board of works decisions as well as BCA and trying to separate them is is what we need to do. Yeah. So, unless the council makes any changes, uh, which they can do, um, uh, right now, if they make changes, it'll go back to the plan commission for activation. If they wait until after July 1, they don't have to do that. State law is changing as of July 1. Um, yeah, I that's a whole another soap box. Um, so

heads up. Uh hopefully that will uh probably won't alleviate any variances honestly because we don't have that many. Our variances that we typically see are like six foot privacy fences in front yards for example as opposed to 4 foot fences or three and a half foot fences in front yards. Uh but again it's uh it could alleviate one or two here or there. So, um I think the material changes actually will help clarify a few things and gives people directive a better directive of what we're looking for in the community. Uh so I think that's the biggest thing. Comprehensive plan uh is underway that update. Uh Dennis, you were on one of the uh stakeholder meetings. Okay. So yeah, that's going on. uh ETA of completion is basically this fall winter. So, okay. Cuz I thought the way she talked, I thought it was 16 months. Uh okay, I could be mistaken. And so, uh it was this fall or winter, it would be into next year then. So, that's all I have for you right now, unless I forgot anything. Amanda, thank you, Nathan. Okay. Motion, please. Motion to adjourn. Thank you. Thank you. [Music] [Music]

[Music]