Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Okay. We'll call the Plymouth Plan Commission to order.

And we will have roll call, please. Christensen.

Here.

Ease. Here. Gidley. Here. Longenecker. Here. Milner.

Here.

Rupchuk-Shafer.

Here.

Secor.

Here.

Sellers. Here. Webster. Wendell. Peace. Here. Johnson.

Here.

All right, do we have a motion for the minutes for the last meeting?

Move we approve the minutes of the last meeting.

Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? All right, we will move on.

Hey, Ty could not be here tonight, but he did prepare the presentation and I will be walking you through it.

There's an agenda. Am I set up, Kyle?

There you go. Okay. Any chance we can move that bar at the top so I can?

I'm going to try to, but it does not move. It goes up a little.

That's good enough. Okay. You have one case tonight. It is PC2026-09 Intrepid Properties LLC. Intrepid Properties LLC, 7900 8th Road, Plymouth, Indiana, 46563, proposing a two-lot minor subdivision of 2525 Western Avenue in Plymouth, Indiana, 46563, that is owned by Carl D. and Tanya L. Stockburger. It is identified as parcel 50-42-29-403-015.000-019. It is zone C3 corridor commercial. And here is the GIS image of that parcel at the corner of Western Avenue and Pilgrim Lane. Here are some photos taken by Ty from Western Avenue, I believe, looking west of the building that is on the property currently. Slightly different angle, looks like the same location. Another angle looking north along Western Avenue. And then here is the proposed plat. You can see lot one in the bottom right corner, and lot two is the larger, the residual of the original parcel. So the request, the applicant is seeking a subdivision approval and creation of an additional lot. It will be named Stockburger's Western Avenue Miner Subdivision. The procedure is a primary and secondary plat reviewed It was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee at their July 14th, 2026 meeting. The analysis, the applicant is seeking to subdivide the 28.69 acre property located at 2525 Western Avenue, also known by the parcel number that I read previously. Under subdivision control ordinance, the Planning Commission shall determine whether or not a proposal has met the requirements and standards of the ordinance. and that the standards of the ordinance have been substantially met before having a public hearing. Based on a review of the proposal to create two lots, lot one being 7.39 acres and lot two 21.30 acres, the technical review committee did not see any issue with the intent. The project would create one new lot. There are no new municipal services that are expected from the subdivision. During the TRC comments revolving around drainage easements, historical utility easements, and accessibility, items were discussed and recommended to be clarified and addressed prior to signing off on the plant. The decision criteria, number one, establishment of a minimum lot requirements. Number two, coordination of streets. Number three, coordination of facilities. Number four, fair allocation of areas. Number five, distribution of population and traffic. So for criteria one, minimum lot standards are met based on the C3 corridor commercial zoning requirements. Criteria two, there are no new roadways being created. Criteria three, no extensions have been included for residual development. Criteria four, for a two lot subdivision, there was no additional area set aside. And criteria five for two lot subdivision and understanding the intentions for the amount of development sought, the area is already developed in commercial and industrial developments. And it doesn't show here, but just to the east across Western Avenue, that parcel is zoned industrial. And of course, this parcel and those to the west are zoned C3 corridor commercial. So the recommendation based on the minor subdivision plot provided and reviewed by the Technical Review Committee, staff would recommend approval of the proposed subdivision as meeting the intent of subdivision ordinance and other associated requirements. Staff would recommend that comments from the Technical Review Committee are addressed prior to signing. So staff recommendation is approval with easement matters needing addressed. So Ty didn't explain this in the slides, but let me tell you what he's talking about there. when Lowe's was built there was a development agreement between the redevelopment commission on behalf of the city Lowe's and Carl Stockburger that included the extension of Pilgrim Lane from where it originally stopped west of the Lowe's property onto Western Avenue as it is today, and also some drainage improvements. Some of the improvements were along Pilgrim Lane, but you can kind of see there in the image on the north side of the Lowe's building, there is a retention pond. There is drainage that extends to the east onto the Stockburger property. It then goes north and then east along OAM before it connects to the city stormwater drain. Is that correct, Dan?

It is correct.

Okay. So... we've been reviewing that agreement from 2002 i believe or to 2004 or so sometime over 20 years ago um in that agreement it says that it is contemplated that once the drainage improvements are constructed and we're talking about the north not the ones along pilgrim lane but that north drainage Once that is constructed, that Carl Stockburger intends to dedicate it to the city and the city intends to accept that dedication. We've not been able to find any documents showing that that dedication was completed. It also references an easement for those drainage improvements and It requires that the city will execute or sign any reasonable requested easements for those drainage improvements. We've also not been able to find any documentation showing that those easements were ever created, signed, or recorded. They were not discovered as part of this plat. Whiteman prepared this plat. They did not discover any recorded easement for that drainage on the north end. Oh, if they found it, then this may resolve it.

We've got a drainage easement over here with that instrument for that way. So are you talking this suburb here?

So this would be over here. It would come on to this parcel north and then east to connect.

Okay. We did find this one over here. then that's a drainage that's also coming up the side. So you're talking going north further and then coming over and over again? Yes. Okay. I still wasn't sure on your location there. I'm not 100% sure. We can definitely agree on that.

Yeah, and that's all it would take. The drainage has been installed. It's been operating for over 20 years. Just to clean it up, we're staff is recommending ty and i and i believe dan also are recommending that uh the easement be created and recorded so that there's no question future and uh i believe the recommendation that ty is making is that as long as that gets clarified and that easement is recorded that he recommends approval of the request So that's all I have. I'll try to answer any questions you have. I know that that was confusing. We're all a little confused by it.

I have one question. This little piece down here that's in the blue in the southeast corner, is that in that legal description or does that have its own? That is in that same legal description? Yes, that is included in the same parcel description. I noticed all those survey stakes were in there when I went by there.

And that would be retained with the residual parcel, the larger.

That's going to be in that new one acre. It will not be in the new, the smaller seven acre piece.

It will not be in that smaller seven acre piece. It will remain with the larger 20 acre or hundred-ish piece.

Okay, I'm sure you're here representing. Do you have anything else to add or please state your name and address. Thank you.

Nathan Flickner, 1402 East Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend. I was just going to address the easement. this plot. I don't see an issue with that as long as I go.

It would be basically a maintenance easement, wouldn't it? They need to have that drainage.

Yes.

Mark was normally 75 feet wide or something.

I'm not sure. It is. The original plan for Lowe's depicted that easement area, so it's a little hard to read because it's a scanned photocopy, but we can provide that if you haven't seen that yet. that was contemplated originally, I think would be adequate at the end to verify that.

We did do a search for easements and we could not find anything that's documented coming from Loebs onto that property.

Any other questions from the board? No, it's being done. Does anyone want to open it up for public hearing? Make a motion we open up the public hearing. Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Anybody that wants to comment on this? Now's your time. Please stand up and name an address. Thank you. You can come on up if you want.

I'm LeVan Thomas, and I have property just across the road. I don't live there, but I have property in that to the north farm property. My address is 6770 Oak Road in Plymouth, but that portion is not related to the issue that we're discussing. My question, I only have one or two, is considering the drainage you were just talking about. Where does this drain into? You said there's a drainage retention pond and all of that. Does that drain over into, does that, where does that drain?

That would drain to the east onto this property that we're talking about. It drains north to Hoham Drive. It runs east along Hoham Drive until it gets to an area, I don't know if you've noticed, but there's some limestone rocks. That would be the area that we're talking about. Then it turns north and run straight into the ditch. There aren't as rightly.

Okay. So there wouldn't be any changes as far as. Capacity and everything.

No, it would stay the same.

So the city water and drainage. Or water and drainage is that nothing will be. Altered that way it was still drain into the city drained.

Yep.

Okay. So once I'm very new at this, you may approve a one to two lot site for this stockburger project. Would they have an opportunity or how does it work? they have an opportunity to add more units or are they limited to just those two units and only those types of units would they be able to even though they've designated it as two units for a housing would they be able to change it into something else without notifying you it's not housing it's uh it's zoned uh c3 which is commercial okay so uh if there was any other division of lots

he would have to go through this whole process again.

Okay. And it's not housing, it's something else, but it's...

Right now, there's no plans for any new construction. The reason they're doing this is the building that's on that southeast... Well, the building that's there. Yes. Carl is selling that to a business that wants to use it, but they don't want to buy the entire area. They only want to buy that seven acres around the building. So that's the purpose of subdividing it is so that Carl and Tanya Stockburger can sell just that seven acres. And they don't currently, at least as far as we know, they're not proposing any plans for any new development or construction on.

Okay. That was what I didn't understand in the letter.

Subdivision is, we talk about a subdivision and we think about houses in a subdivision. What we mean here is just splitting the parcel, dividing it into more than one lot.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. I understand now. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Any other questions? Do we have a motion to close? Second. Been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? There being none. All right. So I just have a question that run across my mind. Maybe you can answer it. We'll try. I know you will. All right. So we let Carl, and it may have been before, we let Carl build the building there. He classified it as a used car lot. That's how we got to keep the cement mixers there. But we just went through a business downtown of requiring them to pave their parking lot. Carl was never required to pave his parking lot. It's open dirt, so now is the new owner going to be required to have a paved parking lot?

I don't think so. I don't remember the exact language in the ordinance, but because they are not doing any new development, I don't think this will trigger a requirement. I'm not sure why Stockburger was not required to pave it previously. That should have been done when the building was constructed or within a year of the building construction. I can confer with Ty and Dennis. I don't know, Dennis, if you have a better answer to that.

Well, it's definitely getting changed. It's not going to be the same type of business.

Yeah. I'm not committing to my answer.

Okay.

Without looking into it further, if they were required to pave, they literally would only have to pave. the parking area right not the entire thing around right so right we would have to look into it further I I agree with Jeff I don't know why it was never Right. I'm not blaming anybody.

I'm just saying that.

That's certainly something we can look into. And it may be that the buyer of the property intends to pave it anyway, and that would become moot. So we can certainly reach out and see if they have plan.

So if they pave more than what the drainage allows, the drainage is going to be different then, correct?

Potential.

I think the issue is it's possible that that building was built before we had that clause in that suspect and they would fall under the law or the ordinances at that time. Since he's not really changing anything there, I'm not sure we can hold them to that parking because that's actually newer than when the building was built. I don't believe he's changing the use. Now, if he was changing the use, you might have an argument, but that's my opinion.

When the new owner came before the BZA, there was a discussion about all those cement necks that were parked along the fences. they said they're not going to park any vehicles that far out. And they would only have a few of their new trailers and vans sitting outside until they were delivered. They're not going to build a huge inventory of vehicles that would sit there. So I don't mean- I agree that that's what was represented at the BCA.

Jeff? Well, I'm here. Well, that's good.

Do you want to come up, Natalie, I think? Sure. Ask me whatever. Jeff, do we need to reopen the hearing? There was a person on Lowe's that also wanted to say something as well.

Oh, yeah.

Well, in that case, then I would recommend that you reopen in public hearing. Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you.

Wayne, I'm the owner of interest properties. And V tech conversions, so I was here for the V tech conversions. 2525 Western Avenue. Or do you want my home address? That's fine. So, yeah, we're started V tech's all going good. Keeping everything inside. Like I said, it would. Carl still has some stuff out there. He's got to move. But other than that. We started production on June 22nd. We got our first unit out last week, and units are starting to roll in. So for you guys that don't know, we built mobile labs for fiber optic industry contractors and stuff that's putting in the fiber optics, as well as underground inspection units for the sewer lines. I know the town of Plymouth has one. that's v-tech i know we're not here to talk about v-tech so on carl's the rest of carl's property i actually have an option to buy the rest of the 21 acres so the um i think the picture was that the picture you had up yeah yeah yeah and i got copies if anybody wants to i did come prepared this guy you're like i thought it was 6 30. So I purchased the seven acres, which we're getting ready to close on with First Source Bank. So where it's divided out there, lot one is what my holding company, the Interrepid Properties, owns. And then Colonel and I are working together on the rest of it in the little section across the pilgrim lane there. So I'm looking to purchase that from Carl, but he's gave me an option, so I don't have to purchase it right now. So I talked to Carl. I'm not real sure because I had talked to Ty a little bit, and we kind of discussed that I wasn't really changing anything yet. He didn't really know whether we needed to come up and present anything. But I just wanted to come up and say that, you know, I want to work with the plan commission and stuff, you know, going forward. I'd like to see it get developed. I mean, it's just a big property sitting there and something needs to be there. So, you know, I don't know if... know greg out at the economic development you know we can work with him too as well um and just see what kind of businesses are interested in coming into plymouth um like to keep it commercial like its own i i know mine is you know you guys gave me the variance for the um for the light industrial um but it is all zone commercial so i know the long-term goal is to keep industrial on the other side of the highway um So if we get the property sold, somebody wants to buy the property where I'm at, I'm fine building a brand new building on the other side of town. So I'm committed to the property there and hoping to get something in there. I know Ty had sent me something on, and I talked to Carl a little bit about it, the water. And I don't know if that's what you guys were talking about when I came in, but the corner over there by. It would be off a whole ham. And where the trucking used to be. They show some kind of easement there for the water. I think it was water drainage for lows. And I'm not real sure. what the easement is if it's an access easement for for the city or if carl just had allowed um for some drainage there i i'm not i'm not clear on that so maybe you guys can tell me a little bit more of what that is Any questions you got for me? I'm not real sure. Like I said, I, I don't have any big plans for it right now other than, you know, just helping develop as far as the water is.

We were just talking about that. That would be the drainage for the lowest detention base. And it runs along the West property line. To the North to home drive runs on the South side of home drive over to the. area where the rocks are yep and then it goes north to the ditch okay on nipsco's property okay yeah and yes we do need an easement there to for the city to take care of that yeah yeah yeah so i mean that's that's often away from anything that would be developed i would think anyways

You know, and I don't know what the plan commission would, you know, if they're thinking we need more, you know, apartment housing or something, you know, I'm open to whatever the city thinks, you know, as far as going forward with, you know, whatever we can get in there. If you guys say, yeah, you know, that would be a nice place for some more housing. We can look at that as well. It'd be really nice if a big Target or a Meijer store or something came in that front section there. But that's where I am on it. I'm open for whatever discussion the city has, and we'll just kind of go from there. But I don't really have any plans on it right now. Okay.

Thanks. Yep. So you said we had somebody online that needed it? Yep.

Good evening. This is Dustin with Lowe's Home Improvement Real Estate. Don't live in Plymouth, but my address is 1000 Lowe's Boulevard, Mooresville, North Carolina. In hearing kind of what the gentleman just spoke about was potentially developing the property. I mean, obviously right now we're talking about a subdivision. I guess my question around the storm sewer easement. is that going to be a perpetual easement to the city is it going to be dedicated to the city that's what we would prefer at lowe's but just wanted to get your thoughts on that because i know that when we developed this site we extended pilgrim we did the pilgrim road extension and we dedicated that to the city of plymouth On the GIS, it does show that the city of Plymouth owns Pilgrim Road extension. Is that going to be the same case for the stormwater or storm sewer easement area?

I believe that's what's being discussed, and the surveyors indicated that they can add that to the proposed plat. So if the Planning Commission chooses, they can approve a plat subject to including that perpetual easement for maintaining the stormwater utilities. I would also recommend that.

Agreed. So that portion would ultimately be owned by the city of Plymouth moving forward?

Well, the easement would be in favor of the city. So we talk about owning it. It's a little confusing. The property would still be owned by the underlying property owner, but the city would maintain a professional easement. So we would always have legal right to access and maintain that drainage.

And then in such case, after we, after that perpetual easement is obviously in place with the city of Plymouth, would Lowe's need to be engaged with the city of Plymouth for an easement between Lowe's and the city of Plymouth at that point?

There, there shouldn't be a need because that, uh, those improvements, um, have been accepted. I don't know if they were formally dedicated, but they, they, been essentially accepted by the city for maintenance. And Lowe's has the right to discharge into that drainage there at the property line. So once it crosses the property line, it becomes the city's responsibility.

Okay. Yeah. I'm not aware of it being dedicated. Um, but I mean, whatever you feel is going to be the best way to approach this, obviously Lowe's is in favor. Um, so who do I need to be getting into contact with beyond this meeting to ensure that that perpetual easement is granted?

Have you been in contact with a tie Adler plan director?

Yes.

He would be your best point of contact. He was not available for this meeting tonight, but he'll remain. the point of contact or anything dealing with the subdivision or plan commission matters.

Thank you. I have no further questions.

Thank you. Thank you. Do we have a motion to close the public hearing now?

So moved.

Second. Been moved and seconded.

Do we have a motion on this property?

Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, getting ahead of myself here. Sorry about that. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right.

I'd make a motion to pass 2026-09 with the contingency of the perpetual agreement be completed.

That's for easement?

Yeah. Okay. Be completed.

second you know you're making up and amendment to that motion if the president allows it go ahead um I would also like to add uh uh also the stipulations identified by the TRC committee and now when my motion took it wasn't their advisement that

The advice from staff was approval with the requirements identified by the Technical Review Committee. I don't recall exactly what those were other than the easement.

There were some utilities that we wanted to identify going across the south parcel, that little seven-acre parcel. I think that was the biggest thing. I think there was some electric possibly and some force main that would possibly going across there.

That would be on the low side you're saying?

Yeah, that little section to the south of Pilgrim Lane. So I just want to make sure that we have the rights to that the city has the rights to maintain what they have there without any troubles later on.

So you made the motion. Do you agree with that too? Yeah. Second, Bigwin Reeves. Is that all I have to do?

So you have a motion and a second to adopt the recommendations that Dan just- Correct. Explain them.

All right.

We will vote by roll call, please.

Christensen. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

building commissioner do you have any updates no okay um i do not have any comprehensive plan updates for you this evening uh i don't have any other business unless the board does we can't close because fred's not that's going to be a problem your next meeting is tentatively scheduled for um well september 1st pending applications. We have a question out there.

Well, I think that is saying happy birthday to Alex. He's today's birthday.

Embarrassment. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. happy birthday dear alex happy birthday to you who loves his father and since you have not a journey yet that goes in the minutes right yeah that'd make a mission to adjourn second it's been moved in the second and all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed All right, thank you. Thank you. Why didn't you bring the cake?

August 4th, 2026 meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals to order.

We'll begin with roll call.

Garner. Kidley.

Here.

Ritchie. Here. Wendell. Here. Jacobs.

Here. All right. Minutes to the last regular meeting of July 7th, 2027 were distributed to the board members via email or mail. Are there any corrections? And if no, I'll entertain a motion for approval or approval of the minutes as presented or any changes you want to make. Motion to approve.

Second motion.

I have a motion. I have a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Okay. First on the agenda for BZA is BZA 2026-28 Boys and Girls Club. Wait a minute.

Ty is not here tonight. So I am presenting Ty's work. Okay. Who are you? He did all of this. I'm just the understudy.

He's an attorney.

Be patient. So the first case that I can't read is BZA. BZA 2026-28. Yes, I did look at that. This is the Boys and Girls Club at 314 East Jefferson Street in Plymouth, Indiana, 46563. They're requesting a variance of development standards to reduce the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 2 feet at the property located at 314 East Jefferson Street in Plymouth. It is identified as parcel 50-32-93-102-043.000-019. It is zoned R3 traditional residential. So here is the GIS image of the property. It's several parcels together there, as you can see. This shows the floodplain area. Almost the entire Boys and Girls Club property is within the floodplain. Here's a photo from the back of the building. This would be the south side of the building. Another angle. So the request, the applicant is seeking to reduce the rear yard setback from 15 feet to two feet. For analysis, the applicant is seeking to reduce the rear yard setback from 15 feet to two feet in order to place and construct a shed on piers at the rear of the property off of the alley. Property is owned to R3 Traditional Residential. There's a floodplain that surrounds the property to the south. All construction included in the project will need to meet the associated floodplain standards. The structure will be placed on a series of piers and a new set of stairs and ramp will be included in the construction adjacent to the building. There will be a small platform in front of the exit door to the building leading to the front doors of the new accessory structure. Your decision criteria are number one, general welfare, number two, Jason property and number three practical difficulty for criteria one day approval of reduction for this accessory structure should not be injurious to the public health, safety and general welfare of the Community. For criteria to the use and value of adjacent property should not be substantially impacted by this proposal. And criteria three, the ordinance would not permit the proposal, but the percentage of reduction should not pose significant impact as the structure will be getting closer to a lesser trafficked alley due to recent roadway adjustments and closures. The recommendation based on the information provided and review independently of any other accessory structures, staff would recommend approval of the proposed reduction in rear yard setback. And it is now up for your determination with a staff recommendation of approval. Okay.

Will the petitioner or representative please step forward to the podium. Please state your name and address for the record.

Andrew Fitzpatrick. 314 East Jefferson. The business address. Do you want the business address or home address? That's fine. Okay. 314 East Jefferson Road. What are you going to build back here? So the old platform out the back two doors is crumbling down. The rails have rusted out coming off. Also, 1997 so it has stairs and yeah was never put in as ada compliant which we knew we needed to fix one of these days so we already have james stone already has permit ready to go to do the platform and when he came out earlier this year to meet with me and a couple board members We agreed that we wanted to put a ramp so there won't be stairs. It does a lot of things to the safety of not only inside the club, but outside the club. If we ever had an active shooter or intruder, instead of the kids falling all over each other on steps and the railing coming off, they got this ramp and they can go out to the park where they're supposed to go, et cetera, et cetera. So it does that as well. So when we were standing there earlier this year, we looked at the platform and the measurements. It's going to be a much bigger platform because the original idea was to come is now now it's about three four feet at the most as you go out and now it'll be like a 10 by 10 and it's got the long ramp well next door culligans has helped us before when we've needed to bring a lift in the gym for our rock wall delays and different things and we had to take the rails off it was impossible to get in and out so the whole idea was we could use a floor jack or something now and just go up the ramp swinging around going to the gym well while we were doing that We recently got some grant funding a couple years ago, and we're able to redesign some of the inside of the gym. And now it can turn into a banquet center to host events for outside people or for us when we have our fundraiser. So in the process of doing all that, we had to get some tables and chairs, nice ones, not just ones that'll fall apart when you're sitting down. So we did that with some of the grant funds we were awarded. And As Art would know, and others have been inside, the storage in the gym, there's hardly anything that goes around behind the soccer walls on the other side. So we've had to put tables and chairs, stack them up back there, and it's not as safe as I would like it to be. I mean, it's safe, but it could be better. So then while we were talking about all this, long story short, the storage ship came into play. And originally we were going to do a 10 by 20, and it would go long ways straight out to the back alleyway. which we knew could possibly go to the very edge of the property line. But recently the idea then became, we'll still set the edge of the storage barn, we'll set the end of the storage barn on the edge of the new platform. And it'll be structured down by James Stone. He'll still do all that work and everything. And instead of going straight out, now it won't even be close to the edge of the property because we decided to go this way. long ways i have to go to so it'll be long ways uh east and west instead of north and south so so it's no longer two feet uh it'll still be the still need down to the two feet Yeah, Ty just recommended to be on the safe side. Okay. I mean, it's not even going to be close, so I'm just saying it's going to be much better. You have room to maneuver if you need a lot more room to maneuver. And that alley is now usually more, except for the parking for you guys, because the road's cut off. And even if it was used in emergency management, it'll be even better now that we've changed the direction of the building. There'll be much more space back there, and we'll have to do less pillars. And the whole idea was to put it on pillars so that... the whole edge will be on the platform and then they'll just be a couple of pillars to hold up the other part because it is a flood zone. And when it, right, you know, when that water comes up at the back, it wraps around the club. And if we had put one down on the ground, it would have just destroyed everything inside. So that's not everything. When we were building that thing, man, I walked away every day keeping it safe. So we came up with the idea to do it this way. And James recommended, he said, yeah, I can do permanent pillars. we could put the edge and secure it down on the platform make it it'll all be compliant and safe and it won't come even close to the ramp be on the other side of that the ramp will go down the same way the stairs do so towards that AC unit over here yeah and we got that it'll go that way and it'll be and you're wrong for the building will be on this side the building will go mostly yeah the building will be on the new platform here and it'll go this way so it'll cover up you know well you'll it'll be up high enough late yeah yeah okay there's it the building is a stick belt No, it's going to be, gosh, what did the guy tell me? It's that new 50-plus year, it's not wood, but they got a name for it. It's not steel. The roof will be steel. But it's got this new, actually 60-plus year on the warranty, paint fading, everything. It's from Yoder's. It's one of the Yoder's groups. It's one that I couldn't afford, I'll tell you that much. That's a very nice one. But we want it to be permanent. We want it to last a long time. We're not putting a cheap one on there.

I do have a concern about there has to be a utility easement for that line that's hanging up in that picture. There has to be a utility easement. There has to be left and right of this property line.

I believe the utility lines are in the alley right of way.

The whole thing is in the alley. If you look like you're on the south side of the island.

Yeah. I came out, looked at it. That's what he said to do. I mean, we, Ty physically came over and looked at all this to put it all together in the south side.

Well, that's for them to, if we approve it, they still got to get, if we approve it, you'd still have to get the utility. If there is a problem with that, right, approved. If it's easy. Do you see what I'm seeing, Dennis, or? Yeah. Yeah. It's farther out in the alleyway. I know that. I've been back here a lot.

That utility is far enough away.

You think that pole is south of the property line? Or is it on the property line? It's south of the alley, actually.

Yeah. It looks to me like the pole is this area further than it is south of the property line.

We'd be putting it up a little higher for you.

Mark? Where'd it go? Somewhere. It's on GIS. No, it's the one I have. There it is. But not killing people. This is the back we're looking at.

That's the four. That's two trailers that got in there. You can see the steps right there.

So what do you think the four is?

I think the four is right here. In the red line? No, I think it's right here. And this is the driveway.

Okay.

See what I'm saying? Yeah. You can see this right here.

I think this is where the hydrant is. Go back to the picture. Yeah, back to the picture. Wow. Isn't there a hydrant there too? I think there is a hydrant. In the four bollards? Right there is a hydrant.

Yeah.

It's right there in sort of the sea. As long as it's not in the... Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

You good? Good. Thank you. All good? Yep. We just got to open up to the public and Talk to them, so we'll have to let you know. We've got more to go. You sit down. We've got to open up to the public.

Oh, yeah. Emotionally open.

See, you're jumping my gun. Sorry.

I've got to push it.

I can't wait until he's off. We have a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All right. Open to the public. Is there anybody in the attendance who would like to speak in favor of the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium. State your name and address. Anybody online? Anybody want to jump up to the podium and say yes? Is a yes a good question or a negative question? We'll hop up there. State your name and address.

Randy Long, after 880 Baker Street. My only two things I'd be asking for this structure, is it going to be far enough off the building to meet our accessory structure? And we have an opposite of five foot or something that has to be.

Or unless it sits on, is it going to be hip to the building?

It's going to be well past 5 foot because the new platform is 10 by 10. I'm going to be able to pass it.

And then the only other thing, I guess, maybe as a comment to think about is if that takes up additional parking, because it is packed. A lot of times when you guys have events back there.

Did they work back here?

I've seen people park back there during events. If we take up space there, where are those people going to potentially park? And how do we deter them from parking other people's property here?

They park in the park right across the street.

Yeah, they won't be able to park. That's what I'm saying.

Would that be okay to park in a park? I park there for the Friday Night Music.

Typically, I want people parking in the grass. We go there. We have those signs up in our park downtown too, but people still...

I didn't see any signs. They've got a little group of us that go over there because it's quieter.

Baseball practice.

We park here in baseball practice. We're forcing more, is what you're saying.

We're not in charge of parking. We talk about one of our things is we have to make sure it doesn't affect adjacent properties or anything like that.

That's the main thing that I and them guys looked at. that's that's all i'm saying so i hear those couple things i appreciate it anybody else if not is there anybody that just like to speak against the proposal if so if so please step forward state your name and address if not i'll ask for a motion to close the hearing i motion to close the second i have a second all in favor say aye is it there any more discussion from the board i'll entertain a motion for approval or denial or other recommendations i'd like to motion that we approve it according to stamp recommendation a motion to approve second i have a second any other discussion if not i'll have the roll call yes richie yes wendell yes jacobs yes all right so now you're done you're good thanks everybody you might look at the parking though as he said we might look and see how many people are parking there for events and if we're going to park if we're going to need more parking

how do we do that even if even if we ask the park we can't park here actually and with the building there they won't be able to because it'll well unless they park in the parking in the area behind the park and stuff we might want to work with the park about that and we get approval just so everybody knows from all the businesses across the street and we send them that way so you know um the dentist and yeah i got all of that they can park over there yeah they can even go down There was a park.

Thank you.

Yep. See you all.

All right. BZA 2026-29.

Is the applicant here?

The applicant is not here. This is actually, it's really not an application. It's an appeal. Doesn't matter.

So we can proceed with it or we don't have to if they're not here.

Well, don't they have to be here even for that? Ty? Ty?

I think this we can move forward because this is not an application does not require public hearing. It's simply an appeal of let's just get it done. Administrative decision. Right.

So 2026 to 29. Before you read it, were they notified in writing of the time of this meeting? Okay, but I mean, they know that they knew that we're at 630, not 730. This hour changes kind of screwed things up. Yeah, I'm with you. I'm not making excuses for them, but why was it in their letter that it was at 630?

I don't know what was specifically sent to them. It was included in the public notice. It does?

Okay. Well, if something would come up and there was a miscreant, we could always redo it again.

They were here last year, though, so that I could understand.

They have been to BZA meetings in the past.

But last year, it was at that 730 time.

So this is BZA 2026-29, Lonnie and Brian Stutler. Lonnie and Brian Stutler at 13291 5D Road, Plymouth, Indiana, 4563. This is an administrative appeal of fines of $200 per day. at parcel 50-42-91-000-103.000-018, located at 7469 Michigan Road, Plymouth, Indiana, 46563. It is on C3 corridor commercial. This is the GIS image of the parcel. If you notice in these photos, they all have a date at the bottom right corner and the dates are relevant to the proceedings in this matter. The first few here were taken May 18th of 2026. These all from Michigan Road. And then these next photos were taken on July 2nd, 2026, also from Michigan Road, although those seem to be from across the road.

Dennis, are these improvements you're seeing or not? It's hard to tell from pictures, so if you...

It's basically documenting... process has taken place.

But it's not where we need it to be.

In my opinion, it was not where we needed it to be. The agreement was that they would have it all taken care of up to the fence. They are basically arguing that they had it taken care of. They thought that they could leave that little area right on the drive because they were working Gotcha.

No, it can't. So what we're doing now is voting on upholding a $200 fine per day.

Yes, and it may be helpful. This was not included in the packet, and I didn't have a chance to email it out, so I printed some copies of... And isn't there a legal thing going on right now, too?

Did he get an attorney?

I am not aware that this property owner has an attorney.

Okay.

There are several attorneys I'm dealing with on various matters that Dennis has... That's what I thought.

...turned up. Doing your job, Dennis.

I applaud you. This particular property owner, as far as I know, has not hired anybody. So what I just handed you is two documents. The first one, the first two pages is a memorandum from that May 18th date detailing the meeting that Dennis and Ty had with the property owners regarding the progress on the property. The last two pages are the notice sent July 2nd imposing the fine for noncompliance with that previous agreement. I believe in your packet you have a copy of the letter that was sent later in July stating that they had come into compliance and the fines were being stayed. they continue to make progress got it so basically you just need to have a motion either we're gonna yeah so you can uphold the fine that was imposed by the building commissioner or you can rescind the fine They are appealing asking you to rescind the fine, but they are not here to represent their request.

What's the reason they're giving for, they can't just move everything back. I noticed they said something about groundwater again, or still.

They're still, the property is wet property. It is.

Further back.

Yep. It is wet on the backside. It does get fairly moist towards the front.

Now, have they done anything to start working on that?

They have talked with the county. The county has, from my understanding, the county has went out and said that there's nothing that is causing from the county's drainage causing this issue.

So... Well, I was out there Sunday and looked at it. It looks like there's room to move that stuff back where we asked it to initially. Or they could get rid of some of it.

They moved quite a bit of it back. We're biting off little pieces. Yeah. Well, that's what they've been doing all along.

Part of it is we can't help if their land's wet or not. No, correct. I mean, if my land was wet, the city's not going to let me do something different with my stuff.

At least we'll find out why the water's staying there.

I make a motion to uphold Dennis' $200 fine per day. A second. Can the president make a motion?

Yes.

Got a motion, got a second. Any more discussion? Roll call.

Gidley. Yes. Redsheep. Yes. Wendell. Yes. Jacobs.

Yes.

like stick the analysis on the decision criteria with very negative termination get any more updates we have our code enforcement module on right now okay it's still a bumpy road but it's there do you have anything to do with people parking on streets or trailers and things that would go to the PDDS without You can make a complaint online. I'm going to email the PD.

then homes that have a lot of clutter and stuff we have to come in and make a complaint to you too right you can apply so you can make your complaint online now any of those things regardless of who enforces it can be made through the city's website okay well there's on center street there there's a couple houses got stuff just packed in the back just like i had to come to the alley of the fire truck wow it was yeah it was yeah about one thousand if you need trees trip

Don't use.

No, it's not.

No, Stephanie. The intent is to have 1 location online. So any of those issues, you can go to the city's website and submit a complaint and then it'll be. I think it's Kyle's responsibility to determine which department gets to do. Okay.

I just, I think it's probably most people don't know. People don't know half the time, and I wonder if that's just education. I mean, there looked like almost a paving machine that was backed in halfway into their driveway, too. And to get around it through the alley was not easy. But I'll put something on. I'll come and see you and make sure I do it right. The discussion happened more than a complaint.

How often do you have to take a fire truck down the alley? Quite a bit.

Well, you imagine if a house is on fire, no matter which side it is, we try to run an engine down the front and an engine down the alley. We don't know for sure which way we're going to make entry. You know, if the fire's in the front, if I can come in the back and push it out the front. So it really, you know, we try to come down both sides if we can.

But you're running into this problem of not being able to get the truck down the alley?

Yeah. Yeah. And it's not uncommon that all of a sudden, boom, you know, there's something there.

Buy smaller trucks.

Yeah.

Get electric ones. Get the electric ones. Let's put that pumper on there. Boop, there goes the battery. They make electric fire trucks. They've not had good luck with them. They burn up. They do. They make them. They've had some problems. They burn up? Yeah, they've got them. They're carrying 20,000 gallons of water. It doesn't put out electric. Hey, we're not done yet. We didn't close the meeting. I'll make a motion. Can we have a motion to close the meeting? I motion we close the meeting.

Second.

All in favor, say aye. Aye.

That's good.