Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

The board of zoning appeals to order. We'll begin with roll call. Garner here. Gley here. Richie's absent. Wendell here. Jacobs here. The minutes of the last regular meeting of November 4th, 2025, my birthday, were distributed on board members via email or mail. Are there any corrections? If there's no correction, entertain a motion for approval as presented. Motion, please. Have a motion. Yep. I have a second. All in favor say I. I. All favor. Done. Mr. President, I have a question for sure question before we start

and I have it for Jeff or Ty. These three cases are all concerning the same property, but the third case seems to me to be is going to address that. Okay. He must know why what I'm going to say. I was going to recommend that. Were you going to recommend that be the first case? Correct. Okay, then that's all I got to ask because I thought I it makes no sense to do the first two. The first two are what came in first in terms of how the packet was stacked. Okay. That's what I wondered if they were is that the order they came in. Yeah. So the way it was that in the stack and the way it was rece I just went 21 22 23

got it advertised looked back at it and said I'm going to have to propose to the four of you to adjust the agenda presentation that requires a motion then we all agree it can be a decision of the chair. Okay. I'm going to go with the last one first. So BZA 2025-23 Ty would you present your findings?

I can do that. So, uh, BZA 2525-23, Julia Blount and Beachfield Properties LLC. Uh, Julia Blount and Beachfield Properties LLC 10859 3B Road, Plymouth, Indiana 46563 and 1619 North Oak Drive, Plymouth, Indiana 46563. a variance of use to allow for a car wash at a property located at 2155 Oak Road and 2131 Oak Road, Plymouth, Indiana 46563, identified as parcels 5042 31 202 uh 004 triple 019 and 50 42 31 2028 triple 019. Uh 5042 312027 triple000019 and finally 504231 20200 90019 zone C3 corridor commercial district thank uh so for the request the variance of use is to allow car wash on those four parcels zone C3 corridor commercial district. As you can see here, highlighted in yellow, those are the four uh parcels. Um, Miss Blount owns the northern business, the main parcel, the parking lot to the south of that, as well as the grassy area to the west, and then Beachview Properties owns the house in the southeast corner. The proposal is to put a car wash on the property. um understanding that you have a site plan in front of you, that's not what what is being approved tonight. It's whether or not the use is being permitted or not. So, they were able to provide us uh one of the site plans that we've kind of come towards at this point in time uh with the big white box in the middle uh being the car wash and the

loop center on the south side, but we'll get into the details in a little bit. um looking uh northbound at the central portion of the property where the main entrance is and then looking south and then we travel to the far southeast corner and looking north and we pan westward uh through the uh house parcel uh looking back past the house and the detached garage on there. And then for context, what's across the street and acting at the intersection? Then we move north and begin to pan from west to north. Then we move up to the intersection in the northeast corner. Uh looking west along US30 and to the intersection itself uh do west along the north property line and then uh southbound and looking at the uh traffic. And then as we head westbound on the property, we are now in the northwest uh corner of the property. And then we begin to pan uh southernly as we come across. And then we relocated to the northwest portion of the property looking east. Having remember all the cardinal directions when pictures taken. Um and then we pan north uh along the property line here. that would be in line with the northwest corner. Currently, we're in the middle of the property where that back grass lot is. As you can see, it continues to go back uh towards the railroad tracks beyond this uh tree line. So, as you can see, there's several arrows that are going on within the property. Um, as you can see, they enter on that central uh driveway. And then you have the stalls that go into the car wash portion, which would be the

southern portion of the building. And then you have an interior and exterior uh vacuum options. The exterior being up towards a road. The interior wraps around the building. So you would head north west and then wrap around heading eastbound into the building itself. And then coupled with their operation is a oil and lube center on the south side of the property. The second time.

Okay. Um so getting into your portion this evening is about the uh zoning classification itself. On the lefth hand side you have the standard development standards uh impervious coverage setbacks those sorts of things. But on the right hand side, you have the list of permitted uses and special uses. Um, the building commissioner and I had an extensive conversation about kind of where would this uh potential use begin to fall. And when you look at just this zoning classification, um, the zoning administrator has the ability to determine whether or not it meets one of those classifications. And when we looked at it, it makes sense for it to begin to fall in towards uh, automotive repair. uh and services. And so there's that classification to it. But upon further research within the overlay district, there is a designation for a car wash. And that overlay district does not touch this area. And so because when the overlay district was created, the thought and consideration is that they were well known that that was the only place that they wanted to put a car wash was within that section of overlay district and nowhere else. You can't default that they didn't think of putting it in the base zoning district. And so that's kind of where this project begins to come about of why it's here specifically. So from an analysis standpoint, the applicant is seeking to permit and approve the use of a car wash. The use is not listed within the standard zoning district, but is mentioned within the overlay district. So it creates a complication within the use table. The applicant is uh proposing a tunnel car wash, a climate controlled indoor vacuum facility, outdoor vacuum stations, and an oil change and loop center. The operation will be open 7 days a week with Monday open 7 days a week with Monday to Saturday operations from 7:30 to 8:00 p.m. and Sunday hours from 8:30 to 7:00

p.m. There will be a maximum of eight employees on the site and the site plans were discussed with multiple revisions over several months ultimately concluding with the site plan shown within the application. So the decision criteria which you have to base your decision on this evening includes the general welfare, the adjacent property, practical difficulty, unnecessary hardship and comprehensive plan. So for criteria number one, the proposed car wash, uh you should not be injured to the public health, safety, and general welfare, but the design is not the most safe design, but is a result of accessibility coordinations. Uh criteria number two, the use and value of the adjacent property may be impacted um by this use. The no criteria number three, the strict application of the ordinance would not permit the proposal, but the plan commission will be hearing in 2026 amendments to permit car washes uh by right uh within the property zoning classification. as a result uh would not have gone before the BCA should those amendments have been adopted by city council prior to uh the company's application. Uh for criteria number four, the strict application would not permit this proposal. And criteria number five, the comprehensive plan through the future development character map supports regional commercial. The plan indicates that it's a hub of retail and service-based businesses, beckons visitors to explore on foot, creating bustling atmospheres that drive economic prosperity. Uh the secret lies in its smartly designed layout where future development is encouraged to prioritize smallcale to sight designs promoting internal vehicle uh connections that minimize traffic impacts on major roads. Uh the savvy approach ensures a seamless experience for both patrons and businesses fostering a thriving ecosystem of commerce. So for the recommendation based on the information provided and reviewed by staff, staff would recommend approval of the company being able to construct a car wash. That is up for board termination. Questions

for staff. Evan, buddy. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um, will the petitioner or the representatives please step forward to the podium? Please state your name and address for the record.

My name is [ __ ] Chani. I'm the CEO of Drive and Shine uh located at 16915 Cleveland Road in Granger, India. Um Oh, we if there's anything else you want to add really is all this is for.

Well, you know, we've been asked for I don't know how many years. our marketing department tells me since we started in Southbend uh 30 years ago, but we've been asked to be in your your community for a long time and and frankly we I always thought it was a little too small for you know for what we do and I was afraid to uh to build $15 million worth of operation in a smaller community. This is not your typical car wash you know that they would build for $3 million. I mean our indoor the big space that we have is just nobody in state of Indiana, Michigan or Ohio u they're building a couple in Chicago but nobody does that portion it's it's a very expensive um just requires a lot of customers and so as we were successful building in Niles Michigan which this one actually mimics that exact location um I thought well that's a really small community so I guess you know uh could we could do well Um, and then this site came about and we're always about location. I mean, naturally, you know, if you're going to have to spend that kind of money, you can't be hiding behind something. It's not going to work. And, uh, so, um, Julie's location became available. Actually, my wife and and so she she told me to make sure you talk to her and then she was under contract with something else when, you know, we first considered it and that didn't happen and then it was available to us. And so, we're delighted that that it's available. And so to fit everything we wanted to do, we had to also combine the southern part. Um, and it would be helpful for me to maybe for those of you who don't really know the operation. So the cars as they come in as they come into our operation they stack up what against an unlimited um two lanes of it is the unlimited members and one lane is the pay as as you go station. So uh typically about 80% after

about a year of operation about 80% of our business sometimes 85 depending on the location is the unlimited membership and that gate opens in less than in under 5 seconds we say two uh but worst case scenario five um it it reads your license plate and knows that you're a member gate opens and you go through so stacking is never this is a lot of stacking you know relative to what we have in other locations but so stacking is never an issue. So you go through and you basically this being the car wash you come out. Now you have a couple of options. You can leave, you can vacuum outside or you can go back around and we always make the floor in the same direction so that we don't have cars colliding. So like we wouldn't want to have come out here and instantly go into this building because that would create a bottleneck. So we did a lot of space for stacking which never gets filled up but just you know it just makes more sense. We got this idea by the way from Germany. Uh and you come in and you go through and that building is uh basically for members only. So you have to be a member to go inside there and uh in there you get everything. You get free towels online and in fact we encourage you to take it home. It's got a logo on it. It's an advertising uh people do. So uh free free towels, free window spray. Every station every station has its own dedicated uh window spray. It's on dedicated vacuum on both sides. It's on dedicated mat machine that we import from Germany. So when you have your mat get dirty, you put it inside there and you can shake it and you know it just does all that for you very quickly. And every station also has a air tool. So you can split you can blow air underneath your like mirrors trap water underneath the seats if you want to paint up with a vacuum. You know vacuums don't fit underneath their air air ducts or whatever. So we give you all all of those tools to practically I don't want to call it detailing your car

but and it's a climate control. So as you can see outside today I mean this is not a place that you can go outside and vacuum today. We provide that uh and then to enhance it more because we know that oil change is another one of the routine maintenance things that you do you combine it with an oil change and if you do get an oil change you get a free car wash. So that's that's the operation. I don't know if you have any questions about that. So, anybody have any questions? Just part of That's right. Yeah. Thank you. Good. Thank you. I want to leave you. All right. More members. Is there any If there's no other questions, I'll entertain a motion for a public hearing. Open. Have a motion. Second.

I have a second. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Same. I now declare the public meeting open. Is there anybody in the attendance that would like to speak in favor of the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. This is for Yeah, we'll have another one for those against. Well, actually, you can do whatever you want, Andy. It doesn't We're not that official. You can come up.

All right. So, my name is Andy Beckman and uh I own the property to the west of Sherwood Tire. I've been Julie's neighbor for 30 years there. Um, I've used Haji's car washes in South Bend and and I'm in favor of the car wash there. I'm not opposed to the car wash. The only thing that I'd like to bring up is in the the picture there, there is an easement to the north of what Sherwood Tire is right now. That easement's 20 foot. Um, I've used that property or Julie's property to to go in and out for the 30 years. The road that we use is 20 foot wide. The easement says 20T ingress egress. I guess I always assumed that was the road. Apparently, it's 20 ft. That's from the fence, 5 ft of grass, which leaves only 15 ft down of pavement. So, I've worked with with Robert and Ty to to put a proposal together with [ __ ] and maybe we can get that wider because a 15 foot road with a car that's 7 and 12 to 8 foot wide trying to pass each other is already over the limit. You would be in the grass or you would be somewhere else. Um, and if you had a fire truck having to get back there or anything else that was large and cars coming and going, it would be very difficult. um with just a 15 foot road. So I think that's the only thing I can say that that I think needs to be changed or we can do something about

and that would be actually this part here. We're voting whether a car wash can go there. The other two that we're going to talk about talking more about what you're talking about. Yeah. So I guess that's just really what I want to say. I didn't know what order. Well, stick around. That's right. And we'll have But yeah, I'm in favor of it. It's just that's the only thing that I can do is really an issue. Yeah. Okay. We'll also need address. You gave her name, but we also address. Oh, yeah. It's 13585 11th Road here in Plymouth. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else in the audience like to speak in favor of it? You can speak. Julie, I'm not going to hold nobody back. Yeah.

Julie Blunt 108593 Road. I'm also in favor of it. I have no qualms whatsoever. Baji's been great to work with. So, I am in favor of a car wash. Very good. I don't know when the right time to say it is, but I'm going to say it now since she's standing right here. Sure. I had the pleasure to serve with your dad on this board 18 years ago. So, it's it's nice to see you back. And he's in can he's in Sacramento. He's doing great. Y turns 83 this year. So, and use your business for many years, too. Yes. Yes. And I thank all of you for the past business. It was very emotional last week, but the outpouring of affection from the community was awesome. That's good. Thank you. Thank you.

The moon is now down. Anybody else? Are you winking at me or you just winking? Okay. All right. I'll at this point in time, is there anybody in attendance like to speak against the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. And remember, this is about a car wash being there. Nothing about the design of the car wash or nothing. This just about having a car wash there. Anybody online? I didn't ask the last time. So, if not, I'll ask if we could uh close with make a motion to close the public meeting. Second. I have a first and a second to close with public hearing. All in favor say I.

All oppose, same. I declare the public meeting closed. If there's no additional discussion from the board, I'll entertain a motion for approval, denial, or other recommendations. And this is just to have a car wash. I move we approve the variance to allow a car wash in this area as presented. I'll second that. I have a first and second. Roll call. Garner, yes. Gley, yes. Wendell, yes. Jacobs.

Yes. So, the first motion does pass. All right. So, Ty, you want to go back to the uh 21 then? Yeah. So, we'll go 21 and 22. Um maybe. So, anyways, we'll discuss now VZA 2025-21. Correct. Ty, go ahead and give your

There we go. Cool. So, BZA 2025-21, Juliet Blount and Beach View Properties LLC. This is a request for advance development standard uh to allow a sideyard setback reduction from 20 ft to 8 ft at 2155 Oak Road, Plymouth, Indiana. Uh so what we're talking about is so we just proved the car wash or you just proved the car wash and the specific location that we're talking about is here highlighted in blue but more specifically we're talking about this red box. The dash line represents the 20 foot setback on the sideyard. The project brings that within 8 ft of the property line which is the solid uh black line on the bottom of the page. So, we took the few pictures out that represented this portion of the case. So, as you begin to spin, this is the area that we're talking about on reducing it from 20 ft to 8 ft. And then from the rear, kind of seeing what that looks like from the rear portion of the property.

So, they'll enter this is where they'll enter from the uh so they would enter approximately where the sign is, right? um more or less across from the frontage private road that leads back to all the businesses across the street there. Yeah. So um I think there might be a slight skew in terms of alignment uh with those

uh driveways and curb cuts. I'm not 100% sure on the final design in terms of where all those curb cuts begin to fall together, but approximately that's kind of where you're looking at. So, as we begin to spin, this would be the far end of what would be that loop center. And we're not necessarily debating whether or not a loop center is permitted. It's simply the setback on whether it can go from 20 to 8. Right? So, bird's eye view over that space again. But that's what's confusing. Go back. See, they're entering here or no, it's entering here. They're entering here.

Correct. So you would enter at the center portion of the property, travel back approximately halfway and then turn south uh into either a the parking zone or to the west or east towards the uh loop center. And we're only talking about this the side step back, not the entrance way. Correct. That's right. I just want to make sure everybody's on the same page.

Yep. So with that space for the analysis, the applicant is seeking to reduce the side guard setback from 20 ft on the south side of the property to 8 ft. The applicant is seeking to permit a car wash under a separate proposal and a part of the property development is in creation of a loop center with three bays. This specific proposed variance is for the southern uh property line setback and the reduced distance to that loop center. Uh the corridor commercial district requires a sideyard setback of 20 ft. The current house which is where the approximate location of the loop center would be is 15 ft from the property line based on beacon. The accessory structure is less than 5 ft from the property line and the adjacent commercial structure to the south is approximately 60 ft from the property line. All sharing a minimum 20 foot setback requirement. So the decision criteria that you base your decision on tonight is based on the general welfare, the adjacent property and practical difficulty uh for that process. So for criteria number one, the proposal should not be interest to the public health, safety and general welfare. Uh for criteria number two, the use and value of the adjacent property should remain minimally impacted because of the setback reduction. Uh but for criteria number three, the strict application of the ordinance would not permit the proposal and the proposal is self-imposed and is not a result of practical difficulty. So for recommendations based on the information provided and general description of the proposal, staff would recommend denial. So for board determination staff would recommend denial for this process. And that's everything I have for this one. Any questions for staff?

Do you know just do you know what that uh bump out or curb right there at the south side? Right there at the south side extends up into the parking lot. Do you know what that is? Looking to the engineer. I'm going to bet you that's a parking island. Sorry. Let me just make sure we're talking about the same thing. Yeah, he's talking about right here. Yeah, the curb island. That's just a curb island. So, this is to mention I'm not tall enough for this screen. You come in on that top there and then when you turn in this way, there's parking stalls over over here. And this parking island is just to kind of separate. This is parking. This is to kind of line up for the loop center. So,

so it's just a delineator between parking and yep operations. Any other questions for staff? Can you just go back a slide real quick? One more. Yeah. Three. Oh, the criteria. Okay. Talk about that. Well, I know. No. I don't have anything. Anybody else have anything right now? Right. Not right now. That's good. Okay. All right. Thank you, Ty. Thank you.

All right. Same sort of process. Will the petitioner or representative please step forward to the podium and state your name and address. It's probably got it, but if you would do that again, I appreciate it. Toani Drive and Shine Incorporated, 16915 Cleveland Road, Granger, Indiana.

Gotcha. um if you could put up the whole picture of the and I will explain why there is a practical difficulty that's really the main issue with this uh and there's a financial hardship if we don't we don't ever have we've never built a facility with less than three bays of oil change again having spent this kind of investment uh you know if we were going to be doing this u making it a two bay um very inappropriate it would stack up our customers it would just delay the processing time it would not be the way that we operate. We're the only old change that I know of in the entire state of Indiana or Michigan. So when you come inside of our loop center, that's how time oriented we are. When you come in on the on the back side of the wall, we have a timer. We actually even have a video screen that shows a picture of the what they're doing downstairs that the customer sees. There's a split screen. They see the basement and the upper section. So, um, to be very time oriented, we don't want to make it look like we're just finished and we didn't do hardly anything. They can see everything by looking at the downstairs and upstairs. And so, the timer is here. Customers don't see the timer. We do. That information gets sent to corporate. And we expect a 10minut cycle. We run over that. 12 minutes is really what we're averaging. Uh, you go to any other oil change, 45 minutes is about what you would expect to see. So, we're being that time oriented, having a two bay oil change would would be a no-go because I don't even know how we would process cars, you know, with only two bays. Uh, and so the reason this building is not shifted north cuz we have, if you see, we have plenty of land here. We could shift the entire thing north by at least 20 ft and get out of this is because there is an easement that runs through right here and it's adjacent to that edge of our building. It's literally attached to it. It's a 15t easement for utilities. There's a

existing um I don't know how big the pipe is. The the uh there's a storm and and uh gas and gas and electric

and but I don't know how big that pipe is. It's a big pipe that brings water from across the street and it brings it to the west know somewhere back here I guess is where it dumps. So we can't physically shift the loop building because if we shifted everything this would come out of here. um and we can't because you know this easement goes straight back and eventually turns back and goes goes that way. Uh so that's the practical difficulty for the site is that that's an imposed condition that we would honestly not have to obey because and we could leave Andy's uh access you know uh untouched because there's perial land. So you see this huge landscape area that we have that could be shrunk to a shallower area and it would allow us to do that. So to me um you know going back to the conditions that why a variance is is is makes sense um those are the reasons that I would feel um the combination of not being able to operate with the two bay uh oil change um not being able to push it up any further north um and this massive investment that we're going to make that would just not be justifiable you not having a three bay change it's it's integral to our operations. 25% of our revenue comes from the oil change and 75% from the car wash. And that 25% adds up quite a bit because we don't really have any extra overhead. It's, you know, once once you build and you have the general manager of the operation, a lot of the overhead is already absorbed. And so having that additional profit center, it's just it's like having a meer or any other site where you have multiple profit centers inside of it just that's how they can justify building a big site like that. I have no other.

Any other questions? Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. I'll entertain a motion to open up the public hearing. So move second. I have a first and second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose same. I declare the public meeting open. Okay. Once again, this is for the setback for the loop center that we're discussing. Is there anyone in attendance that would like to speak in favor of the proposal? If so, please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Sure, Chief. All right. This is in favor. Yes. All the vote. So, yeah.

All right. I'm Chewy Garcia. Um, address is 13235 7th Road here in Columbus, Indiana. So, I'm in favor of the car wash. I mean, I'll probably get a membership for it. So, uh, the only problem I have or I see or question um, as assistant chief in the fire department is the easement. So, I didn't know if there's any kind of easement to the buildings. Are you talking about the north? You're talking about the north easement, correct? And we're talking And that's why I said we're talking about the south easement right now. Right.

So, I mean, I kind of want to bring that one up. I don't know if there's any way we can have a south easement. Is that in discussion at all? So, that way there's not just a north end one. Um, again, just from my standpoint as assistant chief here at the fire department, I just concerns with having only a north easement to those properties on the back end being that close to 30. And again, um, yeah, for that car wash, I mean, I think it's going to be amazing. Uh, it's just my concern is safety. One way in, one way out,

right? So, that south lot is just questioning about that. Is there any way that that can potentially be or there be an easement to the backend property?

So, you're looking for a way to access via south side. Yes. West side. Well, from the south side from the southwest, right? Kind of right right next to Jimmy John's. I don't know if there's correct one back here cuz you're here. We get to it from Jimmy John's. Yeah. But here we can't get around to that. Correct. Is what he's talking about. Right now we can go to the parking lot. Right. Jimmy Chance.

Sorry, I should introduce myself. Danny Erics. I'm with Whiteitman. Uh we did the engineering for this. Uh one one point just of of practical note and not that it excludes any anything but but please note that large white open space that looks like it's completely empty. that's going to be where the detention pond goes. And we haven't gotten to the point of detailing that out, but that's going to take up some of that space. So, don't think that that's just wide open. We can do whatever we want with it. Um, so, and to make sure I understand, you're talking about uh just getting emergency vehicles back around another another way,

another way or for anyone in that building to come out that way versus they're only in and out is close to that intersection. I've came out of there a few times. It takes forever. You have to go right. You can't go left, obviously. Um, and it's just there's a lot of hazard there, especially if that's going to be the only access to those buildings in the back. Be a bottleneck for us bringing the engines in. I actually thought the fire that was back there originally, right, when it burned down.

Um, what we're talking about is if you come in with an a fire apparatus, you may stop want to stop it somewhere that's going to prevent you from getting all the way back here. we may want to bring a second apparatus in and also bring in from a different hydrant and so that's why when you have landlock somewhat a little bit of landlock when you have one way in one way out for us creates more of a hazard and just I want to understand is it is it because there's one way or is it just because that one way is right next to birdie sort of both both one way and then when you press coming in that it's very busy the intersection sure so when all of a sudden they people see fire they don't know what to do they top to get around him and stuff

or you get lines down from a storm there and you can't get back there. Is there any way to have um egress on the back side of that pond to go back to that building? Uh, I mean, as as Tai sort of alluded to, we we went through a few different iterations of of this layout trying to make make things work for everyone and trying to get that access further away from from the from the intersection. Now, now I don't think we ever had multiple accesses. I think it was always just one one route. Was red part of that? um initially,

but uh um but ultimately we weren't able to come to uh an agreement with the the rear property owner on a on a different route um to get back there. So, um but we did not I don't think we ever talked about having multiple access points. So, I didn't even know if that's feasible. You know, it' be not if we had Yeah, I'm not again because we haven't laid out that that pond. And I I don't know that that's Where's I I don't want to promise. Oh, really? The only ones that old. So, you'd have to shut down oak if there was fire anyway with fire that magnitude.

We could bring one farther back though. You'd bring that one down. Then you go across the cracks in front of Mark and we bring another one shut the railroad down and come in that way. That's the way it's laid out now. Is there one south of the of that complex behind Jimmy Johns? Is there one at that by the railroad track down there? A private hydrant? No. But again, that's just my concern.

This one way in, one way out. And that big concern, right? Good discussion. Trying to figure it out. Want to make it. We all like our kind of Oh, it's an off chewy. I I love the whole idea. Yeah. Um, if you leave that northerly easement, that will have to be a 20 foot by fire code, right? So, yeah, that's not good. That ends up with it. Somebody is going to pave a 20 foot parcel for a fire line. Yeah.

When you put our aerials up, 20 foot's not You know how big that thing is? And and it was brought up that in the very f I believe one of the very first meetings at TRC. It was brought up that they would have to shut down Oak Road to get to the hydrant. So and bring one across the tracks too. There's one big buildings. I don't I don't remember that being brought. Well, they might not have brought it up, but I know where we're going to come from. That that is my one concern is that will have to be paved a 20ft drive to be able to get your There's an ement for 20 foot. Uh you can build a 20 foot.

It's not it's not not permissible under our under her right now. She owns it when we own it. Same thing. We have to we have to support that. So you can totally add 5 foot pavement to the north of that and make it a 20 foot which is under the eastment totally at all. I'm just saying it will have to be done. I absolutely agree with a 15 foot road going both way. So you wanted one hydrant to service that whole area? No. Well, there's one right across there like I keep saying we'll come. No, we'll come from BMR in front of BMAR. We'll bring a hydrant from there across the tracks just like we did the last time when burnt back here. Hydrant is across the street. But the first one's going to be the first engine is going to hit the first one across the street and get back here. May I make a comment also?

Sure you can. So what we always end up with engineering team versus fire department they have usually opposing views right and let me share what I'm talking about they don't fight fire

no I know they don't but you know there's always a safety issue from a from an engineering perspective and there's a there's obviously the fire department access so we initially considered leaving that open access to a law circular uh you know access so that you would have more than one way to get in or get The problem is that is so close to the to the traffic light up there that we wanted to limit the traffic to the very few cars that Andy's you know being that it's not a it's not a fast food business. It's a very limited use uh you know operation that it would not cause as much problem as is if we added our traffic to it as well. So uh we could I guess if you if that was something that would help if you felt like that would help the question that you have we could leave it open with a gate that would only open from the from the actually you can knock it down with fire engine can knock down any gate you know but uh if that's something that you feel would help um I would not be opposed to saying that we put some kind of a gate gate access there maybe a 20 foot opening uh with a gate that would or cones that would not let anybody really go through it except under emergency. Um where you could just knock the cones down or just knock the gate down or whatever you thought was appropriate.

But that's where Andy comes in and goes and that's where his business that's where he'll come through too, right? Well, he's going to he's going to he's going to continue to have that access, right? So that we're not talking about taking that away. All I'm suggesting is if it was going to help for for I see what you're saying. Make all that pavement all the way back here. Just just take out maybe as an opening so that the fire engine could go around it if if it was necessary. Would that would that help? I mean that would help on the north side. Yeah. I'm still You're talking about the south side?

Yeah. Well, I'm still concerned about this flow of traffic to and getting back to his property and just access on both sides, but we I look at whatever plan he has end up coming with. That's all I have though. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else in the audience like to speak in favor of Okay. Is there anybody in the audience like Obviously, I'm in favor of it. Um, but I got a question. So, I'm Robert Listenberger where you live. I'm not gonna tell that out loud. Oh, what's the address here? 124. There you go. Right here. That's all right.

So, um, really what you're looking at right now, correct me if I'm wrong, Ty, is the idea of the setback on the south side of the property, and it really has nothing to do with anything else. Okay. So, but um I mean and I don't think anybody's brought it up yet, but they do have um a letter from the property owner to the south who supports it and is it should be in your packet, I think. Or did we? I remember. I have a copy of it. Okay. Um

much less I read that at the Well, you can read it. So, well, um this is from Ken's Equity Group, Burke Richardson. Uh just my client's ACA properties which own and Bay View properties. He owns both on receipt of the drive and shines application for variance from the building standards for sideyard setbacks. After having reviewed the application and site plan, my client has no objection to granting this variance request to reduce the sideyard setback from 20 to 8 ft. So I didn't know if you guys saw that yet. Nope. Okay. I want to make sure you saw that and you need Is this a copy? Uh, you can get it. I appreciate it.

I guess you sent it.

Maybe you can get it. Um, the other thing we've been talking a little bit about the overall project and what Chewy is saying. Um, and I mean there's just I don't know how unless we can somehow and it would delay the project a lot to make any more changes to it and I've talked to [ __ ] about this and um he's opened almost anything but you're at a point where you've got to get this done. So I'm suggesting that first of all we definitely should approve this location. we already did for the use and I suggest I'm saying that we should approve this setback and then you got one more thing your job

I know we should recognize I know he he doesn't listen to me so uh but anyway and then you got one more thing but the discussion about um we need to worry about this part this get this done yeah this one we'll go for right here. Put the set back here. Gotcha. Um, if I may, just Are you speaking against it? No. Oh, you're still in favor of it. I'm still in favor.

Yeah, I'm still in favor. Uh, just just to, uh, clarify a couple things because it got brought up and I want to make sure that you've got the right information. So, um, Haj mentioned that easement that's that's there on the north right along the north edge of the proposed lube center. It has an 18 ft or 18t 18 in diameter storm sewer, gas and electric lines. That storm sewer actually uh comes from across uh Oak. So, it's it's draining other other properties through it. Um so, that's that's the uh utilities there that would be impacted if if things needed to needed to be moved or relocated. And then um just a reminder that and and Ty noted this in in there, the existing garage that's on that site is closer to the property line than what we're proposing with this. And I understand setbacks and you're redeveloping and and so we want to try and be cognizant of that, but uh to the impact of the neighbor would it would actually still be further away than what they've got right now. So

So their building's coming down. Yes. Okay. Yes. the house the house in the garage would be would be completely removed and and replaced with this development. Okay. Just for my clarification, how they're the car wash is going to own all of this property now. Yes, correct. Title all this is going to be transferred to the correct car wash. Correct. Okay. Yeah. I know it's kind of confusing because they're not the current owners, so therefore the application comes through with two different property owners and the and the four different PIN numbers. The other company's not represented. The people that own the house and the garage are not represented here at night. Right. That is correct. They they they signed the applications. They did. Okay. Mhm.

Yes. They also sent that. Correct. Yeah. And they've got that letter. Yeah. So now, if there's anybody else that wants to speak in favor of this portion to allow the setbacks on the south side, I'll open up the public hearing for those who want to speak against the setback on the south side. Is there anybody in the audience? Nobody on there. Hey, can and I don't know if we're still on the the ement. Come on up. Say your name and address. Come on up. So I I don't want to We're We're on the We're on Come on up. It's okay. Talk about the northeast. No, about the south. South only. This is south only. Yeah.

Yeah. We got off talking about the north. This is only for the loop center. The portion that you see on the south side there is all we're speaking to. Are we talking about north at all tonight? The other one is east side, right? No, the other one is north. We don't have it for the north side. That's why it's not in our willy gig right now to discuss. I got to keep to my agenda. Sorry. So at this point in time, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Motion second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I.

All right. At that point in time, if there's any additional discussion from the board, I'll entertain a motion for approval, denial, or other recommendations for allowing the setback for the loop center to the south or not. I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to approve it as presented. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve. Roll call. Garner. Yes. Yes. Wend. Yes. Jacobs. Yes. So that part. So

clarify a little. Yep. Okay. So, the last case here this evening is BCA 20. Here, I'll let you introduce the case if you wish. Oh, that's okay. You can do it. The B we're going to discuss now BCA 2025-2022. I didn't want to steal your thunder. Got it.

So, for BCA 2025-22, Julie Blunt and each of you Properties LLC, this is the final case this evening. It's only talking about the east side of the property. There's nothing to talk about on the north side of the property. Um, as a reference to the previous case, there's some value in the the hardships associated with the access being on the north side, the uh safety aspect to that, potentially having a caveat to what could potentially go on the south, as well as the infrastructure associated on the north side of the loop center. So, all that conversation is is valid and relevant. Um, But I real quick, why aren't we discussing the north side?

Because there's no variance dealing with the north side. No, there's no setbacks or nothing being changed. It I mean, hearing Andy talk earlier, it sound like there was. So I misunderstood that then.

So from a historical perspective before we get to this, this project has been in discussion since about August. We've gone through three revisions in terms of the site plan with variety of uh access points uh singular multiple location of those uh access points uh reallocation of building spaces those sorts of things in order to accommodate different uh input both from the TRC that it originated from the conversations between both property owners uh input from the city from our office all that's kind of all come together and has distilled build over the course of time leading up to this point where there were only three variances being requested based on the site plan and design as it sits today with um the applicant.

Okay. Now, there could be a change in the future uh should the applicant uh seek to redesign the property and shift buildings around there, they still have that opportunity should they wish to exercise it. The proposal for the use of the car wash is for the use alone, nothing to do with the site plan itself.

The uh second case had everything and only to deal with whether or not they could push their loop center um at least as designed today into that southern property uh setback area. And this third case that we're getting ready to open up and kind of discuss is going to be focused specifically on the vacuum uh structure and enclosure that's on the eastand side along Oak that's going to reduce the front yard setback from 30 ft to 17.6 ft.

And that's why I understood. So even you know when when it came up tonight I heard Chewy talk and I heard Andy talk where so where does Andy Andy Osley came here because he thought this is what we'd be talking about. where would he get those answers and discuss that north side then? So, we've been in extensive conversations with Andy about the project. Okay. That's all I want to be sure is he has an outlet and so

especially within the last couple weeks we've had several conversations between both Andy is the rear property owner. [ __ ] is the proposed property owner for the project um as well as the city's offices having conversations about what could potential opions continue to look like, what have they looked like in the past and having everything on the table and having those conversations. Um, we have had fire uh in attendance at the TRC meeting where we expressed uh traffic and safety concerns associated with that project. And so we've gone through several revisions through that process uh with different site plans, those sorts of things and have gone through uh different renditions and micro renditions of those different site plans to accommodate those uh minor and major changes uh throughout the whole process. And so that's kind of what's got us to essentially what would have been mid November to the site plan that we have uh within the application itself. And so within that application itself in terms of the site plan there are three essentially deficient uh functions of that site plan the use of the property because as we discussed earlier the city zoning ordinance does not well accommodate where a car wash can be outside of the overlay districts. The setback on the southern portion of the property and the setback on the eastern portion of the property. The north side of the property is an easement that's been

in existence for quite some time and nothing's changing there. Currently, the way it sits is that there is a 20ft easement that more or less goes up to the fence line itself and there's approximately a 5-ft grass strip as you can see within the pictures themselves between it and the beginning of the pavement. And so that leaves approximately 15 ft of improved access. And so that's where the conversation. So easements, and you know why I'm interested in this? Yes.

So easements doesn't require you have the full 20 foot. Easement is a a theoretical space over physical property. It doesn't necessarily mean it's improved. And just so you know, the reason I've got a minor subdivision that I'm putting an easement on from the learning behalf as a as a very large example, if you think about US30 or 31, all of that is not paved. Correct. You have the center median and grass typically and then you have the dishes typically on either side. But who who gets to decide how much of that easement they get to use if I have property by my house?

Sure. So the the easement an easement is a private agreement between the property owners. The city has no authority over the easement. Got um in this particular situation the easement is 20 ft wide but not all 20 ft of the easement is being used for access. Currently access is has been traditionally across the parking lot which I believe is what Andy was explaining. That says it's been wherever anybody wanted to go back to Yanis the south side or the north side. We didn't [ __ ]

Now everything's getting shifted to the north side and they're complaining because five foot of it is not paved. That probably should have been paid in the long run. That's right. So the easement exists. It's a recorded easement agreement between the property owners and that will remain. So Andy is the property owner to the west has that 20 ft that he can use and develop for access to his property. Gotcha. Thank you. I'm open to it, Andy. I guess you want me to come to the podium. Sure. I would like to have make sure that we're all I want to I want I like it when everybody gets to get along, you know? I want to work it out. I think we all want car wash horses. We want Andy to be happy. you all want.

So, I think really what this comes down to is if if you could look like a Google Earth thing, okay? So, you got the fence, you've got 5T of grass, and then you got this 20 foot when it gets past Julie's, it actually is a road. And until I saw that a week ago, I thought 20 foot ingress egress was that road. That that was the first time I saw it was a week ago. So, we're really about five foot off and I'm hoping that we can work with [ __ ] I would be open I would be very open to sell you an ement because nobody asks nobody in the world that I know of. Well, I guess my ask for an ement got financial

I guess because we've had this it's a private conversation. It has nothing to No, no, I get it. I get I just want to note this right now. What you're talking about is unrelated to the No. And I agree. I agree. I just want to bring that up now. be a good neighbor to you. No. And I want to talk to you about this, you know. Um, but I'm just telling you that as you know what we use is 20 ft forever, 30 years. And I didn't know. And if you look at it, no, I know. I know what Oh, yeah. Let me grab this. Sure. Look at it. It is all of this area. Sorry.

Far more than what the easement is already. Right. Right. and and we could pay lower the grass, but the problem is there's utilities under there and then what do you do with the snow and everything utilities in easement? I mean, I don't we don't know our our own in the city of I don't want to take I got what you got. I know you got I hope you guys can get together and solve that. And I get it now. Now I know that's all I want to say and hopefully we can That's right. privately work this out. Yes, I would love to. I appreciate it. Yeah, I think we can. Thank you guys. Okay. Thanks for that. I wanted to make sure. No, I'm sorry. Where we w No, we didn't realtor. Well, no. Back to our regular schedule variance. Y. Okay.

So, Julia Bluntton Beach Properties LLC 108593B Road, Plymouth, Indiana 46563 and 1619 North Oak Drive, Plymouth Indiana 46563. A variance of development standard to reduce the front yard setback from 30 ft to 17.6 6 feet at the property located at 2155 Oak Road and 2131 Oak Road, Plymouth, Indiana. 46563 identified as parcels 5042 31 20240019 5042 31 202 0080019 5042 31 20200 7le0019 and 5042 31 202 0090019 zone C3 corridor commercial district lot of zeros. Um, so but the bottom line is it's a request for a variance development standard to reduce a front yard setback from 30 feet to 17.6 feet located at 2155 Oak Road, Plymouth, Indiana. Um, here's the whole site plan and on here you can see in blue is the region we're talking about, but more specifically we're talking about this red box. It sticks um 12.4 4 ft into that area leaving 17.6 ft of right away uh in the front yard setback or there's reduction from 30 ft where the dash line is to the end of the box.

What is that box? The box is the um containment building for the outdoor vacuuming equipment. But you don't do anything there. Oh yeah, you do. That's where you get your the hose from to clean up. So, typically in outdoor vacuum units, and I'll leave, okay, more extravagant details uh to the applicant, but typically there's an overhead unit that runs through all the spaces. And then you have the uh vacuum hose that's usually attached to some border or something similar to that effect where just like a drive up um like a drive-in restaurant.

Mhm. you have all the different spaces, similar aspect where you have the different parking stalls. You're able to pull in, vac your uh individual area uh for your vehicle, then you're able to exit uh that same space. It's a similar style when you're inside, but typically there's additional nicities within the interior vacuuming space. But uh you see a lot of these um coming around to a lot of more northern uh car washes, but they've been pretty well standard within a lot of southern uh United States car washes uh just from the simplicity that they don't have the weather like we can have currently. Um but there's been a lot of advancement and push to have additional VAC facilities to be able to make uh car washes more uh interesting to the perspective. But in order to make their facility look nicer, they want to be able to encapsulate that uh structure or series of structures uh within a a containment building. Gotcha. So here's that same region that we're talking about um where approximately where that building would be located be about the end of the driveway on this side. So, as you continue with that concrete portion, you begin to see the curb and gutter um go out towards uh Oak Drive. That would be approximately where the building would be more or less. And so, looking up and down the property, you can see there's a mixture of things within that given area, including but not limited to signs, utilities, Would

that affect the view of anybody pulling out from any that would be a part of the um engineering and site planning aspect? I'll leave the engineer to be able to talk to a little bit more about what potential um viewing issues may or may not be there. Okay. So, leave that right there. Okay. So, off of this case or we staying on this case or we going back to something else? No, we're staying on this case, but I want that left there. Okay. Tell you why. Okay. I I'm concerned with this variance about sight lines along Oakr. Okay.

Okay. People Chewy's already s made a comment about how if you pull out of this drive, you can't make you essentially cannot make a left-hand turn out of there. It's impossible. It's almost it's ultimately impossible to turn left out of there. Now, maybe Andy can tell you differently. He he's had a business there for 30 years, but and I don't there's something I seem to recall that that is that sign going to be taken down and Julie, you'll have to correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that sign's actually too close to 30.

I I would have no clue. Yeah. And I'm I think there was either a variance or something granted to allow that sign to be that close, okay, to the road. Part of that is actually my recollection and if I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I'll admit to it, but I think that sign needs to come down and it's too close to the road to begin with. But I think a variance was granted. I'm almost positive that sign is within the easement itself. Well, so I would imagine it would be going away, but it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with back. It needs to go away, right? I would imagine so. Okay. Okay.

I think I think you can I correct. I get your answer. I understand you're in a certain This sign doesn't have anything to do with the VAC building on Oak,

but it's a sign and I'm concerned about signage on the VAC building all along that all along Oak Road. I'm concerned about people making lefts and rights. And I know we grant one of the things when Jimmy John's went in on the end of that building. There's a sign, if you can picture this, there's a sign on that entrance to that building that says entrance only. And that was granted that that was a request of this board that they put that sign up so that no one would be exiting out of that one, which I know what happens, but

that was done to try to control the traffic congestion there. Okay. So maybe this isn't pertinent to this request, but I'm concerned about what this is the closest I'm going to get a chance to say something until unless there's a variance somewhere else in the future about my concern about signage for this facility along Oak Road. You'll have to meet all signage regulations unless they pursue a variance. So whatever's on the books currently, they will meet or they will become before this. So they'll have to come back if they if they propose something that is not within the current regulations.

But does the narrowing of the setback to 17 ft change the signage rules along there? No signage is a different regulation. Okay. Signage is found under article six about halfway. I couldn't tell you what the three-digit code is. You know where I'm coming from? Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. Don't know. I know what you're talking about. Okay. I expect Titan to memorize that, but I know a few folks. Okay. Continue. Yep. All right. Yep.

So, for the analysis, applicant is seeking to reduce the front yard setback from 30t on the south side or that should have been east side. Um 30 ft on the east side of the property to 17.6 ft. The applicant is seeking to permit a car wash under a separate proposal and part of a property development is the creation of a loop center with three bays specific. Why we got the right one? That's the right one. Half of that's correct. Yeah.

Oh, no. I was just talking about three center loop center with three bays. Just saying that's a part of the development. The specific proposed variance is for the eastern property line setback and the reduced distance to the vac building. The corridor commercial district requires a sideyard setback of 30 feet per the zoning ordinance. Uh some typical accessory structures uses or some accessory uses buildings and structures include garages, carports, porches, decks, awnings, canopies, mini barn, storage sheds, outdoor fire places, outdoor furnaces, children's playhouses, swings, ports, swimming pools, hot tubs, grain bins, grain dryers, solar systems, and storage buildings. Uh some uses that shall not be considered accessory uses uh buildings or structures include a very list of things inside of article uh 610. Uh the applicant indicates that all structures have been designed to minimize the visual impact and maintain a clean and professional aesthetic. So it's a part of that um structures definition is what the proposal is for is an accessory structure.

Uh so for the decision criteria that you have this evening, you're going to base it on three items. the general welfare of the adjacent property and the practical difficulty. Per criteria number one, the proposal should not be injurous to the public health safety uh general welfare while still maintaining area for future pedestrian facilities. The use and value of adjacent property should remain minimally impacted because of the setback reduction and strict uh critical or criteria three strict application of the ordinance would not permit the proposal but the request seeks to shield mechanical installations. So for recommendation based on information provided and general description of the proposal, staff would recommend approval of the front yard setback reduction with the condition that the applicant coordinate sidewalk accessibility with the city office for future development of the Oak Road sidewalk. Now is up for board determination with staff's recommendation of approval with condition. Questions and comments for staff? I don't. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. All right. Will the petitioner representative please step forward to the podium? State your name and address. The recordani um 16915 Cleveland Road Granger Indiana uh 46530 uh drive and shine is you know the operation. Uh so we don't as one of the comments that long one that Tai read it doesn't require that we can put a vacuum unit there without putting a building around it. Um all most car washes actually do. Um, and what what a vacuum unit is is basically something about I don't know about maybe this this big around sits about maybe 6t tall and then has a side unit that goes against the side of it that the motor is to suck and you know provide that. So typically because these things are not cheap to build a lot of lot of car washes just put them out there without a building.

It's very appropriate. Doesn't look terrible. Um, but given that we landscaped the headart of our place and you know, I mean, I'm all about aesthetic really. I feel like it's so important for us to look right and so we put that building there to try to hide um what appears to be mechanical. Yeah.

Um, and even our vacuum, you know, if you go to a lot of the car washes, they have those arches that come up, they light them up like crazy. They have LEDs on them. I just think it looks cheesy. So, we put all put like very narrow stainless structure. we fabricated ourselves and that comes up and the entire vacuum system rests on that. So it's not really from an aesthetic perspective from this from the street it doesn't you can barely even I don't want to say you can't see it but it's not in your face and so that's the reason for the building. So if you would prefer that we don't put it up I'm not 100% opposed to it but I think we're just learning. Yeah. But we put it up because we think it looks nice.

Yeah. Ty, while he's up here, who does look at the safety? Are somebody else looking at the safety of pulling out, pulling in, and obstruction of view? That'll be part of this. That's so that's that'll be looked at. I That's the only one thing I want to make sure is when people pull up, they can based on based on this, it's my turn being the shorter person here. And I think anyone else, I'd say you're the shorter person. That's what 17 feet. Is that what that says? Yeah. So if you're pulled out all the way here looking at oncoming traffic, you're not out in the road yet. That's behind you now, isn't it? Should be correct. So that shouldn't really be an obstruction if it's 17 and 1/2 ft away. No, I wouldn't think so.

Now, if you're 10 cars back there for some reason and you're trying to game plan, you won't be able to see. Well, but that you're not going to not totally related, but somewhat related is the way the curbs are designed for that main entrance across from the private drive at Aldi's is going to impact whether people are willing to make a left-hand turn or a righthand turn out of there. So, I mean, there has to be some thought put into that curb design. I mean, it's the same thing with what wings, etc. And what's the road? Yeah. that runs just a little bit north of that like wings if you want to pull out and go north it's hard but it's a little bit you got a little more room but they're going to take care of that the easy other

technical review technical review so thank you everybody's good okay board members I'll entertain a motion to open up the public hearing second I have a first and a second all in favor say I oppose same I now declare the public meeting open is there anybody in the attendance would like to speak in favor of the proposal if so please step forward to the podium state your name and address. And if not, if there's anybody in the attendance like to speak against the proposal, please step forward to the podium, state your name and address for the record. And with not hearing anybody stepping up here, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Motion second.

I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. Oppose. Same. Now I declare the public meeting closed. Board members, any additional discussion? If there's not, I'll entertain a discussion for the board. I'll entertain a motion for approval or denial or other recommendations. I move that we approve BCA 2025-2022 or 22 um with the um condition that the city provided about sidewalks. Got you. Do I have a motion? Do I have a second?

The ticket that's already been thought of or TRC or the sidewalks. Yeah, it's in there. We want to make sure that they know that it's something we have to think about. Second. So, I have a first and a second. We'll caller. Yes. Yes. Wendle. Yes. Jacobs. You know, it just dawned on me before I make him vote. I shouldn't have voted on the other one. I actually have a pass. Does that matter? I didn't think about it. I actually I also bought a four-wheeler and many things off you. So,

there's no I like to thread my Okay. I vote yes. Yeah. Sorry. So, it passed. Okay. Yeah. All right. Um, building commissioner update this evening. Nothing. Nothing this evening. Okay. Uh, there's no additional business this evening. Uh, so next would be your motion to adjournment, but just a friendly reminder that your next anticipated meeting pending applications is January 6th at 6:30, not at 7:30. We've moved those forward.

We got to make sure we get the people here. I have surgery on the 5th. I won't be here. I'll be out for five weeks. So, so we need are five weeks. I I could probably call in on the next one. Okay. I just like cancer too much and I keep cutting me open. I figure four force Sean. That's everything I have this even. I need to get a hold of Yeah, cuz we don't because the problem is we don't want to get up with three again and have the same thing happen again. And just to go to the order, I hope you guys do work it out. Both of you guys are great people. We're going to be neighbors. I appre Yeah, appreciate that. I'll make entertain a motion to close the adjourn the meeting. Motion made.

I have a motion. Do I have a second? All in favor say I. Thank you so much. Yeah, appreciate it.