Board of Zoning Appeals

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES May 6, 2009 MEMBERS PRESENT: the Meadowbrook Subdivision. This property contains .203 of an acre, is zoned R-2 Rudy Williams, Chairperson Residential and is known as Lot #84 in the Greg Spencer, Vice Chairperson Meadowbrook Subdivision. Mr. Stires added Connie Klungness, Member the property is occupied by a single-family Harold Smith, Member home with a detached garage. MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Stires stated staff received a telephone complaint on March 19, 2009 concerning a Willie Rayford, Member tall, wood privacy fence erected along the rear lot line of the petitioner‟s property. Staff OTHERS PRESENT: inspected and took photographs of what appeared to be a 10 ft. high privacy fence Michael Widing, Development Director located along the rear of the petitioner‟s yard. Tim Stires, Assistant Development Director Mr. Stires added the City Ordinance Dave Wilbur Sr. Zoning Administrator stipulates privacy fencing in the rear yard Stephanie George, Board Secretary; and should not exceed seven (7) feet in height. William Kreegar, Attorney Staff sent a zoning violation letter to the petitioner on April 1, 2009 and the petitioner ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF A responded and met with staff on April 6, 2009 QUORUM: to discuss the fence issue. Mr., Stires added the petitioner, after weighing his options of Mr. Williams called the meeting to order at lowering his fence to a legal height or seeking 4:32 p.m. Ms. George took roll call and a variance, opted for the variance from the declared a quorum with four members in maximum allowable fence height. attendance. Mr. Williams performed the Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Stires stated the petitioner told staff he contacted the Building Commissioner‟s office MINUTES: and asked about fencing guidelines. The petitioner said he was told by staff fencing in The April 1, 2009 minutes were approved as the rear yard had no height limitation. Mr. presented. Motion passed unanimously; 4 yes, Stires added the petitioner finished 0 no. constructing the fence in mid-March. The petitioner explained his reasoning for the tall BUSINESS: 9.6 ft. to 10 ft. high privacy fence is for added privacy, plus protection and safety for his PETITION #10-09 family. Mr. Stires stated the petitioner filed his variance application, deed, site plan and Submitted by William and Mandie Bercik photographs on April 7, 2009. for a Variance from the Maximum Allowable Height for a (Residential) Mr. Stires stated staff notes the submitted Fence Requirement located at 709 South site plan and photographs indicate the Parkway Drive. petitioner‟s privacy fence along the rear yard lot line ranges from 10 ft. high in the Mr. Stires stated this property is located at southeast corner to 6.3 ft. high in the 709 South Parkway Drive on the south side in southwest corner. Staff notes the east half (32 1 ft.) of the backyard fence ranges from 9.6 ft. to Mr. Widing stated everyone is entitled to 10 ft. high. Mr. Stires added the west half (32 peaceful enjoyment of their property rights. ft.) of the back yard fence ranges from 6.3 ft to What has happened is someone has erected a 7.08 ft. high. pool on one side and they have created a vision block from the pool. Mr. Widing stated Mr. Stires stated the petitioner notes the the Bercik‟s want to enjoy their yard without elevation of the neighboring property is somebody peering into their yard. They are somewhat raised or elevated following the trying to create an enclave and enjoy their construction of the inground pool. The raised property rights without somebody invading level of the neighboring rear yard allows easy their privacy. line of sight into the petitioner‟s backyard. Mr. Stires added the petitioner‟s neighbor to the Mr. Williams stated he doesn‟t have any east has a similar privacy fence which tops out problem with this petition, but his personal at 9.5 ft. high. Staff would like to add the feelings about the neighborhood looking petitioner‟s wood privacy fence is well built uninviting with all the privacy fencing up. and adds to his backyard‟s finished appearance. Mr. Bercik stated he has lived in his house for 11 years and there were never a thought of Mr. Stires stated staff is recommending putting up a fence until they started having approval from the maximum allowable height these issues. for a fence due to the raised level of the neighboring rear yard. Staff adds the taller Mrs. Klungness stated she wants to get some privacy fence would allow the petitioner and questions answered in case something like his family to fully enjoy their backyard. this petition comes up again before the Board, because she sees in a neighborhood like this Mr. Williams asked why do you need the fence where all of the yards are about the same. If for the safety of your family? someone can put a 10 ft. fence someone else might say the same thing further down the William and Mandie Bercik, 709 South road. Parkway Drive, Anderson Mrs. Klungness asked if this were an above Mr. Bercik stated there are some issues that ground pool, the pool would have been the they are having with the neighbors. They have same height whether the yard was raised or lived there for four years, and the Berciks not? Mr. Bercik stated where their cement have lived at their house for 11 years. level is around the pool, it is at least 4 to 4 ½ feet taller. Mr. Stires stated there have been some verbal exchanges between the neighbors. Mrs. Klungness asked what was the ground like before they put the pool in? Mr. Bercik Mrs. Bercik stated the verbal exchanges are stated the pool was put in before he moved directed at her when she is home alone. into his house. Mr. Williams stated all the properties are cut Mrs. Klungness asked the fence is there to up by fencing, and the neighborhood looks block the pool? Mr. Bercik answered yes. uninviting or obtrusive. Mr. Williams asked with all the fencing could families enjoy their Mrs. Klungness asked are the neighbors in backyards? Mr. Bercik stated most of the the pool frequently? Mr. Bercik stated in the neighbors around us are mostly chain-link summer, yes. fence. Mrs. Klungness stated she thought rule of Mr. Williams stated Mr. Bercik‟s fence looks thumb that you put the pretty side toward the more like a wall than a fence. neighbor to be a good neighbor, and the ugly side towards your own, and you didn‟t do that. Mr. Bercik stated a neighbor to the east 2 appreciates the fence and he understands Mr. Spencer asked are the neighbors here what Mrs. Klungness asked. Mr. Bercik said tonight? Where they notified of this meeting? six inches behind that fence is a chain link Mr. Bercik stated they were not there and yes fence. Mr. Bercik added that is why they built they were notified of the meeting. the new fence like they did, to keep the chain link fence up also. Mr. Smith made the motion to approve Petition #10-09 based on the following Mrs. Klungness asked if that pool were ever Findings of Fact. The approval of the proposed taken out, would Mr. Bercik lower the fence? variance would not be injurious to the public Mr. Bercik stated that would be fine, yes. health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because there is privacy Mr. Bercik stated when the neighbors stand fencing throughout the neighborhood, and this upon the cement with the standard 7 ft. fence fence is in general conformance with existing you can still see everything from the knees up. fencing on the surrounding properties except That was one of the reasons raising the fence. for the height. The approval of the proposed variance would not affect the surrounding Mrs. Klungness stated Mr. Bercik said the properties because of what was mentioned pool was there when he moved in, so Mr. above, plus the higher fence is necessary to Bercik didn‟t have issues with the pool before. provide privacy, because of the difference in Mrs. Bercik stated no one was living there, elevations between the petitioner‟s property. there has been two (2) people that have lived The strict application of the terms of the there since The Bercik‟s moved in. zoning ordinance would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property, if the Mrs. Bercik stated they would have gotten a 7 proposed variance were denied because of the ft. fence if the neighbor‟s ground level had difference of elevation of the adjacent been the same as hers, with the pool and all. property, the approval of the variance from the minimum allowable height for a fence in Mrs. Klungness asked would the pool that is the ordinance is necessary to provide the there, is it basically affecting you and the petitioner the privacy for his family to use the other neighbor with the high fence? Mr. backyard. Mr. Spencer seconded. Motion Bercik answered yes, as far as he knows. passed 4 yes, 0 no. Mr. Stires added staff did require the Bercik‟s PETITION #11-09 to send notice to the rear property owners. Mr. Submitted by Livesay Properties, LLC Stires talked to Mr. Bercik about how the good for a Special Exception for an Open / bad side of the fence and told him to be prepared if the neighbor did show up and Automobile (Van) Sales Lot located at made an issue, would he be willing to allow 5541 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. them to put the nice boards on the neighbors Boulevard (former McDonalds Furniture side. Mr. Bercik was agreeable to that. Store.) Mr. Spencer asked is there an ordinance Mr. Stires stated this property is located at requiring the good side out? Mr. Stires 5541 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on answered there is nothing in the ordinance the west side. This property is the site of the that states the good side facing your former McDonald‟s Furniture Store. Mr. neighbors. Stires added the entire property contains 4.106 acres and it zoned I-1 Light Industrial. Mr. Spencer asked Mr. Bercik if he would be willing to put finishing boards on the other Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is requesting side if that would make the neighbors feel special exception approval for an open better? Mr. Bercik answered that would be automobile (van) sales lot. The petitioner is fine, if they want that and are willing to at proposing to transform and renovate the least pay for half the cost. former McDonald‟s store into a Low Cost Mobility dealership, which specializes in vans 3 for disabled or mobility limited people. Mr. unchanged with no plans to add any new trees Stires added the submitted site plan shows or shrubs. the existing 125 ft. by 161.2 ft. by 18 ft. high commercial building located on the eastern Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is not half of the acreage will be used as the van proposing any new exterior lighting around sales office. The existing 20,150 sq. ft. building the proposed van sales lot. The only lighting is easily meets all the required minimum existing lighting across the front parking lot. setback for an I-1 zoned property and easily exceeds the minimum lot size requirement of Mr. Stires stated the petitioner plans to utilize 4,000 sq. ft. the existing pole sign located on the southeast corner of the site. The sign will state “Low Mr. Stires stated the proposed mobility van Cost Mobility, Isn‟t It Time To Get Mobile sales lot does not adjoin or abut a residence. Again?” The sign will also have an L.E.D. The Figure 9 Requirements for a car lot message board. specifies car lots not be allowed within 300 ft. of a residence. Mr. Stires added this Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is seeking requirement does not apply. three waivers from the Board‟s Design Standards, including the five (5) foot green Mr. Stires stated the submitted site plan barrier between the parking lot and the shows the petitioner plans to have ten (10) property line, five (5) foot wide concrete concrete parking spaces (10 ft. by 18 ft.) for sidewalks and cross access. The petitioner vans on display for sale at the far north end of would have to remove the curbing and parking the existing parking lot and wrapping around lot to meet the five (5) foot green barrier to the north end of the building and ten (10) requirement. Mr. Stires added there are no concrete parking spaces (10 ft. by 18 ft.) along existing concrete sidewalks in close proximity the front of the store for customer parking. to the site, plus the Low Cost Mobility facility The site plan also shows plans for future is the type of business which is dependent concrete parking on the south and west sides upon drive-in traffic and not walk-in traffic for of the building. Mr. Stires added the site plan customers. The petitioner notes the existing shows (18) concrete parking spaces on the on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is the south side of the store designated for designed for high-speed traffic and adding employees and customers. The site plan also sidewalks next to the roadway would be a shows an additional (24) concrete parking hazard for pedestrians. Mr. Stires added the spaces on the west side of the store designated petitioner noted there is an existing security for employees. Mr. Stires added the south and fence around the property to the south and a west sides of the building currently have substantial grade difference and drainage gravel parking areas. The petitioner‟s plans swale between the two properties. show the graveled areas will be hard surfaced (concrete) by December 2012. Mr. Stires Mr. Stires stated staff is recommending stated the total number of parking spaces (62) approval of the special exception for the open is well under the maximum allowable number automobile (van) sales lot, and three (3) of parking for a 181,000 sq. ft. lot, which is waivers (5 ft. green barrier, sidewalks and one parking space per 1,000 sq. ft. of sales cross access) because the project meets all area or 181 parking spaces. Mr. Stires added setbacks and lot size regulations and all the site plan shows two access drives off the Figure 9 Requirements. Staff notes the west side of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. proposed use is compatible with other nearby Boulevard. The north driveway is 42.9 ft. wide businesses (Carter Lumber, LAMPCO Federal and the south driveway is 44.9 ft. wide. Credit Union, Ricker‟s and Financial Forms and Systems LLC.) Mr. Stires added staff Mr. Stires stated the submitted landscaping believes the waivers should be granted due to plan indicates the van sales lot will have a the prior existence of the business building, its total lot coverage of 34.1 percent, which parking lot and drainage features. Staff would means 65.9 percent will be green or note if the special exception is approved, the landscaped. The landscaping plan will remain Board should require a recorded covenant 4 from the petitioner to insure the three phases Mr. Widing stated it is the department and of hard surfacing (concrete) of the gravel the City‟s policy for developments that don‟t parking area is completed by the year 2012. come before this Board that they make three- year agreements for paving or hard surfacing, Mike Austin, Attorney, 911 Meridian Street, where they are reutilizing properties. Mr. Anderson stated he was representing Tim Livesay came in early and met with Staff and Livesay of Livesay Properties LLC who is the agrees with us about all of our concerns from petitioner. Mr. Austin stated this was a good zoning and building sides. project. This will allow an existing Anderson business to grow and expand. Mr. Williams stated his concern over the gravel on a rainy day it doesn‟t look pleasant. Mr. Austin stated Mr. Livesay currently has Mr. Livesay agreed and he wants it all 65 employees and are not all based here, concrete because of that reason. because some are in other states. Mr. Livesay anticipates within 5 years there will be over Mr. Williams asked is there a market here in 150 employees, and they are expanding and Madison County for this business? Mr. are Midwest based. Mr. Austin added they are Livesay answered yes, they get inquires expanding further west and this would be one weekly about mobility vans. Mr. Livesay step in the continued development for this stated they do some conversions now such as business. It is quite important that existing vans they put lifts in for them. McDonalds Furniture building is vacant at this point and it did house a local business for Mr. Williams asked is there a similar facility many years and this would allow a vacant in Middletown? Mr. Livesay answered yes facility to be upgraded and improved. that is McCrocklin Ford they do similar things. Mr. Austin stated all the procedural requirements have been met, with notices to Mr. Livesay stated they do not approach this the newspaper and certified mail sent out. as being a car lot, they are more a health provider. Mr. Livesay added his background is Mr. Austin stated the display of the a pharmacist and has been for twenty years. conversion vans would be on the outside of the Their approach is market to doctors and building is really a small part of the project. assisted living facilities. Many of the vans will There would be additional vans displayed be coming from referrals from these types of inside and they would not need to apply for providers along with advertising and general the special exception for that particular use. word of mouth also. On the inside there will be other mobility devices in addition to the vans, office and Mr. Williams asked do you have customers meeting spaces. that walk-in off the street and say “hey I want a mobility van” or are they referrals? Mr. Mr. Austin stated the waivers they are Livesay stated probably 50/50 on the van side requesting are very logical due to the given of it. nature of the project. This will improve the vacant property. Mr. Williams asked how many vans do you plan to display out front? Mr. Livesay stated Tim Livesay, 9400 S. 300 W., Pendleton. just ten (10) out front and then some inside the showroom, so they can come in out of the Mr. Williams asked is there anyway you can weather and look at the vans. finish the hard surfacing before 2012? Mr. Livesay stated his goal is to have that done Mr. Williams asked about wheelchair before 2012, just with the economy he wanted accessibility, is the building set up for that? to be safe and not commit to something he couldn‟t do. Mr. Widing asked Mr. Williams if he is asking about the building? Mr. Williams stated yes. Mr. Widing stated Mr. Livesay has a sizable 5 investment going in to remodel the structure Mrs. Klungness asked Mr. Livesay would they inside and some modifications on the exterior. be doing any other repair or enhance engines His plans are being reviewed by the State in the conversion vans? Mr. Livesay stated no right now. Mr. Widing added once the design they don‟t do anything mechanical. The only release from the State is secured then Mr. work they will do is maintain the mechanisms Livesay will be ready to move forward. that are put into the van, if it has to do with electrical that would be a lift. Mr. Livesay Mr. Livesay stated the ramp that goes up on stated it would be mostly electrical. the sidewalk will be removed and a more American with Disability Act (ADA) compliant Mrs. Klungness asked is Mr. Livesay going to ramp put in, and the double door that is there carry Ford vans or something else? Mr. now will be gone and a bi-pull door will be Livesay stated there are conversions for Ford, installed. Mr. Livesay added anyone who is in Toyota, Honda and Chrysler. Those are the a wheelchair will be able to come up and not four primarily that they will use. Mr. Livesay touch a thing to get inside the building. added they won‟t buy anything over two (2) years old and they are sent to a factory that Mr. Smith asked is the flooring inside actually does the modification at the factory. adequate to take the weight of the vans? Mr. They can also buy new vans also and do the Livesay answered, yes it is a concrete floor. same thing. Mr. Livesay stated they can do a Mr. Widing stated his understanding that it lot of the modifications at the store but some had a 5 ½ inch thick floor which is typical of would be sent to the factory for major any of the car dealerships. conversions, such as cutting into the floor. Mrs. Klungness asked has the lot always been Mr. Williams asked would there be any van gravel? Mr. Widing stated yes. trades? Mr. Livesay stated they have discussed it, and will possibly take them, but Mrs. Klungness asked the 5 ft. green barrier, they will take the trade to an auction. They what is the issue with that? Mr. Stires stated will not sell used vans. Mr. Livesay stated there is 3 ½ ft. of space between the corner of they are not going to be a car lot. the parking lot and the property line, it is suppose to be 5 ft. Mrs. Klungness asked on the three-year paving plan, do you want it to be specific as Mrs. Klungness asked is there any need for far as the end of the paving season of 2012 or easements through there for any reason? Mr. would that be unfair? Mr. Widing stated Staff Widing stated no. Mr. Widing added Dr. would like to see the paving by August 2012. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard has already gone through its widening process. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Livesay if he has a certain date in mind to start the paving? Mr. Mrs. Klungness asked Mr. Livesay if he would Livesay stated if budgeting all works out, also have mobility chairs inside the building? Phase One is to be done before they move in. Mr. Livesay stated they would have scooters, power chairs, lift chairs and walkers, anything Mrs. Klungness asked did you choose this to do with getting a person in and out their location because of the interstate? Mr. Livesay house and bath and safety aids. stated because of the interstate for access and the building was available. Mrs. Klungness asked if you remodel this building, will there be a mechanical area that Mr. Williams asked if they have a depot or will install the lifts and things, in the fleet of vehicles? Mr. Livesay stated they are building? Mr. Livesay stated that would be going to deal with a Kalamazoo factory that located in the warehouse behind the building. will give them the Indiana territory, plus The building is a 5,000 sq. ft. building with no some of the surrounding states. walls, just an open area with concrete floor. Mr. Williams asked would there be semis dropping off the vans, and if so, how many 6 times? Mr. Livesay said if they ordered a van into four (4) newly reconfigured lots by the it would be a drop off and go. He added Plan Commission on April 28, 2009. There is sometime if you order a van they will drive the an existing single family home and a home van down and pick up the new one to convert. under construction on two (2) of the four replatted lots. Mrs. Klungness made the motion to approve Petition #11-09 based on the following Mr. Stires stated the petitioner has platted findings of fact. The proposed special the four (4) lots with three different front yard exception is in a proper zone district. The building setback lines. The existing house is requirements of Figure 9 have been met. The located on Lot #560. Staff notes the City‟s proposed special exception will serve a public Subdivision Control Ordinance has a required need and convenience because it would be a front yard setback requirement of 40 ft. Mr. center in Anderson and Madison County to Stires added a 15 ft. front building setback provide and meet the mobility needs of not line is shown on Lot #560 because the existing only our residents, but also those in the house was built fairly close to West 17th surrounding communities. The proposed Street. The home under construction is special exception will not injure the located on Lot #561 with a front building appropriate use of the surrounding properties, setback line of 25 ft. as it fronts West 17th because it was previously a retail business Street, because it is a corner lot and the and currently is surrounded by commercial or petitioner wanted to maintain a suitable retail and will be the trend in this area, so it distance away from future homes to the south. should fit nicely with this development and Mr. Stires added Lots #561, #562 and #563 future of this area. The proposed special are shown with a 20 ft. front yard setback as exception is consistent with the spirit, intent they front Sheridan Street. The 20 ft. front and purpose of the zoning ordinance, because yard setback line is comparable to the front it is expanding an existing business in our yard setback for the existing homes on the community, utilizing a vacant building in a east side of Sheridan Street. The petitioner is prime location and is an entrance into our requesting a variance from the 40 ft. front community. Mrs. Klungness added to approve building setback requirement. this petition with a covenant to be recorded regarding the hard surfacing of the designated Mr. Stires stated staff is recommending gravel areas and this should be completed by approval of the variance from the 40 ft. front August 2012 and grant waivers from the 5 ft. yard setback because it creates a setback for green space barrier, cross access and 5 ft. wide an existing home which was built close to concrete sidewalks. Mr. Spencer seconded. West 17th Street, and will allow three new Motion passed 4 yes, 0 no. homes to be built at a setback distance comparable to other nearby homes, and PETITION #12-09 maintain spacing between the new homes. Submitted by City of Anderson Community Development and Rural Deb King, City of Anderson Community Development, 120 E. 8th Street, Anderson. Opportunities Inc. (ROI) for a Variance from the Front Yard Setback Mr. Williams asked this variance is needed in Requirement located in the 700 block of order to build these houses? Ms. King stated West 17th Street on the south side and the yes. 1700 block of Sheridan Street on the west side. Mr. Williams asked are those houses already sold? Ms. King stated yes, they have some Mr. Stires stated this property is located in families that have already qualified to move the 700 block of West 17th Street on the south in. side and the 1700 block of Sheridan Street on the west side. The property contains .519 of an Mr. Widing stated this is a traditional acre and is zoned R-3 Residential. Mr. Stires neighborhood and there were no setbacks at added this property was recently replatted 7 the time that these houses were built. We can homeowners and that is why they chose this find all different types of setbacks. area. Ms. King stated the City is a entitlement city Mr. Widing stated Community Development and Community Development is part of and Municipal Development have been Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) working together in this neighborhood for and they have a pot of money that they need some time in removing a lot of the derelict to spend in various areas, and new structures. Ms. King has put seven new homes construction is one of them in a 18 month in this area. period. It will be very progressive and there will be more to come. Mr. Williams asked is this part of the Martin Luther King Commission? Ms. King stated no, Mr. Williams asked if the Board approves the they are working with an organization out of petition how long before houses start going Muncie, and they were called Rural up? Ms. King stated by Memorial Day. Opportunity Inc. (ROI) now they are known as Pathstone. Mr. Williams asked would one house be built at a time or multiple? Ms. King stated there Mrs. Klungness asked is that existing house will be two, they already have one started and going to remain there? Mr. Widing stated yes. there will be two additional in that particular area and then a couple more two blocks over Mrs. Klungness asked are you going to do this on Sheridan, Sherman and Hendricks Streets in any other neighborhoods? Ms. King stated for now. yes they are wanting to do this in other neighborhoods, it just depends on what Mr. Smith asked how long is this present plat funding they can get from the State. been approved, just recently? Ms. King stated yes. Mr. Stires stated since April, but they Mrs. Klungness asked how do they select didn‟t know that they needed to go for the these sites? Ms. King stated by the Census variance for the building setbacks, so that is tract and the percentage of vacancy rates, why they are here. percentage of foreclosures and percentage of high-risk loans. The whole concept of the Mr. Smith stated isn‟t it peculiar to approve a program is to address abandoned and plat in Plan Commission without the meeting foreclosed properties. of Ordinance and then hope to have it get accepted later? Mr. Kreegar stated it has not Mr. Williams asked could Community been finally approved yet. It is being held up Development go and buy a piece of property right now and has not been recorded. Mr. off of a landowner? Ms. King stated with this Widing stated the primary plat was approved program no, it has to be abandoned or and then the variance gets approved then it foreclosed on, or the ownership has shifted as goes for secondary plat approved. result of foreclosure. Mr. Smith stated he thought it was final. Mr. JoAnne Holbert, 517 W. 22nd Street, Anderson Widing stated the variance has to come before stated she has property on 17th and Sherman the Board first before it goes to secondary St. The properties sits close to the street, she plat. received two letters and stated she doesn‟t know why she received the letters because Mr. Spencer asked is this development they are going to do whatever they are going beneficial to the community residents? Ms. to do anyway. In regards to whether she King stated there ultimate goal is to wanted a building there or not, they were still appreciate the value not in this current going to build. market, but eventually that is their ultimate goal. One good thing about this particular Mr. William stated not necessarily, that is area, 67 percent of the existing residents are why someone comes before the Board. Mr. Williams added we can say aye or nay, it is 8 not set. If the petitioner presents a good for the existing homes? Mr. Widing stated the petition and makes sense, then the Board new setback is going to be for the new homes would vote to affirm it, but if not the Board not existing. would say no. Mr. Spencer made the motion to approve Ms. Holbert stated the houses look nice that Petition #12-09 based on the following are there, but the houses that she has are findings of fact. The approval of the proposed older and been there for years, so she would variance would not be injurious to the public like to sell that property at some point in time. health, safety, morals and general welfare of When people see these other house sitting the community because the existing home on there, they are not going to look at her house the property and many others in the vicinity to buy. Ms. Holbert added at this point she is are currently less than the required 40 ft. trying to keep them up, but the new houses setback, so this is an older neighborhood. The are going to look much nicer than hers at this approval of the proposed variance would not point. affect the surrounding properties because the existing home on the property and many Mrs. Klungness stated a new or improved others in the vicinity are currently less than home is going to certainly increase the value the required 40 ft. setback, so this is an older of your property and make the neighborhood neighborhood and many of these homes in the more appealing, so if someone is looking to neighborhood have widely varying setbacks invest in that property they would maybe buy and our Zoning Ordinance is more specific to Ms. Holbert„s property and fix it up. Mrs. new construction of neighborhoods. The strict Klungness added new housing is certainly is application of the terms of the zoning not going to decrease the value of Ms. ordinance would result in practical difficulties Holbert‟s property. in the use of the property, if the proposed variance were denied because there are Mr. Widing stated the whole neighborhood funding requirements that have timelines and has been improved by getting rid of some of the development needs to move forward based the derelict houses. He added with the on these available monies and this program building of these new houses throughout that will benefit the residents of the City of area it would improve the existing housing Anderson. Mrs. Klungness seconded. Motion stock as far as property values as long as they passed 4 yes, 0 no. maintain those houses. Meeting adjourned at 5:57 pm Mr. Widing stated the whole purpose of this is to determine what the setbacks of these BY: ______________________________ houses are going to be. The City Ordinance Rudy Williams, Chairperson requires a 40 ft. setback out of our Subdivision Control Ordinance and this is a traditional ATTEST: ___________________________ neighborhood the setbacks of the existing Stephanie George, Board housing vary greatly throughout the Secretary neighborhood. Ms. King stated the Community Development Department is building new houses in addition to if you own your property in that area, they would come in and rehab it if they meet the qualifications. Ms. King added if you own but rent it out there is grant money to also fix those units up and that is an option if Ms. Holbert is interested. Pastor Roosevelt Boyd, 1720 Sheridan Street, Anderson asked for the new setbacks are they 9