Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)

MEETING RESULTS- ZIONSVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DECEMBER 11, 2018 The meeting of the Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals occurred Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 6:30 p.m. in the Zionsville Town Hall Room 105, 1100 West Oak Street, Zionsville, Indiana. The following items were scheduled for consideration: I. Continued Business Docket Number Name Address of Project Item to be considered Approved with Commitments, as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed 6925 E SR 32 Petition for Special Exception to allow for: 2018-31-SE A. Safa (Estimated) 1) A division of land to create a (3) lot residential Minor Plat 2) New residential homes to be constructed in an Agricultural Zoning District (AG). Approved with Commitments, as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed 6925 E SR 32 Petition for Development Standards Variance in order to 2018-32-DSV A. Safa (Estimated) provide for a new single family home on a lot which: 1) Deviates from the required 3:1 lot width to depth ratio in the Agricultural Zoning District (AG). II. New Business Docket Number Name Address of Project Item to be considered Approved with Commitments, as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Development Standards Variance in order to provide for the construction of an accessory structure 2018-41-DSV D. Miller 8370 E 300 South which: 1) Exceeds the height of the primary structure in the Low-Density Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R1). Approved with Commitments, as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Special Exception to allow for: 2018-42-SE J. Marshall 6475 S 275 East 1) A division of land to create a (3) lot residential Minor Plat 2) New residential homes to be constructed in an Agricultural Zoning District (AG). December 13, 2018  Approved as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Development Standards Variance in order to 2018-43-DSV J. Marshall 6475 S 275 East allow existing accessory structures to remain without the benefit of a primary which: 1) Exceed the allowable accessory square footage & height in an Agricultural Zoning District (AG). Approved as presented and w/exhibits as filed – 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Z' Storage Petition for Development Standards Variance in order to 2018-44-DSV 1230 Parkway Drive (S. Scheidler) allow a landscape bed to exceed the required ten foot maximum distance from the foundation of a self-storage facility in Urban General Business Zoning District (B2). Continued with notice from December 11, 2018 to January 8, 2019 Meeting Petition for Development Standards variance in order to 2018-45-DSV B. Bobbitt 465 W Poplar Street provide for the construction of a patio & garage addition which: 1) Exceeds the required lot coverage of 35%, to 42.7% in the Urban Residential Village Zoning District (R-V). Respectfully Submitted: Wayne DeLong AICP Town of Zionsville Director of Planning and Economic Development December 13, 2018 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Pledge of Allegiance was said and attendance was taken by the Secretary. Present: Greg Morical, Larry Jones, Julia Evinger, Steve Mundy, John Wolff. Staff attending: Darren Chadd, Attorney. A quorum is present. Morical Good evening, and welcome to the December 11, 2018 meeting of the Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals. The first item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. All Pledge. Morical The next item on our agenda is attendance. DeLong Mr. Morical? Morical Present. DeLong Mr. Jones? Jones Present. DeLong Mr. Wolff? Wolff Present. DeLong Ms. Evinger? Evinger Present. DeLong Mr. Mundy? Mundy Present. Morical The next item on our agenda is the approval of the November 13, 2018 meeting minutes that were distributed as part of the meeting packet. Are there any questions or comments on the minutes? [No response] Morical Hearing none, I would entertain a motion. Evinger I make a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Jones/Wolff Second. Morical All those in favor, please say aye. Page 1 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. The next item is continuance requests. And, I understand we may have one tonight. If you would please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record and let us know what you’re asking to continue. Shafer Good evening. My name is Jerry Shafer. I live at 6695 Beekman Place, Zionsville, Indiana. I am here and representing Brian and Sherry Bovine in regards to Docket # 2018-45-DSV. There was a little bit of confusion in the paper in regards to the public notice, and so unfortunately we were not able to get that requirement met in time, so we are asking for a continuance to the next meeting so we can meet that requirement. Morical Okay. Thank you. And, Wayne, that is January 8? DeLong Correct. Six-thirty p.m. in this room. Morical And they get that by right or do we need to make a motion? Chadd By right. They’re entitled to one. Without notice, they can’t proceed. Morical Okay. Sounds good. Thank you very much, Mr. Shafer. We will see you back again in January. Shafer Thank you. Merry Christmas. Morical Any other continuance requests? So, the next item on our agenda is continued business, and the first one is Docket # 2018-31-SE, A. Soffa. Please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record, and then give us an overview of what it is you’re interested in tonight. And, you can talk about both your petitions at once. Frandsen Thank you. Morical Thank you. Frandsen My name is Kent Frandsen. I am an attorney with the law firm of Parr Richey, practicing at 225 West Main Street, Lebanon. I represent Dr. Ahmad Soffa, the owner of a 16-acre parcel of agricultural land in the 6900 block of East State Road 32. It’s at the far east end of your planning jurisdiction. Actually, it’s in Worth Township, but it is part of your Zionsville planning jurisdiction. The applications, as Mr. Morical indicated, are two-fold. One is to seek a development standards variance for Lot#3 in the development because of the peculiar shape of the parcel to allow in excess of 3 to 1 width to depth ratio and the second request is for a special exception to permit a 3-lot single family residential subdivision on this 16-acre parcel. Page 2 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 We were here at the September meeting and presented quite a bit of information about the project. There were questions about the covenants that did not exist at that time, and questions about whether we would legally have part of our gravel driveway extending through a corner of the 75-foot legal drainage easement. The original plan showed the driveway would extend through a portion of that 75-foot drainage easement, so we recessed the matter. The remonstrators were heard on the application to some extent in September, and we have had, each side, has had a postponement since then. Since the last appearance, we have drafted and proposed a set of covenants, conditions and restrictions that would regulate the proposed residential use of the property, and shared them with staff. I think you all have them. I have also sent them to the neighboring property owner. We have also revised our plat to completely remove the driveway servicing Lot#3 from the drainage easement. We did that by moving the eastern boundary of the development, the east/west line that divides lots, make sure my numbers are right here, divides Lot#2 from Lot#3. We moved that line 32 feet to the north. Thereby reducing the acreage of Lot#1 from, Lot#1 remains the same, I’m sorry. The reducing the acreage of Lot#2 from 3.5 acres to 3.31 acres, and thereby increasing Lot#3, the larger lot from 7.3 acres to 7.46 acres. So, moving this line 32 feet north completely allowed for the driveway to remain free of the legal drainage easement. We checked with the County surveyor’s office and Kenny Hedge, the County surveyor, preferred that the driveway not be in the easement, and rather than argue about it, or seek a variance from the Drainage Board, we just decided we would move the boundary line and save ourselves the aggravation. So, that has been addressed, hopefully successfully. Other than that, the project remains as proposed. Three individual lots, each with their own driveway. One out onto State Road 32. The other two individual driveways out on to County Road 700 East. The covenants are frankly a work in progress. I don’t know whether the Board of Zoning Appeals is interested in flyspecking the terms of the covenants. If they are, certainly we’re more than happy to consider your wishes. Perhaps the Zionsville Plan Commission might have some thoughts, perhaps staff has thoughts. Perhaps neighbors have additional thoughts. As far as I’m concerned, these don’t need to be finalized until the project would get approved, if it does get approved. But, these are a first attempt to come up with a set of standards that would prohibit the kinds of uses that would be objectionable. Commercial uses are prohibited, rentals are prohibited, multi-family’s prohibited, and the sorts of things you typically find in a residential, even a rural residential, neighborhood like this. But, as I say, I don’t profess to have it figured out, and we’re happy to talk about other ways they can be improved, strengthened, or modified. As indicated previously, the schools welcome three new homes in the Lebanon Community School district. I know there is some concern by at least one neighbor immediately to the west that it’s an agricultural area and should remain such, but I think it is, as indicated the last time, it’s somewhat of a mixed-use. The residences out there, including the Houcks that live next door. These are large lots. Certainly not high-density septic users, and I think it would be in keeping with the nature of the area and would not adversely impact on anyone living in that part of our Township or that part of our County. I am happy to answer any questions you may have. I’ll incorporate what we presented the last time. Dr. Soffa, the property owner, is here. This is his first Page 3 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 application for development of the property, having owned it since 2006. So, with that I’ll stop and see if there is any questions or comments from neighbors or staff, or you folks. Morical Thank you, Mr. Frandsen. Any questions for the petitioner’s representative? Thank you, that was helpful. Are there any remonstrators here tonight? Will you please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record? Houck My name is Matt Houck, 6851 East 32. I live immediately west of this property. I was here before for the first meeting. I really don’t have anything new to add. They have, by moving one corner of the property, taken care of one of my complaints, but that’s really just a small issue. My major complaint is when the counsel first started talking, at the first meeting, he opened by saying that development is inevitable. Well, I disagree with that statement. If that statement were true, why are we all here? I know you guys are not here for the money, and controlled development is inevitable. So, having said that, Boone County and the Town of Zionsville has guidelines. And, those guidelines clearly say that urban and rural need to be separated. Boone County is an agricultural community. The government recognizes that. If we were just going to have blatant development, neither Boone County nor the Town of Zionsville would have made those statements. Those statements exist as guidelines for you guys to follow. When Mr. Soffa bought his property, when I bought mine, when all the surrounding homeowners bought their property, they bought knowing that that land was zoned for ag and only ag. Now he wants to make a dollar. He wants to change it. He wants to put houses on it. That’s not why I bought my ground. That’s not why the adjoining homeowners bought theirs. Everybody bought because they wanted to live in a rural area. This is going to break up the rural area. That is mine, and all the adjoining homeowners’ major complaint. This isn’t land that has been in the family for a long time, 20, 50, 60 years, and a new generation in the farm family is trying to put a house on. This is somebody that came in, stuck some money down, and now they want to profit from it. That’s the sole motivating factor. We are not here to rubber stamp that. That’s my major complaint with it. It always will be, it always has been. Morical Thank you, Mr. Houck. So, there is residential development, you’re to the west. Is that your house to the west? Houck Yes. Morical Okay, and then there is the three to the east. Houck Yes. Morical And, one to the northeast, and this is on the corner of two roads? Houck Yes, 32 and 700. I might add that if you go, I believe it’s across the hall. Look at Zionsville’s wish list. Part of that wish list is to make 700 a major thoroughfare. You’re just putting more houses in the way of a major thoroughfare. Morical Well, and you raise the issue in your letter about the highway department and the driveways. Page 4 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Houck Yes. And, I have an issue with that too, because the State guide, when I first complained, they have since come out with a new guide book for driveway permits, and they have increased the span the driveways are to be separated. And, somebody in the state, is just like, oh well, that’s all right, we’ll ignore that. Why do they have guides? Morical Yes. And, that will be up to them. Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Houck? Mundy I think Mr. Frandsen said that he sent a copy of these covenants proposed or drafted, have you seen that? Houck I saw it. I got it, like, last Thursday, and in all honesty, I have a life and I’ve not been able to read it. Mundy Thank you. Morical Thank you. Any other remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, Mr. Frandsen, do you care to address any of the comments made? Frandsen If 700 is turned into a larger, wider, busier, thoroughfare than it is now, and I don’t know that that’s likely, but if it does, it makes it even more logical that you would put some sort of development on that property, and I think three single- family lots between 3 and 7 acres are frankly probably better than what may end up there if it develops, as Mr. Houck fears. I don’t remember saying development was inevitable. I have been around long enough to know it’s not inevitable. It’s subject to the approval of Boards like this, and this is by no means a sure thing or a guarantee, but I think that quality development, with the proper controls, good location, adequate-sized lots, that’s what I think the Town wants, and with what we have currently in these two Townships, the many, many homes like this on large lots on rural roads. Land that used to be agriculture and no longer is agriculture. Boone County is still somewhat of an agricultural community, but it is changing and that is just a fact of life. Mr. Houck is not an agriculturaler. He is not a farmer. So, that’s all the comments I have. Thank you. Morical Thanks, Mr. Frandsen. Wayne, may we have the staff report please? DeLong Thank you. With this petition, as with all petitions in front of you related to ag- zoned land, agriculturally-zoned land that is seeking to be improved with a single-family residential use, or a single-family residential subdivision, those are required to be discussed and reviewed as part of the special exception process. So, the ordinance dictates and calls out the process that’s in front of you this evening. With that in mind, staff conducts its review of the proposal, compares it to the questions that are within the zoning ordinance, and certainly the responses the petitioner provides for you. Additionally, staff provides comment related to right to farm regulations and proximity to the Indianapolis Executive Airport located southeasterly from this site. As far as the residential use, as with I would say most of the residential projects that come in front of you via the special exception process, staff is supportive of the request as it’s meeting your minimum standards found within your ordinance. Certainly this project would Page 5 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 also be reviewed by the Plan Commission, and subject to additional and more particular standards as are found in the subdivision control ordinance. Again, staff is supportive of the petition as filed, and I would be happy to answer any questions. Morical Thank you, Wayne. Any questions for Wayne? Mundy Wayne, the two, three properties, I guess, immediately to the east of this one, it appears that from the aerial view we have there are three separate parcels and three homes. Is that correct? DeLong Correct. Mundy And, does the orange line represent the boundary of the lot that each of those is on? DeLong Correct. Mundy So, two of those are on relatively small lots, relative to the surrounding, but they look like they are fairly small lots. Is that correct? DeLong Correct. I don’t know the acreage. I can pull that up on the GIS if you’re curious. Mundy Well, I guess one of them is not much more than an acre and a half, and the other might be three or so, just comparing it to the size of the Soffa plot. So, at some time, they got approval to put a home on those lots. DeLong Correct. Mundy Or the home was there and they carved off some of it to split it up. DeLong It certainly wasn’t an action by the Plan Commission of Zionsville since 2010. Morical Any further questions for Wayne? Evinger Wayne, just a quick question. With the Planning Commission, they would have to look at where the building would be for each of the pads, or each of the lots, correct? DeLong Correct. They are looking at the minimum lot area. Certainly there is a request in front of you, and that’s seeking a variance to some ratios. But, the Plan Commission is looking to confirm that the lots as proposed meet the minimum standards of the subdivision control ordinance. Certainly with any deviations granted specific to zoning. Evinger Okay. And, I know this isn’t going to be for us, but maybe with the Planning Commission just as a note, just because of where the Houck’s house is, I could see where one of their concerns would be that one of the houses is very close to where their lot line would be, but that, again, isn’t for us to decide. That would be for the Planning Commission. Page 6 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 DeLong Well, as long as the requested location is within the minimum standards, the Plan Commission would be bound to approve that standard. If there is a specific distance or metric or measurement that this Board might find as appropriate, that is certainly something you would want to discuss tonight that would be within your purview and jurisdiction to discuss. Morical Mr. Frandsen, have you laid out where these houses are going to be, or potentially could be on these lots? In particular, the one that would be closer to Mr. Houck’s property. Frandsen It would be Lot#1 or Lot#3. I’m not familiar with exactly where the Houck structures are located. I have seen them from the road. Do you know, is it Lot#1 that they are more concerned about, or Lot#3? Evinger That’s what, I’m trying to look at this, and trying to look at this, and figure out as an overlay, maybe how it would lay, and where their home would be based on their setback. I don’t have exact measurements in front of me, so that’s the reason, I didn’t know if you had already - - Frandsen --We don’t, we don’t have a proposed area where the homes would be. The lots are pretty big, but all three are over 3 acres in size, so I’m sure there is plenty of room to, I don’t know of any reason why they want to back the house up against somebody else’s house. That affects the value of the lot that we’re trying to sell. So, I think there is certainly room to talk about that. Evinger Okay. Thank you. Morical Please state your name and address for the record. Thank you. T. Houck My name is Tina Houck. I’m Matt’s wife, and we own the property west of this said proposal. On Lot#3, it has a 20-foot rear building setback line, but on Lot#1, it only has a 5-foot. I understand there is difference in the size of the lots, and they’re trying to give whoever might purchase them more room, but that still puts it right against our property line. Frandsen I can address that. I’m not a surveyor, but from looking at it, the reason for the difference is, Lot#1 that west line is a side yard. It has a lower minimum. Lot#3, the front of it is off of 700, so that would be a rear lot line, and that’s why it’s 20 feet for Lot#3. We’re not, as I indicated, these houses are going to have to be more than 20 feet from the back or the west line. Morical So, you would agree that, as it relates to Lot#1, to not build anything within 20 feet of that western boundary? Frandsen Yes. Absolutely. Morical Okay. Thank you. DeLong And, just for point of clarification, the zoning ordinance actually requires a buffer yard of 40 feet for parcels that are adjacent to agricultural zoning, so, certainly, the zoning ordinance also allows the building commissioner to reduce that Page 7 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 setback for certain reasons, but certainly if the Board were to find that the building would be prohibited from that, that would be language of what I have discussed this evening. T. Houck So you’re saying 40 feet is what they normally would set up? DeLong The zoning ordinance requires a minimum buffer yard of 40 feet in-between this property and the next property where you live, and the zoning ordinance also has language in it that allows the staff to reduce that for various reasons, and certainly what the Board, if that’s a concern, certainly the Board could have language tonight to prohibit the staff from reducing that setback. T. Houck Okay. I guess I am confused. According to this, it’s 5-foot, but what you’re saying is, the Zoning Board says it’s 40-foot. DeLong Well, what the surveyor has done is drawn the dimensions based upon the very black and white information that’s in the zoning ordinance when it comes to each district. This setback language is within a different page within the ordinance, you wouldn’t necessarily stumble across it when you’re simply assembling a document to be turned in. Now, if someone were to turn in a building permit, this would be something that would be caught and reviewed, but we’re not at that, we’re very far from that stage. T. Houck Okay. So, that would come when you actually are having a building permit? DeLong Correct. T. Houck Okay. Thank you. Frandsen My client will commit that he will meet a 40-foot side setback for this, and will not seek a reduction in that. Morical On the western boundary? Frandsen Western boundary. Morical Okay. Thank you, Mr. Frandsen. Mr. Houck? We record everything, so I need you to speak into the microphone please. Houck I just want to know if that applies to outbuildings also. DeLong Correct. Morical Thank you. Jones Hey, Wayne. I do have a question about the driveway separation. Just started scrolling around here on 32, and you get over a little closer to the airport, there is a series of half-dozen houses all probably 100 feet apart. So, is this 435-foot separation, is this new, old? Page 8 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 DeLong I’m not prepared to opine on the State of Indiana’s driveway standards. It’s not something staff would know offhand. Jones Okay. DeLong Yes. Typically the party would seek that permit from the State. Jones So, that would be something the petitioner would have to deal with? DeLong Correct. Jones On their own, it’s not really ours one way or the other? DeLong Correct. It is not. Jones Okay. Morical Any further questions or comments? Okay, why don’t we take these one at a time. So, first, Docket # 2018-31-SE, and then the design standards variance. I would entertain a motion on the first one. Wolff I’ll make a motion. I move that Docket # 2018-31-SE, special exception petition in the agricultural district for the property located at 6925 East State Road 32, approximately, supporting both the division of a 16-acre parcel, and the establishment of new residential improvements be approved based on the staff report and the findings of fact as presented. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Mundy Second. Morical Would you be amenable to amending that to provide for the commitment that they made about a 40-foot setback on the western boundary? Wolff I am, but do we need it? Counsel says we need it. I am amenable to that. Morical Thank you. Is that second? Jones And, is there the Right to Farm act added in on that? Morical There is an acknowledgement that is a requirement, right? Does that need to be part of our motions? DeLong Certainly I think that is how we have done it in the past. Chadd I’d like to include it in the motion. Morical Okay. Wolff I am also amenable to that. Page 9 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Morical Excellent. Is there a second for that? Mundy Second. Morical Great. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. Let’s go on to the next one. I’ll say they had the right to farm with this too. Mundy I move that Docket # 2018-32-DSV, design standard variance, petition in order to provide for a new single-family home on the lot, which deviates from the required 3 to 1 width to depth ratio in the agricultural district be approved. We need the form on that one, as well. To include the petitioner execute the right to farm acknowledgement document. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Morical Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. Thank you very much. Mr. Soffa, good luck with your development. We are on to new business, Docket # 2018-41-DSV, D. Miller. Please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record, and give us an overview of what it is you’re interested in tonight. Miller My name is Donald Miller. The address is 8370 East 300 South, Zionsville. My family just moved there, it’s a single-family residence. It’s a ranch home, already existing, built in the 70s. We want to build a pole barn there. It’s going to be 30 feet by 40 feet. It will meet all the other requirements except for, since it’s a ranch, and the walls on the barn will be 14-feet walls, it’s going to exceed the height of the house, the current home. Our intent is to eventually add on a second level, just not right this second. We need the barn right now. We own Fundaes in town. Morical Yes. We saw that. Miller Yes. So, it’s not for any kind of commercial thing. It’s just for storage. Page 10 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Morical You’re going to keep the truck. Right? You’re going to keep the Fundaes truck in there. Miller We need a place to pull it in out of the weather and storage for extra backup freezer and things like that. So, we need that like immediately, and we want to plan our second level. So, we’re asking for a variance to be able to build this pole barn. Morical And you’re confident that you’ll build that second level? Miller Yes. Morical In that 5-year time period? Miller Yes. Morical We saw the pictures of the pole barn. Is that what it’s going to look like? The metal structure? Miller Yes. Morical Are you planning to put any landscaping around that, on the southern side? Miller I’d like to. I’d like to put some pine trees. There is a few pine trees on the property already. I’d like to add some pine trees there on the, it’d be the west side of the building. Morical Yes. I’m thinking about from the street. Miller Yes. It’s all yard there. Because we wanted some privacy from the road, too. So, eventually we’d like to have some extra trees, mostly pine, because more privacy that way. Morical And, with the commitment to add the second story, would you be willing to do that as an actual commitment that we would record? Miller Yes. That’s fine. We just need time to develop it and be ready. Morical And, 5 years is enough time to get that done? Miller Yes. I think 5 years is enough. Yes. Morical Okay. Sounds good. Did you read in the staff report the note about the 2 parcels and how they’re kind of disconnected and it would be good to record a deed that kind of combines the two. Miller I didn’t see that, but we’re totally fine with that. Morical Yes. You actually technically have 2 parcels. The one to the west is not really a buildable parcel, so, but legally combining the two, which is relatively easy, it will just clean it up. Page 11 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Miller Yes. That would be way better for us too. Morical Great. Any questions for the petitioner? Jones Do we have any setback requirements on that east edge of the property? Miller Five feet, I believe. That’s what they told me across the hall. DeLong Correct. Given the zoning, the minimum setback would be the dimension that’s been stated. Certainly that’s for buildability, maintenance of the structure. Stat certainly can’t speak to, is the minimum enough, but certainly that’s what the zoning ordinance would support. Miller There is a wood line that runs behind the building on the north side of the building to separate from the house that is back there, and where the barn is going to be, and so that’s all just grass and front yard. That’s our neighboring owner, and ours. It’s just grass in front of that barn. Morical Any further questions for the petitioner? Thank you very much, and thank you for your service. Are there any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, may we have the staff report, please? DeLong Thank you. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed. As, certainly, you’ve had a few petitions come like this come in front of you where a party is seeking to build an accessory structure that’s in excess and height bulk area intensity than what is permitted by right, but the party also intends to construct an addition to the primary use of the property, which would then render the variance unnecessary. Certainly, three years has been, some petitions that you’ve heard in the past. Staff certainly does not object to the petitioner’s request, and we have found in practice that three years can come and go very quickly in terms of building an addition, at least to get some started in their project. So, again, staff is supportive of the five years. Certainly, within that timeframe, there is the chance, and this is certainly on the Town’s radar, is the thoroughfare plan, and changes to 300 South, otherwise known as 146th Street coming out of Hamilton County. Anybody who traverses that roadway in Hamilton County can see that it is 4 lanes at a certain distance. Certainly, it’s four lanes while coming into Zionsville, or I should say it’s been widened, not to four lanes within Zionsville, but certainly there is a push and a time will come where that road is widened to facilitate additional traffic east to west. Certainly this area will change. The setback will change, you know, somewhat. The property’s relationship to the structures will be a little bit more visible. So, certainly the landscape and the other features for privacy I think will go both ways for the petitioner as well as the moving and motoring public. Again, staff is supportive of the petition. Certainly, as mentioned, the commitment would be staff wouldn’t certainly object to that. Staff would suggest that a time frame be established for the recordation of that commitment. Certainly, our office would help to facilitate that document, we would suggest 90 days from tonight, if the petition would be approved until the time that, the maximum amount of time that could pass until the document is recorded. Page 12 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Morical Thank you, Wayne. Any questions for staff? Hearing none, I would entertain a motion and include within that please that the petitioner will make a commitment along the lines of putting that second story on within the 5-year period and adding some screening around the pole barn, between the pole barn and the street, landscaping screening. Wolff I’ll make a motion. I’ll move that Docket # 2018-41-DSV, design standard variance, in order to provide for the construction of an accessory structure which, one, exceeds the height of the primary structure by up to 4 feet in the low density single-family residential zoning district R1 be approved based on the findings of fact, and based upon the staff and presentation with the additional commitment that one, the petitioner will add a second story within 5 years to bring the site within compliance, and two, the petitioner will add landscaping screening around the pole barn. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Evinger May I just ask a question? Do we talk about having the plat combined and be re- recorded, or have it, is that going to be included in this? Morical Not as a requirement. Evinger No. Okay. Then, second. Morical Okay. Thank you. Would you be amenable to amending your motion just to make it clear that they need to file the commitments? Wolff Yes. And, I believe they should be doing that within 90 days. Morical Great idea. Thank you. Is there a second to that? Evinger Second. Morical Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. Thank you very much. Enjoy your pole barn. The next item on your agenda, and keep dishing out ice cream, of course, is Docket # 2018-42-SE, J. Marshall. Andreoli Good evening, Mr. President. For the record, my name is Mike Andreoli, 1393 West Oak Street, here in Zionsville. I represent Jim and Patty Marshall. They have sought a minor plat approval before the Plan Commission, which is scheduled next week. In anticipation of that, two things are being requested tonight of the Board. The first is special exception to place a single-family home in an ag district. This is an 11-acre tract on 275, 11-acre tract plus or minus. The Page 13 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Marshalls are seeking to divide it into three lots. So that you know, from a contrasting standpoint to one of the things that you already heard tonight, this property has not been tillable acreage. In fact, if you would visit with Mr. DeLong, I have provided him a picture of the overall tract with this old barn. I use the word historic in my narrative. It’s not on the historic register list, but it is historic from the stance that it is extremely old, very unique in terms of its design and nature. That’s the good news. The bad news is, we have gotten recently estimates in terms of what it is going to take to just even stabilize it, and in all likelihood that may be prohibitive for the new lot owner that may come along. So, essentially what we’re asking for is a special exception to locate single family homes in this district, and second of all, to be able to allow the accessory structure to remain, and I’m talking about the barn, the large barn, to remain for up to 3 years. It is our hope that somebody will come along and may want to restore that, because it’s an extremely interesting structure, and I would encourage you for your own viewing pleasure tonight, just look at the picture of it. It’s very, very interesting. We don’t know whether we’re going to be able to preserve it, whether we’re going to be able to keep it, or whether it will have to be torn down, but we are willing to make a commitment that that will be done within three years, or will be any single family homes located there unless they comply with your ordinances in terms of spacial, and square footage with regard to the barn itself, and if not, it’s going to have to come down within three years. It would be our commitment. That’s a commitment that we made in similar situations that we’ve had in front of the Board, and it somebody seeks to buy it and remove it, then that commitment will be moot, because it will no longer be in existence. But, I did want to let you know that there may be an opportunity to sell the lot, and it may not include preserving that particular barn because of some of the cost. Hope that’s not the case, but we’re just going to have to wait and see on that. I’ll be happy to answer any other questions that you have. Across the street from this property is tillable acreage, behind it to the east is tillable acreage, but this is a hard surface road, good access. Permits will have to be obtained for driveway cuts from the County and we’re well aware of that. We’ve also included on our plat and in front of the Plan Commission, a 40-foot easement around there that will carry a right to farm commitment and setback, but with regard to that, since we’re locating single-family homes, if approved, in an agricultural district. So, I’d be happy to answer any further questions you might have. Morical Thank you, Mr. Andreoli. Are there any drainage issues with this property? Andreoli No, actually there is a drain on site. I provided to Janice some of the soil borings that have already been done to make sure she understood and staff understood. There is not going to be any issues. There are drain tile on site. We’ve had the Board of Health come out. We’ve had Mr. Hedge come out to locate. In fact, they were out this week, maybe Monday or maybe last Friday they were out. Not so much to locate the area of the drain that we can tie into, which is not going to be a particular problem at all. There is some other breakdowns of some of the tile drains in the area that damage was caused to those tiles by REMC. Everything on the Marshall’s property has been appropriately taken care of and maintained, and there are no breakdowns there. Some off-site issues were reviewed with the Board of Health and the highway department, and Mr. Hedge’s office because of Page 14 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 some other areas there that may need to be repaired, or they may seek repair of those by REMC, but it’s not going to affect our ability to go ahead and have perimeter drains through the approval process. Morical Okay. Thank you. Any questions for the petitioner’s representative? Any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, may we have the staff report please? DeLong Thank you. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed, as indicated.In front of you this evening, is a special exception request to provide for a 3-lot minor subdivision within the agriculturally-zoned area. The project would also be reviewed by the Plan Commission at an upcoming meeting, specific to the drainage and the soil borings, yes, that information has been provided to Janice with our office and, as provided in the Plan Commission file, soil boring results aren’t necessarily combined with your BZA discussion. We did provide a copy of the Boone County letter as it was sent to a Chrissy, who handles the BZA side of the world in our office, and this is, you know, speaking to that meeting, speaking to the drainage tile that’s on site, these items would be vetted by the Plan Commission. Certainly at their upcoming meeting. Again, staff is supportive of the petition as filed, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Morical Thank you, Wayne. Any questions for staff? Jones So, if I hear you correctly, we are looking at the variances to subdivide the parcel, but the drainage issue will come before us at the Building Commission as part of the approval for that. This same letter will show up there to the Plan Commission, correct? DeLong Yes, it will. Certainly, this Board previously, and certainly will in the future, look to address drainage issues. Many times those projects come in front of you and they will not visit with the Plan Commission because of whatever logistics or requirements that are associated with that petition. In this particular case, there is a separate group, a separate meeting, that will occur. Certainly, this group can dive, no pun intended, into the drainage conversation, or you can certainly encourage those to be vetted at the Plan Commission. Jones So there is the opportunity for the petitioner to maybe show up in front of the Plan Commission with some of this issue addressed? DeLong Yes. That’s certainly what the Plan Commission will look to accept. Certainly what the staff would look to see. Certainly there is encouragement of items to be addressed as the Town’s engineeringstaff reviews the project, conveyance of appropriate perimeter drains, drainage systems to facilitate the contemplated residential development. Jones Okay. Morical Sounds good. Any further questions for staff? So, let’s do these one at a time again, and you know, get the right to farm acknowledgement piece in the first one we address, and the commitment related to the second one, so we can address the commitment as it relates to the barn in the second motion. So, I would entertain a motion. Page 15 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Mundy I move that Docket # 2018-42-SE, special exception petition in the agriculture district for the property located at 6475 South 275 East, approximately, supporting both the division of the 11.8-acre parcel and the establishment of new residential improvements be approved as found in the staff report, and presented, and shall be required that the petitioner execute the right to farm acknowledgement documentation. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Evinger Second. Morical Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. So, next motion. We need to note the scope of the commitment, which is on the prior page. Mundy I move that Docket # 2018-43-DSV, design standard variance, in order to allow an existing accessory structure remain without the benefit of a primary, which one, exceeds the allowable accessary square footage, and height to Lot #2, be approved with the condition that that structure be either removed or repaired or restored within a 3-year period. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Evinger Second. Morical So, would you be amenable to amending your motion that the zoning issue that is that it needs to have a primary structure on there, would you be amenable to that? Mundy I will amend that. Yes. Morical Excellent. Thank you. Is there a second to that? Evinger Second. Morical Great. Any discussion? Jones I have a quick question. There isn’t anything that prevents them from converting this into being the primary structure? DeLong Not from a zoning point of view. Certainly from a practicality and constructability and meeting the building code, residential building code. That’s certainly a possibility. And, then just since I’m mentioning that here, we’re looking at the potential of about a year seeing a new residential code being on the Page 16 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 horizon for discussion for adoption. Not saying it will be. That’s a state level decision. Certainly that’s a very, this property is a very unique opportunity for somebody to do just that, what you’re describing, Larry. Jones Okay. Morical Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? [No response] Morical Motion carries. Thank you very much, Mr. Andreoli. The next item on our agenda is Docket # 2018-44-DSV, Z’ Storage. Please state your name and address for the record. Scheidler Sure. My name is Sam Scheidler. I live at 10325 Cottonwood Court, Zionsville. Thanks for hearing our petition this evening. More importantly, or as importantly, thanks for your prior approval of our overall project earlier this year. Construction is moving along very nicely. We had hoped to be operational yet this year, but with the turn of the weather, we’re now hopeful to be operational in January. Things are moving along quite nicely. The desire and need to move this landscape bed came about from a conversation I was having with Josh Freeh in our fire department. When he was describing the space needed for maneuverability of the larger emergency vehicles around the back of the building, I just thought I should provide the same maneuverability around the front of the building also. So, we’re just asking to move the exact same bed, just south of the drive, into the grass area, closer to Parkway Drive, and thanks for your consideration. I’ll answer any questions, of course. Morical So, Mr. Scheidler, it would be on the northern side of the sidewalk. Is that right? Scheidler Yes. Morical Okay. Scheidler Just into the grass, yes. Morical So, essentially abut that sidewalk. It will be right next to the sidewalk? Scheidler No. It’s a pretty wide, grassy area. Maybe 15 feet wide from the sidewalk to the edge of the grass. We’ll just go from, you know, across the drive to the immediate grass area there. Morical Okay. Scheidler So, they’ll still kinda be close to the building. Not all the way down the sidewalk. Page 17 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Morical Got it. Okay. Any further questions for the petitioner? Thank you. Any remonstrators here tonight? Wayne, may we have the staff report please? DeLong Certainly. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed. The staff report recognizes the unique nature of redevelopment of an existing site. Certainly the unique shape of the parcel also presents some challenges, as well as trying to convert an existing structure to a new land use, as well as work within the existing pavement area that’s there. Certainly staff sees the benefit of landscaping away from the building and up more towards the public way to benefit the community. Again, staff is recommending approval of the petition as filed, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Morical Thank you, Wayne. Any questions for staff? Hearing none, I would entertain a motion. Evinger I move that Docket # 2018-44-DSV, design standards variance, in order to allow landscape bed to exceed the required 10-foot maximum distance from the foundation of a soft storage facility in the urban general business zoning district B2, for the property located at 1230 Parkway Drive be approved as filed, and based upon the findings of fact as presented. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Morical Any questions or comments? All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Motion carried. Scheidler Thank you. Morical Thank you. Good luck with finishing your construction. Okay, Wayne, I know we need to talk about our BZA meeting dates. Are there any other items we need to address? DeLong Not that I am aware of, off hand. Morical Thank you. So, the next item on our agenda is our meeting dates for 2019. Those were distributed to the Board. Any questions or comments on these dates, other than Mr. Mundy saying he may be not able to make one of them? Okay. Excellent. Well, I would entertain a motion that we approve these as our meeting dates for 2019. Jones So moved. Morical Is there a second? Wolff Second. Page 18 of 19 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2018 Morical Great. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Motion carries. And, our schedule is locked in for 2019. We are adjourned. Page 19 of 19