Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)

BZA MEETING RESULTS ZIONSVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Wednesday, August 3, 2022 6:30 PM (Local Time) THIS PUBLIC MEETING WAS CONDUCTED ONSITE AT ZIONSVILLE TOWN HALL IN ROOM 105 (COUNCIL CHAMBERS), LOCATED AT 1100 WEST OAK STREET: The following items are scheduled for consideration: I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Attendance 5 of 5 members attended. (In-person S. Mundy, C. Lake, A. Pickell, L. Jones and Virtual K. Postlethwait III. Approval of the July 6, 2022, Minutes IV. Continuance or Withdrawal Requests Docket Name Address of Project Item to be considered Number Petitioner requested a withdrawal of the Petition. BZA members acknowledged the withdrawal. 9199 Brookstone Petition for a Development Standards Variance to provide 2022-41-DSV D. Linder Place for an in-ground swimming pool which: Zionsville, IN 46077 1) Exceeds the allowable lot coverage 2) Reduces the rear setback from 25' to 10' in the Urban Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R-SF-2. V. Continued Business Docket Item to be considered Name Address of Project Number Denied as presented & filed w/ exhibits & per staff report. 4 in Favor, 1 Opposed 2022-39-DSV 11875 E. 200 South D. Carey Petition for a Development Standards Variance for a Zionsville, IN 46077 reduction in the buffer yard to construct an in-ground swimming pool in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG). August 4, 2022  Approved as presented & filed w/ exhibits & per staff report. 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Development Standards Variance to provide 2022-40-DSV 6490 S. SR 267 for an accessory structure which: D. Giles Lebanon, IN 46052 1) Exceeds the permitted accessory square footage 2) Exceeds the allowable height for an accessory building (being taller than primary) 3) Reduction of the buffer yard in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG). VI. New Business Docket Name Address of Project Item to be considered Number & Link Approved as presented & filed w/ exhibits & per staff report. 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for a Development Standards Variance to 2022-43-DSV 8750 E. 575 South M. Hussain provide for an addition which: Zionsville, IN 46077 1) Reduces the front yard setback 2) Memorialize the existing front yard setback in the Rural Single and Two-Family Residential Zoning District (R-2). Approved as presented & filed w/ exhibits & per staff report. 5 in Favor, 0 Opposed 2022-44-DSV 3575 E. 400 South Petition for Development Standards Variance to provide F. Paul Lebanon, IN 46052 for an accessory structure which: 1) Exceeds the permitted accessory square footage 2) Exceeds the allowable height for an accessory building in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG). VII. Other Matters to be considered: Docket Item to be considered Name Address of Project Number None. August 4, 2022 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 In Attendance: Steve Mundy, Chris Lake, Andy Pickell and Larry Jones Virtual: Kathi Postlethwait Staff attending: Suzanne Baker, Janice Stevanovic, Darren Chadd, attorney A quorum is present. All Pledge of Allegiance. Mundy Thank you. The next item is attendance. Suzanne, will you do, doing that? Baker Yes. Mr. Mundy? Mundy Present. Baker Mr. Lake? Lake Present. Baker Mr. Pickell? Pickell Present. Baker Mrs. Postlethwait? Postlethwait Present. Baker Mr. Jones? Jones Present. Mundy Thank you. The next item is the approval of the July 6, 2022 minutes. Those were provided to you in your packets. Are there any questions or changes to be made to those minutes? Hearing none is there a motion to approve? Lake So moved. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Pickell Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Pickell. All in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] The minutes are approved. The next item not on the agenda but we have made a practice of waiving our standard practice of requiring certified notification to all Page 1 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 those that must receive notice. We’ve allowed for that to be done with first class mail during the pandemic and we have had one notice been given by one of the petitioners in that fashion so is there a motion to waive that requirement for this meeting? Lake So moved. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Pickell Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Pickell. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] That is approved. Thank you. I’ll note that we have had a request for withdrawal on Docket Number 2022-41- DSV, D. Linder at 9199 Brookstone Place, Zionsville, Indiana. They have made a timely request to withdraw their petition. There is no need to make a motion on that, it is automatic but just want to note it for the record. With that we will move on to the agenda. The first item is Docket Number 2022- 39-DSV, D. Carey at 11875 East 200 South, Zionsville. This is a petition which was heard at the July Board of Zoning Appeals meeting and we had a split vote. We had a, a Board comprised of four members that night. The vote was 2-2 so it is an automatic continuance to be heard again this evening. We do have all five members with us, four present and one virtual. We also ask from the back if we have any individuals during the course of this evening’s meeting that wish to speak or be heard, if you would let me know. And I’d ask right now if there is a count of any individuals that are joining us virtually. Rust None yet. Mundy Thank you. I’d like some active, physical movement back there to make sure that I know if there’s something happening there. All right, this, Mr. Andreoli you’ll be representing the Careys this evening? Andreoli Yes, thank you, Mr. President. For the record, Mike Andreoli, 1393 West Oak Street here in Zionsville. I represent Mr. and Mrs. Carey who are with us tonight. It looks like they brought their entire family with them as well and they in essence made the presentation at the last meeting. I had not been retained at that point to help them go through the process. I was retained subsequent to that meeting that ended up in a 2 to 2 vote to look at their petition, in essence, their submittals, make any suggestions that I, I thought might be relevant or helpful to members of the, of the Board of Zoning Appeals in the furtherance of trying to make a vote. Page 2 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 In essence, this is a, a request for a variance from the buffer yard requirements that are, are established in the agricultural acreage. You would note and from Mr. Pickell’s benefit, there’s really not any formal agricultural on either of these two properties, although the Goldsmiths, who own a property, own property immediately behind and to the side of, of the Careys, have a horse farm there and they, they board horses and have horses there so it’s a, it’s an agricultural use of sorts in that regard but there isn’t any farming or anything of that nature with regard to that. Nevertheless, these are two ag parcels that are together and the buffer yard for ag parcels is a, is a 40-foot buffer yard. They’re seeking to put a pool in. They’ve looked at all different opportunities and alternatives as to where to locate the pool, whether it could be a little closer to the house – that’s going to cause removal of a beautiful tree that they have there that kind of defines the property that I don’t think anybody in area wants to see. The, the other alternative is to put it in the back where they’ve located it and part of the reason it’s located in this particular general location is it can be viewed from the house. Back in 2006 there was a barn that was put up that is in the side yard setback. Avariance was granted for that and it exists today and has existed apparently since 2006 without any problems from the neighbors or complaints from the neighbors or anything of that nature. The Careys, before they presented to you at the last meeting, actually went and received letters that are a part of your packet from the surrounding property owners indicating they had no specific objections to this at all and that includes the Goldsmiths who are the ones that are immediately adjacent and to the rear of this particular property. They indicated that they had no objection to the pool. Notwithstanding all of that, the Careys also provided me with some of the transcript and some of the information of some of the comments and I picked up on, on member Postlethwait’s comments with regard to her concerns regarding horses. I don’t know all that much about horses but I know that Kathi Postlethwait does and so I went ahead and called the Goldsmiths and had a, had a discussion with Mrs. Goldsmith about the fact that this pool is going to be located fairly close to the back property line. They board horses back there, they have a board fence that currently separates the property, but that’s all they have back there. She did not seem particularly concerned about that but she did offer a caveat. She indicated to me, and we have memorialized that in correspondence that’s part of your packet, that she doesn’t know how the horses are going to react to the fact that there’s a pool and there’s kids back there fairly close to the property line. She doesn’t think that’s going to be a problem and she thinks when the construction occurs that will adjust them to that and that won’t be a problem. But she suggested if there’s a problem we’ll just put some landscaping and other things back there and I suggested to them, to her with all due respect, that, that my clients were the ones that were asking for something that shouldn’t really be her responsibility to do that and that it’s best to try to deal with these things now if we can to make sure they’re memorialized or get them in writing. So, essentially what I have done is in talking with the Careys who really agree to this is to, to have them agree to put up a 40-foot 8-foot solid board fence along the area of the pool between the pool and the, and, and the fence that’s currently there that defines the property line which essentially is the length of the pool that would shelter the pool and some of the noise from the horses that, that are boarded behind that particular area. And in talking with Mrs. Goldsmith, she doesn’t suggest that that be done now. She’d like the opportunity to see how the Page 3 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 horses react and if there’s any negative reaction she would request that and, and so we have committed and we’ll put this in written commitment form with any suggestions that members of the Board have to go ahead and construct that pool or construct the pool and the, and the fence as designated in the letter in the event that Mrs. Goldsmith decides that that is necessary. And it, it doesn’t have to be an explanation on why if she wants the fence she just simply has to write a letter and that will trigger our requirement to go ahead and construct that fence. I couldn’t think of a better way to try to solve it not knowing whether it’s a problem that needs to be solved than try to preemptively deal with it and make sure there’s a solution to this and that it’s an iron-clad solution and acceptable to both parties and hopefully the, the Board itself in the event that Mrs. Goldsmith decides that there’s a concern. One of the other things that I did a little research on for the Careys because I know there was some comments about this 40-foot ag buffer yard. That, that was borne out of the old ordinances that were established in the county a number of years ago. I know because I have most of the ordinances back into the ‘60s that I keep at the office. From time to time you need to go back and take a peek at them to see what historical information you can glean from them. And our last ordinance that was done, I think in, in the ‘90s, there was a provision put in there with regard to the buffer yard. It came about not because farmers themselves need any buffer yard one to the other, it came about because of the starting proliferation of single-family residences in the ag areas and how that might interface with the farming communities. So two things were borne of that: A 40- foot buffer yard and the Right to Farm covenant that is normally required, that you require in these types of cases where you’re actually putting a single-family residence in an agricultural ground. Here the residence has been there for a long period of time. I thought about making that suggestion but I don’t think it’s really relevant because we don’t really have farming, we really have horses in that particular location. And, interestingly enough, it’s, it’s not because of setback from noise or any of that thing, that aspect of it. It, it was borne out of the fact that we didn’t want to have any plantings in that particular area in the event somebody put a home there they didn’t want to put, they didn’t want to put trees or any type of shrubs in that, in that buffer yard area in case they spray on the other side of it, it would kill all of that. So, specifically, in your ordinance itself under the ag plantings it said no plantings permitted in the 30 foot closest to the agricultural zoning in that 40-foot buffer yard. So and, and that’s just what we have as a 10-foot buffer yard. You don’t have any plantings in there or anything like that – you can’t put any plantings in there in, in, in least in terms of use from a, from a green standpoint or an ecological standpoint. They don’t allow any, any plants in that 30-foot buffer yard. We really don’t have that in this situation at all. It’s not a traditional situation like we’ve seen. This language is inherited from the agricultural uses that we had in the county. These are really two residential uses, one has horses, the other does not, but they still carry the ag zoning classification and that’s why they have to be dealt with. I’d be happy to answer any questions, engage in any discussions. I think the Careys just want to do the right thing. They want to be able to put the pool back there if they can. Their desire is to have their kids outside and not inside on the computers. We’ve talked with them a little bit about that. Even the last vacation they took where they went had, had that in mind so that really is something that Page 4 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 they’re attuned to but they really have tried to see if we can make this correct with the adjacent property owner, Mrs. Goldsmith, and make sure that even needs that she may not be expressing right now are dealt with in the event that they crop up later which I think is important not to have these kinds of concerns fester. If there is a concern, she has a concern, we’ll just build the fence, not a problem. Thank you. Mundy Thank you. Any questions for the petitioners’ representative? Hearing none – Postlethwait Could I, oh, Mr. Mundy if I could just share a couple of thoughts because I, I’ve been cited. So I would just like to point out that my, looking back through the minutes from last month’s meeting, my concerns were not about noise with regard to having a pool in that spot. The horses will adjust and this, this, in fact, is an agricultural use. I keep hearing that this is not ag but I have horses and I, believe me, it’s an agricultural use. There are things that come along with horses that are, that are purely not residential, what do I want to say – results – let’s put it that way. My concern is with the constraints on the neighboring property owner that putting a pool in that spot which will essentially be encompassed by the, the, the agricultural buffer area for its entire length and parallel to that horse fence. The current owner of that neighboring property may not run the spreader along that fence line. I know that we do and it’s the way to keep weeds down from growing up underneath the fence. Also, if the horses are, are pastured in that area, they may well come and stand there and there are things that, that result from that process that may not be so pleasant for anyone who is using the fence or using the pool, sorry. So, I think that if in fact the Board makes the decision to approve this petition, and I continue to feel that it should not be approved, that somehow some kind of waiver or whatever needs to be attached to both the petitioners’ property and in subsequent if there are other owners of this property in the future that gives the neighbor with the horse farm the ability to use that property of the horse farm in whatever way he or she deems to be appropriate and that would include running a spreader and boarding horses and having horses pasturing in that neighboring parcel of land. I, I suspect if that were a herd of cows there perhaps the pool might not seem so appealing in that location because of the, the odors and, and other things that are attached to having livestock and horses are, in fact, livestock and it is, in fact, an agricultural use in my view. Mundy Thank you Mrs. Postlethwait. I have a question for you Mrs. Postlethwait – in your opinion, I know you’re a horse owner, I, and, and maybe I’m incorrect in this – I thought there was also some concern about the activities in the pool might spook the horses to some extent but for that and for some of the other things that you mentioned, what, what is your opinion about the 8-foot fence that they have proposed would be constructed if needed? Would that alleviate any of those issues? I know the odor issue would not go away but any of the others? Postlethwait Well I, I’m not sure that’s an elegant solution to the, to what would be a problem. I, I would from the petitioners’ side of that fence, I would be concerned about having a fence with, just off the pool deck. I mean we’re only talking about a 10- foot distance between, if my memory serves me well, between that pool and the fence line. And you, you introduce into that space a, a long span of a wooden fence and I could see the, the possibility of injury if somebody, you know, getting out of the pool and running along the pool deck which I know children Page 5 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 are not supposed to do but I think the chance of injury there might be a problem. I don’t, I’m not a big believer in, in privacy fences like that and it’s hard to know. As you say, it will not alleviate the possibility of odors that come from livestock. I think the horses one way or another, a lot depends on the horse, some are more nervous than others, others adjust very well having activity around them over time but, again, my con, my concern is really about the constraints that have, will be placed on the neighbor whether it’s that neighbor or that person sells the property in, in the future to having that pool, particularly since we’re talking about not just the, the end of the pool, we’re talking about the entire span of the, the length of the pool running parallel to their property. Did that answer your question Mr. Mundy? Mundy Yes, thank you. Were there any other questions for the petitioners’ representative? Seeing none, are there any remonstrators here tonight or online who wish to speak for or against this petition? No? Seeing none could we have the staff report please? Baker Yes, thank you. I’ll kind of give a brief history just for the member who wasn’t here. The, initially these type of requests can go to the building commissioner which this petition did go to our former building commissioner and he did not approve the waiver request of the buffer yard. Therefore, and they, the petitioners, went to the BZA to request the variance. With that said, looking at the surrounding properties in the area that don’t have pools and also are not in the buffer yard, I think and it also said in the letter from the former building commissioner, which staff is also agreeable to, that it’s meant for agriculture- type uses to be buffered from that, not necessarily pools. So with that said, staff is not in favor of this request and I’m happy to answer any questions. Mundy Any questions for staff? No? Pickell When was the party or the property subdivided, the two properties next door? They’re obviously newer homes but they were, were they originally attached to this property? Baker The adjacent parcels? Pickell Yes. Baker I’ll try to pull it up here and look. Lake So food for thought – another owner of that horse farm property in the future could take that pasture and turn that into tillable land if they so chose in which case you have an overspray issue again. Andreoli Mr. Mundy – in, in – Mundy Yes, Mr. Andreoli? Andreoli In response to the question that was posed by Mr. Pickell, my client advises in the research that she did before she bought the property, the actual property has been in existence since – Page 6 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 L. Carey The house was in the 1870s. Andreoli In the 1800s because it was an old house there for many, many years. I don’t know that it was actually attached to the property next to it or when that split occurred if it even was a split at some point probably was but we have no independent knowledge as to when that split actually took place. Pickell Maybe, maybe a more direct question is when were those two homes built? Andreoli Pardon? Pickell When were those two homes adjacent to this property built? Was it the last 10 years? Last two decades? Mundy For both the petitioner and the representative, our transcriptionist had a difficult time from the last meeting because there was a lot of talk that did not occur at the microphone. So if you would please, anything that you wish to share with this Board, please do so at the microphone. Thank you. L. Carey Well, first of all, I’m Lara Carey at 11875 East 200 South. We moved here a year ago from Colorado and we purchased a very old farmhouse that I believe was kind of reigned over all that property at some point in time. I don’t know the exact dates that the adjacent properties were constructed so I’m, I’m afraid I don’t have that information but I believe it’s like ‘80s or ’90s or – Andreoli In talking with Mrs. Goldsmith, they’ve, they’ve occupied that property because I’m familiar who they were for a number of many, many years. I just don’t know when – Pickell Okay. Andreoli How they first constructed the property but those, those two properties have been there for many, many years adjacent to each other. Pickell Okay. Andreoli And as they say, there was a, there was a barn that was put up that needed a side yard setback immediately adjacent to the Goldsmiths, and that was done in 2006 and was approved by the, by the Board without any objection and I asked Mrs. Goldsmith about that. They haven’t had any problems or difficulties. And so one of the reasons why I wanted to talk to her were the issues that member Postlethwait raised with regard to the horses because if anybody would have any concerns, it would be the people who live there who had the horses and have had them there for many years. So I wanted to make sure she didn’t have any problems, or if she suggested something else. And she told me that, you know, I’d be happy to go ahead and just put some landscaping in if there’s an issue later. But in talking with my client, that really wasn’t, that really shouldn’t be up to her to do that. That should be, that should be what we’re doing if we’re seeking to go ahead and get a variance and put a pool there. So and I, so we focused on the, on the wall. And I must tell you, if we go to do the wall and she Page 7 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 would, and she asked for that, or if she prefers landscaping, we’ll, we’ll do the alternative. And we’d be happy to put that in the actual commitments t,hat if we decide that she wants landscaping as opposed to trees and this, that and the other as opposed to a wall, to the extent we have room and even on her side we’d be happy to go ahead and do that as an alternative with, with, with it costed out and put the same dollar amount in. We have no issue with either one if she makes that decision so. Thanks. L. Carey Thank you. May I say? Andreoli No, you may not. Baker I may interrupt. I, the property to the east, I’m sorry to the west – it looks like the residents and the barn were constructed in 1991 according to the Boone County property record card. Pickell Thanks. Lake It, it appears based on the aerial that there are a series of five or six what look like 80-100 acre lots that originally marched down that road and that that farmhouse would’ve been, the, the house of that 80 or 100-acre plot that was then subdivided along 200 for what appears to be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 other, 5 or 6 other homes and residences so. Pickell That was all I had. Thank you. Jones So I’m still of the same mindset as before. Setbacks, buffer yards, are all fairly common to every type of residential and even commercial and even agricultural property we have out there. While we regularly give variances for especially, let’s say the Village for setbacks or buffers or anything, it’s because there’s actually some sort of history of or and sometimes we’re actually trying to impose a set of zoning rules and regs after the property was developed and the property was not developed with those rules in mind and so variances are often needed just to get it into compliance. When we talk about the idea of barns being in these buffer yards, we’re also talking about a structure whose use is compatible with the underlying zoning. Later we have another request for a barn in a buffer yard but it’s fairly clear looking through it, it is intended to be used as a barn for storage. There’s no plumbing, it seems to be the bare minimum and it seems like it would be compatible to whatever was going on in any adjoining property. A pool is not a compatible use. It is a completely different type of use than a barn or anything else that you would find in an agriculturally zoned piece of property. Finally, as you look through the Findings of Fact, #3 is “strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in unnecessary hardships in the use of the property.” If you read through all of their responses, and these are all what I would consider emotional choices. They don’t want to cut down a tree, they don’t want to use up grass, they don’t want to change the driveway. The property can still be used as their residence as is and there’s plenty of other locations a pool could be placed on that usable ground and they could get all their emotional benefit of the pool without requiring a variance. Page 8 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Mundy Thank you for those comments. I, I would say that when we look at those procedural considerations, it is often difficult to come up with what might be a hardship in everyone’s mind when if, if it were, if the ordinance was applied strictly in some cases. So while I agree with you, continue to live there, we have had lots of cases where making, granting a variance to allow what the petitioner is asking for would be difficult to convince everyone that it was a hardship if we strictly applied it. The, and I’ll, I’ll give my own opinion on it. I, I view this as fairly low risk in terms of creating future problems but will admit that if the ground immediately behind the pool were turned into tillable ground spraying could be an issue. The spraying would not be what you’d want occurring near a pool but it’s been a horse farm for some time. There are ways of, of making certain that there’s safety in, involved in that and the use of the land, I see, is compatible in that you could always make the case that there’s never a place for a pool in the country and that simply isn’t true. It can be compatible but in, in their case they wish to have it within that buffer zone. Postlethwait I would like to just mention and, again, I, I think as I’ve said a moment ago, I do think that putting a pool in that spot puts a constraint on the neighbor, whether it’s the existing neighbor or any, anybody who might subsequently buy that property, as regards to the use of their own property. And I think the idea that it might turn into tillable ground is a good example of that, but also being able to run a manure spreader. There might – I would say if, if, in fact, the Board decides to approve this petition that something should be attached to it which precludes any complaint on the part of the petitioner with regard to what’s happening on the neighboring property and that includes smells, livestock smells or effluent from livestock that would be happening in that horse pasture because there would be livestock, whether it be horses or cows or whatever they might choose to have there. So I think that would have to be tied to that property going forward so that within a year or whatever there aren’t complaints about well, gosh, we, we’d like to be at our pool but it smells bad because there are horses that stand there and watch us and do what horses do. So that would be my suggestion if the Board feels the need to approve this, this petition. Mundy So Mrs. Postlethwait you’re essentially saying, I think, that the adjoining neighbor there needs to be assured of the Right to Farm which includes all of those things that you mentioned. Is that, that correct? Postlethwait I feel, Mr. Mundy, that if someone came to me and said they wanted to build a pool within 10 feet of my horse fence I would be very stringently opposed to that happening because I think, I just don’t think it’s a, I think there’s risks to that with regard to the use of the pool and also the uses of, of the pasturage that I have here. So I just, yeah, I would just want, I think I would want assurances that there are not going to be problems because of unforeseen things in, with regard to the, to that livestock. I don’t know whether they’ve spent a lot of time out there in that spot where they’re wanting to put the pool, whether they’ve gone over, maybe they’ve visited the horse farm, maybe they’ve been in the barn, maybe they’ve been around where the horses are to understand that there are things that come with having horses that may not be consistent with having a pool in that spot. Mundy Thank you. Page 9 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Andreoli Mr., Mr. President – may I respond to that suggestion in terms of our thoughts on it? Mundy Yes, go ahead Mr. Andreoli. Andreoli As I mentioned, maybe, maybe based upon the comments that member Postlethwait has made, although I wasn’t thinking in light of using the Right to Farm law, but maybe it would be applicable. It may not be applicable with Mrs. Goldsmith but if she would sell the property and they decide to have cattle or hogs or something else in that agricultural use as opposed to the horse farm, she doesn’t want to buy herself a problem because now we’ve got a residential use with a pool right next to her property. So I have no problem in adding a Right to Farm covenant along with a covenant with regard to building the fence. I think that makes, makes sense to me. If, if, if it makes sense to the members of the, of the Board. Jones I don’t think the intent of the Right to Farm Act is to allow variances to be granted on any certain piece of property. The Right to Farm Act is, or what we’ve put out there, is just a blanket cover that whenever somebody is putting a residential use in an agricultural area – the underlying zoned land is zoned agricultural – that they understand that the adjoining properties as they conduct their business may have a blanket effect on the entirety of the lot and the residents and everything they’ve done. I, I don’t – I, I see the Right to Farm Act as a, a protection that goes one certain direction. It shouldn’t go back and forth. So, once again, I don’t think signing a Right to Farm Act is a reason to allow a, grant a variance. It’s not the, not the intent. Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. And, and I agree that that is the intent of the Right to Farm Act. It is not to facilitate the granting of a variance. Pickell Just to follow – I, I – this is a beautiful property and I understand your wants and needs but I also, it really looks like there are additional places that you could look at and, and if this were an extension of the existing barn that you’re talking about, I really, I mean it would be like a no brainer for me to be honest but I’m having a tough time not finding, I, I mean looking at your property and, and I see a couple of different places that I would much rather have a pool with my kids that age. D. Carey One would be hidden by a garage – Mundy Sir, if Mr., Mr. Carey if you would come to the microphone please. L. Carey Thank you very much Mr. Pickell for your comments. One of the things we spent quite a bit of time going through like the last one was identifying the different locations and some of the challenges with each one of those locations. Because I agree with you. When we bought that property we thought oh there will be no problem putting in a pool. My problem is I want to be able to see the children from the house. This is, in my opinion, the best, most safe location that I can see the kids. I mean, I spent time putting an 80-page document together and hiring our buddy here because I want to go to sleep at night knowing I’ve tried Page 10 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 everything to create the most safe location for our kids to swim. Also, whether it’s this pool or any other pool, I have three wonderful children and there are many wonderful children in this community. I implore each one of you to think long and hard about anybody that brings a pool in front of you because as parents we were, we are, we have a tidal wave of inputs coming into our children’s lives where they want to do this. Here we are trying to create a place in the community, not just for our children but for their friends to come to, to create new memories, to have new opportunities. And you may call this an emotional thing but it, it is, I think it’s really important that as community members we do everything we can to facilitate these opportunities. The reality is, is this is, this is, in my opinion, a wonderful location for the pool. It’s the best and safest location. There’s a, a, a U-shaped driveway. I don’t know if you could see from the aerial. If you draw a 40-foot line from the outside of the property you can see there isn’t a good other option for this pool to be placed. This – Pickell Do, do operate ag equipment? L. Carey Do I personally? No. Pickell It’s just for, it’s for personal, private vehicles, right? L. Carey Yeah, it’s only – Pickell There’s no ag vehicles going down that driveway? L. Carey No. Pickell Not, it’s intended use was – L. Carey Yes and, and I might add just as a point – I grew up on a farm with horses. I’m very familiar with how they smell and where they – I, I didn’t do it in a big scale. It was only a 5-acre farm. My father’s visiting from western New York, he knows what that’s like. I’m familiar with horses and their spookiness and whatnot. And we treat all the neighbors, the neighbors with like the utmost respect. I just know that’s not going to be an issue now or – Pickell I, I want to be clear that, that I, I have no problem with someone wanting to put a pool next to a horse farm or a hog farm or anything like that. That is your prerogative. What I do have a problem with is the location when there are other locations that I can see myself that you could put – Andreoli Well, it, it’s, the most suitable other location is, is next to the house or close to the house and to do that we’ll have to take that large tree out which is kind of a focal point. Pickell I understand. Lake So this is not technically the, the safest place to put the pool. The safest place to put the pool is closest to the house. It just happens to require a tree coming out. So I just want that clear because this is far enough away from the house that it’s actually less safe than if it were closer to the house. Page 11 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Pickell That’s a sprint. Postlethwait I agree. Pickell That’s a full-on sprint to get to the pool. Lake I was looking at the picture that you provided off the back porch and I go back to a comment I made last time that the water level of the pool is 8 to 12 inches below the deck of the pool and with the glare of light you will not be able to see below the surface of that pool and so if one of your kids had an accident and was floating below the surface you would not see that from the back porch. So this is not the safest place. The safest place is to take a tree out and put it in there. And Mr. Andreoli, I have a lot of respect for you, you mentioned something about that tree being – I can’t remember your word – iconic or whatever it was initially. It’s one of three trees on that site and it’s not even the biggest one so – D. Carey If, if, if that were the case believe me if it were just some ordinary tree in an ordinary area of the yard we wouldn’t even be here right now. We just would’ve done it but it’s the most gorgeous tree on our property, it’s, it’s, it’s amazing. It makes the property. We say this all the time but also that’s our only location for, that, that’s fenced in and allows the dogs and kids to run around – L. Carey In the middle of the U-shaped driveway. D. Carey It’s the only spot we have as well. So, I wish this were the case. I wish it would’ve been easier. We would not be here. The, the amount of effort that’s put into this to try and get the pool in, in the right spot, the, the best spot by far was not because we enjoy going through all this work and, and doing all this. It was an unbelievable amount of work because the bottom line is we can’t get a pool otherwise, it’s just not going to happen. Lake You know there used to be a pool in that exact same spot? D. Carey It was an above ground pool. L. Carey Above ground, little round pool. D. Carey Just a little, tiny thing. Lake It’s not a little, tiny thing. It’s about as big surface area wise as the pool you’re going to put in. D. Carey Yeah, I, I know but – Lake Not including the deck so, I mean, it – a pool works there. D. Carey If it was an above ground pool maybe we’d put it there but – L. Carey But even so it will ruin the tree, even if it was a little above ground pool is what I was told and that’s why they took it down. So that’s a beautiful tree. My Page 12 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Christmas cards I sent out were named Catalpa Hideaway because of the, the look of it. It does, I wonder if neighbors would be more offended by that tree being taken down than by a, a pool because it is so beautiful. Lake Frankly, they can’t see it because there’s trees all around it that block their view of that tree. L. Carey What was your point? L. Carey I’m sorry, Mr. Lake. Lake I just said that your neighbors can’t even see that tree because there’s trees – large, mature trees all the way around your property that screen their view of that tree. L. Carey Well, they can when they come over to our house. Anyway, I, I really appreciate you guys taking the time to hear our case. I, I firmly believe and I really wish you could come over and just look at the property because I think you would see that there’s been a lot of time spent on this for a good reason. And I, I, I guess I have no more to add. I just, I think this is the best, wonderful use of space for, for this property, not just for us but for future owners. I believe it is safe. Mr. Lake you are absolutely right. I, I grew up with a pool as well and you, you want to be close by if you have little kids. Our kids can swim. It’s more you peek out if someone’s – It’s a visual check to make sure they’re okay. You know, you kind of have cameras and stuff but you don’t want to like open up a phone to look at a camera or run, you just want to be able to look out the window and say are all three kids there, are they having fun, you know. It’s a visual check and as a mother I can tell you I am more concerned than anyone else in this room about the safety of my kids and I believe that’s the safest place. There are – I’ll stop talking. I do appreciate whatever you decide. I thank you for this time and for everybody else who has been incredibly patient. Thank you very much. Mundy Thank you. Any further discussion among the Board? Jones Can I make a motion? Andreoli Ah, Ah-- Mundy Yeah and still we still, there’s nothing from online? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Andreoli did you have another point to make? Andreoli Although there hasn’t been any discussion with regard to the, how close this is to the side yard setback. We are willing to look at and have looked at alternatives. If, if the side yard setback closest to the Goldsmiths, even though they haven’t raised this issue is, is a problem, we can, we can move that pool farther away from that side yard setback so we’re only asking for a rear yard setback for the pool. We can adjust that by switching in terms of how the pool would be situated back there so at least the pool proper will be still in view but farther, farther to the, farther to the one side and away from the side yard setback with the Goldsmiths. It would just simply move down the property line and we would not have a side yard setback. Although the Goldsmith hasn’t, hasn’t raise a concern Page 13 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 about that, if that is significant or a change that would justify a vote by a member of the Board, we’d be willing to do that and just move that pool down so that it would be out of the side yard setback and only in the rear yard setback that we would need a variance from but not a side yard setback. We can relocate it and still accomplish it by juxtapositioning where the concrete might be versus the pool. Jones But isn’t that going to make the view of the pool worse? Andreoli Pardon? Jones Wouldn’t that make the view of the pool worse? The ability to see? Nothing. Andreoli Are you being flippant or? Jones No, I’m actually being very serious. What you’re suggesting is moving the pool to the east which means the existing 600 and some odd square foot barn gets in way of the view from the house. So – Andreoli It would still be in the same general location I suggested [53:16 inaudible] Jones I’ve heard 15 minutes about how this one specific – L. Carey Mr. Jones – the location wouldn’t change, the location of the pool. Jones All right. L. Carey The whole. Oh sorry. But I mean I think there’s, there’s a miscommunication – sorry, sorry. I’m so glad [53:30 inaudible off microphone] Jones All right, can we get a motion? Mundy Yeah, I think that Mr. Jones has a point. Pickell Yeah. Mundy It would, you would still be asking for a rear yard setback variance. Andreoli Yes, we would still need the rear yard. Mundy And there are – Andreoli We would just not need the side yard if that was significant to any members of the, of the Board. If not, then it’s, it’s a suggestion that is going nowhere but it, it is a suggestion nonetheless. And I know we’ve approved a lot of pools with a lot of variances including some in Zionsville on lots that really shouldn’t accommodate them and given the space of these two lots and the size of them I would respectfully suggest to putting a pool in the rear yard especially when the neighbor has absolutely no objection to it does not cause harm to our ordinances or your approval process, but thank you. Page 14 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Mundy All right. Is there any merit to some discussion among the Board on a slightly modified location? Lake Not for me. Postlethwait No. Mundy Hearing none then I think we are in a position where we need a motion made. Jones I move that Docket Number 2022-39-DSV, Development Standards Variance for a reduction in the buffer yard to construct an in-ground swimming pool at the property located at 11875 East 200 South, Zionsville in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG) be denied. Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. Is there a second? Pickell Second. Postlethwait Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Pickell. I suggest we do a roll call vote, particularly since Ms. Postlethwait is virtual. Baker Mr. Jones. Jones Nay. Mundy Whoop – Lake Um. Mundy Just a moment – Jones I’m sorry. My bad. Mundy The motion is – Jones Yes. Mundy And I’ll say this for everyone’s – Jones All right. Mundy Benefit Larry – Jones I gotcha. Mundy The motion is to deny the petition so a yea vote would be denial, a nay vote would be an opposition. Jones I guess I need to learn how I, I denial. Sorry. Yea. Page 15 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Baker Mrs. Postlethwait? Postlethwait Yea. Baker Mr. Pickell? Pickell Yea. Baker Mr. Lake? Lake Yea. Baker Mr. Mundy? Mundy Nay. Mundy So the motion to deny petition was approved 4 to 1. Thank you for all of your efforts Mr. and Mrs. Carey. Pickell I hope to see you guys back. Mundy We will need to have the Finding of Facts and that’ll be next time for our next meeting just to sign those. The next item on the agenda is Petition Number 2022- 40-DSV, D. Giles, 6490 South State Road 267, Lebanon. This was a petition that was continued from the July 6th meeting. It was continued due to an error in the notifications. Those have now been made and Mr. Frandsen will you be representing Mr. Giles? Frandsen Yes sir. My name is Kent Frandsen, Mr. Mundy and gentleman and ladies of the Board. I’m an attorney practicing at 225 West Main Street in Lebanon and with me here this evening is Daniel Giles, the petitioner. Mr. Giles has lived at this location, 6490 South State Road 267 for nearly 50 years. He built that home on that property in 1975. He is a retired union electrician. He has one outbuilding, accessory building, pole-type building on the property but as, like a lot of us, we seem to accumulate more stuff than we have room for and he would like a second building on the property to essentially mirror the existing pole barn. To do that he needs three development standard variances. Of course, the existing barn is larger, is taller than the house on the property as is common with these pole barns. He would like to have the new building be the same height as the existing building. It would be located immediately to the south of the existing building, essentially right up against it. it would be the same height, it would be a 30 x 60 building, 1,800 square feet in size. And that, coupled with the barn that’s already there, puts him above the total square footage of the existing residential structure on the property, hence, the need for the second variance. And the third variance is he would like to locate this building on the south side of the existing barn close to the south side of his property, hence, he needs a variance within the 40-foot ag buffer in the area. The good news about it is, frankly, it will not look, it will not look odd. Sometimes these things get decided it seems to be based upon appearances – it Page 16 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 won’t stick out. The building will be compatible with the existing barn. The property to the south has a big side yard which runs all the way up close to Mr. Giles’ own home so putting the barn there will not be obviously close to the boundary line. You can’t tell by driving by there looking at the property where the boundary line is. The property owner to the south, Mr. Connan has written a letter in support of the application before you tonight. The staff report, I think, addresses accurately the practical realities of this situation. The, the whole area out there along 267 is a residential area largely, with any number of outbuildings, accessory buildings, barns. Several of them have multiple buildings on the property. This will not look unusual. It will fit into what’s there now. He would like to put his RV in there. He’s got a couple of tractors which he has mowing equipment. He’s got a vehicle he would like to store and he would rather get it in there, get it inside rather than having it outside where it, it tends to get a little junky when these sorts of, these things get just stacked up outside. So putting a nice building there and putting these pieces of equipment inside actually will, I think, improve the view and look of the appearance of the neighborhood than if this variance would be denied. This is not a business activity. He will not be conducting any business activity. He’s retired and he has no interest in doing business. It’s not a, it’s not a building for a maid or a grandmother or a relative, there are no, there’ll be no plumbing or living quarters. So with that Mr. Giles is here. He’s happy to answer any questions. I presented some photographs that I took before the last proposed meeting in case some of you have not had a chance to see it. I’d be happy to explain what those pictures reflect if you have any questions about them. Thank you for your consideration. That’s all we have at this point. Mundy Thank you Mr. Frandsen. We’re passing those photos down now for those that had not seen larger photographs that you brought this evening. As those are being viewed, does anyone have questions for Mr. Frandsen or Mr. Giles? Seeing none do we have any remonstrators here this evening or online? Nothing online, no one here this evening? All right, could we have the staff report please? Baker Yes, thank you. I’ll start by talking about the buffer yard because I want to be clear on that first. As I stated last time, the buffer yard can be waived by the building commissioner. Unfortunately, we don’t have a technical building commissioner currently so that option to waive that is not an option. They were already going to the BZA for the accessory square footage and the height so we just added on to the petition. With this specific request as it relates to the buffer yard, staff had felt that there are adjacent, there are other pole barns in the immediate area that also do not meet the buffer yard and traditionally a pole barn is a more agricultural type structure so with that said and with the height and also the square footage also kind of goes along with what’s around the immediate area and, therefore, staff is in favor of all three of the requests. I’m happy to answer any other questions. Mundy Thank you. Any questions for staff? Any discussion or questions among the Board? Hearing none is there a motion to this petition? Page 17 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Lake I move that Docket Number 2022-40-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for the accessory square footage to exceed the primary up to 6,147 square feet at the property located at 6490 South State Road 267, Lebanon, Indiana 46052 in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Jones Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. Any further discussion? All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy And Mrs. Postlethwait I’ll just ask to verify – that was an aye from you is that correct? Postlethwait That’s correct. Mundy Thank you. That motion passes. Lake Larry – Jones One question – Lake Yeah. Jones What are the hours for the bar and – Pickell The hours for the bar. Mundy You would pick up on that little – Jones It says under the property history that there’s a family dwelling, attached garage, there’s a bar out there, swimming pool with a deck and patio. I’m just interested in the hours the bar’s open and do you get to use the pool too? Frandsen That’s what happens when you type your own paperwork. Mundy Don’t give him hours Mr. Giles, he’ll be out. Lake Variance number two – I move that Docket Number 2022-40-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for the accessory structure to exceed the height of the primary at the property located at 6490 South State Route 267, Lebanon, Indiana 46052 in the Rural Agricultural Dist – Zoning District (AG) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Page 18 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Jones Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Postlethwait Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] That motion passes. Lake And number three – I move that Docket Number 2022-40-DSV, Development Standards Variance for a reduction in the buffer yard to construct a pole barn at the property located at 6490 South State Route 267, Lebanon, Indiana 46052 in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Postlethwait/ Second. Jones Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones and Mrs. Postlethwait. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Postlethwait Aye. Mundy Opposed? [No response] That motion passes. Best of luck with your project Mr. Giles. Giles Thank you. Mundy That brings us to New Business. The first item under New Business is Petition Number 2022-43-DSV, M. Hussain at 8750 East 575 South in Zionsville, Petition for a Development Standard Variance to provide for an addition which reduces the front yard setback, memorializes the ex – and memorializes the existing front yard setback in the Rural Single Family Residential District (R-2). Mr. Hussain? Hussain Yes. I’m Mir Hussain. Mundy Will you tell us – Hussain I’m the petitioner, the owner of the house. I don’t have a lawyer or an attorney. So we bought this house in 2017. When we bought this house we didn’t know Page 19 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 that there was a road coming up. We, you know, the road was constructed when we were living in the house but there’s a lot of noise and dust and we’re not able to use the porch so we, my wife and me decided to build a washroom in the bedroom adjacent to that one. We have, we have a full bath on the ground floor but it’s, you have to walk through the living room so we thought the best use of that porch would be to build a, build a full bath and, and then we need a new porch because we have two little ones and they’re going to school so they wait for the bus. Mundy All right. It’s that simple? Hussain Yeah. Mundy Any questions for the petitioner? Anyone here or online that would just like to speak for or against this project? Seeing none, could we have the staff report? Baker Yes, thank you. The petitioner, like he stated, wants to put a front porch on the rear, I mean, I’m sorry, to the south of the property and then also at the same time converting an existing covered porch into a bathroom. And while he’s not increasing the square footage, we wanted to memorialize that setback as well. As you may notice, there’s been some right-of-way acquired recently with this property for the extension of Marysville Road. With all that said and also getting DPW’s, I don’t want to say approval but we ran this by them and they weren’t opposed to the request either with site distance or anything like that, that staff is in favor of the request, the two requests, and I’m happy to answer any questions. Mundy So DPW has no objection to the petition? Baker Correct. Mundy Thank you. Questions for staff? Pickell What’s the, would these additions have been in compliance prior to the acquisition of the additional right-of-way? Baker I don’t believe so because the setback would be either 70 feet from the centerline or 20 feet from the property line, whichever is greater, so I think, I think the 70 foot would still apply regardless. Pickell Okay. Mundy So this would memorialize what was already out of compliance anyhow? Baker Correct. Mundy Any other questions for staff? Seeing none, is there a motion on this petition? Lake I move that Docket Number 2022-43-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for the front yard setback to be reduced to 42 foot from the centerline of the road to allow for a covered porch at the property located at 8750 East 575 South, Zionsville, Indiana 46077 in the Rural Single and Two-Family Residential Page 20 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Zoning District (R-2) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Pickell Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Pickell. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] That motion passes. Lake I move that Docket Number 2022-43-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for a memorialization of the existing front yard setback at the property located at 8750 East 575 South, Indianapolis (meant to say Zionsville), Indiana 46077 in the Rural Single and Two-Family Residential Zoning District (R-2) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Pickell Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Pickell. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] Motion passes. Best of luck with your project Mr. Hussain. Next item on the agenda is Petition Number 2022-44-DSV, F. Paul, 3575 East 400 South, Lebanon, Petition for a Development Standard Variance to provide for accessory structure which exceeds the permitted accessory square footage and exceeds the allowable height for an accessory building in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG). Hello – C. Paul Hi. Mundy Would you state your name and tell us about the project please? C. Paul Floyd and Cindy Paul. We live at 3575 East 400 South, Lebanon. We moved there in the facility or in the house – sorry. We’re not a lawyer either. Mundy You don’t need to be. Page 21 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 C. Paul I feel like I need to after all. Anyway, we moved there last fall and it has an existing garage. It’s a, like 2 and 2, so it’s long rather than wide and the back part of it the previous owner, which was I think 93 or 94, had a woodshop back there. F. Paul Mr. Hunter. C. Paul Yeah, Mr. Hunter, and he, my husband likes his Mustang – he has a 1970 Mustang that he loves and he has a truck but the truck doesn’t fit because the garage is so short – it’s a, a 4-wheeler, not a 4-wheeler, 4-wheel drive, sorry. I hate talking in public. F. Paul It’s a big truck. C. Paul Anyway, he would like to have a, a barn – a pole barn built like an L-shape at the back of it and I think we have two – it’s the square footage accessory variance and in height. In order to have his truck in there it has to be I think 14-foot sides. F. Paul That’s to get my trailers in too. C. Paul Yeah, and there’s right next to us has one that’s real similar, we think, to the same size that we have on the west side, I think? F. Paul Yes. C. Paul Sorry, but that’s what we would like to do is just as a storage for his Mustang and his truck. Thank you. Sorry. Mundy All right. Thank you Mrs. Paul. Any questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, any remonstrators online? No? Thank you. Could we have the staff report, please? Baker Yes, so this request is pretty similar to the Giles petition that you just heard, however, they, they are meeting the 40-foot buffer yard. They’re requesting to be over on accessory square footage as well as the height is taller than the residence. Looking at the surrounding areas also go over the height with other pole barns and accessory structures and accessory square footage. So with that said, staff is in favor of the two requests and I’m happy to answer any other questions. Mundy Thank you. Any questions for staff? Hearing none, is there a motion for this petition? Lake I guess I’ll do it. I move that Docket Number 2022-44-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for the accessory square footage to exceed the primary up to 3,468 square foot at the property located at 3575 East 400 South, Lebanon, Indiana 46052 in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Jones Second. Page 22 of 23 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals August 3, 2022 Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. All those in favor please say aye. All Aye. Mundy Mrs. Postlethwait, I think you’re muted. Pickell Aye. Mundy Okay. Postlethwait Well I’m, I’m not but aye. Mundy Okay. Thank you. That motion is approved. Lake I moved that Docket Number 2022-44-DSV, Development Standards Variance to provide for the accessory structure to exceed the height of the primary at the property located at 3575 East 400 South, Lebanon, Indiana 46052 in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District (AG) be approved as filed based upon the Findings of Fact and substantial compliance with the submitted site plans and concepts. Mundy Thank you Mr. Lake. Is there a second? Jones Second. Mundy Thank you Mr. Jones. All in favor please say aye. All Aye. Postlethwait Aye. Mundy Opposed same sign. [No response] The motion passes. Best of luck with your project. C. Paul/ Thank you. F. Paul Mundy We have nothing further on the agenda. So unless someone has a need to present some revelation, revolutionary news to this committee, I would declare us adjourned. Lake I second that. Page 23 of 23