I was just gonna wait at least if they're out, which I believe.

Maybe we'll all fill all the right.

No, no.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Actually, yeah, really.

They're following which EPS.

I think Columbus might be right.

But it was six and we've blown down the bankers county down there.

Four and five members, four is three of the five.

Jim Shield board attorney, Mike Speaker, Rodney Finky, Eric Scheid, Arnold Pascal.

Melissa Bagley Planning Department.

Hi, for our planning department.

This is a judicial proceeding remarks made by petitioners and members of public are considered testimony.

Okay.

We will get started with uh issue BCH 2640.

True and nine stags.

Is it represented here?

Come up to table and state the name regress.

Uh Troy Sag's address is uh one two zero seven five, nice law drive.

It's really Alaska, nine six six four.

All right.

All right.

So uh this is uh for Troy and Dynast.

Uh we're considering right now two point eight five acres and it's zoned R2 residential.

Oh hold on.

Um yeah, there we go.

All right.

Um so this property is within the Hartsville zoning ordinance.

Um however, the agreement that uh is in place between Bartholomew County and um the uh board uh the Hartsville zoning, Hartsville Hartsville Town Board.

Um we are the ones who actually apply the zoning and um do their uh kind of uh review and do all of their their board of zoning appeals and and things like that for um their ordinance there.

So um this parcel, as you can see, is outlined in yellow, and uh Mr.

Staggs recently went through plan commission to have that site uh subdivided into seven lots.

Um and one of the conditions of approval for that was that one of the lots that is being created um has an accessory structure on it, an old barn.

And so the zoning ordinance does not allow us to create violations.

The subdivision control ordinance does not allow us to create violations when we create new lots, and so one of the conditions of approval for that subdivision was that either the barn had to be removed or they had to seek approval from this board uh to allow an accessory structure to remain on the site before a primary structure was uh constructed there.

So um again, we're looking at the whole site here, and in some of the future uh um photos, you can see exactly kind of where the property is.

So again, this is kind of the town of Hartsville, and um all to its um east would be uh single family residential R2 to I'm sorry, to the west, to the east is AP agriculture preferred, and that's all primarily uh tillable acreage, and then across State Road 46 is still um R2 and some C1 direction.

Um as I indicated, um the uh uh proposal before you is to allow that existing structure, it's approximately 2,000 square feet to remain on this newly created lot, and the ordinance, the Hartsville ordinance.

Uh this is the section where it states that no accessory structures are to be permitted on any lot prior to the establishment of a prior uh structure of a primary structure.

Oh, if I can get this right.

All right.

So this again kind of shows the uh proposed subdivision um that again was approved by the plan commission uh contingent upon um getting a variance or the the uh structure being removed.

That is the location of the existing barn.

This is area context, and again the proposed lot is outlined in the dashed yellow lines, and much like in older parts of town, older plates, um, properties kind of function as one, they might be owned by several people, several lots might own, you know.

Um one person might own several lots, that's the way to say it.

Um so sometimes it looks as though there are um some accessory structures just on one lot.

Um these are still considered separate lots.

So there, I'm just kind of outlining the three accessory structures that are on still separate lots um right there um in close proximity to uh the petitioners.

This is looking east into that subject site, and and that is the the barn.

This is just turned around and looking directly to the west down the street um at the residential uh structures, and then you know, of course, some of their accessory structures that they have, and these are not any of them that are on single lots that are associated with houses.

These are all um accessory structures that are on the same lots as every every of the of the primary house.

And these are the development standards uh decision criteria for you in making the decision.

I can answer any questions that you might have.

Can you go back to one of your earlier slides that uh talked about no accept accessory structure should be permitted?

Oh right there.

So this my wife is an English professor and she'd be proud of me for asking this question because you can read that two ways.

There can be no uh states, no accessory structure shall be allowed, or you can say no accessory structure shall receive a new permit to be located on any lot.

Which is it?

Because if you permitted something, you created a permit and given it a permit, which would imply that you wouldn't do that for something new.

Um true.