[A. Call to Order]
[00:00:04]
>> ALL RIGHT. I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
WE WILL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> LEAH YORK. PRESIDENT DIERCKMAN.
[D. Declaration of Quorum]
WE HAVE A QUORUM. WE NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
[E. Approval of Minutes and Findings of Facts of Previous Meetings]
FROM THE-- AND THE FINDINGS OF FACT FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING OR MEETINGS. ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION?>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
AS WELL AS THE FINDINGS OF FACT. >> SECOND.
>> A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
COMMUNICATION BILLS AND EXPENDITURES.
[G. Reports, Announcements, Legal Counsel Report, and Department Concerns]
REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENT. LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT AND DEPARTMENT CONCERNS? YES.>> THANK YOU. ONE ITEM FOR THE OUTGOING BOARD MEMBER RECOGNITION. WE ASK THAT THAT BE MOVED TO THE
END OF THE AGENDA. >> WILL DO.
[H. (V) Nessem Accessory Building Variance (Appeal)]
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
NESSEM ACCESSORY BUILDING VARIANCE APPEAL.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A VARIANCE APPEAL.
ADDITIONAL 20 BY 30 DETACHED STRUCTURE.
SHALL NOT EXCEED 75% OF THE GROUND FLOOR AREA OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 511 EAST 111TH STREET. COLLEGE HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION.
MY NAME IS ROB THOMAS. WE ON NOW?
>> YUP. >> MY NAME IS ROB THOMAS.
WITH THOMAS LAW GROUP LLC. IN CARMEL.
234 EAST CARMEL DRIVE. THE OWNER IS SHAREF NESSEM.
THE PETITIONER IS SEEKING TO CONSTRUCT A 20 BY 30 DETACHED GARAGE ACCESSORY BUILDING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL STORAGE FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. A VARIANCE IS NEEDED BECAUSE THE COMBINED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE GROUND FLOOR AREA OF GARAGES AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IS NOT ALLOWED TO EXCEED 75%.
AND WITH THIS ADDITION THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE EXISTING GARAGE, THAT TAKES IT TO 102% OF THE GROUND FLOOR AREA OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THE PROPOSED ADDITION WILL MEET ALL OVER DEVELOPMENTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
IT IS A LARGE FENCED-IN AREA. THERE ARE NO ISSUES WITH SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE, OR HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE. THE EXTERIOR OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL MATCH AND COMPLEMENT THE EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE. ADDRESSING THE HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS THAT STAFF HAD MENTION IN THEIR REPORT, MY CLIENT HAS RENTED THE PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY AND IS CURRENTLY NOT LEASING THE PROPERTY UNTIL THIS ADDITION IS COMPLETE.
THE HOME WILL REMAIN AS AN INVESTMENT REMEMBER TALL---- RENTAL PROPERTY FOR MY CLIENT. HE WILL NOT BE USING THIS PROPERTY AS A PLACE OF BUSINESS. HE IS CURRENTLY PURCHASING A PROPERTY IN INDIANAPOLIS TO LOCATE HIS BUSINESS FROM HIS CURRENT LOCATION. WE SUBMITTED FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE BOARD AND WOULD ASK FOR APPROVAL OF THOSE FINDINGS. WE ARE HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYONE HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS? ITEM? GO AHEAD. COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD. CITY.
I DO SUPPORT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
I'M HIS NEIGHBOR. IT IS ALL FINE AS LONG AS EVERYTHING IS UP TO CODE, I'M HAPPY WITH IT.
WHICH I KNOW WILL BE WITH YOU GUYS.
>> YUP. >> ANY OTHER REMONSTRATORS OR
[00:05:03]
SUPPORTERS? ANYONE? ANYONE? ALL RIGHT.YOU NORMALLY GET-- YOU DON'T NORMALLY GET A REBUTTAL ON
SUPPORTER. >> THE CITY DOES HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
>> GO AHEAD AND SIT DOWN, SIR. >> WE DO HAVE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT HERE. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS WITH THEIR PAST INTERACTION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. IF EVERYTHING DOES GET ADDRESSED, WE RECOMMEND CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE AS WELL AS THE ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED USE.
MR. LIGGETT? YOU CAN SIT DOWN THERE IF YOU WANT. THANK YOU.
>> IS THIS ON? YOU CAN HEAR ME.
SO YEAH. WE JUST THOUGHT PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE A LITTLE BIT. THAT WAS OUR WORRY.
THAT WE WERE GOING TO-- THAT THIS COULD GET APPROVED AND THEN RIGHT NOW, THE HOME IS BEING USED AS AN OFFICE.
THERE IS NO RESIDENTS THERE. LIKE YOU MENTIONED.
THAT LIVE THERE. BUT THEY ARE THERE.
THEIR VANS ARE THERE. THEIR EQUIPMENT IS THERE.
IF IT IS HIS INTENT TO JUST CHANGE IT TO A RENTAL PROPERTY, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW,-- MAYBE CHANGE OUR OPINION ON IT.
THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET. RIGHT NOW THERE IS-- THE HVAC VANS ARE THERE. THERE IS SOME EQUIPMENT THERE.
ORIGINALLY, IN MARCH, WHEN WE POSTED IT, THEIR SWENT WAS TO-- THEIR INTENT WAS TO MOVE THERE. WE WERE TOLD.
NOW THAT HAS CHANGED TODAY. THAT KIND OF CHANGES OUR
DEPARTMENT, ANYTHING ELSE? DISCUSSION?
>> I'M KIND OF CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT YOU HAD ASKED.
THAT IT IS NOT GOING TO BE A BUSINESS.
IS THAT CORRECT? IT IS GOING TO BE SOMEONE'S
I MEAN, THERE WAS DEFINITELY CONFUSION AS IT RELATES TO THE HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS BY MY CLIENT OF WHAT WAS ALLOWED AND WHAT WAS NOT ALLOWED. WE HAVE HAD THAT DISCUSSION.
HE CANNOT OPERATE THERE AS A BUSINESS.
HE IS NOT GOING TO. HE IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT BY PROPERTY ON ILLINOIS STREET THAT IS ZONED APPROPRIATELY FOR WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO. HE WILL BE NOT OCCUPYING THIS AS -- FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN FINISHING WHAT HE IS DOING THERE ON THE PROPERTY. ONCE THAT IS DONE, IT WILL BE
PUT UP FOR LEASE. >> SO YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS IMPROVEMENT AND THEN PUT IT UP FOR LEASE?
>> WHAT IS THE IMPROVEMENT TO DO? WHY IS IT BEING BUILT? WHAT IS GOING TO BE IN IT?
>> IT IS JUST GOING TO BE STORAGE.
IT WILL BE-- IT IS ATTACHED TO THE GARAGE.
IT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL STORAGE.
IT COULD BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE THAT SOME TENANT MIGHT HAVE. IT IS A SMALL-- THEY ARE OLDER HOMES IN THAT AREA. I THINK IT IS 1,200 SQUARE FEET.
THIS ALLOWS FOR ADDITIONAL STORAGE FOR ANYONE WHO THINKS HE CAN CHARGE MORE TO LEASE IT WITH.
MORE ADDITIONAL STORAGE. IF IT IS SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO HAVE AN APPROVED HOME OCCUPATION, THAT WILL HELP THEM TO DO THAT AS WELL. HE IS NOT GOING TO DO IT.
WE HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION. WE TALKED ABOUT THE STANDARDS.
THAT IS WHY HE IS UNDER CONTRACT TO PURCHASE A NEW FACILITY FOR
WELL, WITH THE DEPARTMENT REAL QUICK.
CAN SOMEONE BUILD SOMETHING OF THIS SIZE FOR STORAGE? FOR TENANTS? DOES THAT PRESENT ANY
DIFFICULTIES? >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY TENANTS?
>> YEAH. >> IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, GIVEN THE ZONING, CAN SOMEBODY STORE, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IN THIS
THAT IS WHY THEY ARE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
BECAUSE IT IS SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUESTED EXCEEDS THAT MAXIMUM 24 BY 30 GARAGE WHICH EXISTED ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THIS WOULD BE KIND OF LIKE A SECOND ADDITIONAL DETACHED GARAGE AT THEIR REQUEST. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> THANKS. >> JUST TO CLARIFY.
IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL STORAGE.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT-- WAS THAT HOW YOU TOOK THAT?
YOU HAD IT RIGHT. IS IT PERMISSIBLE TO ADD THAT TYPE OF STORAGE AND HAVE STORAGE ON A PROPERTY AFTER WE APPROVE
[00:10:04]
THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS? >> YEAH.
I GUESS IF THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THEN THEY COULD STORE
>> AS LONG AS IT IS THE OWNER OR ANYBODY COULD STORE ITEMS?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE REGULATE THAT.
IF IT STARTS TO LOOK LIKE A BUSINESS USE, THAT IS WHEN IT IS
AN ISSUE. >> HOW RECENTLY WERE YOU OUT TO
INSPECT THIS PROPERTY? >> TODAY.
>> OKAY. AND ALSO, AS IT IS YOUR OPINION THAT IT WAS STILL BEING USED COMMERCIALLY.
>> YEAH. I THINK THERE IS SIX AIR-CONDITIONER UNITS THERE. I'M NOT SAYING HE WAS NOT GOING
I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> BUT YEAH.
>> OKAY. ALSO THIS IS AN APPEAL.
>> ANY VOTE THAT WE TAKE TONIGHT IS TO-- I GUESS IT WAS TURNED DOWN. THAT IS WHY HE IS HERE.
>> RIGHT. SO TONIGHT, IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE HEARD AS A BRAND NEW VARIANCE REQUEST IN FRONT OF THE BOARD.
>> OKAY. IT IS REALLY-- KIND OF IGNORING
THAT IT IS AN APPEAL. >> I GOTCHA.
>> JUST A CLARIFICATION AS WELL. THIS IS AN APPEAL OF A HEARING OF DETERMINATION. NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL.
>> REMIND ME, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN AROUND HERE THAT LONG.
VARIANCES ARE REQUESTED WHEN THERE IS A HARDSHIP.
NOT A CURRENT HARDSHIP, NOT A PROJECTED HARDSHIP.
DOES IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? >> THIS IS A DEVELOPMENTAL STANDARDS VARIANCE. ONE OF THE FACTORS FOR IT TO CONSIDER IS WHETHER IT CREATES PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY FOR USE OF A PROPERTY. HARDSHIP IS A USE VARIANCE.
SO PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY IS A MAJOR DETERMINATION HERE.
>> ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? I'M NOT SEEING ANY PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY HERE.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE USED FOR.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION, THEN, TO APPROVE OR-- AM I MOTIONING TO
APPROVE OR TO OVERRIDE THE -- >> UNDER OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, IT IS A MOTION TO APPROVE. THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE VERBAGE BETWEEN THE PLAN COMMISSION RULES OF PROCEDURE AND BZA RULES OF PROCEDURE.
IF YOU APPROVE IT, IT MOVES FORWARD.
A NEGATIVE DOES NOT MOVE IT FORWARD AND THEREFORE, CONCLUDES
THANK YOU. I KNOW WE HAVE DONE NEGATIVE ITEMS BEFORE HERE. SO ANYWAY, I'LL MOVE ON TO APPROVE PZ-2023-00126V. UDO SECTION 502P3 FOR THE ADDITION OF THE DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
>> ANYBODY FOR A SECOND? >> THANKS, BRAD.
WE HAVE A SECOND. SO IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF THIS, GRANTING THIS VARIANCE APPROVAL, PLEASE STATE AYE.
HEARING NONE, IF YOU ARE AGAINST THIS, PLEASE STATE AYE.
>> AYE. >> THAT APPEAL IS TURNED DOWN.
WITH A VOTE OF 5-0. THANK YOU.
[H. (SUA, V) Hope Church Special Use Amendment and Variance]
SUAV, HOPE CHURCH SPECIAL USE AMENDMENT AND VARIANCE.THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING USE IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE APPROVAL. PZ2023-0013.
UDO SECTION 2.5. SPECIAL USE REQUIRED.
TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND COMPLIANCE REQUIRED TO ONLY DECKTATE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAYS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 2,500'S 98TH STREET. FILED BY RICK LAWRENCE OF LAWRENCE & FRANKENBERGER. YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT
> THANKS. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS RICK LAWRENCE. I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH NELSON & FRANKENBERGER HERE IN CARMEL, INDIANA.
EMILY COCHRAN IS WITH NORTHPOINT HOME SCHOOL ACADEMY.
[00:15:02]
THE PASTOR OF HOPE CHURCH IS ALSO HERE, KYLE THOMAS.AND A LAND USE PROFESSIONAL WITH MY OFFICE.
HOPE CHURCH OWNS THE PROPERTY YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN BEFORE YOU. IT IS BOUNDED BY THE ROAD ON THE WEST HERE. 98TH STREET ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND PLEASANT WAY HERE ON THE EAST SIDE.
HOPE CHURCH HAS BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY SINCE THE EARLY 1960S.
IT HAS BEEN IN USE FOR REP RELIGIOUS PURPOSES CONTINUALLY SINCE THEN. IN 1980, A SPECIAL EXEMPTION WAS APPROVED TO ALLOW FOR EXPANSION OF AN EDUCATIONAL WING.
IN 1995, THE SPECIAL USE WAS APPROVED TO ADD A FELLOWSHIP CENTER AND GYMNASIUM. SINCE THAT TIME, THE CHURCH HAS HOSTED DIFFERENT PROGRAMS, GROUPS, IN WHICH HAVE UTILIZED THE ENTIRE FACILITY. SOMETIMES FOR EDUCATIONAL-BASED ACTIVITIES. IN 2002, HOPE CHURCH CONTRACTED WITH HOMESCHOOL ACADEMY. THE REASON FOR THIS JOINT VENTURE WAS TWO-FOLD. ONE, AS CHURCHES EXPERIENCE SOME ECONOMIC INSTABILITY, HOPE CHURCH WAS LOOKING FOR A PARTNER THAT WOULD BRING SOME STABILITY TO THEIR FACILITY AND ALSO ALLOW THEM TO BE ABLE TO HAVE FUNDS TO CONTINUE THEIR MISSIONARY WORK.
AND TWO, IT ALLOWED A HOME SCHOOL ACADEMY TO LOCATE IN CARMEL TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE FOR PARENTS WHO WERE LOOKING FOR ASSISTANCE IN THIS AREA. I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT NORTHPOINT IS NOT A SCHOOL. WE WORKED WITH THE STAFF TO ESTABLISH THAT THEY WERE NOT A SCHOOL AS DEFINED BY THE STATE OF INDIANA OR BY CARMEL'S UDORA. THEY ARE, NORTHPOINT PROVIDES RESOURCES TO STUDENTS UP TO THREE DAYS A WEEK.
IN THIS CASE, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY FROM 8:30 UNTIL 5:30, I BELIEVE. THOSE WERE THE TYPES TO.
COMPLEMENT TEACHING AND ACTIVITIES PRIMARILY CONDUCTED BY THE PARENTS AT HOME. NORTHPOINT IS NOT IN CHARGE OF CURRICULUM, GRADES, OR REPORTING.
RATHER, THEY REMAIN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARENTS.
NONETHELESS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN AMENDMENT TO THE PRIOR SPECIAL USE WAS REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE CHURCH TO BE UTILIZED BY NORTHPOINT AS AN ACTIVITY THAT IS ANCILLARY TO THE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION USE AS REGULATED BY CARMEL'S UDO.
FURTHERMORE, HOPE CHURCH'S AMENDMENT NECESSITATES THAT HOPE CHURCH COMPLIES WITH A TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS IDENTIFIED IN THE UDO. HOPE CHURCH AS HAS PROPOSED TO INSTALL THE REQUIRED BICYCLE RACKS WHICH ARE SHOWN.
THIS EXHIBIT HERE AND HERE, THE TWO ENTRANCES TO BOTH THE CHURCH AND THEN WHERE THE SCHOOLING TAKES PLACE.
AND OVER TIME, THE CHURCH HAS ALSO DEVELOPED TRAFFIC AND SAFETY PROCEDURES WHICH ARE DETAILED IN YOUR HANDOUT.
THEY ARE LISTED HERE ON THE SCREEN.
ALONG WITH AN ASSOCIATED MAP THAT GOES WITH THAT.
AS INDICATED, COMPLYING WITH THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, ALSO INDICATES THE REQUIREMENT TO DEDICATE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND TO ALSO INSTAL PATHS AND SIDEWALKS ALONG PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
THIS MAP SHOWS THAT THERE ARE THREE SURROUNDING ROUNDS ROADS.
CARMEL IS IN THE PROCESS OF DOING A MULTI-USE PATH ALONG HALVERSTICK DP DP ROAD. WHAT WAS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS A REQUEST ON THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE TO NOT INSTALL THE SIDEWALKS ALONG 98TH STREET AND PLEASANT WAY. AND IN TALKING WITH THE STAFF, WHILE WE STILL-- WE UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND INSTALLING SIDEWALKS AND IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS, WE WOULD NOTE THAT IN NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO CONNECT IT TO ANY OF THE OTHER AREAS AROUND HERE UNTIL PERHAPS THE MULTIUSE PATH IS INSTALLED. THEREFORE, WE ARE PROPOSING THAT IF THE BOARD SO DEEMS IT TO REQUIRE THE CHURCH-- THAT WE BE PROVIDED FIVE YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THIS PATH INSTALLED TO MAKE ACTIVITY IN THIS AREA. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M
AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THOSE. >> THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTERS IN THE AUDIENCE HERE? IF THERE ARE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS.
DOES ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK IN RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK. AS A SUPPORTER.
GO AHEAD, SIR. YOU GOT FIVE MINUTES.
IF YOU NEED IT. >> MY NAME IS CLAY CROCKER.
[00:20:02]
I LIVE AT COLONY COURT, NORTH OF THE CHURCH BUILDING.IF YOU GO OUT OUR REAR GATE, YOU ARE AT THE CHURCH.
WE HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THE CHURCH BUILDING.
WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY CONTENTION OVER THE YEARS.
WE HAVE BEEN RESIDENTS THERE FOR 29 YEARS.
AND THE HOUSE RELIVED IN APPROXIMATELY ONE YEAR YOUNGER THAN THE CHURCH BUILDING ITSELF. WE OFTEN GO FOR WALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THERE. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF SIDEWALKS THERE ALONG THE SOUTH PART OF PLEASANT WAY.
FOR THE MOST PART, WE CAN WALK ON THE STREETS JUST FINE.
YOU KNOW, WATCH FOR VEHICLES AND ALL.
WE ARE NOT OBJECTING TO SIDEWALKS.
WE DON'T SEE A NEED WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW ALONG 98TH STREET OR ALONG PLEASANT WAY. AS FAR AS THE SCHOOL IS CONCERNED, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A DESIRE, I KNOW FOR THE PASTORS THAT HAVE BEEN THERE TO MAKE FULL USE OF THE CHURCH BUILDING THROUGH THE WEEK. NOT JUST ON SUNDAYS.
I THINK THAT IS A REALLY GOOD GOAL.
WE SUPPORT THAT. IN FACT, MY WIFE ENJOYS HEARING THE CHILDREN ON THE PLAYGROUND AT RECESS DURING THE DAY.
BECAUSE SHE IS A STAY AT HOME-- AS FAR AS THE TRAFFIC PATTERN, IT IS NEVER-- IT HAS NEVER REALLY CAUSED ANY PROBLEMS WITH TRAFFIC COMING OR GOING. EXCEPT MAYBE DURING DROP-OFF OR PICKUP. THEN IT IS ONLY LIKE A TWO, THREE-CAR THAT YOU CAN GET BEHIND AT THE STOP SIGN.
THERE IS NO REAL PROBLEM WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW.
THAT I HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS. AND CERTAINLY, NO MORE THAN OR NO LESS THAN TABERNACLE ACADEMY. WHICH IS LOCATED AT TABERNACLE DLURNLG ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 9 #TH AND KEYSTONE.
THEY NO LONGER HAVE THE ACADEMY. DURING THE DAYS THAT THEY DID, BACK WHEN WHEN THERE WAS A STOPLIGHT THERE ON KEYSTONE, THERE WAS NO REAL PROBLEM WITH TRAFFIC PATTERNS EITHER.
I HAVE SEEN THE CHURCH. I HAVE DRIVEN THROUGH THERE.
WHEN THE ACADEMY IS IN OPERATION.
I HAVE NOT SEEN-- THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF ACCOMMODATING, BUFFERING OF TRAFFIC WITHIN THE PARKING LOT.
AND NOT ON THE STREET. SO THAT TRAFFIC CAN FLOW WELL.
CHILDRE CAN BE PICKED UP AND DROPPED OFF SAFELY.
IT DOESN'T ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS WITH THE VARIANCE, SO THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY REMONSTRATORS? RAISE YOUR HAND IF THERE ARE REMONSTRATORS.
NOT SEEING ANY, YOU DON'T GET ANY REBUTTAL.
THIS PETITION HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND THE PETITIONER WILL INSTALL BICYCLE PARKING AS WELL AS REPLACE ANY DEAD, DYING OR MISSING LANDSCAPING, AND STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. RECORD REGARDING THE SIDEWALK COMMITMENT, PLANNING STAFFER IS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN A FIVE-YEAR TIME PERIOD.
WE DO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE SPECIAL USE AMENDMENT REQUEST WITH THE CONDITION OF ADDRESSING ALL REMAINING COMMENTS. WE ALSO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTS FROM TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION OF THE PETITIONER PHASING IN THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIDEWALKS ALONG 98TH AND PLEASANT WAY OVER A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD.
AS WELL AS PROVIDING PLANNING STAFF WITH A COPY OF A RECORDED COMMITMENT ABOUT DEDICATING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE COMMITMENT TO INSTALL THE SIDEWALKS WITHIN FIVE YEARS.
THANK YOU. >> AND A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
THE COMMITMENT TO INSTALL A SIDEWALK, IS IT ALONG HAVERSTICK
ROAD? >> JUST TO SAVE US A LITTLE BIT OF TIME. RICK, COULD YOU APPROACH? ARE YOU WILLING TO MAKE THESE COMMITMENTS AS OUTLINED BY THE
BOTH THE TACK AS WELL AS THE SIDEWALK FIVE-YEAR.
ET CETERA, ET CETERA. AS WRITTEN?
>> THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS-- UPNOT SURE WHEN THE FIVE-YEAR STARTS. WE WOULD PREFER A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN FIVE YEARS. WHETHER IT IS FIVE YEARS FROM TONIGHT OR FIVE YEARS FROM WHEN THEY INSTALL THE PATH.
EITHER ONE OF THOSE IS FIVE YEARS.
>> I THINK FOR OUR PURPOSES, IT WOULD BE FIVE YEARS FROM TONIGHT. AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
WE HAVE TO PUT A TIME FRAME ON IT.
[00:25:02]
>> TWO QUESTIONS. TO DRILL DOWN ON THAT POINT.
I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT THE-- INITIALLY, THAT THE TIMING WOULD BE FIVE YEARS FROM THE COMPLETION BY THE CITY.
>> WE ARE FINE EITHER WAY. WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, SET A DATE. TO START FROM.
I THINK WE AGREE WITH LEO. THAT WE WOULD HAVE IT START FROM
THE DATE OF TONIGHT'S MEETING. >> SO IF FIVE YEARS FROM TONIGHT, THE CITY HASN'T DONE ANYTHING ALONG HAVERSTICK, THEN THE CHURCH'S PORTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONNECTED TO NOTHING. I WOULD SUGGEST WE SET THE TIME OF THE COMPLETION BY THE CITY OF THE SIDEWALK.
>> I THINK THAT PROJECT IS CURRENTLY IN THE WORKS.
IT IS NOT A PIPE DREAM. IT IS HAPPENING.
IF NOT HAPPENING TODAY, IT IS HAPPENING WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I KNOW OTHERS-- OTHER PAST PROJECTS HAVE BEEN WITHIN FIVE YEARS. BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
THE CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE WHENEVER WE SAY SOMETHING LIKE THE CITY IS THAT WE LOSE TRACK OF THAT IN THE PROCESS.
SO IF YOU WOULD AGREE TO POST A BOND, FOR THE ENTIRE COST OF THE WORK RIGHT NOW, I SUPPOSE THAT WAY WE COULD WOULDN'T MISS THAT OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT SIDEWALK INSTALLED BECAUSE THAT BOND WILL KICK THEN WHEN THE CITY GOES TO INSTALLING.
THAT OH, THERE IS AN OBLIGATION TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS.
OTHERWISE, IT FALLS BACK TO THESE MEETING NOTES.
>> SOMEBODY HAS THE TO REMEMBER. >> EXACTLY.
THERE IS A THAT IS MY POINT. THERE IS NO PIVOT POINT THERE RELATIVE TO REMEMBERING. IT IS CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO BE
THE PETITIONER. >> THE MAGIC IS IN THE
REMEMBERING. >> YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.
AS AN ALTERNATIVE, IT IS MAYBE THE BONDING, A WAY TO RESOLVE
THAT. >> UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T THINK WITH THE FINANCES, THAT THE BOND WOULD BE PRACTICAL.
WE WOULD ACCEPT IF IT IS FIVE YEARS FROM TONIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT MAKES IT EASIER ON US. THANK YOU.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, SIR? >> I WAS MOVING TO APPROVE IT.
SOMEONE ELSE-- OKAY. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE DOCKET NUMBER PZ DOCKET NUMBER 2023. PZ-2023-00132V WITH THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD STARTING THIS
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE. >> AYE.
>> ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING ANYONE, MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. > THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS
EVENING. >> DON'T FORGET OUR SIDEWALKS WITHIN FIVE YEARS. ALL RIGHT.
[J. (V) L’Etoile Variances.]
THE OLD BUSINESS. SOMEBODY IS GOING TO NEED TO PRONOUNCE THIS FOR ME. A KID FROM BATESVILLE IS NOT VERY GOOD WITH WHAT APPEARS TO BE FRENCH.BRAD, I KNOW YOU GOT THIS. >> L'ETOILE.
L'ETOILE. A MAN THAT IS GOING TO PARIS TOMORROW. OH, I'M SORRY.
I APOLOGIZE. JUST BY YOURSELF, OF COURSE.
HOME WILL BE FULLY OCCUPIED. L'ETOILE.
VARIANCES. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE APPROVAL.
PZ-2023-0023. 40 FEET MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK FOR SURFACE PARKING. FOUR FEET REQUESTED.
AND WE WITHDREW ONE. PZ-2023-00085VUDO.
REAR SETBACK. 40-FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK FOR REQUIRED. THREE FEET REQUESTED.
AND 20 FEET MAXIMUM. REAR SETBACK REQUIRED.
43 FEET REQUESTED. THE SITE IS LOCATED ON WEST MAIN STREET. ZONED UC URBAN CORE BY BEN BEMIS OF CEC INC. ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER AZIZ MAMAEV.
PERHAPS THAT IS CLOSE. >> DAN MORIARTY FROM STUDIO ARCHITECTURE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER TONIGHT.
I THINK YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT.
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT A FEW TIMES HERE.
TONIGHT IN A CHANGE FROM OUR LAST HEARING, THE NUMBER OF UNITS HAS CHANGED. SO WE MEET THE PARKING VARIANCE.
WE ARE HERE TONIGHT TO JUST ASK FOR RELIEF FROM THE SETBACKS.
REQUIRED UNDER THE URBAN CORE ZONING.
[00:30:04]
AND TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, THIS IS -- I ASKED MY CIVIL ENGINEER IF WE COMPLIED WITH THE SETBACKS, WHAT WOULD BE LEFT WITH THE PROPERTY? THOSE SETBACKS REPRESENT WHAT WE ARE ASKING RELIEF FROM. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER.>> THANK YOU. AND THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. WE WILL GO DIRECTLY TO STAFF.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD?
>> THANK YOU. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM LAST MONTH'S DEPARTMENT REPORT.
JUST TO CON CONFIRM THAT THE NUMBER OF APARTMENT UNITS IS NOW PROPOSED TO BE 33 INSTEAD OF 36. AND PLANNING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE TWO VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR SETBACKS.
>> DISCUSSION? >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.
DOCKET PZ2023-00083V AND DOCKET NUMBER PZ2023-00085V.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I'LL MAKE COMMENT.
I THINK THIS PROJECT HAS COME A LONG, LONG WAY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. I LOOK FORWARD TO HOPEFULLY-- WE WILL SEE-- MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE. AYE.
ANYONE OPPOSED? >> WE HAVE ONE OPPOSED.
AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM.
[J. (SE) Bonilla Short Term Residential Rental (Appeal).]
WE HAVE BONILLA SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL RENTAL.THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE APPROVAL FOR AN STRR, AND A PORTION OF THE HOUSE, UDO SECTION 2.07. PERMITTED USES.
RESIDENTIAL, SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 2918 EAST SMOKY ROAD. ZONED R1 RESIDENCE.
FOLLOWED BY... FILED BY STEPHANIE MARIS ON BEHALF OF DBM GROUP LLC, OWNER. THIS IS OLD BUSINESS.
GO AHEAD. KEEP IT AS BRIEF YOU AS HUMANLY
GOOD EVENING. I'M STEPHANIE MARIS FROM COHEN, GARELICK, AND GLAZIER. I REPRESENT THE PETITIONER, DBM GROUP, LLC SEEKING AN EXCEPTION FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL OF THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE RESIDENCE. ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE LLC LIVES ON THE RESIDENCE PERMIT INNOCENTLY, AS AND AS I MENTIONED, THEY ARE LOOKING TO ONLY RENT A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE. THE SIBLINGS' ELDERLY FATHER LIST NEXT-DOOR. THEY HAVE AN INCREASED INTEREST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RENTERS ARE RESPONSIBLE.
THEY WILL IMPLEMENT RULES SUCH AS QUIET HOURS, LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF GUESTS, NOT ALLOWING ANY PARTIES TO BE THROWN. THE RESIDENTS, THE SETBACK-- ARE SET BACK FROM THE ROAD. TRAFFIC WOULD NOT BE IMPEDED.
NOR THERE WOULD THERE BE ALLOWED ANY STREET PARKING ON 136TH STREET. THE STREET THAT THEY ARE LOCATED ON. AND THE RENTAL WOULD BE MANAGED THROUGH AIR B&B, USING THEIR SCREENING PROCESS AND WOULD BE MANAGED BY ROSIA BONILLA. SHE MANAGES SEVERAL RENTAL PROPERTIES. AND MEANWHILE, LIKE I SAID, WE WILL LIVE ON THE PROPERTY FULL-TIME.
WE WILL MANAGE THE RENTAL FROM THERE AS WELL.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, BUT PER YOUR REQUEST, AS I KEPT IT AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE.
AS THE PETITIONER STATED, ONE OF THE OWNERS WILL LIVE ON THE PROPERTY AND ONLY RENT OUT THE SECOND FLOOR.
PLANNING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTIN REQUEST.
WE RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION AS WELL AS THE ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, SIR. >> WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THE
LAST TIME? >> NOTHING HAS CHANGED.
BEFORE IT IS BEFORE YOU AGAIN BECAUSE THERE WAS A 2-2 VOTE LAST MONTH, SO WE NEEDED TO TABLE IT.
>> IT IS JUST COMING BACK. >> YES.
>> QUICK QUESTION. MY CONCERN LAST-- IN THE LAST MEETING WAS-- EXCUSE ME. IT SEEMED AS THOUGH IT WAS GOING TO BE A LONGER-TERM RENTAL. THERE WAS TALK ABOUT RENTING FOR THREE AND FOUR AND FIVE MONTHS AT A TIME.
IS THIS GOING TO BE A LONGER-TERM RENTAL? OR IS THIS GOING TO BE LESS THAN 30 DAYS WHICH IS FOR THE SHORT
TERM RENTAL? >> THEY ARE SEENING FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS. THEY ARE MAINLY LOOKING TO RENT
[00:35:01]
TO TRAVEL NURSES WHO ARE TYPICALLY HERE ON ONE OR TWO OR THREE-WEEK CONTRACTS. SOMETIMES IT IS RIGHT UP TO THAT 29, 30 DAYS. THEY ARE SEEKING THAT SHORT-TERM FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS. IT DOES FIT WITH THE TYPE OF RENTER THAT THEY ARE. THAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR.>> THEY CAN COMMIT TO RENTING IT FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS.
>> IF THAT IS WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THEM TO GET THE APPROVAL.
>> OKAY. THE LAST MEETING I GOT THE IMPRESSION THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT RENTING IT FOR THREE, FOUR, FIVE MONTHS IF THEY HAPPEN TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WAS
AVAILABLE TO DO THAT. >> WELL, IF THAT IS NOT --
>> TO ME, THAT IS NOT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
>> YEAH. IF THAT IS NOT PERMITTED BY THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS, THEN THEY CERTAINLY WON'T DO THAT.
BUT THEY DO THINK THAT IT WILL HAVE BETTER SUCCESS RENTING IT OUT FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS. THAT IS THEIR GOAL.
OBVIOUSLY, THEY ARE NOT DOING THAT RIGHT NOW.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE EXCEPTION. I DON'T KNOW.
THAT IS WHY THEY ARE SEENING IT. SO THEY CAN RENT FOR 30 DAYS OR LESS. YOU ARE WELCOME.
>> BRAD? >> SO LAST MONTH, THIS WAS-- THE OUTCOME WAS A 2-2 TIE. I VOTED IN FAVOR LAST MONTH, CASTING MY FIRST VOTE EVER IN FAVOR OF A SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL RENTAL VARIANCE. THE REASONS HERE WERE THAT THIS PETITIONER OFFERS AMPLE ON-SITE PARKING.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED IN A SUBDIVISION WHERE TYPICALLY, THERE IS SPILLOVER EFFECTS ON NEIGHBORS.
THE OWNER HAS EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE MANAGING SHORT-TERM RENTALS. THIS IS OWNER-OCCUPIED.
AND THE BUSINESS PLAN RENTING TO TRAVELING NURSES IS A BUSINESS PLAN THAT WOULD HELP THE COMMUNITY, HELP OTHER BUSINESSES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. PARTICULARLY, ONE LOCATED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPERTY.
>> THANKS FOR THAT EXPLANATION. FURTHER?
>> ONE CLARIFICATION. FROM EITHER THE DEPARTMENT OR LEGAL. SO IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, IT TALKS ABOUT UDO SECTION 9 908. STATING THAT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE USES ALLOWED.
UNDER THE UDO. SO IT SHALL NOT NOT BE GENERALLY ENTITLED TO FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION.
COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT? HOW ARE WE TO LOOK AT THIS?
>> YEAH. I THINK IT WAS WRITTEN IN THAT MANNER TO MAKE THE PETITIONER ACTUALLY WORK HARD TOS TO GET APPROVAL. A PRIOR ISSUE WE HAD IN THE COMMUNITY WITH, LIKE, THOSE PARTY HOUSES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
JUST SHOWING THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND CAN BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT IS WHY IT WAS
WORDED THAT WAY. >> AND ALSO I CAN PULL UP ON THAT-- FOLLOW UP ON THAT AS WELL.
ANGIE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. A LOT OF TIMES, IT IS A FIRST APPROVAL, ONE-YEAR APPROVAL IS A TEST-RUN, IF YOU WILL.
THAT IS WHY WE ARE LIMITED TO ONE YEAR.
BUT THEN IF THERE ARE NO REMONSTRATORS, IF THE PROPERTY OPERATES AS PRESENTED AND ESPECIALLY HERE WITH THE BUSINESS PLAN, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, THEN IT BECOMES FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. AFTER THE FIRST YEAR.
AS LONG AS THERE ARE NO REMONSTRATORS.
>> OKAY. THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> MORE DISCUSSION?
>> MOVE TO APPROVE DOCKET PZ-2023-00109.
>> NEED A SECOND. >> A SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE. >> AYE.
>> ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO ADJOURN QUITE YET.
THIS IS THE LAST MEETING I WILL HAVE THIS MIC IN FRONT OF ME AND HAVE CONTROL OF THE MEETING. I WANT TO SAY ONE THING.
THANK YOU TO JIM FOR DOING A GREAT JOB AS THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CARMEL. I WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD. I ALSO THINK HE IS A GENIUS.
YOU KNOW, HE ASKED ME TO BE ONE OF HIS APPOINTEES FOR 20-SOMETHING YEARS. 23 YEARS.
I DON'T REALLY REMEMBER ANYMORE. IT HAS BEEN AN HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO SERVE THIS COMMUNITY.
IT HAS BEEN A GREAT STAFF THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
YOU KNOW, PHENOMENAL AND OF COURSE, THAT GOES FOR YOU, MIKE, AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> SO WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO GO ON RECORD TONIGHT TO SAY SO LONG TO A GOOD FRIEND OF THE CITY. MANY OF YOU KNOW LEO STARTED IN 2000. THERE IS VERY FEW THAT LASTED 22 YEARS. HE DID TAKE A LITTLE TIME OFF FOR R&R AT SOME POINT. KIND OF MIDWAY THROUGH HIS BZA CAREER. HUNDREDS OF VOTES AND AWE YOU KNOW, AS WE ALL KNOW, LEO BRINGS A SENSE OF FAIRNESS, RATIONAL JUDGMENT. I MEAN, HOW MANY TIMES DID WE
[00:40:01]
HEAR HIM SAY REQUESTS IT IS NOT RATIONALE." A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. HUNDREDS OF VOTES, SMALL PROJECTS, CONTROVERSIAL PROJECTS , IMPORTANT PROJECTS.YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T EVEN GO THROUGH ALL THE HIGHLIGHTS.
ALTHOUGH THE YEAR OF MARK MARIETTA KIND OF STANDS OUT.
THE HIGH SCHOOL EXPANSIONS. YOU NAME IT.
BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU, LEO, FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY AND FOR MAKING CARMEL A BETTER PLACE.
WE HAVE A LITTLE PARTING GIFT AS WELL.
AND JOE HAS THAT FOR YOU. BUT AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> I WANT TO JUST ADD THAT IT WAS A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH YOU, LEO. I WANT TO ALSO BRING UP THE FACT TO KNOW YOU AND WORK WITH YOU. I WANT TO BRING UP THE FACT THAT IF SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE, YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO COME BACK, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO GIVE BACK THE GIFTS.
(LAUGHTER). >> FROM YOU, I CAN FULLY
APPRECIATE AND RESPECT THAT. >> YOU KNOW, YEAH.
I WANTED TO, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN AND GROWTH IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CARMEL FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS.
20-25 YEARS IS A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
A LOT OF THIS IS ATTRIBUTED TO YOU.
I APPRECIATE YOUR YEARS OF SERVICE, YOUR LEADERSHIP, AND REALLY THE PASSION WITH WHICH YOU OPERATED.
I KNOW YOU FEEL DEEPLY ABOUT CARMEL, AND IT SHOWED IN EVERYTHING YOU DID. SO THANK YOU.
>> 16 YEARS AGO OR SO, YOU CALLED THE MAYOR AND GAVE HIM MY PHONE NUMBER, AND I HAVE BEEN SERVING AT HIS PLEASURE AND MY SLESH PLEASURE EVER SINCE. THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT INTRODUCTION. I THINK IT IS IRONIC THAT IT IS
YOUR LAST MEETING. >> THE MEETING IS DRAGGING ON UNNECESSARILY FOR 7 EXTRA MINUTES.
>> IT IS RIDICULOUS. >> TOTALLY COUNTER TO EVERY BIT
I APPRECIATE IT. IT IS TORTURE.
IT IS TORTURE. YOU LEFT WESTFIELD.
I'M GOING TO WESTFIELD. YOU HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB.
I APPRECIATE YOUR FRIENDSHIP. AND STEPHANIE'S.
THANKS, EVERYBODY.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.