The Plainfield Board of Zoning Appeals met on Monday, December 17, 2007. In attendance were Mr. Monnett, Ms. Duffer, Mr. Cavanaugh, Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Matrana.
ROLL CALL/DETERMINATION OF QUORUM
Mr. Carlucci administered the Roll Call.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Gibbs made a motion to approve the minutes of the Plainfield Board of Zoning Appeals of November 19, 2007 as submitted. Second by Mr. Monnett. Motion carried.
OATH OF TESTIMONY
Mr. Daniel administered the Oath of Testimony.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mr. Matrana reviewed the Guidelines Governing the Conduct of Public Hearings. The first matter before the board tonight concerns Mr. William Cherry, BZA-07-024.
Mr. James said this petition is to satisfy a condition that was placed on a Variance of Use that was granted back in 1994. The condition was that if there is a new tenant proposed for the building at 1856 Stafford Road, which is at the northeast corner of Stafford and Elm Drive, which is zoned R-3, that noticing would be done to the surrounding property owners and this request would be brought back to the board for a public hearing. The owner of the property is Mr. William Cherry; he is here tonight. This use is for an office building and the new tenant is Edwards Jones Investment firm, which is an appropriate use for a professional office. So, that is basically what this petition is. It is just in compliance with the previous condition.
Mr. Bill Cherry at 1854 Stafford Road said my office is next-door to 1856. Chuck Mead who is a custom homebuilder in Town retired. He had been in that office for probably ever since we built it in 1984. He retired in July and I advertised for a new tenant and Edward Jones is ready to move a representative in and as Mr. James said, I'm complying with the provisions of that variance that was granted to me back actually in the early 80s and then it was revised a time or two I think in the 90s. That is why I'm here; to get your BZA approval for the change of tenant.
Mr. Matrana asked, is there anyone in the audience who would care to speak on this matter? Being no one coming forward the public portion is now closed and I would like to open this matter up to the board of discussion and a possible motion.
Mr. Gibbs made a motion that the Board of Zoning Appeals approves BZA-07-024 as filed by Mr. William L. Cherry to lease a tenant space at 1856 Stafford Road to Edward Jones Investments. Second by Ms. Duffer. Roll call vote called.
Mr. Monnett – yes
Ms. Duffer – yes
Mr. Cavanaugh – yes
Mr. Gibbs – yes
Mr. Matrana – yes
5-ayes, 0-opposed, 0-absent. Motion carried.
Mr. Matrana said the next matter before the board concerns Debra Lynn Lathan, BZA-07-025.
Mr. James said this petition is a Special Exception to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption at a restaurant tavern at 115 N. Center Street, which is zoned Town Center. The property is right next-door to us. It has been operated as a restaurant or tavern for years. Just most recently it was operated as a pizza restaurant that did not serve alcohol. With any establishment that serves alcohol you have to get a Special Exception in the Town Center District or if it is zoned General Commercial. The board has always placed a condition that whenever a new tenant or owner enters a new building, that they have to come back to the board to get another Special Exception. The Special Exception is non-transferrable to a subsequent owner or operator of a business. So, that is what this petition is about. There has been one change since it was last a bar/tavern. Up above the restaurant tavern is, I guess you could call it, a youth center; it's called The Attic. It has been in business and before the previous tavern went out of business I think it was called Timothy's Pub. They co-existed for about six months so that is one significant change that was not in existence prior to this request. So, The Attic what they do is they provide a place for local bands to play so they have some teen-agers up there. In researching this we do not have a defined use for this type of use. The closest thing in the Zoning Ordinance that would be a similar use would be a social club. The social club is allowed in the Town Center also with a Special Exception. This hasn't been an issue before because the previous restaurant did not sell alcohol. Now that this request has come forward this has raised the concern about the two issues being so close together. Could there be the potential for some problems?
Staff Comments: the petitioner states that the liquor license, if they get it from the Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission, is only for on-site consumption within the confines of the restaurant or tavern. If they were to allow alcohol to go outside of the restaurant, they would risk the loss of their liquor license. Staff recommended a condition so that this request comes back before the board on an annual basis by the BZA to make sure that there are no conflicts between these two uses being so close together. And then a third issue is knowing the youth center may require a Special Exception which is the more appropriate use in the Town Center District; the restaurant or tavern or the youth center? I have talked to the owner/operators of The Attic and they told me that they co-existed with Timothy's for about six months and they didn't have any incidents at that time and that he is looking for another location for the youth center. So, with that I will let the petitioner come up and answer any questions that you might have.
Mr. Greg Genrich with Bradford & Riley said we prepared for the liquor license application and also the exception to serve alcohol and this is Debra and Tim Lathan. They are longtime residents of Plainfield. I guess the issue of concern to you all, which I understand is an all age's music venue on the second floor and then there will be the tavern and restaurant on the first floor. The licenses that they are applying for is what is called a type 210 license, which was created about 20 years ago by the general assembly where they are taking the beer/wine license and gave the right to do carryout for the ability to serve beer/wine/liquor inside the establishment. So, there is a food requirement of 100,000 so you have to be a restaurant and you surrender the right to do carryout. It is basically to get around the quotas and the smaller towns that are growing so you can attract more restaurants and keep more businesses into these areas. So, there will never be the ability to have alcohol leaving the establishment without the violation of State law. As Mr. James said earlier, it kind of goes for six months to a year prior to it closing without incident. The owner of The Attic does have somebody controlling the lots. There are requirements if you are under 18, there are not pass outs so once you leave the establishment you have to leave; you can't leave and go to your car and come back. You have a long history with the Lathan's without any major infractions or issues of concerns. They have been good corporate and commercial neighbors and I think they will do the same thing with this new license if granted. I would be happy to answer any questions from the board.
Mr. Matrana asked, when they were operating Timothy's, did they sell alcohol?
Mr. Genrich said yes.
Mr. Matrana said so are they just changing the name from Timothy's to a different name?
Mr. Genrich said right; they had sold the bar.
Mr. Lathan said we have had two businesses in the building and then they moved out so we are just trying to open it back up. That is basically what we are doing.
Mr. Matrana asked, will it be called Timothy's again?
Mr. Lathan said it will be called the Old Pub.
Ms. Duffer asked, are you the owner of the building?
Mr. Lathan said yes.
Ms. Duffer said so you just lease the space out to Mug and Pie and so forth.
Mr. Lathan said yes.
Mr. Genrich said they are buying on contract so they are the leasing/subleasing the contract. We have a consent from the owner for the exceptions.
Ms. Duffer said I have a question about the back stairs. To go to The Attic, the upstairs, is that the back entrance? So, there is no way for them into the bar through that back entrance?
Mr. Lathan said they are two complete separate entities. They cannot get into the bar through The Attic at all.
Mr. Matrana asked, have you had any discussions with the owners of The Attic? I know they are looking for a new place to rent. Have they asked you any questions or had any problems?
Mr. Lathan said no; not at all.
Mr. Carlucci said I have known Tim for a long time. He had the unfortunate or fortunate job of trying to teach my daughter to dive. On the other hand I'm always concerned, and I understand what Mr. Genrich says about you can't carry liquor out, but I work at the Town Hall different nights during the week and I have seen those kids milling around out front. In the wintertime there is probably less milling out front but in the summer they are out front. I don't know when they go in or when they come out but usually when I come into work and go back out, they are there. We probably should have looked at this earlier because I don't think anybody would have a teen club right next to a place that serves alcohol. I know you can't take the alcohol out but it gets in their stomach and they are taking it out so I'm just not convinced that something won't go wrong at some point that we will all be unhappy about later. Because you have people who are drinking alcohol and they may not be carrying it out but they are bringing it out someway internally. You don't know if a fight will pick up and if you fall off that sidewalk, you are right in the driving area of Center Street. So, I'm more concerned about that because nobody would put those uses anywhere or shouldn't put those uses anywhere in proximity to each other. They both go in the front doors unless there is a back door that I'm missing here.
Ms. Lathan said there is a back door.
Mr. Carlucci asked, do they go up the back door?
Ms. Lathan said The Attic is on Center Street and there is also one for the pub on Center Street but 99% of the people will go in the back entrance to the pub in the alleyway.
Mr. Carlucci said all I know is there are two main entrances to Timothy's and The Attic are on Center Street. Maybe some people will come in and go in the back if they park in the back but there is nothing to prevent them from coming and going in the front door. My concern, as the Town Manager, is you are putting these two groups together and maybe we have just been lucky and nothing has happened but you have to make the best decision you can.
Ms. Duffer said you say you are purchasing the building on contract, is that correct?
Mr. Lathan said yes.
Ms. Duffer asked so do you sublease out to The Attic?
Mr. Lathan said yes.
Ms. Duffer asked, so when is their contract up?
Mr. Lathan said they have a month to month contract.
Ms. Duffer said and they are currently looking for another location so I think it maybe goes back to Staff comments; which is the more appropriate use in the Town; is it a pub or is it a youth center? Because if they are on a month to month, that could be changed easily.
Mr. Carlucci said to be clear you own the building now, is that correct?
Mr. Lathan said yes. I'm buying this on contract and the building is like two different things; there is a business upstairs and a business downstairs. The only thing I wanted to say is I opened Timothy's Pub up in 1994 and we ran that for 13 years. We have never had any kind of trouble like somebody falling off a sidewalk or anything like that. We are responsible people and we don't just serve people alcohol and send them out the door. We take care of our customers; we take people home. I feel like I have a very good record for the business that I'm in.
Mr. Carlucci asked, are you going to have bands playing on the inside too?
Mr. Lathan said we plan on doing some music but this new business is really going to be downscaled; we aren't going to be opened as many hours. We will be the smallest bar in Town, if you want to put it that way. Maybe once a month on special occasions we will have a band; we will probably have a band for the grand opening, if we get the license. The kids and the alcohol thing I understand your concerns but I'm not sure what you are afraid of, I'm not sure the exact thing that you are afraid of. Are you afraid of a fight or something like that?
Mr. Gibbs said for me the overall perception is teen-agers are kids with teen-agers upstairs and a tavern is downstairs. That's my biggest concern; I don't like that. It is nothing against you personally; I just don't like that concept of a Town Center. Okay it's a Town Center because you have a tavern and bar and that's great but you have youth upstairs. I just don't like the way the mix is.
Mr. Lathan said you have the same concern at the Metropolis to a certain degree when you have a lot of kids out there migrating going to the theater with restaurants and bars in that environment as well. I'm not saying that it is exactly the same but you do have a place where youth is congregating. The key is the people serving the alcohol are responsible and have a good record and a good history. In talking to Jason of The Attic there is some security involved on the weekends where they have people looking up the lot and kind of controlling it.
Mr. Jason Tom at 5979 Gadsen Drive said security wise if my father is available, he is a retired Hendricks County Sheriff's Deputy; works security force. He controls the parking lot and watches the kids on the inside. If he is not there, we have another gentleman who brings his daughter up with him and instead of charging him get in we let him work for us; we pay him a fee for controlling the parking lot and then on the inside as well to make sure the kids are good. If he can't make it, then I have another gentleman who does it for us. We have three people who work security for us. We control the parking lot and keep an eye on the kids on the inside.
Ms. Duffer asked, how late are you opened in the evenings?
Mr. Tom said that varies. It depends on how many bands we have that night. If we have four bands, we are opened from eight to 11:30 p.m. If we have five to six bands, we start at seven and we try to be done at 11:30 p.m.
Mr. Gibbs asked how many days a week are you opened?
Mr. Tom said mainly it is Friday and Saturday.
Mr. James said (inaudible).
Mr. Tom said we do have some special weekday shows. (Inaudible). We follow the curfew laws. If they are under 18, (inaudible).
Ms. Duffer asked, do you take identification of the kids when they come in to know their age?
Mr. Tom said not all of the time. If it is a small crowd (inaudible).
Mr. Matrana asked, could you say that again? If the bar room tavern is approved, then you are going to change the minimum age to 21?
Mr. Tom said yes, which is the way that it was before to go outside.
Mr. Matrana said so children under 21 could still be allowed inside.
Mr. Tom said correct.
Mr. Matrana said there was kind of a note in the information packet here that you might be looking for a new location.
Mr. Tom said yes. What I would really like to do in the future is (inaudible).
Mr. Matrana asked, do you have any definite plans when you might find a new location?
Mr. Tom said I'm just in the research stage. (Inaudible).
Mr. Matrana said so at the present time you kind of anticipate staying where you are.
Mr. Tom said yes.
Ms. Duffer asked, what concerns do you have about a bar below?
Mr. Tom said (inaudible).
Mr. Matrana asked, how long has the youth center been there, The Attic?
Mr. Tom said we have been there for two years. (Inaudible).
Mr. Matrana asked, is there anyone in the audience who would care to speak on this matter?
Mr. Ron Semler at 134 N. Center said I have had the opportunity on various summer evenings to step outside my house and smoke a pipe on my porch. So, I have witnessed a great deal of what transpires outside of The Attic and formerly what was Timothy's Pub. I would like to start out by saying I have no basic objections to pubs; I like pubs and Timothy's always had good food. When they have music, I wish we could keep the doors shut because it rattles the windows. I have no idea what goes on upstairs in The Attic because that seems to be fairly quiet. However, there are many, many evenings outside the house where there are many young people. Mr. Carlucci's concerns I think are well founded. They come out of The Attic, they hang around the parking lot. My wife and I have been entertained by shouting matches, people yelling at each other and fistfight occasionally. The kids don't really stay in the parking lot. They sometimes get into the street skateboarding up and down the sidewalk and the entryway to the parking lots. We have had bands that finish inside and bring their drums outside and play quite loudly into the night on the summer evenings. I guess I have a great concern that while the people may not mix while they are in the tavern or while they are in The Attic they are going to mix in the parking lot. I'm very, very much concerned about the kids out there being mixed with adults that are coming out of the tavern. I believe Mr. Carlucci is correct in that it is a recipe for disaster. Just as a local that has observed it for quite some time those are my concerns and I wish the board would take those into consideration. I would be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Matrana said being no one else coming forward I would like to close the public portion of this meeting.
Mr. Tom said as far as fistfights I haven't heard of any troubles. Drums I haven't heard of. Guitars I know they have acoustic guitars and they will sit out there and play every now and then. I think one thing that we have to realize is right now it is 18 years old. When you get the kids, they are still 18, they are still kids and then once Tim opens back up, we are raising it back up to 21. That three years you would hope would make a little bit of difference with maturity. You can't really take for granted what we have now with 18 as to what we are going to do with 21.
Mr. Matrana said 21 is just kind of a funny point because anyone can enter the building that is 15 or 16; the only thing about 21 is if you want this little pass out ticket to come back inside but still there are going to be children.
Mr. Tom said right and if they are 15 and 16 or 14 or whatever, then their parents are going to be outside to pick them up when it is time to go; they are not going to be driving home unless they live close and then they will walk home. But I just wanted to make a point that this is the first time that I have heard of fistfights. I haven't heard of any or seen any.
Mr. Matrana said but according to the petition before the board you wish to co-exist on top of the bar right now.
Mr. Tom said yes.
Mr. Cavanaugh said I have been a patron of Lathan's former business there and I enjoyed going there. I think they rent a very nice place. I have also had some experience with crowds and the attendance at The Attic. I don't think they are compatible uses. I support the Lathan's interest in reestablishing their business there; I think it is a good location and an appropriate location for that but I would have to agree with Mr. Carlucci; I don't think the mix of clients is good. The times that I have been around The Attic I see large crowds of kids out on the street and in the parking lot being kids, doing what they do. I believe the patrons under 18 are allowed to leave and make cell phone calls because cell phones don't work inside the facility so if you are under 18, I believe you can get a pass out and make your call and supposedly come back in. The other thing with the younger patrons for The Attic if you are 14-16 or whatever age, you can leave whatever time you want. There is no obligation for The Attic to keep track of those kids so if you have children there that are due to be picked up by their parents and they want to walk out the door at 9:00, I don't think there is anything to prevent that. I think it is a tough situation. I think the activity of The Attic has probably grown over the years. I can recall being at Timothy's and hearing bands up above when we were listening to bands at Timothy's. But my perception is that the business at The Attic and the attendance at The Attic has probably increased dramatically over the last couple of years. I think you guys brought a really good crowd most of the time so I think that both businesses serve a need and certainly The Attic has demonstrated that there is a want and a need for that type of facility in the Town of Plainfield and there are children and young adults that provides a creative outlet for people who have that tendency in our community. But I don't think they are compatible uses and I would like to encourage the two users to try to come up with some type of different timeframe and perhaps The Attic could find a new location. Tim and Debbie would be able to relocate or reestablish their bar and restaurant business there and both needs could be served. But the way that it stands right now I know the Lathan's run a quality business and do the best for their patrons and those concerns but to represent the Town's best interest I don't think it is a good mix right now. When those kids and clients are coming in and out, you can't control that mixture very well. That is my general comment.
Mr. James said I think Mr. Cavanaugh hit on the key issue; are these compatible uses? How do we classify The Attic? Is it a social club or do we require them to get a Special Exception? Which is the more appropriate use for this location, a restaurant tavern or the youth center?
Mr. Cavanaugh said the issue before the board right now is a Special Exception for the new restaurant and bar. Mr. Daniel can correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't have any input with what is happening at The Attic with this venue, do we?
Mr. Daniel said no. All you have is what you have before you and that is the question of approving or not approving the Special Exception.
Mr. James said that is correct but I would like some direction on what we do with The Attic. Do we make them come back and get a Special Exception?
Mr. Daniel said I think that is a question for another meeting. Right now we have a petition before the board that they need some action on one way or the other. I don't think that question is before the board tonight.
Mr. Genrich asked, could I address the board?
Mr. Matrana said I would like to ask you to step forward to see if perhaps that you might want to include some information tonight before we make a motion on this. Would you like to perhaps discuss a termination of lease for The Attic and if you would like to discuss that, then the petition before the board would be a whole lot easier to decide.
Mr. Genrich said I can't speak for the Lathan's on that comment but I would say that the hours that they intend to operate the bar would be 11:00 to 9:00-10:00 for the week and the weekends would be midnight. So, there would be some overlap but I can't sit here and say that they are prepared to kick out a tenant that is paying rent who has been operating. A proposal that was pulled up by Mr. James was to a one year review of this, which it may take that long to find a venue for The Attic. I understand your concerns but is there a way we could deal with a more dedicated security outside the building to allow this and give more comfort for the board that would be addressing your concerns.
Mr. James said (inaudible).
Mr. Genrich said I guess what I'm hearing is what happens outside the building.
Mr. Matrana said also on the inside.
Mr. Genrich said Mr. Tom has indicated that he has people outside doing some controlling but would there be a more dedicated controlling pattern that would give you more comfort in this situation?
Mr. Matrana said at this time while we are still discussing this petition could I ask Mr. and Mrs. Lathan to step forward and see if you would like to say anything about the termination of the lease of The Attic right now? If we vote on the specific motion for the Special Exception to operate a bar/tavern, it would make it easier if the two incompatible businesses would have a solution before we vote on this particular motion tonight?
Mr. Lathan asked, what are you asking me?
Mr. Matrana said if you would like to say anything further before we decide to vote?
Mr. Genrich said would you be willing to terminate the lease with The Attic to get this approval? In the perfect world I think there wouldn't be a concern at all with you getting this exception if there wasn't The Attic upstairs.
Mr. Lathan asked, what kind of timeframe are you talking about?
Mr. Matrana said it would be up to you to declare a timeframe but the particular motion tonight is should we grant a Special Exception to sale alcohol? That is what we are going to decide tonight.
Mr. Lathan said I would be willing to terminate The Attic in a timeframe period. I just can't tell them that they are done next week. (Inaudible). Is that the answer that you would like?
Mr. Matrana said in a roundabout way yes you are correct but if we had more of a specific timeframe rather than sometime in the future. Right now we are going to vote on whether or not to approve a Special Exception to serve alcohol and we just perhaps would like some further direction on how long you would intend the lease with The Attic to continue.
Mr. Gibbs asked, it is a month by month lease, is that correct?
Mr. Lathan said it is a month by month now.
(Inaudible).
Mr. Tom said (inaudible).
Mr. James said (inaudible).
Mr. Lathan said (inaudible).
Mr. James said (inaudible).
Mr. Lathan said in all fairness to The Attic I think six months might be a fair enough time for them to search and find a place.
Mr. Monnett said some of the discussion here is going over and above what is before us this evening. If there is this much uncertainty, we should let them go back and work through the issues that they have at hand and bring what they want to before this community at another time.
Mr. Genrich said we have no problem coming back in January.
Mr. Cavanaugh said I would agree with that concept because I don't think it is fair to ask them to try and negotiate right now. If you would like to have some more time to review the situation, I think you have a feel how some of us feel about it. We think you have a significantly okay use but not the mix between the two. Maybe you could go back and negotiate your situation and see what might be the best outcome for all.
Mr. Lathan said (inaudible).
Mr. Genrich said we could agree to come back to your next January meeting.
Mr. Daniel said I think really the question is whether or not you want to withdraw this or continue it but I'm not sure 30 days is sufficient. What I hear from the board they don't want to run your business but I think it seems pretty clear that these two businesses can't stay in the same building. So, my concern is if you come back in January and say they will be out by March or April, I don't think that is what the board is saying. I think when you come back, you are going to have to come back and say The Attic is gone and we want in; something like that because the board is not going to pass a conditional Special Exception. I don't think they want any overlap at all.
Mr. Lathan said you don't want the bar and The Attic running at the same period.
Mr. Daniel said that is what I'm hearing.
Mr. Cavanaugh said that would be my expectation. I have another question; I believe I heard that maybe you guys have a deadline to have your license registered or to apply for that in some way.
Mr. Genrich said the hearing with the liquor board is February 4th; that is when it would be granted by the ATC.
Mr. Cavanaugh asked, is that a monthly occurrence or quarterly?
Mr. Genrich said they meet monthly.
Mr. Cavanaugh said so there is not a specific deadline other than your current expectations for when you would be granted that license.
Mr. Genrich said given their history with the ATC I'm assuming they would grant their license at the February 4th meeting.
Mr. Cavanaugh said if we extended it a month or two months for you to make your final arrangements, then it is likely that you would be able to get the license in the timeframe that is on a regular schedule.
Mr. Genrich said yes. So, if we came back and they could give you what you needed, in January we would be on the same track that we are on right now.
Mr. Daniel said just so we are clear I don't think the board wants assurances. When you come back, if I'm reading things right, they want The Attic not to be there.
Mr. Genrich said we hear what you say but we just need to talk with them but what you want is no overlap between the two establishments.
Mr. Daniel said correct.
Mr. Matrana said if we were to grant a continuance, would you like for it to be February's meeting?
Mr. Genrich said January.
Mr. Gibbs said I don't think we are saying necessarily between the pub and The Attic; what we are saying is business types.
Mr. Daniel said I think what Mr. Gibbs is trying to say is this board is not telling you which business to pick or anything; they are just saying they can't stay in the same locations.
Mr. Cavanaugh made a motion that the Board of Zoning Appeals continues BZA-07-025 as filed by Debra Lynn Lathan, LLC requesting a Special Exception to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption within an establishment to be known as the Old Pub at 115 N. Center Street to the next meeting. Second by Mr. Gibbs. Roll call vote called.
Mr. Monnett – yes
Ms. Duffer – yes
Mr. Cavanaugh – yes
Mr. Gibbs – yes
Mr. Matrana – yes
5-ayes, 0-opposed, 0-absent. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS/NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Matrana said the next matter before the board concerns old business in reference to BZA-07-020.
Mr. James said we heard this back in August. Mr. Rose has a tractor trailer that he was parking at his residence at 912 Gary Drive. He likes to go to car races and he uses the trailer to transport his racecars to the races and he has also modified it so that he can use it for living quarters. The board determined that it was not a recreational vehicle as he was wanting it to be determined. So, we sent a letter on August 21st stating that the board denied the variance to allow the tractor trailer to be parked at his residence. He was given 30 days to look to make other arrangements to park the tractor and trailer. That time expired on October 1st. He was sent a letter stating that he had 10 days to remove the tractor trailer or he would be fined $50.00. He came in and talked to me and we went down and looked at the trailer and he had it licensed as an RV. The Bureau of Motor Vehicles allowed him to license it as an RV so he said I've got it licensed as an RV and I think I should be allowed to park there. But I made the determination that it was not an RV even though it was licensed as an RV. The primary use of the trailer was to transport the racecars. So, on November 26th I sent another letter with another fine of $50.00 and gave him 10 more days to remove the trailer and as far as I know the trailer is still being parked at his residence. I guess what I'm requesting tonight is a motion to go after a court order to have the trailer removed.
Mr. Monnett said so to date his fine is just $50.00.
Mr. James said yes. In a Residential District you can't do it per day; it is per violation.
Mr. Matrana said so the violations would accrue just once a month.
Mr. James said two. Right now he owes $100.00.
Mr. Matrana asked, does the fine escalate?
Mr. James said I can escalate it; I can double the fine the next time I send a violation letter.
Mr. Carlucci asked, has he paid anything?
Mr. James said no. He hasn't paid anything so that is why I'm requesting the court order.
Mr. Carlucci said Mr. Daniel can correct me but when you write the letters, we can write the letters and say that everyday the violation occurs and continues to occur is an additional $50.00. So, if you write the letter that way, I think that will work.
Mr. Daniel asked, is there an exception in the Residential District?
Ms. Duffer asked, he isn't living in it is he?
Mr. James said no.
Mr. Gibbs said if I remember right, we had the discussion about that being an RV.
Mr. Daniel said this is a racing operation transport.
Mr. Gibbs said so the State of Indiana says it is an RV.
Mr. Daniel said they can call it whatever they want but the board determined it was a transport.
Mr. Cavanaugh asked, did you see the registration for it? They could have taken an RV plate off somebody else's RV and stuck it on there. Just because he has an RV plate on it frankly doesn't mean that it is an RV but the board determined that it is not; that it is a race hauler so I don't think that is in question.
Mr. Carlucci said Mr. Rose is under Indiana law and could have appealed this to the Circular Superior Court within 30 days. I haven't seen him come in here and I think the only way that we are going to get him to act is to take him to court and force the order.
Mr. Matrana said Mr. James just to refresh the board's memory when you are talking about big trucks, normally it is a tractor, which disconnects from the trailer and the total units have to be licensed separately and then the total rig becomes like 60 feet long. Is that what we are looking at; a regular size tractor trailer?
Mr. James said that is correct.
Mr. Matrana said I wanted to make sure that we are talking about a tractor trailer, which is not legal.
Mr. Daniel said if you are a NASA car fan and I don't know if you are or not and you see these pictures at the track, that is exactly what he has down there. It has a number 24 and all of that other on it that they call racecars and there is no question that most of them up front will have some area to change clothes or have a meeting or something. They will have a little area but the majority of that trailer is designed to pull and work on racecars.
Mr. Gibbs asked, if a vehicle is illegally parked, can the Town in this case impound that vehicle?
Mr. Daniel said probably not. It is a pretty drastic remedy and that is one of those that if you do it, you really have to be right. We have provisions to get a court order requiring him to move it; that is our remedy.
Mr. Gibbs said I'm for getting the court order but I want another letter per day fine.
Mr. James said it doesn't say per day. It just says not to exceed $150.00-$250.00 and up to $2,500.00.
Mr. Carlucci said everyday is considered a separate violation.
Mr. Monnett said when he gets this court order and he doesn't move it, then what?
Mr. Carlucci said he would have to answer to a judge on that one.
Ms. Duffer asked, how many letters have you sent before you went to a court order?
Mr. James said this is the first for me so I don't know what has been done in the past.
Mr. Carlucci said it's not something that we want to do because there is an expense to do it. I just don't think he is going to do it. If he is not going to pay attention to a little fine, a big fine isn't going to make any difference. Apparently, he has convinced himself that the RV is the way to go even though he was told that was not going to work here.
Mr. Gibbs made a motion for our Town Attorney, Mr. Daniel to move forward with BZA-07-020 to acquire a court order to move said trailer. Second by Ms. Duffer. Roll call vote called.
Mr. Monnett – yes
Ms. Duffer – yes
Mr. Cavanaugh – yes
Mr. Gibbs – yes
Mr. Matrana – yes
5-ayes, 0-opposed, 0-absent. Motion carried.
Ms. Duffer asked what about the billboard?
Mr. James said that is coming in January.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Cavanaugh made a motion to adjourn. Second by Mr. Gibbs. Motion carried.
