RV storage, massage therapy business win BZA approvals

Monday, November 9, 2020

A south side businessman may have helped the city solve one problem, while almost bringing another upon himself in the process.

Mike Poor of Poor Rentals LLC earned a special exception to allow RV storage and mini-warehouse/self-storage units at 1227 Bloomington St. in the General Business District (GB1) during the November meeting of the Greencastle Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Wednesday night.

He hoped to pair that with a development standards variance to allow expansion of a gravel parking lot at the same location, the old Chuck’s Rental and A-1 Auto Sales site. However, it soon became apparent that city officials weren’t likely to approve an additional section of gravel behind the existing building on the site.

Although the current legal, nonconforming gravel lot can be maintained as such, to expand it would require a variance to development standards, City Planner Scott Zimmerman pointed out.

During at least two previous city meetings, the need for RV parking was stressed as something that has been an outgrowth of the COVID-19 outbreak as many residents have purchased RVs to enjoy as something that has not fallen victim to the pandemic.

But since such vehicles are not allowed to be parked on city streets for more than 48 hours and the existing area RV storage (the fairgrounds, private Groveland lot) are said to be full, city officials had remarked how creating such a facility could be a good opportunity for a local businessman.

It didn’t take long for Poor to seize that opportunity, purchasing the 1.43-acre site to the south of his Feld’s Carpet One business that included a gravel lot that’s been used for storage of some sort for more than 40 years. He petitioned to put gravel on the 15,000 square feet behind the existing building to expand the area for parking RVs, boats and other vehicles. The building itself will be climate-controlled indoor storage.

Poor plans fencing all around the property, making it a secure location for people to park their RVs and all, while also cleaning up the area that is part of the southern entrance to Greencastle.

“How many RVs can you get on the property?” BZA member Wayne Lewis asked.

“I’m hoping to have up to 50,” Poor responded, acknowledging that he has not measured it out to determine a more-exact number.

Meanwhile, he plans to keep the mound to the south in grass as a buffer between properties. No access road is planned to South Street, Poor said, adding that he plans to pave the two entrances off U.S. 231 so that vehicles can make a safer entry to the property.

Poor was asked by City Attorney Laurie Hardwick that if the use was approved and he was required to pave the smaller area, would he do it?

“No,” Poor admitted, citing dollars and cents and good business sense, “I’d just use the area already graveled.”

He said he had hoped to extend the gravel behind the building to accommodate some longer, 36-foot trailers.

Making the motion to approve the special exception for the storage lot, Lewis said he was “excited to see it was going to be secure and lighted, and that the entrance to Greencastle was going to be cleaned up and give the community an opportunity to deal with a situation that it’s going to be faced with very soon.”

Unanimous approval followed the Lewis motion.

However, the BZA ultimately tabled the second part of Poor’s request to make an additional graveled area. City officials have been holding strong the requirement that all such new lots be hard surfaced.

“We can’t make financial reasons part of our decision,” noted alternate board member John Phillips, filling in for Brian Cox who excused himself from the issue as director of the Chamber of Commerce.

“Although that’s what business is all about,” Poor countered, suggesting the cost of paving would override the additional income that could be made from the area in question.

The city ordinance does require paving, Mayor Bill Dory said from the audience.

“I applaud Mr. Poor for going after a solution for a problem we have here in this community,” Dory added.

City Planner Zimmerman recommended denial of the development standards variance, since Poor intended to use gravel. Should he consider a hard surface, perhaps made of millings from asphalt streets being replaced, it would be a different story.

The BZA suggested that Poor could go ahead and fence everything and not gravel the spot in question, creating a hard surface at a later date, once access to millings is possible. The theory is if he does the millings, it would meet standards, and if he doesn’t, he wouldn’t need a variance to leave it in grass.

Phillips made the motion to table the standards variance request. Had it instead been denied, Poor would have had to wait a full year before being able to refile the petition. It gives him the option. He can always withdraw the request if he uses millings to meet the standards.

In the evening’s other case, Rebecca Hunsinger received unanimous approval to conduct a message therapy business out of her home at 412 E. Walnut St.

Hunsinger’s petition was previously tabled and then withdrawn before receiving action at the BZA’s November meeting Wednesday night when she received a special exception for a Type II home occupation in a traditional neighborhood (TN).

Parking was really the only issue brought up as Hunsinger said she has room in her driveway for two additional vehicles and there is on-street parking along Walnut and around the corner on Taylor Place. However, she plans only one client at a time with little or no overlap, so parking was not seen as a problem.

Clients will use the front entrance, she said, and there will not be any need for signage.

The site will remain a residence.

One letter of support was noted from neighbor Jinsie Bingham, 104 Bloomington St.

Cox made the motion to approve the request.

BZA chairman Andrew Ranck was absent with Margaret Kenton chairing the meeting in his absence via Zoom. Also in attendance along with Lewis, Cox and Phillips was BZA member Doug Wokoun.

The next regular session of the Greencastle BZA is set for 6 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 1 at City Hall.

Comments
View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I look forward to reading the Banner's coverage of the County BZA meeting which took place last night.

    -- Posted by Ben Dover on Tue, Nov 10, 2020, at 8:07 AM
  • Ben, you have piqued my interest with your tease!

    -- Posted by gustave&zelma on Tue, Nov 10, 2020, at 8:53 AM
  • The city complains about all the water runoff from paved areas (parking lots,etc.). And we find in their zoning laws the city is its own worst enemy.

    Poor's request to rock the remaining portion of the property was tabled? How much difference between small rocks and millings to cover a lot can there be?

    -- Posted by Lookout on Tue, Nov 10, 2020, at 1:17 PM
  • Maybe the city needs to put a filler in the water bills outlining the restrictions on RV/Boat storage in a residential neighborhood. These things are popping up like dandelions. Thank you Mr. Poor for opening this storage facility , I just hope people will utilize this.

    -- Posted by Alfred E. on Tue, Nov 10, 2020, at 4:01 PM
  • Expectations for profit must be very high, what with the city forcing residents to use such a facility under threat of fines (and eventual loss of property) for violations. So much so that the businessman can go forward with the confidence of not even measuring the property to determine the viability of the business plan.

    -- Posted by techphcy on Wed, Nov 11, 2020, at 7:18 AM
  • It is discouraging to read that the city requirements are so onerous that the proposed business is not viable. And yet, the city desires this service.

    Is gravel really that undesirable? It's already been noted that it drains better.

    A storage facility is not the same as a parking lot. Less in and out. The appearance issue has been addressed.

    It sounds like the city wants this for multiple reasons and should make an exception.

    -- Posted by letspulltogether on Wed, Nov 11, 2020, at 8:52 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: