Thursday, June 22, 2000


Vice Chairperson Linda Rootes called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. in the Boone County Chambers having a quorum present.

Vice Chairperson Rootes explained the function of the Board of Adjustment. She stated that all decisions are based upon the Boone county Zoning and Subdivision Regulations, which are considered to be part of the record of the proceedings.

Roll call was taken:

Present: Linda Rootes, Vice Chairperson

Larry Bossaller

Kay Clementz

Cindy Bowne

Absent: Tom Trabue, Chairperson

Also present: Bill Florea, Staff

Thad Yonke, Staff

Ora Ramsey, Secretary

Member Bossaller made and Member Clementz seconded a motion to approve the minutes of May 25, 2000 meeting with one correction. Minutes were approved as corrected by acclimation.



    1. Request by Teresa Shaw to place a pre-1976 mobile home on 17.38 acres,

located at 6350 Hwy 124, Harrisburg.

Thad Yonke gave the staff report that the current zoning of the property is A-2 (Agriculture). The adjacent zoning is A-2 (Agriculture). The parcel is a 17.38 acre piece. The site is located approximately 1 mile east of Harrisburg on the south side of State Hwy 124. The property is currently vacant. The actual variance is to place a pre-1976 mobile home on the property for residential use.

The zoning history show that the original zoning for this tract is A-2 and there have been no previous requests on behalf of this property.

Staff notified 7 property owners.

Teresa Shaw, applicant, 6060 Wagon Trail Ct, Columbia. Ms Shaw explained that she is trying to move her 12x70 trailer on her 17.38 acres. She has had some bulldozing done and is having the water extended to the property. Pictures of the exterior and interior of the home were circulated. Her parents had a new electrical panel box put in the home before it was given to Ms Shaw.

Vice Chairperson Rootes stated that in pre-1976 mobile homes the electrical wiring and emergency exits were a concern.

Ms Shaw stated that there are two doors in the home. One exit is in the front and one in the rear by the bedroom and bathroom. Both doors are functional. Ms Shaw stated the wiring was in good shape and that the panel box was put in to replace the old fuse type box.

Member Bowne asked if the whole trailer was rewired.

Ms Shaw responded that only the electrical box was replaced. The whole trailer was not rewired. The wire that runs through the trailer does have a ground to it. It was approved last year when the home was placed in Mobile Village Park. (See permit #4028 – electrical inspection approved 8/18/99).

Vice Chairperson Rootes asked if there was any other information that could be given that would help the Board members make a decision.

Ms Shaw stated she just bought the acreage and wants to place the trailer on the land for probably 4 years. She does not plan to leave the home on the land forever. Just long enough to pay off the land. At that time she will either purchase a newer home or build a home. She does not plan on living in the home for the rest of her life, but financially this is her idea situation, instead of trying to make a land payment and a home payment as well.

Open to public hearing.

Those in favor of request.

Jeff Koppelman, 212 Hollyridge Lane, Columbia is the landowner across the road from subject property. He came mainly to speak to Ms Shaw and to view the photos of the home. He had some reservation about what was going to happen on the property in question. However, since speaking with Ms Shaw has decided he did not have a problem with the home being placed on site. Ms Shaw assured him that she intended to keep her property as wildlife like as she could.

Those in opposition of request.

Closed to public hearing.

Vice Chairperson Rootes asked if Staff had received any phone calls from any of the neighbors that were notified.

Thad Yonke stated he received one phone call from a neighbor that mainly wanted to know what the process was and did not understand what it was for. It was explained to the neighbor that the only reason the public hearing would happen is because of the year of the trailer. If the trailer had been a newer than 1976 model single wide the applicant would not need to appear before the Board of Adjustment. It is purely the age of that unit on the size of acreage that is being considered that caused it to come before the Board.

The neighbor was concerned about the potential for fire since the area is heavily wooded. She just wanted that reflected that that was a concern she had. However, when Staff visited that the site they were able to see that the applicant had cleared a good area up front near the road and it does seem to be away from the wooded area.

Member Bossaller asked if there were any other mobile homes in the area. Ms Shaw responded that there was a doublewide less than a ¼ mile away.

Member Bossaller then asked Ms Shaw if she planned to put any other buildings on the property. She stated she has a permit to place a 30 x 30 double garage. She stated she may put up a pole barn some day in the near future.

Vice Chairperson Rootes stated the mobile home looked very attractive in the picture. She thought it was a good thing that Ms Shaw was familiar with the history of the trailer since it has been in her family for many years. Vice Chairperson Rootes asked if the requested variance was granted if it would be permanent for as long as Ms Shaw cared to leave the trailer there. Staff responded that it would be permanent.

Member Bossaller asked if interval inspections would be done? Bill Florea stated that once the variance has been approved, the trailer would be inspected during the placement of the home. However, once the home has been completely set and inspected and power issued and the final inspection done there would not be any other inspections on the home unless Ms Shaw decided to exchange her current home for another home. The new home would then be required to have a new permit with new inspections.

Ms Shaw stated that if she changed the trailer it would be for a newer one, not an older one.

Member Bowne asked the actual age of the trailer in question. Ms Shaw said it was a 1972.

Member Bossaller expressed concern that once the variance is granted it if final. He asked if it was possible to grant the variance contingent upon a periodic review of the trailer to make sure it is in the same condition as when the variance was granted.

Vice Chairperson Rootes explained that this situation was slightly different from where the Board grant a variance for a setback or a second residence (temporary residence). If this home were a 1977 or 1978 the applicant would not need a variance at all. The only concern is the condition of the unit.

Staff member Bill Florea stated that there was no guidance in the Zoning manual. If safety is the concern then certainly the Board can request the applicant return periodically to review the condition of the dwelling unit.

Vice Chairperson Rootes explained that safety was an issue. The Board was concerned for Ms Shaw’s safety. They were also concerned for the safety of anyone who may purchase the property should Ms Shaw decide to sell her land.

Ms Shaw stated she had no intention of the selling the property or use it as rental property. She bought this piece of land that was on old coalmine pit that nobody wanted. She has already spent $2,000 just flatting out the land. She plans to upgrade the land – not down grade it.

Member Bossaller stated he would be okay with the variance with a condition that a review would be needed every two years. That way the Board does not loose total control of what will happens in the County. It is just a matter of strict review.

Janet Hendren, 10119 E Hwy HH, Hallsville, asked to be recognized. Vice Chairperson Rootes allowed Ms Hendren to speak. She felt that the Board was changing the rules on Ms Shaw and felt it was unfair. Several other applicants of pre-1976 mobile homes have been granted variances in the past. Ms Shaw comes along with a request for a pre-1976 and all of a sudden the rules change on her without warning. In her situation, Ms Hendren stated that she was aware of the 2-year review when her variance was granted. However, in Ms Shaw’s situation that is not an automatic condition that is placed on the variance.

Member Bowne stated that a 28-year old trailer was an awfully old trailer. Her experience with trailers has shown that after 10 years they show a lot of wear. She stated she could not imagine the type of wear a 28-year old trailer would have on it – not just the electrical, but the understructure, the flooring, the walls, the roof.

Ms Shaw stated that she is single and that financially this is her ideal of getting her land paid off and then getting a new trailer.

Member Bowne stated she would be inclined to deny the request without some type of periodic review being placed as a condition on the variance.

Ms Shaw then asked if other applicants with pre-1976 homes had conditions placed on their variance.

Vice Chairperson Rootes stated she did not have the records before her – but that the Board has all different kinds of requests for different reasons. Some people ask to place a pre-1976 mobile home because they have fire damage to their house and they wanted a change to repair it and live in the pre-1976 while they repair their home. The review would be just like this. It would be advertised. The Board and applicant would come back into a meeting. The Staff would be asked if anyone has been complaining or if their people in the audience who have concerns. Chances are that if the situation was the same we would just grant it for another term. Vice Chairperson Rootes told Ms Shaw that if the variance was granted for a period of 4-years that at the end of the 4 years she could come back before the Board and let them know of her progress at that time since she plans to upgrade anyway.

Vice Chairperson Rootes stated there were several options. If the Board members wanted to look at the trailer they could make a motion to table the request, they could make a motion to approve or deny, and they could make a motion to approve with periodic reviews.

Member Bossaller made and Member Bowne seconded motion to grant variance with a 3-year review, on the request by Teresa Shaw to place a pre-1976 mobile home on 17.38 acres, located at 6350 Hwy 124, Harrisburg.

Larry Bossaller Yes Linda Rootes Yes

Cindy Bowne Yes Kay Clementz Yes

Motion to grant the request carried. 4 Yes 0 No






    1. Review permit issued to Ronald Vaughan for a mobile home as a second
    2. dwelling located at 5931 N Hwy VV (granted 4/86).

      Bill Florea gave the staff report that this property is located at 5931 N Hwy VV, Columbia. It consists of .45 acres and is zoned R-S (Single Family Residential). The surrounding property is zoned R-S (Single Family Residential). It is located 1.5 miles north of Columbia on Rte VV. There is a house on the land as well as a mobile home that is subject to this request. The request is to renew a permit for a mobile home as a second dwelling. Prior to 1986 there were two houses on the property. A fire destroyed one of the houses that was occupied by his daughter. April 1986 Mr Vaughan was granted a permit for a second dwelling. The permit has been reviewed as required. The last review was conducted in 1998. Staff notified 13 property owners of this request.

      Ronald Vaughan, 5931 N Hwy VV, Columbia. Mr Vaughan stated that his situation is the same as at last the review.

      Open to public hearing.

      No one spoke in favor of the request.

      No one spoke in opposition of the request.

      Closed to public hearing.

      Member Bossaller made and Member Clementz seconded motion to approve the renewal of the permit issued to Ronald Vaughan for a mobile home as a second dwelling located at 5931 N Hwy VV, Columbia (granted 4/86) for an additional two (2) years.

      Larry Bossaller Yes Linda Rootes Yes

      Kay Clementz Yes Cindy Bowne Yes

      Motion to approve the renewal of the permit for 2 more years was carried. 4 Yes 0 No

      * * * * *

    3. Review permit issued to Barrett Spangler for Robert and Janet Hendren

to place a modular home adjacent to an existing house on 1.74 acres located at

10119 E Hwy HH, Hallsville (granted 6/96).

Thad Yonke gave staff report stating that this property is zoned A-2 (Agriculture). Adjacent zoning is A-2 (Agriculture) to the north, east and west, to the south the zoning is R-M (Moderate Density Residential). The site is on 1.74 acres and is located 3 ½ miles northeast of Columbia. It is near the intersection of Murry on State Highway HH. There is an old house on the property a mobile home was added after the Board approved the variance in 1996. The actual house on the property was supposed to be used for storage only. On the requested variance, the Zoning Regulation, Section 4, A (5) Every building hereafter erected or structurally altered shall be located on a lot as herein defined and in no case shall there be more than one main building on a lot except as otherwise provided in this ordinance. This variance was approved in June of 1996. The last review was June 1998. The modular home is on the property. The old house still remains on the property and the variance still needs to be renewed until the house is removed. Staff notified 12 property owners.

Janet Hendren, 10119 E Hwy HH, Hallsville. The past year has been bad for the Hendrens. Mrs Hendren was involved in a car accident last July. She has had 5 surgeries, lost a kidney, neck surgery, 3 kidney surgeries and will soon have a knee replaced. Mrs Hendren said the man that hit her was not insured so they have had to be responsible financially for all the medical bills. The Hendrens are asking for another two (2) years. She said the house is still used for storage and that no one wants the house gone more than she does. They had planned to double payments to pay off the land and then tear the house down. Mrs Hendren has not been able to work for the past 8 months and because of the medical bills they have not been able to make the double payments. The land is due to pay off in 13 months. So the land will be paid and the house will be torn down within the next time frame.

Open to the public

No one spoke in favor.

No one spoke in opposition.

Closed to the public.

Member Bowne asked if the home was inhabitable if he does not want it torn down. Mrs Hendren said the home could be lived in. The inside of the home looks fairly nice. The outside looks really bad. There are no electricity, water, or sewer hook-ups at this time. The agreement was that no utilities be hooked up to the structure.

Member Bowne asked for clarification on the original variance. She wanted to know if the variance was granted because of having two structures on the same property or because it is less than 2.5 acres that she was placing a modular home or because it is sitting in front of her home as it exists now?

Thad Yonke explained that the original variance was for a second dwelling unit on a single tract of ground. The other unit being in front of it really comes into play more someone applies for a permit to place an accessory dwelling to be added after there is already a primary dwelling on the site, in light of the fact that the other dwelling is to be removed at some point in the future. It will bring this into compliance where it no longer needs a variance on it. The lot itself, being less than 2.5 acres, is a legal lot of record. So it is illegible for one dwelling unit as long as it can get the Health Department to sign off on the wastewater. The only reason it was here was for the one variance.

Member Bowne stated she has seen the structure. The screen doors are standing open. The land has been mowed right around the house but not out to the road. There is heavy vegetation growing around it. It is not an attractive structure.

Mrs Hendren agreed that she had said the exterior of the house was bad and that the interior looks okay. The exterior needed major repairs. It needed more than we were willing to put into such an old old house.

Member Bowne asked if a bank or the individual that sold the property carried the loan.

Mrs Hendren said the individual that sold the property to them carried it.

Member Bowne asked if it was a condition to their loan that they could not destroy the structure. Was the loan carried on the property or on the structure.

Mrs Hendren stated the loan and condition to the loan were for the house and the land. The house must remain intact until the property has been paid off.

Member Bossaller stated that Mrs Hendren had been through a lot. One of the reasons that variances are granted is due to hardships. He said it would be good if they could tear it down as soon as possible once the loan had been paid off.

Member Bowne commented on the asbestos shingles. They could not be burned.

Mrs Hendren stated that the old structure could not be burned anyway, because it was too close to her present home.

Member Bossaller made and Member Clementz seconded motion to approve the renewal of the permit issued to Barrett Spangler for Robert and Janet Hendren to place a modular home adjacent to an existing house on 1.74 acres located at 10119 E Hwy HH, Hallsville (granted 6/96) for an additional two (2) years.

Larry Bossaller Yes Cindy Bowne No

Kay Clementz Yes Linda Rootes Yes

Motion to approve the renewal of the permit for 2 more years was carried. 3 Yes 1 No




The Board welcomed new Board Member Cindy Bowne.



Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,



Ora L Ramsey


Minutes approved on the 24th of August, 2000.