Get Adobe Flash player

 

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday March 11, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were: Jay Clawson, Gary Barbour, David Rosenbarger, Charles Anderson, David Scott, Stephen Fisher, Don Ward, Dennis Sterrett. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Weaver.

Visitors Attending were: Mike Burke, Jack Jacobs, Greg Viney, Donna Geisler, Charles R. Mellon, Richard & Elizabeth Syphers, Don Tribbett, Jim Smith, Bev Smith, Dick Martin, Julie Pell, Larry Pell, Kevin Shaffer, Frank Blaser, Chad M. Dillmer, Bruce and Rosie Gunther.

The meeting was called to order by President Charles Anderson and roll call was taken. Don Ward made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the February 11, 2002 meeting. Motion was seconded by Jay Clawson and carried unanimously.

****

#776 The Kelly Family Limited Partnership; Requesting to rezone from R-2 to I-2 on lots 132 & 133 in North Addition and .50 of an acre. The property is located in the Town of Reynolds at 406 N. Boone Street. This has been referred back to the Area Plan Commission by the County Commissioners to review and approve the commitments to be attached to this rezoning.

President Anderson stated, this has been brought back to us from the Commissioners.

Director Weaver stated, the commitment has come back to you for review, it has not yet gone to the Commissioners.

President Anderson asked, anyone here representing this request? I have not seen anyone. So we don’t have anyone here, I guess we will table this.

Attorney Altman asked, the only thing that I can say is, as I understand this is a little bit in posture than a lot of things that we have. Director Weaver, correct me if I’m wrong but, I think this is sent to us by the County Commissioners to re….

Director Weaver stated, no, it has not yet gone to the County Commissioners.

Attorney Altman stated, oh, it hasn’t.

Director Weaver stated, the Commissioners want us, prior to it going to them to have approval of the commitment.

Attorney Altman asked, so that…

Director Weaver stated, so the commitment and the rezoning have not yet gone to the Commissioners, we need our Board’s approval before the Commissioners want to hear it.

Attorney Altman stated, that isn’t what I thought that the situation was, I think we need to table this until they are representing….

Jay Clawson stated, we have to read the commitment anyway…

President Anderson stated, we have to read the commitment.

Director Weaver stated, you have the commitment here, I did not send you this copy, it’s very hard to read and I did not receive the original so, this copy that you have, has been faxed back and forth a couple of times so it’s very difficult to read.

Jay Clawson asked, should we read it even if they are not here?

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think so, it’s just so that you can make sure that you have, can read what you are looking at.

Jay Clawson stated, I make a motion that we table this request and if Director Weaver can get us a better copy so that we can read the commitment before next meeting, I would appreciate it.

President Anderson asked, so we have a second on that?

David Rosenbarger stated, second.

President Anderson stated, so moved.

****

#782 Bruce J. & Rosie E. Gunther; Requesting to rezone from I-1 to R-2 on .07 of an acre. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 530 Ireland Street.

President Anderson asked, is there anyone here representing this request?

Greg Viney was present to representing this request.

President Anderson asked, do the Commissioners have any questions about that request?

Jay Clawson asked, I know that we have done an awful lot of them in that area, does this meet the minimum square foot requirements for an R-2?

Greg Viney stated, Bruce just got here.

President Anderson asked, so we have Bruce and Rosie Gunther here too?

Rosie Gunther stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, Jay, in response to that question it does meet the size of the lot requirement but, it does not meet the minimum lot width requirement, the lot is a grandfathered lot, when it was platted, prior to Area Plan.

Jay Clawson stated, okay.

President Anderson asked, do we have anyone in the audience with any questions about that request at all? If the Commissioners have no questions on it, I say let's go ahead and vote.

Jay Clawson asked, they are going to have to get variances?

Director Weaver stated, they have to request a variance to build.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The results of the vote were as follows: 8 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to City of Monticello for their action.

Attorney Altman asked, that will be next Monday right Jay?

Jay Clawson stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, next Monday evening at 7:00…

Jay Clawson stated, 7:00…

Attorney Altman stated, at the City Council meeting room for their final consideration. They have the final say on this as in most of the matters before us the rezoning, so if anyone has anything that they want to say or do, be there.

Jay Clawson asked, do you know where the Council Chambers are?

Bruce Gunther stated, no.

Jay Clawson stated, you know where the Clerk Treasurer, it’s on the alley side of the City building, Police Department, back side of the Police Department, Greg, do you know where it’s at?

Greg Viney stated, I know where it’s at.

Jay Clawson stated, okay, 7:00.

****

#783 Jackie L. Jacobs; Requesting to rezone from B-1 to B-2 on .402 of an acre in the Town of Monon and .28 & .25 of an acre in Monon Township. The property is located at 111 Market Street.

President Anderson asked, do we have anyone here representing that request?

Jack Jacobs was present to represent to represent the request.

President Anderson asked, do the Commissioners have any questions about that request? Did we have any calls about that?

Director Weaver stated, we have not had any correspondence, no. What he’s trying to do is bring this property into compliance with the Ordinance.

President Anderson asked, does anyone in the audience have any questions about that request? If not, I say let’s go ahead and vote.

Attorney Altman asked, Director Weaver, this is a use of a restaurant that has been there for, how long, Mr. Jacobs?

Jack Jacobs stated, the restaurant has been there for approximately 10 years. It was formally a tavern.

Attorney Altman asked, at the same general location right?

Jack Jacobs stated, the same exact location.

Attorney Altman asked, so this is not a use that is not new at all, it’s just trying to bring it into compliance so, that this isn’t a violation situation before us?

Director Weaver stated, that is correct.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The results of the vote were as follows: 8 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to Town of Monon for their action.

Attorney Altman stated, this will be forwarded to the Town Board for their part on the real-estate that’s in the Town of Monon and we never know exactly when they will read that for sure. We send it out right away but, that sometimes takes a little doing to get there so you should probably check with the Clerk of the Town Board to make sure when they will, when they get it and then when they will consider it. This is for everyone’s information and consideration. The amount of the real-estate that is in the County, will be hear by the County Commissioners and they do that here and it’s Monday morning at 8:30 right here and they have the final say on the part that is in the county. So that will be right here in this room, 8:30 Monday morning.

Jack Jacobs asked, do I need to be here?

Attorney Altman stated, I would suggest that. They have the final say and so does the Town Board on the amount that is in the Town. Does anyone else have any questions on that? Okay, thank you very much.

****

#784 James E. & Beatrice Smith; Requesting to rezone from R-2 to R-3 on .775 of an acre and the NE corner of Lot #10 in Golden Hills 3rd Addition. The property is located in Union Township at 5785, 5787, 5789 & 5791 E. Golden Hills Drive & 2215 Runway Court.

President Anderson asked, our Director went to find us some pictures on this. Do we have anyone here representing that request?

Don Tribbett stated, I’m here with Bea and Jim Smith.

President Anderson asked, and then we have, our Director should be back here pretty quick. Do we have any questions from the Commissioners about this request at all?

Don Tribbett stated, I do have a drawing that I would like to pass out that shows the layout of the property plus, we have attached several letters from adjacent property owners that have been kind enough to give us letters in support of this.

President Thompson stated, give us two back here, so we can get one entered into the record.

Attorney Altman asked, for the record, we have received a map of the general location of the area showing pieces of ground that have names on them, I presume that is a neighbors Mr. Tribbett?

Don Tribbett stated, yes, that is correct.

Attorney Altman stated, and owners of the real estate involved not all of it is located but, much of it is around the neighborhood and it’s the first sheet of that. The second sheet would be a letter from Judy Zook. The letter was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members. The next letter, page 2, page 3 is addressed to the White County Area Plan Commission from Scott A. and Leslie D. Coates was read out loud to the Board and the audience members. The fourth sheet of that exhibit is again addressed to the White County Area Plan Commission from Russell F. Graefnitz was read out loud the Board members and the audience members. Then the next letter to us, White County Area Plan Commission from Bill and Mona Burgess was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members. The last of this exhibit that we have received from the applicant from Joseph B. Holscher and Marilyn S. Holscher was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members.

President Anderson stated, I would imagine that there are people here with questions, we’ll let everyone talk too.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, we have theirs, we’ll read these later when he gets done with his presentation.

President Anderson asked, do the Commissioners have any questions right now about this?

Jay Clawson asked, yes, is that even on a regular road or is that a private drive that goes back to that property?

James Smith stated, private drive.

Director Weaver stated, I can not answer that Jay.

Jay Clawson stated, it’s not wide enough for two cars to pass on it…

An audience member stated, go down hill or drive up the street.

Jay Clawson stated, I mean that’s, we need to know what’s going on in our Ordinance about putting, I mean that’s a real congested area down in there.

Don Tribbett stated, I think it’s indicated in the staff report that’s been provided to you. What the Smith’s are trying to do is to bring the property into compliance with what already exists there. When they bought the property they bought their initial piece of property several years ago, there are already 5 dwelling units on that property, that consisted of a duplex, a mobile home, another mobile home and then a garage with an upstairs apartment in it. What really brought this to a head was when they decided that they wanted to get rid of one of the mobile homes and fix up a garage already on the property as well they were told that they couldn’t do it because, the fact that it wasn’t R-3. So what they already have there, is within what you would normally classify as an R-3 district in that predated even their buying property.

President Anderson asked, is there anyone in the audience with any questions about this request?

An audience member stated, I didn’t hear what you said, I’m sorry.

President Anderson asked, do we have anybody with any questions about this request in the audience? Do you want to make a statement about this request?

Donna Geisler stated, I’m representing my mother Edith Dunham who also owns property on that and who the Smith’s bought the property from about 14 years ago, well, 1986. I have a petition here, of course with some undersigned people because, we do not believe that it should be changed. I do sympathize with the fact that the zoning is the way that it is however, I don’t believe that the increase traffic on the road would be good, it’s a dead end access road with one lane. There’s not available parking and I also have another complaint, the legal description of the property proposed for rezoning is incorrect. The .775 hundredths of an acre does not include 2215 Runway Court. Legal notice of this zoning hearing wasn’t sent at least to my mother until almost to late and it didn’t arrive to her residence until the 9th which was Saturday. She called me and was very upset and to my knowledge until, unless it’s changed Smith’s don’t have legal, clear title to the property as of yet.

President Anderson asked, do you want to respond to that at all?

Don Tribbett stated, I’m not sure what the title issue is, they certainly title the property, I’m not sure, there has been a lawsuit against, I think, between her family and the Smith’s that they got ruling on today which was in favor of the Smith’s. So I think that there is, I assume that’s the title issue that she is referring to. As far as the additional traffic, we’ve already got the same amount of buildings there. They are going to have primary, on the primary lot I think there may be if you look at the applications it refers to the Northeast corner of lot #10, I think that’s what she’s objecting to there is the legal. I think what was really intended was the Northeast corner of 10, lot #10 but, it’s clear the only thing that they have in lot #10 is lot in the Northeast quarter. So I don’t think that there is any sort of substantial error in the description of the property.

President Anderson asked, the acreage is right now?

Don Tribbett stated, well, there’s .775 yes, if you look at, maybe if you look at the map…

Attorney Altman asked, Director Weaver was just talking to me because, she examined the record, Diann Weaver, our Director. Director Weaver is there something that you want to talk about on this issue, I don’t want to cut you off Mr. Tribbett but…

Director Weaver stated, I have looked at our copy that we have mailed to the Herald Journal, for advertising and you are correct, the legal description is not right. That is not by Mr. Smith’s error but, an error from my office, so I apologize for that.

Attorney Altman asked, so that…

Director Weaver stated, the part of lot #10….

Attorney Altman asked, so if that is so, we are, this matter is not properly before us tonight. We need to have that re-advertised so that it can be reheard at the next meeting which, will be when Director Weaver?

Director Weaver stated, um….

Attorney Altman stated, April the 8th at 7:30…

Don Tribbett stated, if it would please the Council, the Smith’s advised me that they would like to go ahead, if we could, proceed on the part that was properly advertised which would not include the Northeast quarter of lot #10, just include the original tract that they own. That’s the one that had the dwelling units on it when they bought it.

Director Weaver asked, so, it would not include 2215 Runway Court.

Don Tribbett stated, right and if they want then, they can come back in and petition later for that additional property.

Donna Geisler stated, I still have an objection to that because true, although, they did receive legal notice of that yesterday, that does not necessarily mean that it is out of the lawsuit. We do have appeal rights and also that wasn’t exactly what I had in reference to, without bringing up personal things for the Smith’s, I hate to say that but, there has been calls made to my mother and I both, about….

Attorney Altman stated, nothing personal…

Donna Geisler stated, no I’m not but, about getting the clear title to this property.

Attorney Altman asked, and you’re talking about the part of the property that has been advertised correctly?

Donna Geisler stated, correct.

James Smith stated, excuse me, she’s talking about her property…

Attorney Altman stated, you don’t know what she’s talking about, she hasn’t exactly said.

Donna Geisler stated, I will say if you wish me to.

President Anderson asked, are you talking about…

Donna Geisler stated, I’m talking about the .77, I mean the 8 tenths of an acre that they purchased from us.

President Anderson asked, so it would be, which all of this includes, close to 8 tenths of an acre on that…

Donna Geisler stated, correct.

President Anderson asked, are you talking about the whole property?

Donna Geisler stated, yes.

President Anderson stated, which includes the 5 units that are on the one piece…

Donna Geisler stated, there is a two part contract and both parts tie into each, if it’s, if one is not fulfilled the other one is also void. The contracts themselves, the two contracts, are together.

President Anderson stated, that’s a legal thing, that’s not for us…

Attorney Altman stated, I was going to say, what I hear you saying and my council listen to me and see if I’m, if there is a real challenge to the title of the applicant whether they do or don’t have title to this. That would be a significant challenge as to whether we could hear, whether they could present a rezoning for us, in front of us. I think that might be something that I would need to maybe receive some information on the title from the objector and from the applicant, get that in writing, so that I can present that to the Board and then we would at least have an idea what they are talking about, I don’t now at all.

Steve Fisher asked, wouldn’t she have to provide some documentation of that claim though Attorney Altman, I mean…

Donna Geisler stated, I have the contracts, I have no problem…

Steve Fisher asked, you could say, you could come in and say that I own the property that K-Mart is on but, unless you have something in hand…

Attorney Altman stated, I hear what you’re saying but, she’s talking about them buying it off of her mom so, there is a bit more…

Steve Fisher asked, did you bring any documentation or anything with you?

Donna Geisler stated, I didn’t bring that with me, I do have it at home, I can bring it in.

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know exactly what to say, I can’t advise the Board either way.

President Anderson asked, did they bring a title with them?

Director Weaver stated, evidentially we have a legal description for the .775, the document is not identified what it came from, we have a copy of the deed for lot #10 so we do, that is a deed.

President Anderson asked, do the Smith’s want to respond to that?

James Smith stated, Director Weaver should have a deed for both because, I went downstairs and got them and took them up to her office.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t have a copy of a deed on the .775, I have a legal description but, it’s not, if it is a deed, it’s not identified as a deed, I only have one page and it does say that it’s page 4 so, I don’t know what document that it came from.

James Smith stated, we had a mortgage on that and Dunham’s had a second mortgage because of the purchase, that’s the way that it was purchased with a mortgage and a second mortgage. The second mortgage was paid off and the second mortgage was released some 60 or 90 days ago. There was also another property involved which is a different property across the street which was, had another contract on and we do not have a deed to that property we’re not asking for rezoning for that property we’re not asking for rezoning for that property.

Attorney Altman stated, then that doesn’t have any relevance, I guess I hear the objector indicating the challenge and title to your…

Donna Geisler stated, if they show me the title, I will say yes, but, with the bank calling me, I don’t think that they have the title.

Beatrice Smith stated, can I interject something here. The bank is calling them because we are trying to refinance the property so that we can connect our sewers. In order to do that we have to pay off a second mortgage that they have on lot #10 or lot #3 which is down here across the street and we’re trying to get the pay off on that. It has nothing to do with the .775.

President Anderson asked, has their contract, you paid their contract…

Beatrice Smith stated, yes we have on the .775.

Donna Geisler stated, yes but, the property that they are talking about on lot #10 if you read the contract, it is also tied to this lot. If there is a default on one, there’s a default on the other one automatically. It says so, right in the contract.

David Scott asked, you’re not actually wanting to add living quarters or anything that you’re doing…

James Smith stated, what we’re going to do, there is a building on there now that we call the pool house that we want to develop into our home. We live in a mobile home and we want to tear that mobile home down and get rid of it, we’re actually swapping one unit for another. I have pictures of our property of all of the buildings on it. You know, I have all kinds of stuff here that I would be happy to share it with you.

Donna Geisler stated, I think that some other people have something to say about that.

Attorney Altman asked, do you know anything about the title Mr…

Don Tribbett stated, well, I saw the deed the day that we grabbed it to take it upstairs to Area Plan so I know that there is a deed. Now, she mentions about the bank being involved, that leads me to believe that she’s talking about some sort of security instrument that somewhere along the lines that she had seen. Well, a lot of people have a mortgage on their property….

Attorney Altman stated, I understand that, I’m not talking about that sir.

Don Tribbett stated, I don’t have a copy of the deed with me but, I have seen it.

President Anderson stated, but, as long as your title is clear to the property.

Attorney Altman asked, certainly, you made mention of a court ruling on this, can you enlighten us?

Don Tribbett stated, there was originally a dispute with regard to this portion of this, this is all part of the lot, this is where there is a garage with a dwelling unit above it, if you look at it.

Attorney Altman asked, that’s the piece of property that’s…

Don Tribbett stated, that was part of the original tract when the Smiths bought it and then they entered into a transaction and that’s what the litigation, right Attorney Altman, that’s what’s the litigation that they just got an order out of today? There was some dispute over who should have possession of that.

Attorney Altman stated, and they confirmed title and possession…

Don Tribbett stated, Judge Thacker just…

Attorney Altman asked, and your clients…

Don Tribbett stated, yes, and they just got word of that today.

President Anderson asked, is that where you come in with, other than the mortgage, the two mortgages being tied together and the…

Donna Geisler stated, both contracts are tied together, if there is default on one there is a default on the other one and the other one is not to be paid off until 2007. I agree that they are trying to get that paid off but I also know that the bank is calling us wanting us to release the title so that they can get the loan, or the deed. So I assume that they are getting the title, what they are saying is, or what I was told is they needed the deed for this piece of property that was already paid off, paid off to us but, see we didn’t have the deed because, we have the second mortgage. I don’t know whether they paid the bank off or not.

President Anderson stated, but, they haven’t defaulted on any of their mortgages, or any of their contracts.

Donna Geisler stated, it’s not been paid off, it’s just…

President Anderson stated, right but, that piece is not due to be paid off yet.

Donna Geisler stated, right but, it is still in the contract that if they do not pay it off we get the whole thing back, both pieces.

Don Tribbett stated, even assuming that what she is talking about now, which is even a little hard for me to respond because, I don’t know exactly what we’re talking about. Assuming that they are contract purchasers which, is what she just said, a contract purchaser would still have standing to come before this Board now.

Attorney Altman stated, contract purchaser, contract seller should be consenting to this application.

Don Tribbett stated, we don’t have that, I’m trying to respond the best that I can with some reservation…

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know either, I guess what I’m saying is, if they are owners they need to consent to this application.

Don Tribbett stated, the contract is a total different tract of land in the first place.

Beatrice Smith stated, there is not a contract on .775, it’s been paid off, it’s been released.

Attorney Altman asked, and nothing on lot #10?

Beatrice Smith stated, no, she has nothing to do with lot #10.

Donna Geisler stated, I have no objection with lot #10 except that it was not listed, that it was not in the legal description to begin with.

Attorney Altman asked, .775 is not under contract?

James Smith stated, no.

Donna Geisler stated, no.

Attorney Altman stated, then let's don’t talk about contracts now, mortgages I understand, mortgage holders do not have to consent to this, contract owners, or signers have to consent to this. I think that we can proceed.

David Scott asked, why are you opposed to changing the zoning?

Donna Geisler stated, because, from what I understood, from people who have talked to me in the neighborhood, that they wanted to change it so that they could get this one family dwelling to two family dwellings. They already have two trailers on that lot plus the two, the motel and the thing, I have been around for the longest period, probably of any of these because I grew up here. This is my grandfathers’ home and my fathers home, okay, these were all there, the barn that they are making into a house, they have been using as a house just under the line. They’ve got someone else that might want to say something about that to you I don’t know but, if they pull a trailer out and they make this into a house would a wash, why would they need to rezone it? It’s already zoned at an R-1, which is dwelling units which, is two family dwelling units okay, I can’t see any reason other than them wanting to make it an apartment building or something for them to rezone this.

Director Weaver asked, what is there now is grandfathered, as it sits, it can not be changed, once it is changed that breaks the grandfather clause so, in order for them to get the property into compliance…

Donna Geisler stated, it was not grandfathered before because, that’s why we had to sell it to them to begin with because they wouldn’t let us divide that up. They did move a trailer up on the hill that was not grandfathered because, if they moved it from one location to the other, when they bought the place.

Director Weaver stated, they are trying to bring it into compliance now. It is not properly zoned, they are wanting to make changes…

Donna Geisler asked, so are they paying the back…

Director Weaver stated, the Ordinance is written, in order for them to make the changes they have to bring it into compliance first…

Donna Geisler asked, so the have to pay the back taxes…

Director Weaver stated, so that is the reason for the changes, the taxes have nothing to do with the rezoning.

Donna Geisler stated, well, I just think that it is wrong and I’m not the only one, I have a petition here.

President Anderson asked, do you want to put that into the record, bring it up and then we have someone else, come on up and state your name.

Julie Pell stated, I think you have copies of the Paul Wing letter and the Neal Nussbaum letter. If not, I have them for you, they were given to me.

President Anderson asked, that was the ones that I handed you?

Attorney Altman stated, I have not read them but…

Julie Pell stated, okay, I just wanted to make sure that you have them. This is not a personal vendetta on our side, by no means. We respect Bea and Jim Smith, our property does abut up against theirs directly. We live at 5800 E. Golden Hills Drive, my husband and I, we oppose just simply because, we think that there is other alternatives, maybe, can we get a variance for them. We want them to come into compliance and we would like nothing better for them to remove that trailer that is on there. I think there is some other resolution that we can come up with than giving them the R-3, it’s not physically one, I don’t believe with the way that we have seen it in the last 5 years that I have lived there. Parking is atrocious, we’ve probably got the best parking lot on the whole entire road. Two, when they have their summer people up, they are parking in yards, on the sides of the streets. We have a brand new baby along with our neighbors and our other neighbors who have young kids and we feel like if this is going to zoned as an R-3, it’s going to be too much traffic, you know our kids are not going to be able to ride up and down a private road safely. I just think that there are other options to give them to come into compliance and as far as this garage that they are talking about, maybe we can have a request for someone to come out and take a look at it because…

Director Weaver stated, I have been though it…

Julie Pell stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, the Board members have pictures that I have taken.

Julie Pell stated, okay and I think that you can honestly state that what they have done to it is nice, it’s pretty much a home now, I mean they live in it in the summer time, we live right by them, we know that. So I think that taking the trailer off is a big plus but, I don’t think that it entitles moving it to an R-3. I think that the property values would go down and such, we are opposed to that. Thank you.

President Anderson asked, anyone else?

Attorney Altman stated, let me read the petition that the objector filed, we will share that with everyone. I marked that as objectors’ exhibit. The petition was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members. We also have two other letters and I will get them in from people I believe, there are 3 here.

President Anderson stated, the second one, you already read that.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, that’s right, I have. The two that I have not read, the one March 11, 2002 to the Area Plan Commission from Neal & Barb J. Nussbaum. The letter was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members. The second letter is, okay, I just want to make sure that I read that, March 8, 2002 to the Area Plan Commission from Paul J. Wing. The letter was read out loud the Board members and the audience members.

President Anderson asked, at the present time, how many permanent residences are there?

James Smith stated, one, two, two.

President Anderson asked, two permanent residences.

James Smith stated, we have a small mobile home up on the hill at the rear of the property, it has two bedrooms, an old mobile home. We just rent it to a fellow that works down at the coffee shop and then we have a mobile home that we use.

President Anderson asked, but, you’re doing….

James Smith stated, the rest of it is all…

President Anderson asked, you’re remodeling the garage, you want to get rid of the mobile home that you are in now?

James Smith stated, that’s correct.

President Anderson asked, what about that duplex on there? is it for summer?

James Smith stated, it’s seasonal.

President Anderson asked, seasonal, and then you have, so, how many seasonal properties do you have on there?

Beatrice Smith stated, on that property…

James Smith stated, counting the one above the garage, we have 3.

President Anderson asked, the one above the garage.

Beatrice Smith stated, not the garage we’re remodeling…

President Anderson asked, the one above the detached garage?

An audience member stated, the “L” portion.

James Smith stated, the one that is the toe of the boot.

An audience member stated, the one that they just got.

Jay Clawson stated, that’s on a separate lot.

Director Weaver stated, that’s on a separate lot.

Don Tribbett stated, no, it’s not, this is part of the same lot, this is part of the, this is how they originally acquired it.

Director Weaver stated, it has a separate legal, so it is not included on this request.

President Anderson stated, so it’s not included in this request then.

James Smith stated, if you put the .775 Director Weaver, it is.

Beatrice Smith stated, yes, that is.

Don Tribbett stated, they include the .775.

James Smith stated, but, there is no, there is going to be one less building on the whole thing, there’s not going to be any increased traffic.

President Anderson stated, right, but, the only way that we can do this or put you into compliance here is to go with an R-2 zoning….

James Smith stated, the only reason that I bought it, or requested an R-3 is….

President Anderson asked, but, is there anything that will restrict him to the number of units that he can have on that?

James Smith stated, the only reason that I have requested the R-3 is because, they suggested that I do that in order to come into compliance.

President Anderson stated, that’s the only way that we can bring it into compliance.

Director Weaver stated, he has to have 7,000 square feet per unit and I calculated up earlier and if I calculated correctly, he can only have 4 units, total of 4 units on this property.

President Anderson asked, which at the time, how many units would you have?

James Smith stated, well, if we don’t count the toe of the boot…

Director Weaver stated, but, if that’s in the legal description, we have to count that.

Jay Clawson asked, by us acting on this, it’s still a non-conforming use, I mean by us changing it to an R-3, there is not ample parking per unit. I mean with him having to do that, he would have to bring the whole property into compliance with parking spaces for every unit that is there, there is no plan there, that would have to be administrative, is there enough room on this property the way that he has it laid out to have with, you know…

Director Weaver stated, I think that he could probably accommodate…

President Anderson stated, but, he’s going to have to show us something…

Jay Clawson stated, and with it being on a private drive…

Director Weaver stated, he has a long drive that goes back to the detached garage on the North…

James Smith stated, I don’t know if you folks are familiar with the property or not but, I would be happy to share these photographs.

Don Tribbett stated, I don’t know how familiar you are with the area but, there is an awful lot in the entire area squeezed in, in a fairly small area. In fact, I guess one of the things that I was a little surprised to hear in the Nussbaum letter because, if you look at their property, they have 4 mobile homes, 2 cottages on their property plus a 4 car garage and you know if you’re looking at the overall scheme of the neighborhood…

President Anderson stated, they are probably grandfathered in too…

Don Tribbett stated, well…

President Anderson stated, their not actually changing…

Don Tribbett stated, until they want to do something as far as their property.

President Anderson stated, but, they are not wanting to change anything on there so, they are fine the way they are.

Don Tribbett stated, I’m just trying to give you a feel for the nature of the neighborhood.

Attorney Altman stated, two things that you can do. You can get a commitment you can say that they can only have 4 but, then they can go ahead and ask for a variance which, would allow them to have maybe 5, 6 or 7. I don’t mean that they would but, I have seen people wanting to do that so, that’s what a commitment would stop is, if you would require a commitment to only let them have the 4 units of such and such size.

President Anderson asked, they’re actually wanting 5 units, is that what you’re wanting? You have 2 units, or 4 units…

James Smith stated, we have 3.

President Anderson asked, the whole .775…

James Smith stated, we have 3, summer seasonal units.

Attorney Altman stated, they have all count now, it doesn’t matter whether it’s seasonal or not.

James Smith stated, well, we have 3 of those, we have 2 permanent, drop one permanent and add one.

Attorney Altman stated, so you’re exactly right Jay, they don’t have enough, even if you gave them the rezoning, it’s out of compliance.

David Rosenbarger asked, are these two separate lots or is that all one?

Director Weaver stated, no, those are two separate lots, 2215 is on it’s own legal description.

Don Tribbett stated, yes, that’s the one that it think is over here, that’s the one that wasn’t in the newspaper.

Director Weaver stated, the green line should be your property line.

David Rosenbarger stated, the one 5789 trailer is even on someone else’s property.

Don Ward stated, you’re right.

Beatrice Smith stated, I would just like to say, all that we want to do is move a mobile home and make that one building our residence, that’s all that we’re asking and she said that we couldn’t do that without making it a rezoning.

There was discussion among the applicants and the Board members.

James Smith stated, this is part of an aerial, it shows on here…

Jay Clawson stated, plus do either of the mobile homes come into, like I say, we had a request the last time on the guy wanting to go into business with a barn and he wanted to make a non-conforming structure. When we’re rezoning, we have 2 trailers that don’t meet our, their too old to meet our age requirements for mobile homes, right, because you can’t tell me either one of those…

Director Weaver stated, and the newer one is the one that they want to remove.

James Smith stated, I believe that rule is just for stuff coming in, it isn’t for existing.

Jay Clawson stated, well, when we change classification of zoning, you have to bring the property into compliance with the plan, if you are going to change the zoning, if I read the Ordinance…

President Anderson stated, even though you’re trying to improve your property, we if we try to change the zoning there are new standards that you have to be on, on this property too.

Attorney Altman stated, it has to be in compliance, that’s all.

David Scott asked, there’s no way that they can get a permit to do what they need to do to that without changing the zoning? I mean it seems like we’re…

Director Weaver stated, they have to go though the Board of Zoning Appeals also…

David Scott stated, discouraging people to improve their property here. I mean they are going to improve their property here, they are going to improve their property in the neighborhood.

Attorney Altman stated, well, one person says it is and one person says maybe it isn’t so, I don’t know.

David Rosenbarger stated, but, the other thing is, that we have to look at is, not necessarily them but, 20 years from now like the one letter states, once we change it the land owner has to ask to change it back and then all of a sudden they put in the six.

David Scott stated, I agree with the zoning…

Jay Clawson stated, when they put in the zoning in the 70’s they deemed that this wasn’t appropriate for R-3 properties. They said that one and two family units even though at the time that they instituted planning, they hoped at some time that these properties, little trailers and small cottages would be removed and then they could have two units per lot…

James Smith stated, okay, I’m ready to deal…

Attorney Altman stated, we’re talking please…

Jay Clawson stated, we’re just passing it back and forth and that’s what I’m saying with a lot of the properties like on where they have the 4 trailers. If those were removed, they’re not ever able to bring them back on the thing and they were thinking at that time if they would make that property less dense than it was at the time of the exception of planning because, the road back there is not a sufficient road to handle what is back there at this time. A lot of it was 40 years ago, were weekend cottages and now they have become nice year around homes especially, the people that live out on the lake to make it more dense would be…

Julie Pell asked, I just have a question, a couple of years ago, I seen a permit in what they call the garage that he was doing work on it. Did he obtain a permit to do that? If he got a permit then what’s stopping him now, to get a permit, to just finish it so that they can live in it?

Director Weaver asked, which garage are you talking about?

Julie Pell stated, the barn, I have never known it to be a garage, they have always lived in it since I have been there.

Director Weaver asked, the two story?

Julie Pell stated, yes.

James Smith stated, well, we have never lived in it, we’ve been in there in the summer time and so forth but, it’s not livable.

Cindy Bixler stated, we have lived there 6 years and they have lived in it since we have been there. There is a washer, dryer and everything.

President Anderson asked, do you want to respond to that?

James Smith stated, well, I think that Director Weaver could respond to it because, she has been there and taken pictures.

Director Weaver stated, the Board has copies of those pictures.

Julie Pell stated, we’re not arguing that they want to make that into a home, we just do not want an R-3 in there. We want to work with them to provide them the permit or whatever needs to be done to get them into compliance but, I don’t think that it’s…

President Anderson stated, the main thing that you guys don’t want to do is increase the congestion…

An audience member stated, no…

Julie Pell stated, no, that’s correct.

President Anderson asked, I understand that but, we can restrict even on that R-3 to so many units, well, it is restricted they have for each unit or home, they have to have 7,000 square feet and isn’t there somewhere what around 30 some thousand square foot out there? So they can only have 5 units there anyway but, then they don’t have enough room for parking, how many square feet does that come out to? Is it 42,000…

Don Ward asked, how many acres is it?

President Anderson stated, .775.

Attorney Altman stated, 4.17 units is what it comes out to.

President Anderson stated, 4 units.

A Board member stated, 4 units.

Attorney Altman stated, would be all that you could have on it…

President Anderson stated, that you could have on the property.

Director Weaver stated, 2215…

David Rosenbarger stated, you can’t have, you can’t figure the .775 unless you put those two together.

Director Weaver stated, the .775 is not…

David Rosenbarger asked, it’s just the one?

Director Weaver stated, it’s just the one.

David Rosenbarger asked, how much is it when you put both of them?

Jay Clawson stated, he said that was figured in as part of other lot…

Director Weaver asked, yes, 2215 is not part of the .775 and that is not 10, no they are talking about down at the bottom on your map that you see the 5787, see the red square to the right of that?

Don Ward stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, their including that.

James Smith asked, part 10, acres right here…

President Anderson stated, so which one?

James Smith stated, the toe of the boot.

Beatrice Stated, no the toe of the boot…

President Anderson asked, okay but, you’re wanting 5 dwellings on the one that is there or is it 5 total with the other property?

James Smith asked, pardon?

President Anderson asked, how many properties do you want on the one that is 7…

James Smith stated, there is 5 there, this is a separate property which we won’t include…

President Anderson asked, you have 6 properties then, or 6 homes.

Beatrice Smith stated, right, correct.

James Smith stated, yes.

President Anderson asked, so if you rezone that the way that we have it now, unless you got a variance on it, you could only have 4 homes on it.

David Rosenbarger stated, .775 is all…

President Anderson stated, like James said, the trailers then wouldn’t be in compliance.

There was discussion among the Board members.

Don Tribbett stated, I think at one time they were talking about selling off part of that, that’s the reason for the line but, that is still part of the .775. This is what I’m talking about, this is the .775…

Don Ward asked, so, it is this part right here?

Don Tribbett stated, yes and then the other property was not properly advertised.

There was discussion among the Board members and the applicant’s attorney.

David Rosenbarger asked, so we’re looking at 5 units here plus a detached garage.

Beatrice Smith stated, plus 2 detached garages.

Don Tribbett stated, yes, the garage that they want to make into a unit, 5785…

Director Weaver stated, 5785 is the one that they want to covert, without a variance you can only have 4 units, without a space variance.

James Smith asked, if I only had 4 right now with the zoning, do I have to go get a variance?

Director Weaver stated, not for the amount of units, you do have to go back as we discussed because of your prior variance.

James Smith asked, because of what?

Director Weaver stated, because of your prior variance.

James Smith stated, okay, that’s the reason.

Attorney Altman stated, the prior variance is, is the unit that he is suppose to be, got the permit for that they are talking about, that they want to convert into a home, the variance said that they couldn’t convert it into a home…

James Smith stated, but, that was before sewers and so forth…

Attorney Altman stated, but, that was a condition of you getting the permit and being allowed to do that.

James Smith stated, I don’t recall that…

Attorney Altman stated, well, I can tell you that’s exactly what it says, the variance.

James Smith stated, I’m not disputing it, I’m just saying, I didn’t recall that.

Attorney Altman stated, and that was a condition that you allowed to be part of that variance request.

Jay Clawson asked, what was that exactly again, was something suppose to disappear when he got the variance?

Director Weaver stated, it was for storage.

Attorney Altman stated, it was for storage.

Director Weaver stated, he had a height variance.

President Anderson asked, if we do, how old is the trailer that you’re wanting to keep, what year is it?

James Smith stated, 1948 or something.

President Anderson stated, so it wouldn’t not…

Beatrice Smith stated, no…

President Anderson stated, I mean you would have to….

Beatrice Smith stated, it’s a 60 something…

President Anderson asked, what?

Beatrice Smith stated, the one that, oh the one that he’s wanting to keep, I’m sorry.

James Smith stated, the one that I’m going to tear down is a 1965.

President Anderson asked, but, the other one is a 1948?

James Smith stated, something like that.

President Anderson asked, which would be…

James Smith stated, but, you know if that’s what it takes, I will get rid of both of them.

President Anderson asked, does anyone else in the audience have any questions on this request?

Donna Geisler stated, I just have one quick question, he also built an extra garage up there, the garages don’t count in any of this variance part right? The extra garages?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Donna Geisler stated, okay, I was just wondering about that.

President Anderson asked, does anyone else have any questions about this? I say let's go ahead and vote.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The results of the vote were as follows: 1 affirmative and 6 negative and 1 abstention. (Attorney Altman read “there are 8 votes cast, 7 votes no, 1 vote yes”). This will be presented to County Commissioners for their action.

Attorney Altman asked, this will be forwarded to the County Commissioners their meeting next Monday morning at 8:30 and they have the final say, it will be forwarded with no recommendation. Does everyone understand that next Monday is when it’s decided?

An audience member asked, and it’s where?

Attorney Altman stated, right here.

Jay Clawson stated, with no recommendation.

****

#269 Frank Blaser; Requesting primary and secondary approval of a 1 lot subdivision to be known as Heritage Lakeview Subdivision on 0.692 of an acre. The property is located in Monon Township at 7106 N. Lakewood Drive. Tabled from February 11, 2002.

President Anderson asked, do we have anyone here representing this?

Frank Blazer was present to represent this request.

President Anderson asked, does primary approval meet all of the…

Director Weaver stated, to the best of my knowledge, yes it does. We did receive a letter. It was a copy of a letter that was sent to Frank Blaser I believe, from John James. When Mr. Blaser first filed this with us he had all of his information that it was a shared well with John James that owns Lakewood Resort Park. We received a letter from Mr. James that says that, I will read it into the record. The letter from John James was read out loud to the Board members and the audience members. I just wanted the Board to be aware of that.

Frank Blaser stated, the reason for that is, if I can respond to it is, we had an agreement when we sold John, Lakewood Mobile Home Park. The agreement was that we would get free water so, what he’s saying is if I sell the house and whoever buys the house is going to have to pay for the water.

President Anderson asked, the water comes from, there is no well on this property?

Frank Blaser stated, there is no well on the property, there are 3 wells that was on the whole property before I sold off the part, I still own one of the wells, there is a shared, one of the wells, and they are all tied together. There is, it’s a unit type thing so, I do have a well on there that would be, it wouldn’t be a part of that house, I mean, they would have to pay for the water based on Monticello’s rates.

President Anderson asked, they could probably drill their own well on that too…

Frank Blaser stated, well, if they wanted to they could but, I doubt if they would.

Attorney Altman asked, have you given the people that would own this lot an easement to allow them well usage?

Frank Blaser stated, they would have that agreement with John James directly. That’s what John is saying in that letter.

Attorney Altman stated, I think what John James is saying is that you don’t have an agreement.

Frank Blaser stated, what John is saying is that they would have to pay for the water, I was getting it for free.

Attorney Altman stated, in conclusion, the house does not have water rights or use of the dumpster.

President Anderson stated, with no charge.

A Board member stated, there will be a charge.

Frank Blaser stated, with no charge, what he’s saying is…

Jay Clawson stated, it says down here that the water fee will be determined by amount charged by the City of Monticello.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s not much of an agreement that I, I don’t know that it matters too much…

Steve Fisher stated, it doesn’t really matter because, they can drill their own well on the property anyway so, you can subdivide without the well.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m just saying is that I don’t think that there is an agreement here of any sort.

Steve Fisher asked, but it’s not really an issue right?

Attorney Altman stated, right.

Jay Clawson stated, well, he’s saying that there can’t be anything put on the thing that, when he plats this new lot on the subdivision just free water and dumpster. See he might have had that in his but, we wouldn’t want that, he wants us to know that can’t be attached to the subdivision when he does that.

Dennis Sterrett stated, he’s not speaking the water rights of being lake usage, extra boat storage.

President Anderson asked, and the buildings are all meeting setbacks is that right, already. Has he met the subdivision requirements?

Director Weaver stated, yes, to the best of my knowledge it does.

President Anderson asked, do the Commissioners have any questions? If not let's vote.

Attorney Altman asked, Director Weaver, with doing this, they don’t create any variance on Mr. Blaser’s property?

Director Weaver stated, not to my knowledge.

Attorney Altman asked, everything is far enough away…

Jay Clawson asked, the new house that he is building, constructing is not anywhere near that right?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Jay Clawson asked, it doesn’t make that non-conforming use right?

Attorney Altman asked, there is nothing on Mr. James’ property or the neighbors property that would make something out of compliance?

Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of. I mean, if there is, I’m not aware of it.

Attorney Altman stated, there’s nothing on the plat that shows that in fact, it doesn’t show anything hardly and that’s why I’m concerned about this one.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Primary Approval Request for a 1 lot subdivision to be known as Heritage Lakeview Subdivision located in Monon Township, was approved by a vote of 8 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met.

President Anderson asked, do we have any improvements on this?

Director Weaver stated, the Drainage Board is not requiring anything for draining, there are no new roads to be put in, to my knowledge, there is not.

Jay Clawson asked, are there any easements across this property or…

Director Weaver stated, I can’t answer that one.

Dennis Sterrett asked, a private road coming in there, county maintained?

Attorney Altman asked, are there any private roads sir?

Frank Blaser stated, the main road coming into the area, the one side of that lot is Lake Road 65, and the corner is on Lakewood Drive.

Director Weaver asked, is that maintained by the County?

Frank Blaser stated, Lake Road 65 is and Lakewood to that corner of Lake Road 65 and Lakewood is. There are some children that live there and the school bus comes down. So they plow right there, on down Lake Road 65 and across Lakewood Court, and Lake Road 64.

President Anderson asked, are there any other questions?

Attorney Altman asked, is everything on there you see Jay, that there should be?

Jay Clawson asked, well, I mean by looking at the pictures, I just wondered if N.I.P.S.CO. has any other easements to gas lines or anything, because, there are other houses that come up the back side of Meredith Court right? Along the lake there?

Frank Blaser stated, the only, there is a main gas line that goes North up Meredith Court but, on the lakeside, it’s not on our side.

Jay Clawson stated, we would just want for the final plat if there was a N.I.P.S.CO. easement through there that it be shown anyway…

Director Weaver stated, Jay, I have asked for that from Mr. Milligan…

Jay Clawson asked, and he didn’t…

Director Weaver stated, I have asked for that on the primary and secondary both and we haven’t received anything.

Jay Clawson stated, maybe he checked into it and there’s not. We just like to have that for reference.

Attorney Altman stated, one says overhead electrical I see here on this one Jay…

Jay Clawson stated, but, I think it dead ends on the other side of…

President Anderson stated, other side of the road…

Jay Clawson stated, yes, the other side of the road.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m just looking at it and if there’s nothing else, I see that is, I just picked up another plat and that’s all that I see on this one. I think that’s the same one that you are looking at President Anderson.

President Anderson stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, yes, I think that you have the primary plat and Jay has the secondary plat.

Attorney Altman stated, but, that still doesn’t answer my question as to whether there might not be a NI.P.S.CO. easement for something else.

Frank Blaser stated, well, N.I.P.S.CO. doesn’t come out there, it’s R.E.M.C. as far as electric.

Jay Clawson asked, well, or utility easements but, I’m sure, aren’t they already on record?

Attorney Altman stated, well, should be…

Jay Clawson stated, if there is an easement, yes, they should be if there is.

President Anderson stated, she asked for that and he didn’t get it on there so evidentially…

Jay Clawson stated, there must not be any because, it looks like what he’s showing the overhead coming from the other…

President Anderson stated, I say let's go ahead and vote.

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing that I mean is I think that it should be noted that if there are any easements, utility, it should be shown on this plat.

President Anderson stated, we have been trying to get him to do that for a long time.

Frank Blaser stated, I have no problem, easements, utility, it should be shown on this plat.

President Anderson stated, we have been trying to get him to do that for a long time.

Frank Blaser stated, I have no problem, I will see what I can find out for you on that Mr. Altman but, I don’t believe that there are any because all of the power is on the other side of Meredith Court. There are some power lines but, transformers and so forth but, they’re all on the other side of Meredith Court.

Jay Clawson stated, that’s fine, there may not be but, if they are, it would be nice before it’s recorded.

Attorney Altman asked, so there’s no, you don’t get gas through N.I.P.S.CO.’s gas lines or anything?

Frank Blaser stated, yes, we do and they are on the same side, I’m building a new home on that end and we had to have it all marked out so I know where they’re at and they are all on the lake side of Meredith Court.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Secondary Approval request for a subdivision to be known as Heritage Lakeview Subdivision located in Monon Township, was approved by a vote of 8 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met, primary approval has been granted and the Subdivision is in compliance.

Attorney Altman stated, subject to the requirements that any utility easements be shown on the plat if any, this matter has been approved.

****

President Anderson asked, next on the agenda is business, do we have any?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Anderson asked, do you want to tell them what he was wanting to come to us for?

Director Weaver stated, Mr. Jordan was going to come to the Board to talk to them about subdivisions and the possibility of having some flexibility on a subdivision as far as the size of the lots.

President Anderson asked, he’s wanting to be able to sell off without subdividing?

Director Weaver stated, well, what he had indicated was maybe going through a primary approval and then being able to change the size of the lot…

President Anderson asked, any time that he wanted to…

Director Weaver stated, before the secondary. I explained to him, I didn’t think that there was any way that we could do that but, he wanted to come and talk to the Board about it.

Attorney Altman stated, you can do that if you change the Ordinance.

Jay Clawson stated, well, if he goes to bigger lots he can change but, you really couldn’t make it where their nonconforming lots, I wouldn’t think that you could actually do that. I mean if he has the road infrastructure and sewers and stuff and decides to take two lots or three lots and merge them into, divide them into two, redraw it and put it on a final plat when the whole thing is done.

Attorney Altman stated, we certainly can do that, you can do that because we allow, we’re adjoining land owners President Anderson, you and I can swap ground as long as we don’t break a variance.

President Anderson stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, and that would be the limitation and obviously if it’s approved with a smaller putting it together bigger is allowed…

Jay Clawson stated, then you could put bigger structure but, I wouldn’t see where you could ever take and make them smaller to where they wouldn’t fit.

Attorney Altman stated, no, not without our approval, pre-approval of some sort.

Jay Clawson stated, yes.

Director Weaver asked, the only thing that I have is, are there any questions for the attorney’s fees for this month? Just so the Board knows too we did have to hire another attorney to represent us on a case that we are dealing with which is Rodriquez lawsuit and therefore we will be receiving some claims from Dow Dellinger who is going to be representing us on that. When we get that, don’t be shocked.

Attorney Altman stated, the other thing that we should report that, not so much Area Plan matter as a BZA matter but, people are trying to get a variance on the front deck and it was not allowed.

Director Weaver stated, now wait, they never even applied, they never applied, they couldn’t get approval through S.F.L.E.C.C…

Attorney Altman asked, so that’s been removed…

Director Weaver stated, they built a deck without a permit…

Attorney Altman stated, compliance and enforcement’s.

Director Weaver stated, without a permit and without a variance. They could not get approval through S.F.L.E.C.C. to put the deck up or apply for the variance, and after a long struggle they have finally removed the deck, after two years.

Don Ward asked, what do we do with this last one, or next to the last one. If there’s no other way to make them bring it into compliance and make it an R-3, what are we going to do?

Jay Clawson stated, downsize, those aren’t, they are way over built there for the density on what they can handle in that area. It doesn’t show on those lots too, those lots have a lot of elevation changes on them like Nussbaum’s property. Once they have problems there, they shouldn’t be allowed. One goes, it stays gone until they get the, because, I have been there to work on stuff and you can’t park. There are people parked, in the mud, yard and it would be different if these people had it laid out to where everyone can come up and pull but, in the summertime, that road isn’t wider than two tables put together and there’s people parked in yards, it’s a mess.

Steve Fisher stated, on a lot of those properties when you walk in there’s multiple units on one parcel, they should know when they are purchasing it that’s there’s something on it.

Attorney Altman stated, they knew that one was not.

Jay Clawson stated, and then he built a garage and thought well, I’ll slip this into a house here like this and now it’s well, why can’t we do that.

Director Weaver stated, well, he still has to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals, he’s still going to wind up dealing with us on that one.

Attorney Altman stated, what he’s added lists, specifically revoke.

Director Weaver stated, yes, the request was for a height to put storage up above for a detached garage.

Attorney Altman stated, we have been suspicious of that always and we put a restriction on that, so I’m just telling you, that’s the way that it was.

President Anderson stated, he can still build a new house there but, he’s got to…

David Rosenbarger stated, get rid of the rest of them.

David Scott stated, he could probably subdivide it into lots…

Director Weaver stated, I don’t think that he’s got room for an access.

Jay Clawson stated, yes, there’s really no place to put a road in there.

Don Ward asked, could he, can he do that if we didn’t rezone, pull those out of there and take them out?

Attorney Altman stated, sure he could.

Director Weaver stated, he can pull them out, he can’t put anything back.

Jay Clawson stated, if he got rid of the trailers and did his garage thing and got some kind of an agreement with BZA about doing that but, I don’t foresee changing that to an R-3.

President Anderson asked, he couldn’t go to BZA and approve that garage into a house, he could or couldn’t?

Director Weaver stated, no, not really because, he’s not properly zoned, that’s why he had to come to you first.

Attorney Altman stated, it would be a use variance and we’re not allowed, BZA is not allowed to give a use variance.

Steve Fisher stated, I think that it worked out in the end that he’s not going to be able to do that. I think he was trying to see what he could get.

David Scott stated, I think that was the whole idea when he grandfathered it like you were saying, once they get old enough and out do their use, get rid of them and get the land back the way that it should be.

Jay Clawson stated, it would be different if that property had adequate access to it. To make it higher density, I mean if it was on a main road or had at least a road where you could make it wide enough to put a road back in there. It’s built so close that there’s no way that you could ever make that road adequate back there.

Steve Fisher stated, if it was farm ground all of the way around it or something like that where you don’t have to deal with the neighbors…

Jay Clawson stated, but, it isn’t, its congested…

Director Weaver stated, it’s very congested…

Jay Clawson stated, on top of everything.

****

Steve Fisher made a motion to adjourn.

Jay Clawson seconded the motion.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Donald W. Ward, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission