Get Adobe Flash player

 

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, August 11, 2003, 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, Scott Kyburz, Gregory Bossaer, Dennis Sterrett. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Weaver.

Visitors Attending were: Richard Suray, Marilyn Bregitzer, and Doyle Maxwell

The meeting was called to order by President Charles Anderson and roll call was taken. Jay Clawson made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the May and June of 2003 meeting. Motion was seconded by David Rosenbarger and carried unanimously.

****

#821 Richard J. & Sandra L. Suray Revocable Trust; The property is located on Lot 1 in Breezy Hill Subdivision West of Lowe’s Bridge at 3838 E. Bailey Road. This was tabled from the May 12, 2003 meeting.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting to rezone from B-2 to L-1 to bring the property into

compliance with the White County Zoning Ordinance.

President Charles Anderson asked, do we have a problem with this? Is there anyone here representing this request? Please state your name.

Richard Suray stated, I’m Richard Suray.

President Charles Anderson asked, do any of the commissioners have any questions for Mr. Suray? This property has two houses on it?

Richard Suray stated, it has two small cottages on it.

President Charles Anderson asked, so what are you going to do with the property? You are grandfathered on these two cottages that are on there.

Richard Suray stated, the intent is as soon as the lease is up on the one cottage, it will start coming down and then I’m moving into the other one temporary while I’m building the house.

The one cottage is in my way, so it has to come down, and the other one is going to be too close, so it has got to come down as soon as I can move into the new house.

President Charles Anderson asked, now do any of the commissioners have any questions?

Attorney Altman stated, Mr. Suray presented a commitment for the plans as we requested at the last meeting at exactly why it was continued to get this done. I think the board has a copy of it before them. It says that it is subject to obtaining a rezoning and a variance for an overhang, demolition permits and #2 and tells us again which one is cottage 2.

Richard Suray stated, Cottage #2 is the one the furthest from the lake.

Attorney Altman asked, will it be removed? No that is the one your moving into.

Richard Suray stated, that is the one I’m moving into.

Attorney Altman stated, you have disconnected the utilities to cottage #1 and as you can read demolishing part of it. Constructing and demolishing the other. If he fails, we have the usual enforcement language in there.

Richard Suray stated, it really meets the, complies with the rezoning. About the time I start tearing it down, even if I take part of it down, I’ve got all the utilities, it is uninhabitable at that point. At that point it is only a one family property. I really meet that compliance by that time.

Attorney Altman stated, but you want to go ahead and do more.

Richard Suray stated, I’ve got to do more.

Attorney Altman stated, your commitment says that and sets forth the details of what he wants to do.

President Charles Anderson stated, basically what you want to do is get both cottages off and build home on it eventually.

Richard Suray stated, yes to make a long story short, yes that is exactly what I need to do.

I have to live in one of them while I’m doing this, I expect to retire in May and that time I’m trying to sell my place where I’m at and that is why I need to move in there.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The results of the vote were as follows: 10 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to White County Commissioners for their action. That will be Monday August 18, 2003.

****

#828 Dale Ward; The property is located on 16.049 acres, located North of Monon at 10012 N. U.S. Highway 421.

Violation: None

Request: He is requesting to rezone from I-2 to B-2.

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

Dale Ward stated, I’m Dale Ward.

President Charles Anderson asked, is there a building on there?

Dale Ward stated, yes, I bought it from Circle R sales a year ago.

President Charles Anderson asked, do you want to put a business in there?

Dale Ward stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson asked, do any of the commissioners have any questions for him?

Director Weaver stated, we have not received any calls on this.

Attorney Altman stated, this is going from an I-2 to B-2, sort of the reverse of what we ask for. The standards still have to be met.

President Charles Anderson asked, are the setbacks all right on the building for a business.

Director Weaver stated, I believe so.

President Charles Anderson stated, any other questions, if not let's vote.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The results of the vote were as follows: 10 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to White County Commissioners for their action.

****

#289 Unice Maxwell & Fabian Trost; Requesting approval of a 1 subdivision to be known as Trost Subdivision on 1.294 acres. The property is located East of I-65 and North of 400 South at 3706 S. U.S. 231.

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

Doyle Maxwell stated, I’m Doyle Maxwell, I’m representing them.

President Charles Anderson asked, does this meet all of the requirements?

Director Weaver stated, the only thing that I just noticed this evening when looking at the secondary plat, they have the front setbacks indicated as 55’ on the plat, when it should be 80’. It is on a State Highway.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what is on the primary is 80’.

Director Weaver stated, yes it is on both, I just did not catch it. They have them listed down where the list the setbacks. They have it listed as 80’, but have it shown as 55’, which would keep the home from meeting the setbacks.

President Charles Anderson asked, are they wanting to build on this?

Director Weaver stated, it has an existing home on it.

Attorney Altman stated, the house is actually grandfathered.

Several are talking at once.

??? asked, they would have to have another permit to rebuild it anyway?

Attorney Altman stated, well you would have to have more than that, you would have to get a building permit, and you would have to move it back to.

Several are talking at once.

Jay Clawson stated, he will have to show that line moved back on the secondary plat.

Several are talking at once.

Director Weaver stated, 80’ is required on a State Highway in an A-1.

Attorney Altman stated, the only other thing is to get a variance now. Sometimes that helps marketability.

Doyle Maxell stated, the house is already sold, or is going to be sold.

President Charles Anderson stated, so it is going to be sold to someone else.

Doyle Maxwell stated, I can tell them that they will have to do that, but I don’t, the house has been there for a 100 years. I don’t think.

President Charles Anderson stated, you really want to tell them though because they will be at a lost on something.

Doyle Maxwell stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, this is not totally in compliance that is what our Director is saying. I agree with her on that because of the 55’ involved here.

Director Weaver stated, the subdivision is not creating the problem it is not meeting.

Several are talking at once again.

Attorney Altman stated, either way it has to be 80’ for reconstruction.

Doyle Maxwell asked, if they want to reconstruction they are going to have to come here and get a building permit.

Director Weaver stated, and possibly a variance, if they want to go that distance.

President Charles Anderson asked, are there anymore questions?

Dennis Sterrett asked, so what should we, subject to drawing a line at 80’.

Attorney Altman stated, the setback has to be drawn on the plat, and the secondary plat. We ought to note that the home is not in compliance and if it were.

President Charles Anderson stated, it is not in compliance.

Attorney Altman stated, the secondary plat has to show the 80’ setback, we can vote subject to that.

Doyle Maxwell asked, so Jim just has to change that plat?

President Charles Anderson stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, you need and I really mean this, you need to tell your buyers that this is not in compliance.

Doyle Maxwell stated, yes, and if they have to rebuild it would have to be 80’ back.

Attorney Altman stated, because you.

Several talking at once again.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Primary Approval Request for a 1 lot subdivision to be known as Trost Subdivision located in East of I 65 and North of 400 South, was approved by a vote of 10 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met.

Attorney Altman stated, this is subject to the setback being 80’ on the secondary plat. Also note that the new property needs to be notified that the house is not in compliance.

The Secondary Approval request for a subdivision to be known as Trost Subdivision located in East of I65 and North of 400 South, was approved by a vote of 9 to 1, 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.

****

President Charles Anderson stated, next on the agenda is business. We have an amendment.

Director Weaver stated, this is the schedule of uses that we had discussed, I made the correction that the board has requested. It has been advertised and is ready for a vote.

President Charles Anderson asked, are there any questions?

Greg Bossaer asked, Diann, I went through here, where does like farm chemical retailer or.

Director Weaver stated, yes that is a good question.

Greg Bossaer stated, well that is fine if that is what it is, I’m trying to remember

Several are talking at once.

Attorney Altman stated, truth is, we don’t know, it may be.

Greg Bossaer stated, a farm store is fine, if that is, that is the only question mark I had and could figure.

There is discussion among the board.

Director Weaver stated, I think farm store is referring to more of what you are talking about Greg. Unlike Big R is more along a retail line.

Attorney Altman stated, I guess that could be if you believe the rest of it is all right, you ought to go ahead a vote on it. I think that this ought to start the next list of things that ought to be added to it. I think that is probably, we are always going to have this list. It maybe needs to be on there.

President Charles Anderson stated, I think farm store would cover it because it is both in the industry.

Director Weaver stated, I think that is the intent there because you wouldn’t make Big R be in an Industrial zoning. I don’t know if that is the proper language, I think that is the intent.

President Charles Anderson stated, farm stuff instead.

Without further discussion the board voted.

Amendment to the Ordinance to Table 1 official schedule of Uses 9 approved and 1 negative.

Jay Clawson asked, I know BZA has a lawsuit pending, or has it been settled?

Attorney Altman stated, it is pending.

Jay Clawson stated, about changing our wording in there about what is allowed in the County. Right now any kind of sign says it can be 2 faces per sign. Which I think that needs to I think bill boards need to be worded as a single face sign with I’m not sure exactly what a standard bill board signs are. Figure that no bigger than a 12’ x 25’. If you call Burkhart and ask them what your sign on the normal facing would be.

Attorney Altman stated, I would be in total agreement with that.

Jay Clawson stated, because that is something that is way to. I mean if you had to small post with a small sign on it, when you get a post with two huge billboard that becomes obtrusive.

Director Weaver stated, I’m going to need help amending that one, so whatever anyone can give.

Jay Clawson stated, I don’t think the City will have any problem signing that when we send it out to the County.

Director Weaver stated, if they have any impute, I would rather have that. If they have any ideas of what they want to see, they can get that to me that would be helpful.

Jay Clawson stated, we will talk at our next city council meeting, and I will have George send you something. I think we need t do something before this happens again.

President Charles Anderson asked, are you talking about using both sides of the sign?

Jay Clawson stated, they are having 4 billboards on one sign, on one post. We have one in town and they tried to build another and.

Attorney Altman stated, so far it is stopped.

Dennis Sterrett stated, well if you but just 2 then you are going to have to have a post somewhere else.

Attorney Altman stated, it just limits, so they can’t be some place else.

Jay Clawson stated, plus they will have to be 1500’ apart.

Attorney Altman stated, you are right, it still makes it that they can have it, but they have to have it so far apart. It is much better than having these monsters that they want to put up.

Jay Clawson asked, how do you feel about it Denny?

Dennis Sterrett stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, I have one thing, we are talking about having people testify. We are going through with BZA Appeals and they do a record just like we do here. The department does for us. I know that there is testimony that was at the hearing that we had at BZA. People talked from the back thinking that they would get on the record and it just doesn’t pick up. I guess what I’m saying to you all of you help your president and being really conscious of this. Those people really need to come up and talk into the microphone.

President Charles Anderson stated, we could do that.

Director Weaver stated, and stated, their name.

Attorney Altman stated, because is they just stand back there under the best of terms it might we picked up.

President Charles Anderson asked, do we have any other business?

Director Weaver stated, I might add that the Commissioners have tabled the White Rock rezoning and they have not acted on that yet. It will be going back to them next Monday. White Rock is the Hubbard property. There is some debate on that because of the expansion of Sixth Street. Which at the time I didn’t even give that any thought, or I would have brought it up.

President Charles Anderson asked, why would they want to table it? Are they wanting to buy it at a cheaper price or what?

Director Weaver stated, I cannot answer that, I was not at the Commissioners meeting when they tabled that.

President Charles Anderson stated, that entire area out there, the best use is going to be for business, it isn’t going to be residential.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know.

Attorney Altman stated, quite frankly you guys ought to consider dedication of right-of-way when you rezone. If you get a rezone, the developer dedicate a right-of-way, maybe 50’ along there.

Director Weaver stated, there is another one coming back to you, it is the Teumer one, up in the Maple Bend area. The board requested further information on that. 1. Was a letter from the DNR and other one was a statement from an Engineer stating that the size culvert that we were asking for is adequate? They then reverted it back to the board, so we are going to be receiving those documents, once we do I will be bringing that back to the board as well.

President Charles Anderson asked, what about the Brookston deal? Did they ever solve anything between them?

Director Weaver stated, I have not heard anything from them.

Jay Clawson made a motion to adjourn.

President Charles Anderson stated, we are adjourned.

****

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Donald W. Ward, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission