Get Adobe Flash player

 

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, March 13, 2006, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were: Jay Clawson, Gary Barbour, Charles Anderson, Charles Mellon, Donald W. Ward, Dennis Sterrett, and Greg Bossaer. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Weaver.

Visitors Attending were: Dan Alvarez, Al Tebo, Mary Jo Burke, Charles Burke, Don Pauken, Jeff VanWeelden, Dowal Dellinger, Terry Beasy, John Koppelman, Charlie VanVoorst, Fred W. Buschman, Larry Noe, Robert Kinser, Walt Hough, Dan A?, Tom Parsley, Mary McClintic, Eileen Hofmeyer, Clarisssa Hofmeyer, Stan Hockema, Delea Hendress, Rev. Charles Blakey, Connie Neininger, Terri Raines, John Raines, Dirk Fleck, Floyd L. England, Don Apple, Katie Apple, James O. Beliles, Chris Fullerton, Linda Fullerton, Jim Wooten, Rhonda Wooten, Randy Williams, Greg Peters, and Ben Woodhouse. Also attending but not signed in are Rex Hendryx, Georgia Hendryx, and Didier Glattard.

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 March 13, 2006 meeting. Motion was seconded by Jay Clawson and carried unanimously.

****

#898 John E. & Tara A. Lynch; The property is located on 0.758 of an acre, SE corner of N ½ SW ¼ 31-28-3, located on the East side of Lowe’s Bridge at 4472 E. Penrod Drive. Tabled from February 13, 2006 meeting.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting to rezone from R-2 to B-2.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody here representing that request you want to step forward and state your name and every body has to come forth and state their name for the record. And you want to give an overview of what you want to do with the property?

 

John Lynch stated, since the last meeting we put a letter together for those people that would be affected by, what we want to do with that property is put in a detail shop that we would detail cars boats and store either cars or boats during the winter time. We listed the restrictions that would be no problem for us including rezoning the property… and committing to the business type or applying for and not take any changes to that. We’re not storing any boats or cars outside we would continue to improve the appearance of the property.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, and they are requesting to zone form R-2 to B-2, I forgot to add that to that. You wan t to go ahead and stay up here for a while. And then anybody here have any questions about the request?

 

Don Apple stated, my name is Don Apple. I reside right across the street I also own trailer court mobile home court right along the side of it. On the East side of East Shafer Drive I presented a letter that I just received and I apologize for the length and the and I would like to enter that into

record and with your permission I would like to read that letter if with your permission with Mr. Altman’s permission.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, you want to enter that letter into record then. Don you can go ahead and have a seat if you want to. That would be my permission. You can.

 

Don Apple stated, addressed to the White County Area Plan Commission from Steve Mazelin Investigations, Indianapolis. Continues to read the letter (see file). And I also have some concerns of my own I would like to address the Commission with number one, we own Apples Family Park formally River View Park, I’m directly across East Shafer Drive and the campground and the mobile home park. We have a full time resident living in that park only fifty feet from the entrance proposed for business. We own on the lakefront across from the business building, less than 100 foot from this building in residential homes. Mr. and Mrs. Lynch have a rental home less than 100 foot from business buildings still zoned residential too. Mr. and Mrs. Mazelin has two buildable lots on the other side of the fence right butted up against the fence proposed buildings that they’re going to use the business. Mr. and Mrs. Mazelin own a lakefront home across the road 150 feet from the business building. On these residential lots and backed up there were, are buildable lots and the reason they haven’t built on them is because they never had sewage to build, it is now. So the lots are becoming increasingly of greater value. Mr. and Mrs. Paul Spass are building a new lakefront home exceeding $350,000 just across the road from the business building. Mr. Raderstorf has a home beside mine directly across from the entrance to this building. And he has a problem with parking, he parks his cars on the, basically on the county right of way right in front of his garage it’s a big gray garage right on the corner. And they would be right beside the driveway where there would be entrance and exiting from this business road. We successfully thought the kennel would be zoned in a business building. That the previous owners, we questioned the ability to enforce any restrictions from the zoning board…things in the ordinance. We respectfully request Mr. and Mrs. Lynch that they either withdraw their petition that they are applying, to deny the petition that’s in the interest of all the surrounding property owners. We all pay large property taxes for the privilege of living on the lake. Valuing of our property if there is a business sitting across the street in the middle of a long established residential area. Mr. and Mrs. Lynch do not live in the area and would be absent to the priors and our residential neighborhood. And on behalf of all the residents that most of them could not be here tonight but would have liked to of been. I just ask on behalf of those people that the board deny Mr. and Mrs. Lynch.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, does anybody else in the audience have anything more or anything new to add to that? Or anything different for, or against, Come forward please.

 

Charles Burke stated, Mr. President, members of the board, my name is Charles Burke. I live four or five doors down from the proposed rezone requesting I would like to remind the board this was visited about two years ago and at that time it was denied from an R-1 to and Agricultural. I want to remind you that this is a quiet residential area. And since the rezoning petition a couple years ago, there has been one change noticeable change to the neighborhood. And that’s a street sign just a few hundred feet down from the petitioners requested property and the sign says caution children at play. Now I also would like to lead you into a summer scene of the area there are no side walks in the area. During the summer time you can see little boys and girls on their bicycles their skateboards going up and down the black top street. That’s their playground. Adjacent to the property that they’re requesting rezoning on is property that’s…

 

President Charles Anderson stated, I think we’re going to have to move this on.

 

Charles Burke stated, excuse me.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, we are going to have to move this on a little faster. We realize that it’s getting everything played out in those areas…

 

Charles Burke stated, okay. This area that I’m referring to on any given Saturday or Sunday afternoon you are liable to see anything from 20 to 30 young people playing games in this field. Now my request is I missed the last meeting. I am sorry for taking up too much of your time I plead with each of you, deny this request.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody else with any questions about this request at all. Do you want, John, you want to come forward and make any statement?

 

John Lynch stated, yes. Regardless of what…

 

President Charles Anderson stated, this is John Lynch.

 

John Lynch stated, regardless of what happens if we don’t change the zoning, the buildings are not going to go away. So it’s going to look like it does now. If I were to get this rezoning it could only look better. If I don’t then I don’t, but I will not be able to improve the look of the buildings. With restrictions that we’ve asked for if we can’t put storage outside or do work outside. I can’t see what’s going to change; it’s not going to be the traffic. That’s not going to be an issue we have the first drive inside Penrod. That’s not going to be a problem. If we were zoned a year from now as we are today, I could trash the place and be legal. With what I’m requesting I would not be allowed to cause an unsightly business so to say. So all I can do is tell you that we’ve we are willing to put in writing what we will do the restrictions that we will stick to. That’s it.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, does any body else in the audience have any thing new to add to this at all. As far as restrictions or anything, I don’t think that’s going to. As far as your petition to change the zoning, I don’t think restrictions are going do any good because it doesn’t look like any of the neighbors will be more accepting with any restrictions. So, and again there are only seven members here and it takes six members to vote for it for a positive recommendation. For this to go on, and that’s all we do is recommend to the commissioners whether it should but by the same token you don’t want to drag the things on and on and on we’re just going to get piled up too. So do you want to go ahead and have this voted on at this time.

 

John Lynch stated, you’re saying how many people again?

 

President Charles Anderson stated, six, there’s a ten member board and it takes six members voting for, for positive recommendation for this to go through.

 

John Lynch stated, okay.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, the commissioners have any questions for anybody about this request?

 

Don Ward stated, I have one. Is there still a boat launch there at the bridge?

 

Don Apple stated, yes there sure is. Right beside the bridge.

Don Ward stated, well that’s a business isn’t it?

Don Apple stated, it’s attached to the Mobile Home Park.

Katie Apple stated, Mobile Home Park.

Don Apple stated, it’s always been there, been there for forty years.

Katie Apple stated, it’s not sitting in the housing addition.

Attorney Altman stated, if you’re going to answer please do it in the mic.

President Charles Anderson stated, we need this for the record. This is Mr. Apple responding to the boat launch.

Don Apple stated, I’m sorry Mr. Ward.

Don Ward stated, there was a restaurant there at one time.

Don Apple stated, it is long since gone sir. Intentions to tear that building down to…

President Charles Anderson stated, and he was asked so that’s the question. Any other question the commissioners have? I’d say let’s go ahead and vote on it then.

The results of the vote were as follows: 3 affirmative and 4 negative. This will be presented to the White County Commissioners for their action.

Attorney Jerry Altman stated, that will be next Monday at 8:30 in the morning. Right here and they have the final say. Everybody hear that? Everybody understand that?

Somebody from the audience asked, 8:30, sir? At 8:30?

President Charles Anderson stated, anybody that’s concerned about it ought to come because they have the final say on it but it will go with no recommendation to them. It’s not a positive recommendation on this.

John Lynch stated, thank you.

****

#899 Rangeline Properties, Inc, Owner; Jeff VanWeelden, Applicant; The property is located on Lot 1 in Korpita’s Corner Subdivision, located West of Monticello at 19 S. 300 E. Tabled from February 13, 2006 meeting.

Violation: Photographs for the Board’s review for the pending notice of violation.

Request: They are requesting to rezone from A-1 to I-2.

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

Dow Dellinger stated, my name’s Dow Dellinger. I am here representing Indiana Waste Systems I am not in fact a member of your board but here once again, here on the same issue. So we would like to address a few issues that I don’t think that you have heard before on this matter. At least not before on the rezoning issue. We’d like to talk about what we’re here is, Korpita’s Corner Lot 1, of the two lots. This is the lot that sits to the West of the two lots that sit contiguous to each other on the corner of Hanawalt and 325. In 2003 this board and I’m sure of the make up of the board at that time but this board approved Lot 2 to be zoned industrial for the use of the trash operation this is the same trash operation going on now. What we’re asking for and the issue has become the owner of Waste Systems would like to add a transfer station, which would generally and there was some discussion at a previous meeting that this was going to be a land fill or generate more trash. What this basically does is let him build a building that he transfers trash from his operation from his trucks into a larger container to ship garbage into a landfill. Either a Waste Management Landfill or where ever else he want to truck that garbage to. This doesn’t particularly make a larger operation other that building and the ability to change garbage from a truck of his to another truck of his. There is no intention to allow others to use the transfer side as a garbage dump. It all has to be enclosed in the building and the operation has to take place in the building pursuant to the permit. So I wanted to make sure the board knew and that several of the property owners here knew that it’s not a second land fill coming into the area that we’re talking about we are talking about just a change in operation how that garbage is handled there on sight.

President Charles Anderson stated, actually right now, it’s not even, it’s not a transfer station it a trash collection there, right?

Dow Dellinger stated, right and right now yeah, we’re just wanting a collection sight.

President Charles Anderson stated, what we’re basically doing is trying to… what he wants to do is rezone from A-1 to I-2 for him to have an I-2 zoning and to run a transfer station on that he would still have to get a special exception from the Board of Zoning Appeals for that so basically what we’re here for is, tonight, what’s the best use of that land.

Dow Dellinger stated, and that’s exactly right. And really the only reason why we’re here at all is because there has become this issue about access to the property, which, we think you can still access the property even in Agricultural I mean they would have rezoned both lots if would have thought they needed that for access at the time they got there IDEM permit to do this transfer station so.

President Charles Anderson stated, basically tonight we are more concerned on which is the best use of land.

Dow Dellinger stated, on Lot 1.

President Charles Anderson stated, on Lot 1.

Dow Dellinger stated, that’s exactly right. Yeah that’s exactly right. And basically what we wanted to show we’ve brought, we’ve taken a couple of pictures. This is, Hanawalt Road is basically rife with businesses operating in an improperly zoned property and distressed property along Hanawalt Road. The complaints basically have come from kind of two primary objectors through this whole rezoning issue all the way along. And the complaints have been that the property values are devalued by this, by this trash business that’s already there. You’ll see that we’re basically surrounded by industrial on one side of this lot. On the side to the East and also on the side to the South there’s a, there’s a junkyard that has been in operation there for many years. We don’t believe this would effect the property area. We’ve taken some pictures we would like to show you the properties. We would also like to give a little idea how much zoned properties there are around the area or close to the lot that we’re talking about.

Attorney Altman stated, Mr. Dellinger, for the record you are going to give us a copy of those.

Dow Dellinger stated, and I have copies of those pictures also, yeah for the record.

President Charles Anderson stated, for a second right now, basically what’s on Mr. Pauken’s objection to us hearing tonight was that; would Area Plan’s decision to re-hear Rangeline Property Inc appeal regarding use of lot 1 for access and operation of their waste business without rezoning. I don’t really think that applies to us right now. They are trying to rezone this so I don’t think that portion of it applies to us. Anybody else on the board? How do you feel about Mr. Pauken’s petition as far as us not being able to hear this until after the BZA would approve the use of that lot? Which I don’t think it could unless it was rezoned anyway. For the trash business, or for the transfer station? Do we have any? Any of the board members have any, want to state anything on that? Do you want to go ahead and take a vote on whether to continue to listen to this or to accept the petition that was brought before us? Cause I don’t want to get too deep into it if…

Jay Clawson stated, what does our lawyer say?

President Charles Anderson stated, what does our lawyer say?

Attorney Altman stated, I’ve reviewed the letter and the situation here. I believe that there is no question that the state statute and our ordinance talks staying proceedings pending an appeal. I also believe that the ordinance and the state statute does not limit an applicants right to take other means to do what ever they wish to do with their land. Whether that’s to in this case, one could arguably say that it’s a different way to get the same effect. But it is a very, very different way and it is also a route that our state’s statute and our ordinance makes for anybody that to do and because of that I believe that their, this action by Rangeline is not stayed at this time. That is a rezoning isn’t. And because of that I believe we should be able, we should in fact proceed if Mr. Dellinger’s client wishes to do so.

President Charles Anderson stated, I agree, I think that we can proceed as far as the rezoning of this. As far as talking about using this as an agricultural and whether you can come in and off of it on a business. We can’t talk about that. Any other board members have any questions about that?

Jay Clawson stated, I move that we carry on with the…

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah we carry on but, I’m going to him a chance to respond just a little bit if he wants.

Don Pauken stated, I’m Don Pauken. We had an appeal, appeal number 4 and the action was stayed. This is about Lot 1 and this also about access and use of Lot 1 for the transfer of business. The appeal is against Lot 1, using Lot 1 for access ingress egress. So there’s another portion of this that you haven’t read. And that’s about Mr. Barbour. Who sits on the Area, on the BZA. I’m going to try to convince him tonight to go against this petition because of other problems connected with ingress egress and so forth.

President Charles Anderson stated, I don’t really think that applies to whether we can change, or whether he has the right to change zoning from A-1 to I-2 on this particular piece of property.

Don Pauken stated, that’s my opinion. But we are dealing with access, we are sealing with Lot 1 the appeal is dealing with access in Lot 1.

President Charles Anderson stated, but that would be after the fact of whether it does or does not get approved tonight that would be after the fact. That if we go to the BZA or not. I don’t see where he acting on whether the zoning for Lot 1 would be. What the best use of the land for Lot 1 whether it would be Agricultural or whether it would be Residential whether it would be Industrial as I mean it has something to do, all of them are tied together. Right. But it still we not we are acting on the best use of that land. That’s the only thing we can go by on that one. I think right at this point. And we have to have members from this board on the BZA board too.

Don Pauken stated, but there is several there is going to be several things that I will show you tonight which go right back to…

President Charles Anderson stated, okay but we can go through those too and still hear this.

Don Pauken stated, it’s up to you.

President Charles Anderson stated, that’s the way I see it on it. Anybody else, any other board members have any problem with that? You want to proceed?

Dow Dellinger stated, okay we sure will. We were saying there were several, there were several properties that we don’t object to, but the reality of it is, is that there are several distressed properties several businesses operating out of the area. You can see this is 1361Hanawalt Road, and this is 610 Hanawalt Road. You can see 1389 Hanawalt Road.

President Charles Anderson stated, just because others in that area are out of compliance doesn’t…

Dow Dellinger stated, but and our point is, is that there are several distressed properties down there that this is not the only property that’s hurting the objectors property value. You can see that this is the corner of 400 and Hanawalt. 923 Hanawalt. 1438 Hanawalt. This is, this is the view from 1198 Hanawalt Road looking down to, to where the Lot 1 is. You can clearly see that there is no way of seeing that property that is a close up shot of that. That’s basically out in front of Mr. Pauken’s property looking back to the West of the property this is from 3566 this from Mr. Pyle’s property.

President Charles Anderson stated, they, they’re not the only ones that have objections.

Dow Dellinger stated, and I realize that. We just talking about from the vision from the East has very damage to that, to that real estate. The other thing is we took some pictures of the Industrial zoned areas. We’ve got several sites here all within a half mile of the property and a mile and a half here. Again, half mile, a mile, a half, this is Condo and Sons within nine tenths of a mile of the properties. You’ll see Hardebeck’s Warehousing within seven tenths of a mile. Six tenths of a mile at REMC. And this is the view from the North Fisher Street. Here’s an overview of the Industrial sites you can see the two lots directly to the South and directly to the East of the Lot 1 that we’re talking about is Industrial. You can also see the amount of Industrial zoned properties. The black, the black section is about the center is the NIPSCO property on US 24. The remainder are the Industrial sites along the Sixth Street corridor. The area is Industrial. The area to the west has been zoned Industrial with the junkyard that sits contiguous to it. To the area, the East is Industrial we think this would be, this would be, a constant use, a good use for the property to use Lot 1 as Industrial when it is surrounded by Industrial properties. This removes the issue of the use that we’ve got, we’ve got several issues of the drive that we obviously have. We’ve got an appeal on BZA about access. This would remove any issue we have with use of the driveway going on and off that property. No, no one likes the trash business nobody likes to have the trash business around us. It’s a reality we need to have the trash business around. In October 2003 this board thought that it was okay to place that operation there to rezone it Industrial so an IDEM permit can be utilized to get a transfer station. There’s been some consideration about trying to assist Waste Management or some political pressure to assist Waste Management this is a, a local hauler that’s the only real competition that Waste Management has in the area. Waste Management, like it or not, is a giant company. It is the largest Trash Company in the United States. 429 collection operations, 366 transfer stations, 289 active landfills. It’s 120, or excuse me, twenty one million customers that’s thirteen point seven billion dollars, right off their web site of what their revenue is a year. I mean, for whatever political pressure there is for us to assist them with this issue. I mean, there is no economic pressure on Waste Management from a local holler being the only, only competition that Waste Management has. It’s a good site for this. You know, the board thought it was a good site before the boards allowed the trash or the junkyard to be there. As the consistent use with the property. It’s a good decision to make. To make that entire corner Industrial, like it should be. So we won’t drag it out any longer than that but we wanted to bring some facts that I don’t think were before the board before and we ask for your consideration on this issue tonight.

President Charles Anderson stated, you want to bring, anybody else who has anything and I think Mr. Pauken has got a presentation he wants to give to him. I’ll let you go through that too.

Jim Wooten stated, I’d like to say something.

President Charles Anderson stated, you want to come forward and state your name?

Jim Wooten stated, hello. My name is Jim Wooten and I live about a mile and a half North. This things called Rangeline Property it’s not called Hanawalt Road Property and as you gentleman probably know the first thing that happens when you go up against a major corporation like Waste Management is they come in and buy you out and now you are Waste Management Rangeline Property. I’d much rather be in here arguing against these two gentlemen than I would against a Waste management’s money. With the attorneys that they can bring in here and all the information they could give you. So it might be Rangeline Property’s right now but it’s not too far from being a Waste Management property. They will come in here and buy these guys out. They’ll do what ever they want to do. It’s a residential area. I would like to see the houses stay the way they are and keep the values the way they are. Thanks for hearing me.

President Charles Anderson stated, anybody else have any questions from the audience about that?

Don Pauken stated, I’m Don Pauken. Before you this evening is Rangeline Properties request to rezone Lot 1 even though it, itself by itself the lot fails to meet the minimum width and area requirements for an I-2 zoning. We oppose this rezoning. All of the information, which I am going to relay to you, does indeed have a bearing on and is pertinent to the rezoning request. As I look back over Rangeline Properties actions before this commission and my presentations to this commission, I see that several things have happened. I would first like to say that in my presentations I have tried to interpret the rules under which this commission operates. And must admit, that the current rules are hard to follow. I have newfound respect for the Area Plan Director’s ability to understand and operate within these rules. At this time I would like present some facts as we see them. I think maybe, the commission members will see our concerns as local neighbors and residents of White County. The operation of Rangeline Properties proposing, in our opinion, has no real potential to add value to White County. As we look at what has recently been done at Liberty Landfill. We can see its value to White County in the form of tipping fees to the county and Liberty Township. The added revenue from these fees enable the county to construct a new jail and most recently help the hospital with its property purchase. Liberty Township has used the tipping fees to provide the best equipped fire department in the county. And residents in Liberty Township have not paid property to the Township for years. As residents of White County we see little or no value of that kind to our community. As it relays to the proposed White County transfer facility. Look at Monticello today with the addition of the new Best Western Motel, Wal-Mart, and the hospital. As well as the Sixth Street project. It is apparent that Monticello is growing towards the West. Do we need or want a trash transfer station in our growth area. Another thing we need to ask is where will Rangeline Properties haul its compacted trash? Will it always be to our landfill? What happens if the facility is sold, will the new owners still use our landfill? As we look to the past in trying to establish how the operation would be run by Rangeline Properties. We have other concerns. Here are some of them: Is the safety issue over a year and a half ago we asked Mr. VanWeelden would have his, would he have his trucks use Rangeline Road for access to his property. As Hanawalt, Division Road is narrow and not built to handle these loads. Yet today, his trucks still use Hanawalt Division Road. Rangeline Properties was not supposed to operate as a transfer station until construction of the facility was completed. However, they did operate in this fashion and was sighted by IDEM for this violation. Rangeline Properties placed a driveway on the North lot and stored containers on that lot. Another violation. This commission told them to move the containers. Did they comply? No, it was necessary to fine them and file suit to get the containers moved. You now have been told of yet another violation that is using Lot 1 for waste truck parking and container storage. Rangeline Properties is stated to the commission that they can not control what happens within their operation at all times. At the last Area Plan Commission meeting, Rangeline Properties told us that it is hard to tell where the property line is between Lots 1 and 2. Their attorney pointed out in pictures that were presented to the commission that it is very hard to tell from what position the pictures were taken and where the line is. Some of the pictures were taken by the Area Plan Director. I think she knows where the property line exists between Lots 1 and 2. If I were being watched and wanted to prove that I was a good businessman. I would mark that line, and train my employees and comply with the rules. Instead of hiring an attorney and threatening to sue the commission. Rangeline Properties knows that they are being watched. But instead of complying with the rules that have been set forth, they still lack the ability to control their operation. All of these items make us wonder what will happen next and if Rangeline Properties will comply with more rigid transfer station regulations. At this time we should look at some of the plans that were submitted to IDEM for the transfer facility as we have some issue there. They are as follows: the plans show using Lot1 one for access, even though Lot 1 was not zoned correctly. And I will show that here. Here’s Lot 1 and Lot 2. These are taken from the permit to IDEM. Surveyed drawing, The drawings of the survey. As you can see here. This is Lot 2. This is the transfer facility that’s been proposed. And by the way they have a permit for this from IDEM. You’ll notice his trucks and they operation to their traffic flow diagram shows this. Trucks coming in and trucks going out and so forth. They are using Lot 1 for this operation. Rangeline Properties placed a driveway on the current drainage plan that has not been approved by IDEM uses Lot 1 for the drainage detention pond for the transfer station even though it is not zoned I-2. Let’s go back to this particular drawing. This is where the proposed retention pond or detention pond is in their drainage plan that was submitted to IDEM. It uses Lot 1 for that operation. Why do they need a retention pond? To handle the run off from Lot 2. They are using the pond for their business. Now there is more to this particular pond problem. Rangeline Property’s attorney is stated that a he wants accessory use drive on Lot 1 but the plan shows more than 50% of Lot 1 would be used as drives and drainage to support the business on Lot 2, for Lot 2. Let’s got to this. Lot 2, Lot 1. Now I went and clipped and pasted this up in here to show the pond and their access route. This green line separates what they are asking for in their appeal, in their appeal for access, egress. Let me explain something here. This does more than access into Lot 2. This is using the guys if you want to call it that. Of excess to operate the business. Notice this little piece in here. Here’s the loading bay. What if, lets assume, theirs is a compactor, compactor box, sitting in there loaded up. Ready to go, it’s not on wheels, it’s on skids. Truck comes in with an empty box. He dumps the empty box over here. He drives in here because of the length of the vehicle he’s got to get into this lot here. Along side the retention pond. Backs into the loading bay and loads the compacted box onto the back of the truck. How they do that, they tilt the bedroll it up on there. Now but when they do that. There’s another problem that occurs. Leach aid or squishy material that has been squished down and out of everything that you can imagine. Has been put in the boxes. Where’s it going to go out at? The boxes stall, leak on out. Now they come up into here, they back in here, drop the box off, again tipping the box, or the bed rolling the box off. Again, where is this liquid that’s leaking going to go? All right, then they back up and pick up the new box, the empty box. And repeat the operation, putting the new box in there. That is not access, ingress/egress. That is operation at the facility is required to operate the facility. As described at previous Area Plan Meetings Lot 1 is not just a driveway but is needed to exchange proposed compactor boxes at the transfer station, which I just mentioned to you, because of this IDEM will not approve the drainage plan unless Lot 1 is zoned properly. The attorney representing Rangeline Properties has used the term accessory drive when in fact the box exchange area is a principal commercial use of Lot 1. Not an accessory drive.

President Charles Anderson stated, which we’re not really getting into that right now.

Don Pauken stated, I’m almost finished. The current drainage plan places the compactor boxes being moved from the transfer station right next to the proposed detention pond. The pond is not isolated from the waters of the state of Indiana because it is directly connected to the county tile that eventually drains to our lakes. Here is the location the pond drains directly in to this tile, to the Diener open ditch, to Honey Creek and into Honey Creek Bay, Shafer Lake. And right there in the blue I’m showing that the, that’s Indiana Beach. If you notice run off or rainwater will wash any material, this material called leach aid, leak from the box or during an exchange activity, into the pond and into our lakes. The pond that is being proposed is a dry bottom pond. After a storm or during a storm all of the rainwater goes this way and is detained in the pond. However, it’s designed to meter the flow out so that with 48 hours the pond is dry again. So any leach aid that is carried with the rainwater gets into the tile into the lake. And there is no way of knowing what is in this leach aid and it could contain medical acids, oils, diapers, I, I mean, I don’t know what’s going to be in there. That is a risk we as a county can not afford as down stream as Indiana Beach and our swimming, fishing, and boating areas. Consider the impact on Monticello’s tourism if our waters become polluted with this type of waste. The septic system as shown located under Lot 2 driveway and the proposed transfer building. In violation of the Indiana State Board of, State Board of Health rules. Here’s the septic manhole right here, this all going to be drive. This building right now, the area behind the quonset there is all bare land back here. And nobody seams to know where the field is. But anyway, the whole thing is going to be covered. And it is very suspicious that this is the tile, the county tile that runs through there. Where are the fields? Nobody knows. But anyway, State Board of Health says you cannot cover a tank or an absorption field. And they’re showing it on their permit drawing. Bottom line, this rezoning fails these tests. The need for such a facility in White County. There is no need. Environmental soundness. Why do we have I-2 with Special Exception and an IDEM permit to handle this? Because it’s an environmental type of thing that we have to keep watch on all the time. No resident approval along this area at all, you’ve saw my 80 some petitions, signed petitions before and there’s people here tonight. I’d like to see who’s here supporting this, or supporting the objection to rezoning. Can you show your hands?

President Charles Anderson stated, give a show of hands on it. You want keep your hands…

Attorney Altman stated, I counted twelve people including Mr. Pauken.

Don Pauken stated, okay the, again, this rezoning fails the test the economical sense for the county and as residents. It also fails the test for sound business practices of the business of the petitioner. In light of the information presented tonight we ask the commission to deny Rangeline Property’s request for this rezoning. Thank you.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have any response at all about the leach aid and things? Such as covering the septic system and since we got too far into this rezoning of Lot 1.

Dow Dellinger stated, you mean just briefly, just so there’ s not…

Attorney Altman stated, wait just a second before we do that. For the record we received, we’re accepting in or maps by the objector that he ‘s testified from and you’ll get those copies just like Mr. Dellinger gave copies of his photos. Thank you.

Dow Dellinger stated, just a couple of brief places to make that the board’s not mislead. The violation, the only violation they have had with transfer of trash on that property was transferring cardboard at the request of the county and once they, once IDEM the operator that he couldn’t do that they’ve stopped transferring cardboard from those from the garbage bins on location. The drainage plan has been approved by the Drainage Board. As a matter of fact, it was more restrictive plan that the county required than IDEM required additionally for drainage. In order to protect any run off IDEM didn’t require it, but Indiana Waste Systems agreed to modify the plan so that there would be total containment in a sump area for any run off anywhere rain water run off on the property because of Mr. Pauken’s objection.

President Charles Anderson stated, so where would that, where would that be collected?

Dow Dellinger stated, it’s collected, there’s a there’s a collection unit that will sump pump a couple of drains around where the ramps are to collect the water that’s around the ramp area. That will go into a, into a holding tank and that will have to pumped and hauled like a like any other hazardous contaminate, you know, any other hazardous liquid. So there will be a holding tank that will hold the rainwater around the ramp area to collect any thing that’s running off during the transfer of that garbage. Now there was originally a sump area for the inside of the building area but we’ve expanded that out added a couple of drains to tie into that sump area. And the collection tank area.

President Charles Anderson stated, now the septic area that’s just for toilets and your facility? Is that what that’s for?

Dow Dellinger stated, and that’s the Board of Health has given us approval on the current design for the building permit so you know we don’t know that we’re in any violation of septic ordinance right now and the proposed building apparently doesn’t violate any septic ordinance at this time.

President Charles Anderson stated, do the commissioners have any other questions for him or any of the parties involved?

Don Ward stated, on that septic pick up, or leaching, is that all going to be concrete?

Jeff Van Weelden stated, yes.

Don Ward stated, inside and out?

Jeff VanWeelden stated, yes.

Jay Clawson stated, it has to be put into a tank and hauled to a special landfill.

Jeff VanWeelden stated, it’s got to be pumped, it’s got to be, and it’ll be pumped by Godlove.

Dow Dellinger stated, yeah Godlove’s handles that material.

Jeff VanWeelden stated, then they take it to a waste treatment plant? Water waste treatment plant.

President Charles Anderson stated, do the commissioners have any other questions?

Charles Mellon stated, we’ve heard most of the stories two or three times. I think we’ve spend a lot of time on this situation, too much time. I think it’s probably time to vote, one way or the other.

President Charles Anderson stated, we got one more if its Don Pauken.

Don Pauken stated, Don Pauken, don’t be mislead about the attorney is saying here as far as the drainage goes. The, I admit they have taken care of collecting what falls on the ramps by storing it and then having it hauled away. The problem here is the tipping up of these boxes during the exchange and then having that leach aide flow into this pond and then into the tile. It’s metered into the tile directly. There’s a screen to keep the big pieces out but that’s it. Any liquid that is contaminated will be going into that tile directly. And as I understand it IDEM has not approved their drainage plan, White County has approved a plan but as far as I know it has not been issued to them because there are other things involved that they have not produced.

President Charles Anderson stated, now this is a long way, even if it gets passed tonight as an I-2 it still has to go before the BZA and some other things and how often does IDEM inspect these areas? Or inspect ground around these areas.

Dow Dellinger stated, if the transfer station is in, they are able to inspect more than just an operator.

Jeff VanWeelden stated, they’ve come out, they’ve come out there four or five times and I never had any issue ever before. I got a violation for that.

President Charles Anderson stated, do you know if you, with a transfer station whether or does anybody in the audience…

Jeff VanWeelden stated, there’s more, they regulate it a lot more, yes. Well they make sure, they make sure your drainage and everything is in compliance and you know, in terms of you know it’s a safe operating facility.

President Charles Anderson stated, if there’s no more questions I’d say let us go ahead and vote.

Gary Barbour stated, if, when you do expect those change, is the entire area set up to drain the leach aide into the area into a tank?

Jeff VanWeelden stated, yes, where the box is picked up, yes. That’s….

Don Ward stated, what about if you store boxes outside. Is there any way, area they covered so that rainwater can’t get into them and…

Jeff VanWeelden stated, they’re covered, they’re totally covered, they are totally encased in steel, steel encasement.

Don Ward stated, so there is no rainwater going in and going down through?

Jeff VanWeelden stated, like if you, if you, went to like Rural King and looked at Rural King, it would be the exact same thing as many other business. It’s you know, but this will have where you pick it up is you know, any liquid that would come out would be in the containment facility and what it is, is just a square opening on the back of a box that is about four foot by four by four. And what you do is you pull it away and then you put a tarp across the back so no solids fall out and it’s how most of the industrial companies that how all their trash is hauled in the same type of receptacle.

President Charles Anderson stated, solid doesn’t fall out, but there is areas for leach water to come out of something like that.

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, well it’s a, it’s a mesh tarp but there is a lip. There is a lip on the bottom for it so it’s not all the water coming out. There is a lip on the bottom it doesn’t go all the way to the bottom it’s like a door with a hole in it and then a ramp pushes it through when it’s hooked up to the machine. A ramp pushes it through but when it’s picked up it’s on the ramp and that’s where the containment is, you know, it’s contained and pumped into a tank.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, what do you think is compacted? Is that all compacted within, inside of the building where the compaction or any of the leach from the compaction is inside the building?

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, yeah, yeah and it’s, it can’t rain on the compacted trash because it’s inside a container. It’s inside a building also.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, it’s all compacted inside the building.

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, and the shoot and everything is inside the building.

 

Dennis Sterrett stated, but you’re pulling a container out and backing it up and dumping it off of there on the outside of the building.

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, yes.

 

Jay Clawson stated, on the concrete.

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, if you were to slide it, if you went to slide it, if you went to slide, if you went to slide and empty one in there. If you didn’t slide an empty one in there you pick that up haul it straight to the landfill, dumped it and brought it back. No you would not. But with the size of our operation we probably would not you know we do not have the traffic flow that would require consistent container being placed there.

 

Dennis Sterrett stated, while it’s outside, if you did do that, you would be tipping it twice.

 

An audience member stated, you can tip it

 

Jeff VanWeelden stated, yes, yes, if you slid it off and slid an empty one in there at the same time you would have to set it off the truck and move the land.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, we’ve got one more and we gonna have to call it quits.

 

Jim Wooten stated, last time. Again, Jim Wooten. Rain water and abien water don’t have a lot to do with this. If somebody put something inside that container that has liquid in it and they compress it. That liquid is going to run out. It’s not rain water the leach aide can be a material that somebody else inadvertently or on purpose puts in there. It’s going to leach out. Right now when they set there empty containers and you folks told them to move them. It’s four foot four inches of standing water. It’s running down into that open tile and Charlie Geier’s cows are out there drinking that water right now. So it’s not necessarily the ambient moisture, it’s what is put in there before. That could have liquids in it. Thanks for hearing me again.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, let’s go ahead and vote.

 

The results of the vote were as follows: 4 affirmative and 3 negative. This will be presented to the White County Commissioners for their action.

President Charles Anderson stated, we still have a violation on this one. And the violation was using Lot 1 on which still is an Agricultural lot for business. Does the board have any recommendations on what we should do about this? We ‘re right back to number 899, not moving right along.

 

Jay Clawson stated, shouldn’t that be under business?

 

Director Weaver stated, that’s the North property.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, it has to be settled right now or solved right now. Any recommendations on the…? And as far as I know we only had one that we had pictures of. One violation on this.

 

Director Weaver stated, this is from the pictures that I presented to you at December’s meeting.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, that we had last time.

 

Jay Clawson stated, one?

 

President Charles Anderson stated, no it was several different pieces of, several different times but one period…

 

Jay Clawson stated, how long of a period of time?

 

Director Weaver stated, I can’t answer that because it, there were things that would be there then they’d leave and then…

 

Dow Dellinger stated, from 10-13-05 was the first set of pictures.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, and part of them they contested that were there, and part of them contested they may not have been off the property line, but they did admit to…

 

Dow Dellinger state, we had two times where we know…

 

President Charles Anderson stated, two times that they know that they have been in violation with the material loader.

 

Don Ward stated, well, I’ll throw up a five hundred dollar fine and you guys can hash it over.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, and that was second on the five hundred dollar fine for those violations and that would finish out those violations unless something else gets moved over there until the situation gets resolved.

 

Gary Barbour stated, is that per violation or is that both?

 

Jay Clawson stated, both, total.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, total violation.

 

Jay Clawson stated, for both of them.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, all in favor for all the violations up to date other than the ones that was covered at that we settled out of court which people didn’t like either. It’s a five hundred-dollar fine. Do we, can I have a show of hands for the five hundred-dollar violation?

 

Attorney Altman stated, five votes, vote yes on that…

 

President Charles Anderson stated, how many voted against?

 

Attorney Altman stated, only one against.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, who didn’t vote?

 

Attorney Altman stated, maybe I missed, please raise your hands those in favor of the five hundred-dollar fine. One, two, three, four, five. Charlie is your hand up or down?

 

President Charles Anderson stated, down.

 

Attorney Altman stated, okay five votes for that and then those against.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, two votes against.

 

Attorney Altman stated, okay five to two.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, and I don’t think we need a, on this, we don’t need a quorum, do we or do we need a quorum on this?

 

Attorney Altman stated, we need six.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, we need six votes. So what does our lawyer say we do now? Bring it up again at the next meeting? Can I get another motion on this?

 

Don Ward stated, I vote another motion.

 

Gary Barbour stated, I’ll make a motion that, it’s a thousand-dollar fine. Five hundred dollars for each of them and it’s payable immediately.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, now we have a thousand-dollar fine. Do we have a second on that one? So there’s no second on that one?

 

Don Ward stated, I’ll second and then we’ll vote on it.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, we still have to have six on the second motion. Okay let’s take another vote. All in favor of a thousand or five hundred dollar fine on the two violations did we.

 

Don Ward stated, yeah they admitted to doing that.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, raise your right hand.

 

Jay Clawson stated, what’s this for?

 

President Charles Anderson stated, for the thousand-dollar fine on two, or five hundred dollars of violation for two and payable immediately. So we’ve got four so now.

 

Gary Barbour stated, how about, I’ll make a motion of a seven hundred and fifty-dollar fine.

 

Jay Clawson stated, for both?

 

Gary Barbour stated, sorry, total. Okay, three hundred-dollar fine for each one. Six hundred dollars total.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, six hundred dollars total.

 

Jay Clawson stated, I second that.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, so, move to this so let’s have a vote the six hundred-dollar fine. Three hundred for each violation.

 

By a show of hands the vote was six to one in favor.

 

Don Ward stated, when does it have to be paid?

 

President Charles Anderson stated, immediately. Okay, now any other violations comes up do we want to stay with the three hundred dollar fine or we want to go to a five hundred dollar fine for each violation after that? And can we do that?

 

Attorney Altman stated, can’t do that.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, we can’t do that. What can’t we do? Until we have a violation we have to vote on each individual violation.

 

Attorney Altman stated, each individual violation when it comes up.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, okay.

 

Attorney Altman stated, in due process.

 

Dow Dellinger stated, are you talking about a violation on the absent lot, we’ve settled the suit. Jerry just filed a dismissal.

 

Several people say, on Lot 1.

 

Jay Clawson stated, anything that occurs after today.

 

Director Weaver stated, on Lot 1.

 

Dow Dellinger stated, oh I thought you were talking about the lot on the other side.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, the lot on the other side has been settled. It’s done.

 

Dow Dellinger stated, okay.

 

President Charles Anderson stated, and anybody here that doesn’t want to stay for the rest of the meeting they can leave now too.

 

****

#900 James O. Beliles, Sr.; The property is located on Lot 16, Part Lot 21, Part Lot 22, Lot 23 and .20 of an acre, Part NE NE 33-27-4, property is located in the Town of Reynolds at 209 W. 2nd Street, also on the southwest corner of Boone Street and 1st Street and also on the southeast corner of Center Street and 1st Street. Tabled from February 13, 2006 meeting

Violation: None

Request: He is requesting to rezone from B-2 to R-4.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody here representing this request? Do you want to come forward and state your name and?

Randy Williams stated, thank you. Randy Williams. I am an attorney with a firm Ball-Eggleston-Bumbleburg down in Lafayette representing Mr. Beliles in this petition. I’d note that last month we weren’t here, we had called and submitted a letter to the staff prior to the meeting, which indicated that we would table it till this month. I will, I know it’s getting late. I’ll move this along as quickly as we can. You should each have in front of you, they were submitted for distribution a five or six page document and I’ll kind of take you through that and just kind of point out what we’re talking about here. This is in the Town of Reynolds. It’s on the West side of 43 and generally it’s been called a trailer park that was what it was known as for years. The first document that we have is actually pulled off of your GIS map of course the lines which are drawn don’t always match up directly to the property lines so you can see little over laps here and there. But as you can see up in the left-hand I show the left-hand corner of this particular drawing there currently exists eight trailers. The right corner, upper right corner there are six. And then the center, mid center bottom, there is one. That’s, those are the properties which we are dealing with. The second page is the survey the actual survey, which was prepared at the time my client purchased the property just again, to show you better, give you a better understanding of where these particular properties are. The third, again, this is taken from the White County documents off the and things off the website. Showing generally again generally not the exact location of the particular trailers again showing the existence of eight in the upper left, six in the right and one on Lot 16. The last, excuse me, the next document shows Lot 16 and the current location of the building on that lot the next page is to be the upper right and that showing these, these are the intent my client has with regards to these particular properties. I’ll get to that again in a minute. The next, again, is the upper right hand corner, which would be First Street and Boone Street. Do you recall the other drawings and photographs show their current, currently exists six trailers in those locations. In that location, the intent, which my client has, is to reduce the number of trailers in that location from six down to four. I also just point out for you to see up where, you see up where kind of up in the upper left hand corner of this particular page, there that is a that is for concrete slab for dare I say a trash container. I’m not, I didn’t intend that to happen but that is the purpose of that.

President Charles Anderson stated, is there going to be a leach in that?

Randy Williams stated, dare I say. The last, the last page it actually folds out and this is where there currently exists eight trailers. It’s my client’s intent to replace that with six. When I say replace I mean that, I do mean that. Some of the trailers which currently exist there if you had a chance to go past there if you are familiar at all. Some of those were constructed back in 1960’s. They’re old they’ve been sitting there for a period of time they’re run down windows are broken out, vermin has entered the building, entered those the intent because of the zoning here. My client can leave the trailers that are there as they are and using the term in which you are familiar with it. We’ll call it the grandfather clause. They don’t, they don’t comply with the current zoning but since they were there prior to the rezone to the B-2, I think in that location. They can remain in that location as is and he can he can provide certain rehabilitation work to those to those existing trailers to bring them into compliance with both and rent those out. That’s not what he wants to do. What he wants to do is take those out bring newer ones in the basically what we've talked about reducing from, from 15 down to 11. And there are certain requirements and I can’t and I’m sorry I can’t recall off the top of my head. But new trailers that are brought in have to be manufactured after the year what is it 19?

President Charles Anderson stated, eighty…

Randy Williams stated, eighty-eight. So there are some of them would be even more than 20 years newer than those that are currently in existence. We also understand that there are other, again, these are drawings showing my clients intent there. Without the rezone he can leave those there, fix them up, rent them, that’s not his intent. The, there will be one more step for him and we understand that. The rezoning is one step, a second step would be to go before the BZA because there may be certain set back requirements once we get the precise placement of the trailers which he wants to put in there. And again, this is a sketch, which he has put together showing set backs about five feet off of the right-of-way. If the trailers are going to be that size. So these are, these are, again, showing his intent his plan, we’ve been in front of them and had some discussions with the Town of Reynolds. We understand that ultimately the Town of Reynolds is who decides this as a legislative body. We would ask that this board provide and present to the Town of Reynolds the town council, members of which are here tonight but send on a favorable recommendation for this particular request. And Mr. Beliles is here, he will answer any questions that we are able to answer this evening. Again, we presented this last week, we were at the Town of Reynolds kind of to follow up some discussions we’ve had about two or three months ago and we understand that we will have to go back there one way or the other. But we are requesting a favorable recommendation.

President Charles Anderson stated, does any body in the audience want to talk on this request? Come forward and state your name.

Charlie VanVoorst stated, thank you for your time. Charlie VanVoorst. I’m an adjacent property owner and also a member of the Reynolds Town Council. Mr. Beliles and Mr. Williams have been to a December board meeting that we had and was presenting this to us in the same way that Mr. Williams was tonight is tonight and said that he was going to move the trailers out and put in newer trailers. He was going to bring us back a plan in our February meeting on how he was going to do that, and he didn’t. He didn’t show up and do that. Right after our December meeting or January meeting, I’m sorry, he started to remodel a 1962 trailer so clearing his intent is to remodel these trailers instead of pulling them out and replace them as we would like for him to do. You know a sixty-two model trailer doesn’t meet code, the electric isn’t up to date on it. And I just feel like we have some concerns there on whether he is going to move the trailers out or remodel as he has done with one trailer already. It’s not what he told us he was going to do, he was going to replace that trailer with a modular home that he was going to live in, didn’t do that. So you know, I’m not I just have some concerns for the Town of Reynolds. We have a new habitat pond going up there next door and I have some property next door and I, I’m glad that somebody did buy the trailer park. I just, we would just like to have it cleaned up and I have some concerns whether that is his intent or not. Or whether he is just going to remodel some of these old trailers that are really in bad shape the varmints have been living in them for several years. The windows are gone. No floors in some of them and I just…

President Charles Anderson stated, what would you say the appraised value is of one of these trailers that he is remodeling would be?

Charlie VanVoorst stated, after the remodeling?

President Charles Anderson stated, no before the remodeling. What…

Charlie VanVoorst stated, it would have a negative value as far as I’m concerned. I mean, there’s no floors in them, the doors are gone.

President Charles Anderson stated, even in a B-2 zoning if he wanted to improve these if he goes over 50%, if it’s grandfathered the way it is, can he go 50% of the improvement?

Director Weaver stated, no he can improve up to 50% of the assessed value of it.

Charlie VanVoorst stated, you know if Mr. Beliles would go ahead and replace these with some newer trailers I’m all in favor of it. But he has already showing us that that is not his intent that he is going to fix up the old trailers and you know what kind of people that will draw for the Town of Reynolds and that’s my concern to the board here tonight. You know, I’m not against the trailer park I just I…

President Charles Anderson stated, but as the trailer park is right now it he’d have to fix these trailers up before he could rent them?

Charlie VanVoorst stated, that’s correct not any of them, not any of them are livable as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been through every one of them.

President Charles Anderson stated, and that you know, to me that’s would be more of a Town Board problem instead as far as I mean…

Charlie VanVoorst stated, yes, that’s correct.

President Charles Anderson stated, we change the zoning on that he’s have to do more improvements and more restrictive on setbacks and…

Jay Clawson stated, I have a question for Jerry right away if we change the zoning he would have to bring that into compliance with our ordinance. If we were to okay it he would have to get rid of those. There would be no remodeling of the old trailers. Am I right in saying that?

President Charles Anderson stated, if we change the zoning?

Jay Clawson stated, if we change the zoning.

Jay Clawson stated, because if he is grandfathered…

Attorney Altman stated, if we change the zoning he is no longer grandfathered.

Jay Clawson stated, right.

Randy Williams stated, well I didn’t understand that, I, that’s good to know. Okay.

Jay Clawson stated, I just wanted to make sure I’m clear, that we’re clear on that.

President Charles Anderson stated, what does our Director say on that?

Randy Williams stated, I misunderstood that in talking to some people earlier about that.

President Charles Anderson stated, what do you think on that?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know. I don’t know.

Jay Clawson stated, that’s why I directed that at Jerry. I would think that if we rezone, change zoning it would have to be, you know, brought into our compliance with our ordinance at this time and it doesn’t meet our ordinance.

President Charles Anderson stated, well, they’re too old. They would have to be eighty-one or older trailers to even be able in that.

Attorney Altman stated, they said that would have to be consistent with zoning. Whether the trailers are or aren’t appropriate would be another thing.

Jay Clawson stated, well there’s not, they’re…

President Charles Anderson stated, but would they still be grandfathered if we change the zoning?

Jay Clawson stated, no. I wouldn’t think.

President Charles Anderson stated, that’s what he’s asking.

Attorney Altman stated, they would not be grandfathered in their in their set back shall we say violations. They may or may not if…

Jay Clawson stated, and they’re not, they’re not occupiable at this time would they have to be issued permits to be occupied? And that would have…you know, I don’t know.

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think that’s the problem.

Jay Clawson stated, do we have that right to make that…

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think that’s a problem. However I think the, if he’s going to leave it the way it is zoned now and just cut it back and get approval there. Then I think that’s one thing but if I think if he changes the zoning he has to conform to the new zoning and those requirements.

President Charles Anderson stated, but if it’s left the way it is, if I don’t know how the Town would be able to do something like that. He can only improve up to 50% of what the assessed value and the, the trailer or what ever it is in there which may only be a couple of doors or a couple of windows.

Randy Williams stated, still wouldn’t be livable. So I guess we’re back to if it is rezoned does he have to go by the new zoning rules for the year of the trailer? That was never answered that I heard.

Attorney Altman stated, I think he would.

Randy Williams stated, he would have to. That means a lot.

President Charles Anderson stated, which would have to be eighty-one or later in our ordinance.

Director Weaver stated, eighty-one or newer.

Attorney Altman stated, his setbacks would have to be consistent.

Randy Williams stated, not the trailer itself.

Attorney Altman stated, not necessarily the trailer.

Randy Williams stated, not necessarily or is that, yes or no?

Attorney Altman stated, no.

President Charles Anderson stated, but still…

Attorney Altman stated, however it still comes down to it has to be…

President Charles Anderson stated, he’d have to fix it up…

Jay Clawson stated, it still wouldn’t qualify that way. If it was, if it was…

President Charles Anderson stated, to be able to police something like that I don’t know how you’d do it.

Don Ward stated, well if it’s outside if it’s over the setback line it has to be moved back, right?

Attorney Altman stated, right.

Don Ward stated, that means it has to be reset.

President Charles Anderson stated, and if it has to be reset then it has to be inspected or it…

Don Ward stated, it has to be inspected the foundations have to be below frost line has to tie down past the be done, it’s going to be expensive to move them. It looks to me like if we rezone it, any thing over an eighty-one has to go, because it’s going to be a reset to move it back.

Charlie VanVoorst stated, that’s what I’m kind of asking you know that makes a difference on how I feel about it, I mean.

Attorney Altman stated, I think they would.

Don Ward stated, it has to be reset according to the code now. Which means the foundations have to be below frost. Which is three feet deep or more. Tie downs and everything else have to be regulated.

President Charles Anderson stated, state your name.

Randy Williams stated, Randy Williams I think if new ones were brought in then the new ones have to meet the new requirements. That, that’s correct.

Don Ward stated, but if we rezone.

Randy Williams stated, if the Town of Reynolds rezones.

Don Ward stated, the trailer’s over the line…

President Charles Anderson stated, if we make a positive recommendation and the Town of Reynolds rezones it.

Randy Williams stated, I don’t know if as I sit here. I don’t know the answer to that for sure but I’m thinking it was rezoned once before. That time, at that time it was rezoned before this same property. Those continued to be a non-, it’s a non conformed, well first of all it’s a non conformed use. That’s why I did say if he was going to make any change he would have to come into to BZA make a request for the seventies changes in the setbacks. So we, we are familiar with that if he is going to do that.

President Charles Anderson stated, Mr. Beliles want to make a statement at all?

Randy Williams stated, he likes me here.

Don Ward stated, well it looks like if you have to move it back to get it back to setback line that’s a reset.

Randy Williams stated, that, that’s correct. And if it’s moved there’s no question, there’s no question that he has to meet all requirements unless there’ s a variance through the BZA.

President Charles Anderson stated, is there, are there livable trailers in that park?

Randy Williams stated, the one, which has been discussed, is one, which my client has done some work. He’s going to be it is his intent to be living in that one pending the work being done on others. That’s what he hopes to do. And things change, as we all know, sometimes people submit a building permit for a garage and then that building permit turns into something else, I mean so. From what happens from the initial has, has changed can change over a couple of months period. So where we first discussed in December, and I’m not going to get into any I don’t think it’s the place or time to get into any other discussions about. Other things, which have been, said so.

Randy Williams stated, we’re trying to clean up a mess. I think that anyone who’s been out there knows that there is a mess out there. My client wants to do what he can to clean it up. And we just, we all know that ultimately it’s up to the Town, the Town Board and we’re just asking for a favorable recommendation. It’s their decision one way or the other.

President Charles Anderson stated, Charlie you want to make another statement?

Charlie VanVoorst stated, I, I’m just really concerned as Mr. Williams says whenever it is rezoned, you know it’s subject to change however they want to do it. Mr. Beliles is, has showed to me in the past that he does whatever he wants, whenever he wants and it makes no difference how you zone it or not. And so I, I guess it really doesn’t make any difference at this point unless we have some restrictions on how he does it. Because I believe that he’s already shown to us that he’s is remodeled a 1962 trailer that I mean if you look at it who wouldn’t like to live in something like that. I’m sorry, I’m having a problem with it so I just ask you to look at it real closely before you make a decision hopefully help us through this so. Thank you.

President Charles Anderson stated, any body else in the audience.

Delea Hendress stated, yes, my name is Delea Hendress . I’m also on the Town Board in Reynolds. And live in Reynolds. I don’t think there is anything worse he can do, I mean, he plans on trying to remodel them. And I, somebody needs to fix it up. It is a very bad eye sore I know that if even we rezone it he still has to get setbacks and variances and everything. So there is still a lot more steps to go through yet and I would like to see it cleaned up.

President Charles Anderson stated, as far as the property right now, what is the shape compared to at the time Mr. Beliles purchased the property?

Delea Hendress stated, he just purchased it. It’s been like this for. He bought it in…

Charlie VanVoorst stated, in November…

Delea Hendress stated, yeah and it’s been a junkyard. There hasn’t been anybody living in them, a couple years.

Somebody in the audience said ten years.

Delea Hendress stated, yeah, I was gonna say, for a lot of years.

President Charles Anderson stated, so actually they’re pretty much un-inhabitable?

Delea Hendress stated, oh yeah. Yeah, he at least came in and boarded some of them up because there was kids actually going in them too. So…

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody else?

Chris Fullerton stated, Chris Fullerton also with the Town Board of Reynolds. And I think that the fact that Mr. Beliles fixed up a single trailer along the road. First of all I can see a little bit of his point in doing it and the fact that he would have a starting point. He could not have moved a double wide in there without zoning so there is no way that he could have instituted any kind of plan or anything except fix up the property in one way or another. He did go in there and board up the trailers and, and cut some of the grass down and try to at least alleviate some of the rodent and other problems that existed with the trailer court. And it’s a mute point that he may have fixed up one of these trailers he has the right to fix up those trailers up. Up to 50% of their value is my understanding. At this point anyway so whether we rezoned or not he would have that ability even if he wasn’t pursuing this avenue. I think Mr. Beliles is showing us that he intends to make some improvements with the property further more it is my understanding that the Town of Reynolds should we approve this rezoning can have some say in set restrictions on said rezoning. And in that fact, we can say Mr. Beliles you have given us a plan and if you stick to that plan we then can conditionally approve the zoning. Is that or is that not a fact?

Attorney Altman stated, we would have to have a commitment. I guess stepping back just a little bit. When the presentation was before us by Mr. Williams he indicated that they were reducing the number and moving the trailers from six to four I believe it was and from eight to six. And because of that is why I indicated because he was moving everything and rezoning that they needed to then conform once they were done with the ordinance. And that’s why I said that. If he were just rezoning it, it wouldn’t necessarily be the same as when he say, he is rezoning and reducing and changing and moving everything. That’s when he has to come into compliance with the ordinance. It’s the rezoning and moving every thing and that’s why I’m talking about that. And just to bring it up and that’s exactly what his commitment is to do. And so that if he does get this rezoned he would be committed to have them all in compliance with our ordinance.

President Charles Anderson stated, but even if we rezone it. Can the Town Board still put commitments on what we do?

Randy Williams stated, stipulations and conditions yes sir.

Attorney Altman stated, you certainly can require a commitment that would conform with what you wish to have happen or you just don’t vote on it. Or just don’t vote positively on it.

President Charles Anderson stated, all we make to you is a recommendation on that should vote on it and then can actually make your own commitments in the Town of Reynolds.

Chris Fullerton stated, okay, my question is then revised to say that if we put stipulations and or conditions on this rezoning. And the conditions and or stipulations are not met with in the acceptable period of time and I don’t know what that period of time might be, but a reasonable period of time. Could then we revoke that zoning.

Attorney Altman stated, actually you’d have, you would have to talk to our department about enforcing that commitment and going to court and requiring that that commitment be complied with or our commitment that we usually prepare says that the rezoning reverts to the old rezoning, old zoning with the violation.

Chris Fullerton stated, again I’m unclear about that answer sir.

President Charles Anderson stated, but that would bring you right back to where you were though without could bring you back to B-2 and all those little trailers that you got out there.

Chris Fullerton stated, I think that Mr. Beliles should be able to proceed and clean this up which is really what we all want…

President Charles Anderson stated, but you would, you would have the legal grounds to go after him legally though. If he’s doesn’t do what you want.

Chris Fullerton stated, good deal. Well again I think for Mr. Beliles to proceed and to haul a double wide in that trailer that he was fixing up he has to have this rezoning. And there for I’m in favor of it, thank you.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody else want to?

Fred Buschman stated, it was brought out earlier, I’m Fred Buschman, Town Board member. It was brought out earlier Mr. Beliles spoke to us in December, told us his plans. We got nothing in writing, and there is nothing in writing here tonight. And if you if a man tells you he’s going to do something and then he does the exact opposite it leaves you with a feeling of un-trust. And if you people here on this board here tonight don’t know for sure for your vote one way or the other what it is, I urge you to put it off until you do know. Because his word is not has been demonstrated as not very good. Thank you.

President Charles Anderson stated, does anybody else in the audience have anything?

Randy Williams stated, other than slander…

President Charles Anderson stated, state your name. State…

Randy Williams stated, other than slander, which has been stated in this board and on the record. I would like to point out a couple of things. That it’s my understanding that at least one person and I’ve been told this, I’ve been told this by a realtor that at least one person who has spoken tonight actually bid on this property and he was out bid by my client. So that’s that…

President Charles Anderson stated, well, let, let’s not get too far into that.

Randy Williams stated, the shots were taken and I’m going to go any further than that. But if I think the ideal thing to do is to just get this to the board, get this to the Town of Reynolds. The town gets competing interest competing statements made by the board members, let them decide how they want to handle it.

President Charles Anderson stated, the commissioners have any questions for any body on the…

Gary Barbour stated, Charlie, either way it’s going to go to the town whether we vote it no or yes.

Jay Clawson stated, yeah it’s their final judgement on it.

Don Ward stated, can we offer restrictions though?

President Charles Anderson stated, but do you want to restrict it to revert it back to what it is?

Don Ward stated, yeah I mean

Jay Clawson stated, it’s a nonconforming use right now. What we’re rezoning it to be going to be more restrictive than what they’ve got already. So…

President Charles Anderson stated, the only restriction would, I think legally the Town Board ought to put their restrictions on it if it goes back to them. And if they don’t meet those then they’ve got legal grounds to go to court on …

Don Ward stated, well I, I don’t think that we ought to, my own personal opinion is, I don’t think we ought to rezone it unless every trailer older than 1981 goes out. That’s the way I feel about it.

President Charles Anderson stated, do I have a second on that one?

Dennis Sterrett stated, I second that.

Jay Clawson stated, I do. I would too because that’s what meets our ordinance and there’s nothing in our ordinance that says that nobody can bring in a trailer and do any remodeling on anything older than that.

President Charles Anderson stated, I mean, the wiring and everything in those are so bad. They would have to rewire everything. I don’t know how you can remodel any of those without getting over 50% of the cost of one if they have been sitting for that many years.

Randy Williams stated, and I’m sorry. Did I hear that if you're going to recommend to rezone only if the all the trailers…

President Charles Anderson stated, meet 1981 or newer.

Randy Williams stated, okay.

President Charles Anderson stated, can I get a show of hands on that? Okay, we’re all in favor of that. Do we have any…

Dennis Sterrett stated, I’d like to discuss also, I believe there is an open ditch that runs through there. Runs through the property. And that’s a regulated drain so you’re gonna have to bring your plan on what you’re gonna do to the Drainage Board. Cause there’s a…

Randy Williams stated, we said there are other steps that we…

Dennis Sterrett stated, there is a 150-foot easement on that drain.

President Charles Anderson stated, and would the representative agree to 81 and newer?

Randy Williams stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay. I’d say let’s go ahead and vote then.

Attorney Altman stated, and as I understand you’re proposal is condition upon the reduction and the, and all of the trailers as you indicated.

Randy Williams stated, yes. Jerry, without the streets named off the top of my head, upper right hand corner I’ll use that. But in the Northeast side that, it would drop from six down to four. The Northwest side from eight down to six. And then the one center, there would still be one there.

Attorney Altman stated, and that is you’ll put that into a form of a commitment?

Randy Williams stated, yeah that’s, that’s we would commit and that’s we said that from day one.

President Charles Anderson stated, and then the commitment to upgrade everything 81 and above.

Randy Williams stated, and there would be a condition right then the condition, conditional that any changes anything brought in is over 1981.

Dennis Sterrett stated, can we write that on the ballot?

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah write it on the ballot.

Attorney Altman stated, I sure would. Yes sir I think it’s always a good idea to write it down, Denny. You betcha. And as I remember our commitment, while it says we can enforce it to revert back it doesn’t necessarily have to revert back and you can get enforcement of the proposal that your proof so that you don’t have to be in the worst situation. Worse than you are now maybe.

Delea Hendress stated, yeah.

Attorney Altman stated, okay. That’s what I’m trying to say to you. There’s where maybe you should have your attorney look over the commitment too.

Randy Williams stated, if it is rezoned to R-4 what’s the time limit say the town doesn’t approve that also.

President Charles Anderson stated, if the Town approves it. The Town ought to put the time limit on it. Right we can do that after we vote.

The results of the vote were as follows: 7 affirmative and 0negative. This will be presented to the Town of Reynolds for their action.

Attorney Altman continued, with the condition that the commitment be made that all the trailers would, older than 1991 would be removed and that there would be the population reduction as set forth…

Several people say 1981.

Attorney Altman stated, 81. What’d I say? Sorry.

President Charles Anderson stated, they wouldn’t have minded that either.

****

#902 White County Memorial Hospital; The property is located on 38.165 acres, Part E ½ NE 5-26-3, in the City of Monticello on the West side of Sixth Street between South Street and Gordon Road.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting to rezone from A-1 to B-2.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we anyone here representing that request? Come forward and state your name.

Attorney Altman stated, Mr. Chairman, before we do that my wife is a, on the Board of Directors at White County Memorial Hospital and because of that I believe it to be a conflict of interest. Therefore I’m recusing myself from this matter.

President Charles Anderson stated, so recuved or recused. You want to state your name?

Dr. Cardwell stated, hello I’m doctor Cardwell the hospital CEO and I’m here to request a rezoning from the current A-1 to the proposed B-2. We have our architects in place we have construction managers in place. We believe we have our bond financing all set. We plan to construct a ninety thousand square foot hospital. Right now a fifty thousand square foot medical office building which continues to grow. We were working just this last week on perhaps even fifty thousand square feet. We have thirty-eight acres in which to work. And I just ask your consideration.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody here with any questions about the request at all? Commissioners have any questions about the request?

Don Ward stated, I just wonder what they’ll do if we turn them down?

Charles Mellon stated, do you got a drainage permit?

Terry Beasy stated, Terry Beasy. I’ve attended several county commissioners meetings and seen the hospital perform its change and the dynamics of the hospital change. I think this is probably a positive move for White County and I hope the board allows Mr. Cardwell and his nice suit to continue his positive moves. Thank you.

President Charles Anderson stated, and that’s what we hear from the big cooperation. Commissioners have any questions on this request? I’d say let’s go ahead and vote.

The results of the vote were as follows: 7 affirmative and 0negative. This will be presented to the City of Monticello for their action.

Jay Clawson stated, Monday.

President Charles Anderson stated, and when does that meet? You want to make sure you’re there though because they’ve got the final say.

Jay Clawson stated, six o’clock.

****

#903 Jack & Ruby Isom and Indiana Beach Inc, Owners and Cornerstone Group, Applicant; The property is located on part of the SW NW 33-27-3, in the City of Monticello at 823 West Washington Street.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting to rezone from R-2 to B-2.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody here representing that request?

Didier Glattard stated, hi, my name is Didier Glattard. I am a principal with the Cornerstone Group. We have all of the properties in question under contract purchase.

President Charles Anderson stated, is there anybody that have any questions about that request? Okay you want to come forward and state your name?

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, hello my name is Eileen Hofmeyer. I live at eight twenty two West Washington Street directly across the street from the property and I want, would like to know what the intention of and what they are going to do with this property. It’s going to affect me, I’m already surrounded by water. If they pave it, is the water going to run down on me? And also what’s it going to do to the value of my property?

Charlie Mellon stated, you’re on the North side of the road, is she on the North side of the road.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, I’m on the North, directly across.

Charlie Mellon stated, first place?

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, would you like to address that? Say your name.

Didier Glattard stated, our intent is to take, currently three buildings on the entire property that we are purchasing; a used car dealership and then a small retail, which has two tenants. A Frame shop and I forgot the other tenant and a single family home, which is on the residentially zoned property.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, that’s directly across the street from me.

Didier Glattard stated, there’s a large power line easement, 150 feet wide along Sixth Street that is not buildable. What our intent is, is to build a drug store on the property and a relocated used car dealership.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, will it be paved? The whole lot be paved? What kind of drain, if you could come down to my house now. I’m surrounded by water right now.

Didier Glattard stated, well I saw the big pond on the site over there. We had a lot of rain over the weekend.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, yes.

Didier Glattard stated, obviously when we redevelop the property we will have to meet all of the new drainage codes for the property and it’ll actually help the problem of the drainage other than hurt it I would think.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, and I wonder what that’s going to do to the value of my property. And also I want to know if they are going to come out on Washington Street with traffic, because I don’t want that traffic coming out in front of my house on Washington Street.

Didier Glattard stated, well our current plan does not show any access onto Washington Street. We show access onto Sixth Street and access onto Highway 24.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, okay.

Didier Glattard stated, you know, I didn’t I must say I didn’t think was the forum to discuss the plan. I do have plans here that I could share with the board if they would like to see them. They are conceptual in nature. But fairly close to what we are planning to do. Is that some thing I should do or?

Jay Clawson stated, if you want to present them, we put them on the record.

President Charles Anderson stated, your main concern would be the drainage and…

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, and the traffic and what it’s going to do to the value of my property. I don’t know if that’s going to have any effect.

Charles Melon stated, you just moved in there the last year or two?

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, it’s been there a year and a half. Lingenfelters had the house before.

President Charles Anderson stated, do you want to show her a copy of that too?

Didier Glattard stated, it’s our understanding that if the zoning changes, is approved we will still need to go for a zoning, site plan approval through the board of adjustment in order to get parking requirements approved. So the site plan will still need to go through the secondary interview process.

Charlie Mellon stated, had you? Well you said you did the plans right now of putting an entrance out on Washington Street. But do you intend to tear down the house and all that area? The old house that’s there? The East maybe your tenant, who ever comes in there, might want an entrance out onto Washington Street if he builds a building clear down to the East end of it. And he wouldn’t have to if he could get out there. That’s kind of a dangerous intersection up there with Sixth Street and 24 and all the other on the other side. The bank and the Family Express has got exits out to Sixth Street and your exit to Sixth Street and all of the new people that’s behind would exit out. I f you’d have a bad wreck there or something, that would be about, it’ll hold them up for a couple of hours during the summer when all the Beach traffic is out there. That tenant might want to get out to go uptown or get out of there to do something. You wouldn’t have to go all through if it’s a car dealer, he wouldn’t have to go through all of his cars and stuff to get out of there. He’d be right down there by the building where it wouldn’t be bothering too many people in getting out of there. He wouldn’t be going out of there very, very often. I wouldn’t think and there’s been a drive on to Washington Street ever since that house has been there already. Yeah and that’s a private drive.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, there’s no, is there a drive down there?

Charlie Mellon stated, oh, yeah.

Didier Glattard stated, our plan doesn’t show a driveway onto Washington Street because we were being cognizant of the fact that it is a residential street. We certainly would prefer to have an access to Washington if we able to get that.

Charlie Mellon stated, your tenant, your tenant on the backside there might have…

Didier Glattard stated, we’re not pushing that, and we’re not asking for that. Having access onto Sixth Street is very important to us and having access to Highway 24 is very important.

President Charles Anderson stated, is this all you’re going to be building after Sixth Street Project is done or…

Charlie Mellon stated, it’ll be built a long time before that.

Attorney Altman stated, however it will be consistent with the Sixth Street Project, right?

Didier Glattard stated, right I believe there is some right-of-way taken that will be part of our approval process. And again these are conceptual plans they are not base on hard surveys and.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, it’s not a final plan.

Charlie Mellon stated, it may not be in the plans now but I would think that in the future if the people are not there in the area behind you. Somebody might change hands and they might want a drive out there and now since it’s in construction now would be the time to put the drive.

President Charles Anderson stated, now really it is not in the construction. Right now what we’re talking about is rezoning it.

Charlie Mellon stated, well it could be included though.

President Charles Anderson stated, from R-2 to B-2 on that. The commissioners have any other questions about this request?

Don Ward stated, well you know supposable when we rezoned that other area to the West…

President Charles Anderson stated, they should of kept that road straight.

Jay Clawson stated, yeah, the mayor come to us before saying that the road was going to be moved over to line up with what ever that Eighth Street that street is out there. I’m not sure what the street is.

Charlie Mellon stated, that’s Eighth down there by…

President Charles Anderson stated, they were suppose to angle that though weren’t they?

Jay Clawson stated, but, but that never happened.

Don Ward stated, that never happened but it really should be done. We really should make sure that we get a hold of that property.

President Charles Anderson stated, across the street so we have all that road.

Don Ward stated, yeah next to that ladies home. So we can swing that over and get away from that jog in the street.

Charlie Mellon stated, that belongs to that factory. That belongs to that factory where you’re talking about.

Don Ward stated, yeah. Supposable the factory will give the right-of-way for that street. And really and truly we ought to make sure we got it or make sure the city gets it.

President Charles Anderson stated, well but that’s the City, the City’s job to do that together would make more since.

Charlie Mellon stated, if they would make a commitment on that.

President Charles Anderson stated, who could?

Charlie Mellon stated, the owners.

President Charles Anderson stated, but they don’t own this property.

Charlie Mellon stated, put an opening onto Washington Street.

Jay Clawson stated, well I know right now that in their negotiations the mayor’s explicitly asked for no entrance to be put into that residential area.

Charlie Mellon stated, yeah but is the mayor over the Area Plan Commission?

Jay Clawson stated, well yeah. We have final say of it. One way or another so…

Charlie Mellon stated, well I know you do but that’s not…

Jay Clawson stated, but they are agreeable to asking for what they, you know, that’s their plan they’ve presented and.

Attorney Altman stated, looks to me like the presentation they’re giving us indicates that there will not be there and that’s one of the questions that the lady, the neighbor has. And I think he ‘s represented that he will not go on Washington Street and that’s one of your things that you were talking about. And basically objecting about so that answers the one of them at least.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, will there be a barrier there on the street?

Jay Clawson stated, there will be curbs and sidewalks.

Attorney Altman stated, the usual curbs and sidewalks would be what would be there. You wouldn’t want anything more than that or it would be unsightly.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, we were assured by Mayor Fox that they would not come out on Washington Street.

Attorney Altman stated, and that’s what this says, and that’s what this says ma’am.

Eileen Hofmeyer stated, when we finally gave our approval, then we approved that they would not come out on Washington Street.

Attorney Altman stated, and that’s what this says ma’am.

Didier Glattard stated, and as you can see we are also showing a landscaping feature that would screen most of all of the neighboring properties.

President Charles Anderson stated, and most of the cars.

Jay Clawson stated, because on the backside, that is part of our requirement. On the back side of the building to on the East side wouldn’t have to have like a fence but that’s part of our requirements.

President Charles Anderson stated, does anybody else have any questions about this request at all? Any from the commissioners? I’d say let’s go ahead and vote.

The results of the vote were as follows: 6 affirmative and 1 negative. This will be presented to the City of Monticello for their action.

Attorney Altman stated, Monday at what time?

Jay Clawson stated, six.

Attorney Altman stated, six o’clock for the final action on this.

****

#307 Rex A & Georgia Lou Hendryx; Requesting approval of a 4 Lot subdivision to be known as East Chester Estates Addition #1 on 4.033 acres, part N SE 26-25-4. The property is located Southeast of Brookston, on the South side of Hendryx Drive.

President Charles Anderson stated, is this for Primary and Second Approval or?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, do we have anybody representing that request.

Rex Hendryx stated, Rex Hendryx, my wife Georgia.

President Charles Anderson stated, do you want to make any statements about what you are going to do on that property?

Rex Hendryx stated, well there are going to be four lots each one just hair over an acre. We’ve already got all the plans ready, the drainage has been checked and everything seems to be a go. Got the okay from the County Highway to, we have to go across the County Highway for the drainage. And we got the okay from them, Mr.Brooke.

President Charles Anderson stated, anybody in the audience with any questions about this request at all? Any of the commissioners have any questions and does it meet all the standards of the subdivision ordinance?

Director Weaver stated, to the best of my knowledge. Yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, Don have any questions about this at all or is he…

Attorney Altman stated, Rex, what’s the building lot size and the setbacks?

Rex Hendryx stated, pardon?

Attorney Altman stated, what’s the building lot size and the conforms of your setbacks?

Rex Hendryx stated, well the lots are like 1.1 acre.

Attorney Altman stated, yeah I know but…

President Charles Anderson stated, they’re all different.

Attorney Altman stated, the building area. Do you, do you?

Rex Hendryx stated, whatever, whatever Mr. Milligan drew up for me.

Attorney Altman stated, okay.

Dennis Sterrett stated, looks like it would be forty. Cause if you’d subtract sixty in the front one hundred in the rear, that’s one hundred and sixty and the lots would be forty foot to build on. Is that your question?

Attorney Altman stated, yeah, yeah…

President Charles Anderson stated, forty foot by …

Attorney Altman stated, by approximate.

President Charles Anderson stated, a bunch.

Attorney Altman stated, by a bunch, yeah. So there is significant area. This will all be septic systems?

Rex Hendryx stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, and wells, private wells.

Rex Hendryx stated, yes, yes, I’ve them salt tested and we have to put in a new drain. So I’ve got it all lined up to do that. That’s the reason we have to go across the road to drain.

Attorney Altman stated, and the Drainage Board has given approval for drainage.

Rex Hendryx stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, so let’s go ahead and vote then.

The Primary Approval for a 4 lot subdivision to be known as East Chester Estates Addition #1 was approved by a vote of 7 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay we’re ready for the Secondary and there’s no improvements that have to be made on this?

Director Weaver stated, they have supplied a list of improvements to done. You have a copy in your packet for the perimeter drains.

President Charles Anderson stated, do they have a bond or…

Director Weaver stated, they have not given me a letter of credit as of yet…

President Charles Anderson stated, should we do that? Do we need to?

Director Weaver stated, they will have to do so before we, they can record the plat, yes. Either that or they will have to install these before then.

President Charles Anderson stated, you understand that about the letter of credit for the improvements and everything?

The Secondary Approval request for a subdivision to be known as East Chester Estates Addition #1 was approved by a vote of 7 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met.

Attorney Altman continued to say, the standards of the Subdivision Ordinance have been met. Subject to of course the improvements being installed as indicated and approved at or bonding and subject to ten days appeal time. Alright.

****

President Charles Anderson stated, okay next on the agenda would be business and as far as Rangeline Properties, we’re not going to. I don’t think it’s our place to decide whether, that’s gonna be a court deal whether they can work or operate off of an A-1. Because that’s what you’re still left with is an A-1. Did anybody here want to make a statement about, we had a problem with the fine on them, and not taking them to court and things like that. Does anybody want to make any statements about that on Rangeline Properties or anybody got any other questions on Rangeline Properties or nip it in the bud.

Don Ward stated, what is that one, I don’t know?

President Charles Anderson stated, this one was on the business. But it was something that…

Director Weaver stated, was with the North Property.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah North Property, yeah you know, as far as I know it’s all over. It was something we had tabled at the February 13th meeting to discuss on that But as far as I’m concerned that property’s done with. We’re through with it. The other property hasn’t been.

President Charles Anderson stated, anybody like to make a motion to adjourn.

Jay Clawson made a motion to adjourn.

Don Ward 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