Get Adobe Flash player

 


The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, April 14, 2008, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were: Jim Mann Jr., Mike Smolek, David Rosenbarger, Gerald Cartmell, Dennis Sterrett, Greg Bossaer, and David Scott. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Weaver.

Visitors Attending were: Howie Reiff, Harold Reiff, Edward Heath, Ann Heath, Bruce Lyons, George Cook, Susan Waymire, Charles R. Mellon, Greg Johnson, Sandra Johnson, John Koppelmann, April Stokes, Dan Meyer, Janet Meyer, Vic Richter, J?? Miller, ??, Jenny Clark, Gilda Hickman, Larry Moser, Jeff Nagel, and Deputy Ben Woodhouse.

The meeting was called to order by Vice President David Rosenbarger and roll call was taken. Jim Mann made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the March 10, 2008 meeting. Motion was seconded by Greg Bossaer and carried unanimously.

****

#951 Thomas G. & Amy B. Herman; The property is located on Lot 51 & 52 in the Original Plat of the town of Norway, in Union Township, located North of Monticello at 1902 & 1910 N. Buckeye Street.

Violation: None

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

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, anyone representing this request?

Bruce Lyons stated, I am.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, state the name please.

Bruce Lyons stated, I’m Bruce Lyons, I am Tom and Amy’s son in law and I’ve never done this before so I’m not sure the procedure. I’m just standing in for him.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, rezone from R-2 to B-2. Commissioners have any questions about this request? Anyone in the audience have any questions? It’s that simple. No comments then …

Attorney Altman stated, this is right beside the business of Norway Garden, right.

Bruce Lyons stated, right, yeah …

Attorney Altman stated, which is zoned B-2.

Bruce Lyons stated, correct. It will square off the property to the end of the block.

Jim Mann Jr. asked, just out of curiosity, you going to keep the home there or…

Bruce Lyons stated, at this time yeah, we are going to use it for storage purposes.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, for storage, okay.

Director Weaver stated, there is a duplex on 1 lot isn’t there? Duplex on 1 lot and a home on the other?

Bruce Lyons stated, yeah, yeah, right.

Director Weaver, well it would not be in compliance with a B-2 zoning, no. Business zoning does now allow for residences.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, what would you be doing with the duplex.

Bruce Lyons stated, at this time, that’s, I misunderstood his question. That’s the 1 we’re going to use for the storage.

Director Weaver asked, and what will you do with the house then?

Bruce Lyons stated, it’s just, the house on the corner?

Director Weaver stated, mmm hmm.

Bruce Lyons stated, that’s an office.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so the whole thing, any other questions? It meets all the size requirements?

Director Weaver stated, I believe so, yes.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, if there’s no other questions, vote.

The results of the vote were as follows: 6 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to the County Commissioners at their next meeting, and that’s when Diann?

Director Weaver stated, Monday.

Attorney Altman stated, Monday, next Monday morning at 8:30, right here, and they have the final say, okay.

Bruce Lyons stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, thank you very much.

Bruce Lyons stated, thank you.

Attorney Altman stated, one thing maybe ought to mention to others that are here. This is a 6 person board and there are just 6 persons here. So to get a positive recommendation you have to get the vote of everybody here. You can in fact continue your request if you wish to do so but we only have 6 votes right now.

Gerald Cartmell stated, you should of said 10 member.

Attorney Altman stated, well it’s a 10 member board, yeah, but there’s 6 members here and you need all 6 of them to get a positive recommendation. That’s what I mean to be saying, okay. Yes there are 10 total members but only 6 here today. Okay, thank you very much.

****

#952 Gregory A. & Sandra J. Johnson; The property is located on 1.012 Acres, OUT E N N, 09-27-03, in Liberty Township, located North of Monticello, West of East Shafer Drive at 5638 E. 400 N.

Violation: None

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

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, is there anyone here representing this request?

Attorney Altman stated, excuse me, for the record, we now have the 7th member coming in the door now, so that you have a little bit of slack.

Greg Johnson stated, all the pressures off now. Greg Johnson.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, the Commissioners have any questions about this request? Anyone in the audience have any questions or comments. Please step forward and state your name please for the record.

Vic Richter stated, hi, I am Vic Richter, I live to the East of the Johnson’s at 5660 E. 400 N. and I guess I was concerned with the rezoning from to R-2. I wish that could be made R-1. Simply because the R-2 as I understand it allows duplexes and I think the R-1 zoning would allow them to do, Johnson’s to do what they want to do which I don’t want to prevent them from doing that but I I’m apprehensive about having a zoning that would allow sometime in the future a duplex on that property that might come up to like 9 feet within my to my boundary so that was my concern.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, okay. Is there a reason for the R-2 verses the R-1?

Director Weaver stated, the R-2 does have a little less restrictive setbacks than the R-1. Not, not much. I think were talking only about 5 feet.

Vic Richter stated, as I understand it, their rear setback was the problem, and it’s the same for both.

Greg Johnson stated, I’m fine; I have no problem with that.

Attorney Altman stated, second voice there, you need to speak into the mike.

Greg Johnson stated, oh, sorry, sorry, yeah, I would have no problem with that if that’s the case.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s the applicant speaking. Um, Mr. Richter you have a letter that you sent to us that we received April 10, 2008. Do you want that read into the record or can you presence take care of it?

Vic Richter stated, I don’t really care, you know, if they all agree it’s R-1, then I don’t have any issues so.

Attorney Altman stated, we’re checking here so you might stick around here. Diann?

Director Weaver stated, the front setback for both zonings are the same. The setback for the rear is 5 foot difference, R-2 requires 30 foot, R-5 or R-1 requires 35 feet. The sides are a little different. On an R-2 it’s a minimum of 8 foot with a total of 18 feet. R-1 is a minimum of 9 feet with a total of 20 feet.

Vic Richter stated, you’re going to have…

Greg Johnson stated, yeah, that’s fine.

Attorney Altman stated, so Mr. Johnson you’re saying you don’t have any trouble with the R-1 setbacks and you would modify your request to an R-1.


Greg Johnson stated, sure, yeah, no problem.

Attorney Altman stated, for the audience to understand that, you can move down but you couldn’t move up to R-3, that’s what I’m trying to say, so you’re amending your request as I understand it to an R-1 request.

Greg Johnson stated, yes that’s fine.

Attorney Altman stated, okay. Very good.

Dave Scott asked, is there an existing house on this property?


Director Weaver stated, yes there is.

Dave Scott asked, and this doesn’t make it non compliant does it?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t believe so, no.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, yeah that would be the only thing is, your existing house, we don’t want to make it non compliant like Dave just said.

Director Weaver stated, anything setback wise it would bring it more into compliance than it is now because the A-1 zoning requires 100 foot rear setback.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, any other questions from the audience?

Sandy Johnson asked, can I come up there? I just want to say something. I’m his wife, Sandy Johnson, and I’m going to say before, when we built our house back in 1988, 20 years, um, Liberty Township didn’t have rezoning so we are already less than 100 feet from the field so, that’s the only reason why we have to change.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, the Commissioners have any more questions? Let’s vote.

Attorney Altman stated, vote on this for the record of R-1.

Gerald Cartmell stated, I don’t think I have a ballot. Did I get one to start out with? Oh, here it is, covered up.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m not blind but you got to look.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, do you have a ballot for Mike, Jerry.

Attorney Altman stated, oh, Mike did you sneak in and not get one. Sorry Mike, you surely needed to have one.

Attorney Altman stated, the amendment to the request is to R-1 and with that amendment the vote were as follows: 7 affirmative and 0 negative. This will be presented to the County Commissioners for their final action on this and that’s next Monday morning, 8:30, right here okay.

Greg Johnson stated, okay.


Attorney Altman stated, and they have the final say.


Greg Johnson stated, thank you.


Attorney Altman stated, thank you.

****

#953 Brandon R. & Nicole M. Getz, Owners & George Cook, Susan Waymire, & Venture Wireless, Applicants; The property is located on Lot 1, Block 7 in the Original Plat of the Town of Brookston, at 601 S. Prairie Street.

Violation: None

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

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, who is representing this request?

George Cook stated, my name is George Cook and I’m co-owner Venture Wireless, I’m a partner to Susan Waymire.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, the Commissioners have any questions on this request? My first question is parking off street for a business?

George Cook stated, would you like to see a sketch I’ve got. This is tentative.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, and I guess Diann, what are the requirements for B-2, off street parking.

Several members are talking at once.

Director Weaver stated, per retail establishment it requires 1 parking space for every 300 square feet of building there is.

Mike Smolek stated, say that again.


Director Weaver stated, 1 parking space for every 300 square feet of building area.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, so how many parking spaces are you planning on doing with this?

George Cook stated, I’m anticipating probably 10.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, 10.

Attorney Altman asked, you don’t know what your square footage is George? Sorry, I stumbled on that. 10 would be 3,000.

George Cook stated, um, it’s not 3,000 square feet.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I was going to say, just eyeballing that house, it doesn’t look like it is.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, 1,600 or something like that George.


George Cook stated, I’d say it’s probably 15-1,600.


Attorney Altman stated, okay, that’s kind of what I would have guessed. Figured you would have to add it. What’s it say there Diann?

Director Weaver stated, 1,794 square feet is what the property record card shows.


Attorney Altman stated, pretty good guess. Estimate I should say.

Director Weaver stated, 1 per every 300 square foot of building area.


Attorney Altman stated, so he has adequate to do that.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, another question I have on your map you were showing. Where’s the, the original plat of Brookston had 60’ rights-of-way. Where is your property line and …

George Cook stated, I would say this probably what I’ve got on that sketch is probably 10 feet encroachment on that.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so how far, I know that’s…

George Cook stated, well it would still have 20 foot clear of the property line and the edge of the…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, that’s what I’m getting at is the…

George Cook stated, okay 20 foot would be sufficient for parking.

Attorney Altman stated, to Sixth Street, is that what you’re talking about.

George Cook stated, off of Sixth Street. Right.

Dave Scott stated, and they’re going to do this for a Venture Wireless store, is that what it is?

George Cook stated, that’s correct. We attempted to purchase the building that we’re in right now in Brookston, there was some contamination in the soil which would prevent us from purchasing it.

Dave Scott asked, can we put a commitment on this that if it goes out of wireless business it can revert back to residential, I don’t know if we want everything in the business zoning to go in that area. Or is that a concern of the people in the building? It’s kind of a spot zoning there.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, well you’ve got one across the street.

George Cook stated, Harmon Insurance, right across the street.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I guess to help with that question, we’re getting ahead here just a second. Does anyone in the audience have any questions or comments about this? Step forward and give us your name please for the record.

April Stokes stated, I’m April Stokes, I live in 511 S. Prairie, which is right across the street. Sixth Street, from the proposed location and I have a question first off. R-2, as I’m understanding from what I’ve been hearing tonight means that it’s a residential area but allows 2…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, a duplex type house.

April Stokes stated, okay, would B-2 then which is what he’s asking for, business, mean that he could have 2 businesses running out of that 1 location?

Attorney Altman stated, no, it would just be 1 business.

April Stokes, stated, just 1, ok. I’d like to, if I could, that’s a petition, from the 2 blocks surrounding the location, asking against the request for the rezoning.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, mark it, objectors, exhibit A. It is highly against rezoning, it says Petition and against rezoning 601 S. Prairie, Brookston, Indiana from R-2, residential to B-2, Business and signed by several people and I’ll just circulate them among, there’s several signatures so the simplest thing is to just let the board look at that and then that’s the best effort.

Mike Smolek asked, what are you going to do to the house as far as, are you going to change the look of it or?

George Cook stated, I didn’t know if, did you get a chance to look at those sketches I made or?

George Cook speaking to board member about drawings away from mic.

Mike Smolek stated, well just down the street you got Subway.

George Cook stated, Dr. Lopp.

Mike Smolek stated, you got a lot of businesses along that strip.

Attorney Altman stated, and the pharmacy.

April Stokes stated, I could help out with that as well. Sorry, this is April Stokes again.

Attorney Altman stated, put that in the record as, oh, excuse me, I didn’t know you had that many, nothing, I thought you were down as, this would be number …

April Stokes stated, this is a crude version of a map of State Road 43 which is also known as Prairie Street, it gives you, there’s a legend below that says that the red print are business of different sorts and the blue print is the proposed location. All of the black print is what is existing residential, um, my husband and I worked this up to show that just in our lifetime from the South, business have encroaching more and more per block to the residential area. Each of these businesses was once, as far as we can remember, zoned residential. There are other business locations in Brookston that could accommodate something like this. It doesn’t have to take the rezoning of our residential buildings. We’ve also seen a trend of once something is rezoned that if something better comes up a building is left vacant and is now zoned for business and unless another business comes in to occupy that we now have empty buildings in the town that aren’t being used. Like I said before, there are other buildings that can be used for the businesses in Brookston for sale right now and there are other businesses that are currently remodeling store fronts. In the Main Street area and where we could consider in Brookston our business district if you were to say we had one and I think one of our biggest issues is we want to stop the scattering of businesses throughout the residential blocks and keep the houses the houses and the businesses the businesses. Also if I can continue, I have a few other points. Were concerned and I’m glad the issue was brought up I mean there’s a possibility of it being turned back into residential afterwards but we as people living around it don’t know what is going to happen to that building as a commercial building and so were curious once the wireless business is thru with the building will it be sold, will it be rented, will it continue as a business, what is allowed to go in there. There is a school just down the street. That community is a community of young people with young kids and empty nesters with grandkids who come to visit. Of course our first thought is we wouldn’t want anything inappropriate to go in there as a business and it just seems like as a better business choice would be to keep the businesses together and it just leads back to what I said before that businesses just seem to be getting scattered throughout the residential areas. A huge point is that drainage is not adequate, it has gotten better but it is not fixed, especially on the State Road 43 intersection of Sixth Street and Prairie. It floods excessively because it is a valley between the East side and West side, creates a valley and 43 is the lowest section of that area there. The property that you see 600 S. Praire that’s not its correct address, its addressed off of Sixth Street, is a business with a parking lot. It’s blacktopped and it add’s significant water shed to the flooding that we already have that’s a problem. My fear is that if we add to the other side, we have shed coming from this side and we add another parking lot on this side if we don’t have any, if we are taking away green area for the rain to infiltrate it’s going to go right into 43 as well and just increase the flooding issues we have there. The traffic…

Jenny Clark stated, uh, Jenny Clark stated, I live at 602 S. Prairie which would be directly across the street to the East I believe and the drainage is one of my main concerns as well. My crawl space and basement do flood and I am very nervous. I’m concerned if he makes a parking lot across from Ms. Stokes house that by taking away the soil and the green like she said there will be less soil for the rain to infiltrate and thus create runoff into 43 which would then come across 43 into my front yard, cause more flooding for my crawl space and my basement. Also another concern is I believe the intersection Sixth Street and 43 or South Prairie that is in question is not an appropriate intersection for traffic to be turning off of it. 43 already backs up. When the light turns red up in the middle of town you already have back up of traffic in front of my house which is approximately 3 blocks to the South and that raises some red flags to me as far as being able to turn off and on of 43. Also the increased traffic is a concern of mine since I have 3 small children who like to go for walks and ride their bicycles and things like that. There are as someone did state other business in the are but they are what I feel at a more appropriate intersection which is actually where Venture Wireless is located right now, at that intersection, there is actually a caution light there now. In my opinion that is a better area for turning off as far as warning that traffic is slowing down as opposed to the intersection at Sixth Street and Prairie. Thank You.

April Stokes stated, she covered my traffic issues. She also touched on the thing that I’m most concerned about and that is the safety of the kids who live there and do come and visit. I’m curious of who the cliental will be. Once the town is saturated with the product who will be coming in to get service for that product or buy that product and it’s obvious that the road is where the cliental will be coming from. It is going to be brought in from people commuting from wherever they are going. I don’t think any of the moms in the area are looking forward to random walk in patronage right across the street from their kids. I had one mom say to me, a neighbor’s house is supposed to be somewhere where you have to practice stranger danger that you learn in school. I’m also concerned that kids do ride their bikes on Sixth Street. We already have a business with a parking lot and when people are backing out of that parking lot you try to make the kids as well informed as you can but the drivers aren’t always as attentive as they should be as well and if we increase the parking and the risk of people backing out onto Sixth street to get out onto 43 its just going to be an increased risk for the kids as well.

Mike Smolek asked, what’s the hours the business runs right now?

George Cook stated, 9 to 6.

Mike Smolek stated, 9 to 6.

Attorney Altman stated, please take your hat off.

Jeremy Miller stated, oh, I’m sorry, Jeremy Miller, I live across 43 and I think they have touched pretty much on all my concerns but more so the safety issues are big but my thing is, there’s already buildings in Brookston that have nothing in them that are starting to look a little less than pleasant and there already zoned business and they have been for, I couldn’t tell you how long. I’ve lived there for 10 years and they’ve been business since I’ve lived there and I don’t understand why we would want to rezone residential when there’s already empty buildings sitting around. I mean, you know, it’s a small town, it still looks decent but when you start moving the businesses out of the small business section out to residential spots in sporadic fashion you end up with these buildings, lets face it, if somebody’s not renting them out or they’re not being used, there not going to upkeep them. That’s how you end up with these little towns you drive thru on the highways and you wonder man, what happened to this place. It just looks like the whole town is starting to fall apart. You know, I think its just, I see it as just a dangerous, I don’t want to say a precedent, this isn’t a court, but you know a dangerous idea of rezoning residential areas to business when there is already business you can locate at.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, okay, thank you. Any new comments?

Dan Myer stated, my name is Dan Myer, I live in Brookston as well, off of Ripley Street. My wife is here, we’re also signers on the petition. Just wanted to make another point as well as the 2 other speakers have made and I’ve also got a problem or not a problem a question about property values if this is zoned business, what happens to those property values of those surrounding houses, does it go up, does it go down, does anybody know? Does anybody care? If it does go up I don’t think that we want to be paying the higher property tax’s that a business might bring into that area. I live right behind Subway right now and it wasn’t Subway when we got there. We moved in shortly before Subway moved in. It was a bank before but we took that in stride thinking it was going to be vacated or tore down and then when subway came in it made our life with raising our 2 boys more hectic. We could hear the loud speaker going on at all hours of the night when they were supposed to be sleeping. I’m sure they won’t have a loud speaker or anything like that but just the area that is a residential area should stay a residential area as stated before. There is plenty of buildings in Brookston that could accommodate another business that wants to go in. That’s all.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, alright. Commissioners have any more questions.

Dave Scott stated, I have 1 more question. Are you going to have any kind of a tower or anything?

George Cook stated, tower?

Dave Scott stated, or antenna or anything like that for wireless internet or anything.

George Cook stated, no, no, no.

Jenny Clark stated, I do have 1 quick question.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, state your name again please.

Jenny Clark stated, Jenny Clark. We had said something before about possibly adding some sort of addition that if Venture Wireless does leave the location that it could be zoned back to residential that just goes back to basically reiterating what Ms. Stokes said that being, you know, a family oriented neighborhood, which we are, we don’t want some sort of establishment coming in with cliental that we wouldn’t want our children around. I do have a question though. I don’t know what the boundaries from the school to where this location is. Is this location far enough from the school that say a bar or an establishment like that could…? And then another question. I’m not sure what the plans were, if the location was going to be completely torn down and something new built or just remodeled.

George Cook stated, ma’am. Here is the existing photographs and the proposed.

Jenny Clark stated, well I’m aware of, it’s right out my front window, what it looks like now.

George Cook stated, okay, this is it facing North.

Attorney Altman stated, by the way George we need copies, all of those.

George Cook stated, I’ll have to make copies.


Attorney Altman stated, Diann can do that for you.

George Cook asked, do you want to do that tonight.

Director Weaver stated, yeah, um, what size are they? I don’t know that I’ll be able to do them in color but we can at least do them in black and white.

Jenny Clark stated, okay, I see, 1 question, I guess, another problem that I have. I’m not sure if there are other copies of this around or if it needs to be passed around again but there would be a lighted post signage out front which would be directly out of our front windows and how late would the business be open?

George Cook stated, ‘til 6.

Jenny Clark stated, ‘til 6. Do you know are those hours subject to change that maybe a certain night of the week that maybe they would be open till 9 or 10 you know. That would interfere with sleeping patterns at my house with the bright red sign you know at my window.

Attorney Altman stated, zoning requirements would have nothing to do with that.


Jenny Clark stated, okay. Okay.


Attorney Altman stated, so the next business or this business would have lights after that.


Jenny Clark stated, okay, I guess just…

Director Weaver stated, and to answer your question, what I found, it says that adult business, excluding taverns are limited to 1 per B-2 zoned area and may not be closer than 500 feet to any school, church, daycare center, or residential, so it does exclude taverns.

Jenny Clark stated, so, and I’m almost for certain that there’s enough, more than 500 feet from the school and the expressed location. Depending on, and I’m not quite sure what the boundaries would be. There’s the elementary school and then there’s an auxiliary gym, so I’m not quite sure what the measurements would be. You know if the measurements would start at the auxiliary gym or if they would start over on the actual playground property. That’s maybe something that we should look into something further.

George Cook asked, may I address something. This is, it would be less than 500 feet to the school. It would not allow a bar.

Director Weaver stated, I believe so to. The lots are 50 foot wide and I only count 6 lots so that would be 300 feet.

Attorney Altman stated, of the photographs, those are for the record and our photographs are for the record to.


April Stokes stated, April Stokes again. So from the drawings I’m not getting a clear picture of what exactly the building is going to look like. Is the 2
nd story going to remain? Is it going to…?

George Cook stated, 2nd story will stay there, yes. It will just be storage.

April Stokes stated, okay, and as far as, I guess, exterior, will it look commercial or will it look in place with the homes around it.

George Cook stated, I’ve tried to do a combination of both. Again, it will definitely look better than it does right now.

Attorney Altman stated, I guess the only thing I can mention here is, unless there’s a commitment involved there are no restrictions. It can be torn down by some other owner some other day and put whatever’s allowed in there. Not that I question Mr. Cook’s statement at all. I’m sure he intends to do what he just said, but unless there’s a commitment, by that, I’m talking about a written document that says that’s so, there is no restriction on what would be some day in there and that’s just for everybody’s information okay.

April Stokes stated, and from what I understand, the lighting that’s proposed has nothing to do with this board.

Attorney Altman stated, it has to do with the zoning and what the ordinance would allow in there April, but it would, you know, whatever the ordinance allows they can do in a B-2.

April Stokes stated, the store that exists now, its sign is lit 24 hours a day. This sign that’s proposed here, if that remained lit 24 hours a day would shine directly into my bedroom.


George Cook asked, may I address something?

Attorney Altman stated, and that may well be what could be in a B-2. Right Diann? The illuminated sign would be permitted in a B-2.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

George Cook stated, they’re not on 24 hours a day; they are put on a timer.

Mike Smolek asked, why does it have to be B-2. Can you do B-1?

Director Weaver stated, it doesn’t. Retail sales can go in a B-1 it does require a special exception.

Jenny Clark asked, what would be, sorry. Jenny Clark, what exactly are the differences between B-1 and B-2. I know before you had you know made it cut and dry what R-1 and R-2 were.

Director Weaver stated, a B-1 is supposed to be your more residential compatible business’s, more your downtown type business. B-2’s allow like gas stations, restaurants, that kind of things.

Jenny Clark asked, okay, is there a reason why B-2 instead of B-1.


George Cook stated, no, it wasn’t a real selection; in fact it was more just a arbitrary decision on my part that day. A B-1 would be fine.


Attorney Altman stated, but you need a special exception to…


Gerald Cartmell stated, now you got to come to the BZA.


Director Weaver stated, if he goes with a B-1 he would have to go thru a special exception, yes.

Several members are speaking at once.

Dan Myer stated, Dan Myer again.

Attorney Altman stated, excuse me, wait, we’re still, we’re talking here.

Dan Myer stated, okay, I’m sorry.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s alright Dan, we’re just…

Director Weaver stated, question was asked what the setback, the difference of setbacks are. B-1 from a city street for a front is 0, from the rear yard is 10 foot unless it’s adjoining a residential zoning then it would have to be the same as the residential zoning, and 0 on the sides unless it is meeting a residential zoning then it has to meet the residential zoning setback. B-2 is the same except for the front and it requires a 25 foot front setback variance, or setback.

Attorney Altman stated, so B-2 is more restrictive actually, right Diann.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yeah.


Director Weaver stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, than…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but my other question now is are we putting him into non compliance?

Mike Smolek stated, a lot less restrictive that way but B-2 opens it up to a lot more other stuff.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know, because I don’t have a survey, I can’t answer that question.

George Cook stated, I did not want to put out the money for a survey until after I found out the zoning would be a viable option.

Director Weaver stated, if you would request a special exception you would be required to have a survey.

Dennis Sterrett asked, do we have 3 fronts here?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yeah.

Director Weaver stated, yeah.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, 25 feet, you can’t, on a 50 foot front.


Gerald Cartmell stated, now we’re in a mess.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so either way it’s going to take, from what I’m seeing it’s going to take a survey to see, because, I just cant see a 50 foot wide lot meeting a 25 foot setback.


Director Weaver stated, I think the house is 20 foot wide too.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, you don’t want to rezone and automatically put it into non-compliance.

Director Weaver stated, the house is 28 foot wide according to the property record card.

George Cook stated, I’m going to have to have a survey done.

Mike Smolek asked, so you’re 28 foot wide and the side yard is at least what, 5 foot?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, and the front setback is 25.

Director Weaver stated, it would be at least 8.

Mike Smolek stated, so you got 18 feet across this way and you need 25 feet, so.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, we could do 25 on one side and then the other side.


Gerald Cartmell stated, you got to many fronts too.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, that’s the nature of Ripley and 43 in Brookston. They’re on a side street.

Attorney Altman stated, is that making a decision?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, it gets more confusing. We don’t want to put you into automatically into non compliant. I don’t think we can.


Attorney Altman stated, well you can but it makes it so his business…


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, can’t open.


Attorney Altman stated, can’t open unless he gets a variance, whatever it amounts to.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so we can still vote on whether to rezone it or not and then it falls back to him and Diann.

Attorney Altman stated, and it would be, actually the town board makes the final decision, but yes, you’re right, it would be then as to whether he needs a variance. And it sounds very much like he probably does given the size of the home and I presume where its positioned verses the 25 foot that it needs.

Greg Bossaer stated, Dave, this gentlemen had a question.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, oh, I’m sorry. You were standing up here, did you have a question.

Attorney Altman stated, we did want you to stop, we were just discussing.


Dan Myer stated, Dan Myer again, the petition and the people that are here tonight are just against any kind of business’s going in on that side of the road while there are still plenty of businesses in Brookston to maybe look at. I don’t know what the soil thing was, the issue was with your present building.

George Cook stated, contamination.


Dan Myer stated, and that presents…

George Cook stated, a garage there at one time and we spent over $4000.00 for a phase 2 test.

Attorney Altman stated, go closer to the mic. I’m afraid you may not be picking up.

George Cook stated, we spent over $4000.00 for a phase 2 test…

Attorney Altman stated, thank you.


George Cook stated, at our existing location in the intent to buy it, but there was contamination in our soil and our attorney had recommended that we do not just walk away, run away, so it’s not an issue that we haven’t considered other properties in Brookston, we needed a property, and this is under the recommendation of Verizon to get highway frontage and with the situation that we have in Brookston, you are quite limited in that type of property with highway frontage on 43. There demographics state that they wanted us to stay in that same general area where we’re at right now, this is what we’re looking for. And I understand that, I appreciate that, just my point and April, along with everybody else, we don’t want it to start taking away residential, pretty good residential areas for businesses when there are other buildings and things going on in Brookston. That’s all I needed to say, didn’t mean to interrupt your…

Attorney Altman stated, no no you didn’t, thank you. Thank you very much.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, any other questions from the Commissioners? Let’s vote.

Attorney Altman stated, let me have the exhibits, and then Diann, I can mark them and then Diann can make copies.

George Cook stated, don’t mark them up until she makes copies please.

Attorney Altman stated, Diann, he wants these to marked after you make copies.

April Stokes again, I’m wondering…


Attorney Altman stated, we’re voting.

April Stokes again, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m just glad to listen but just so you know, we’re beyond that right now April.

April Stokes stated, okay thank you.

The results of the vote were as follows: 0 affirmative and 7 negative. This will be presented to the Town Board of Brookston with no recommendation for their action.

Attorney Altman stated, now, for everybody here, we certify and forward that onto the Town Board of Brookston. We’re never exactly sure when they consider this. So you need to check with the town board and the clerk treasurer to check and see when they will, we certify it, probably Diann will get this done tomorrow or Wednesday, okay. So that will go out by mail and you check with them, they have the final say, okay. So do check with them and does anybody have any questions about that? Okay, very good, thank you.

George Cook stated, thank you.

****

#5 Edward W. Heath; Requesting to Vacate Part of Lot 11, Streets and Alleys in Shady Haven Subdivision. The property is located East of Monon and north of the intersection of Apple Knob Drive and Boller Court. Tabled from March 10, 2008

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, anyone here representing this request?

Edward Heath stated, yes, I’m Edward W. Heath and I’m going to ask a favor of ya. I’m awful hard of hearing, so I’m not ignoring anybody if ya ask a question you have to scream at me.

One of the reasons, there’s several reasons I want to vacate that is number 1, I never intended to develop it. I’m a farmer, that’s not a very large farm and it’s in a wooded area, I do have livestock and that lot, like I said will never be developed. When they put the sewers and stuff in, they asked me about it and I told them then I was not going to develop it and in fact what were doing tonight I intended to do 10 years ago and I never done it so I just want to put it back in with the farm and not have it as a lot.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, Jerry, this is a new one on me. What do we do here?

Attorney Altman stated, oh, okay. Basically you have a ballot here, this is, in a sense very much like a subdivision in reverse and it, you have the, I presume the board has a copy of the subdivision that was originally approved that contains 11 lots in it and what he is really just asking is to vacate that part of lot 11. How much of part 11 will be part, will still be part of the subdivision.

Edward Heath stated, if you’ve got a map of it, I don’t know if you do or you don’t.

Attorney Altman stated, I do have.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, we’ve got one Ed.

Edward Heath stated, it will show lot 11 there if you look, you will see a complete line of lots along that road there. Lot 11, the part I want to do away with protrudes back to the North. And that’s the part that, it just actually jogs back in there, it wont interfere with rest of these at all, they will stay just like they are, it wont just stick back to where it does now.

Ann Heath asked, do you want me to show you where it’s at?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yeah, because I’m lost.

Ann Heath stated, this is the part that is already the subdivision, this is our lot and this is already farm land and we just want to make it continue to go around and get rid of that.

Attorney Altman asked, and your name ma’am?

Ann Heath stated, I’m Ann, I’m his wife.


Attorney Altman stated, okay.

Jim Mann Jr. asked, my question is on this aerial. Does lot 11 come down and include what looks to be a mobile and a garage?

Ann Heath stated, that’s not ours, it’s already been separated off.

Edward Heath stated, that’s already been separated off.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, okay, that is totally separate.

Edward Heath stated, yes it is.


Ann Heath stated, yes.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, along with what’s going back to the west.

Edward Heath stated, that’s correct, and all that’s been developed.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, right, I understand that.

Edward Heath stated, the only part that’s not is the part that you see…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, what I was, when I looked at the plat and then I looked at this it wasn’t clear to me that, what belonged to what, so you are saying that you want all this to be contiguous right here.

Edward Heath stated, right, right, that’s exactly right.

Ann Heath stated, it comes down here. The green line.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, yes, well along here and then down.

Ann Heath stated, no, you’re up to high. The green line is the back…


Jim Mann Jr. stated, what I’m saying you want to have contiguous is this.


Ann Heath stated, yes, yes.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, this is already subdivided.

Ann Heath stated, yes.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, yeah. Okay.


Ann Heath stated, and other people own that.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, okay.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, Ed, you realize by what we’re doing, will not change that zoning, it will be an R-2.

Ann Heath stated, its ag 1 already.

Director Weaver stated, it’s zoned R-2 from what we researched.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, it’s an R-2 from when it was subdivided.


Edward Heath stated, okay, I guess I don’t understand what you’re talking, okay, the ground round, what is it zoned at?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, R-2, right?

Director Weaver stated, A-1 to the North and to the East and then R-2 to the South and to the West.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, everything that is subdivided, all those lots are R-2, which is, lot 11 is part of that, which meant its R-2.

Edward Heath stated, but it still wouldn’t be a lot. It would fall back into the wooded area. Whatever I run on the wooded area, if I run cattle in the wooded area I could run it on that ground there to, correct.

Director Weaver stated, it would go to an acreage description, that’s what this would accomplish.

Dave Scott asked, what about this public road that goes back next to it? Does that…


Dennis Sterrett stated, that will be vacated along with it.

Dave Scott asked, vacated along with it and then there’s nothing back in there?

Edward Heath stated, that road was never developed back there anyway. It was just developed, that road was just developed, that road was only developed, there’s probably a road back there but it was only actually developed back to where that …

Dave Scott stated, lot 10.

Edward Heath stated, where that lot ends right.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

Dennis Sterrett asked, you own to the East of that too don’t you?

Edward Heath stated, I own to the East, yes, I own all the way, I own it all but that, yes.

Dennis Sterrett stated, so if the road is vacated, usually it goes half and half. You’ll get…

Edward Heath stated, right, right.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, any other questions? Anybody in the audience have any questions or comments? I suppose we can vote.


Attorney Altman stated, from a zoning point of view I see given the uniqueness of this location, this situation, see no reason why there, this couldn’t be vacated very easily. It doesn’t look like it would affect or harm anybody and the roadway, usually that’s a real bug a boo vacating it but it looks like it’s just exactly the same way. Its like you said, he gets both, he gets it all because he owns all of it around there, so, and it’s just his pleasure I think, really. And therefore I think it’s totally appropriate to do this if the board sees fit to vote for it.


Greg Bossaer stated, and all we have to do is vote on all this stuff the plat should be vacated.

Attorney Altman stated, yes, that’s right.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, what about the yes, no, 1, 2, and 3 questions.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, yes I would, yes I would.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, answer 1, 2, and 3, and pick your choice of the next 4.


Attorney Altman stated, whether it should be or shouldn’t be, ya.

Mike Smolek asked, who owns the house trailer? Is that you?

Ed Heath stated, no.

Ann Heath stated, no.

Director Weaver stated, Flores is his last name.

Edward Heath stated, right, I can’t pronounce his name.

Mike Smolek asked, so if we vacate this, its still going to stay R-2 and he was wanting to know about running cattle back there, is that going to be…

Edward Heath stated, see I run, see I got this one big strip right here, this is a wooded area and I run, or I haven’t but I got llamas and stuff and I run them back thru here and I haven’t done anything with it because it is a lot and I just wanted to put this right back into the wooded area. Put it back into that piece of property.

Attorney Altman stated, if nobody objects he may do that. He may still have a problem because of that zoning okay, but you can still vacate it and he could then maybe rezone it if it really was a problem serious enough to change it or want to change it. That’s about the only condition I can see. I agree with you. I don’t see other than he decides he doesn’t want and he owns all the ground so, he has given notice to everybody so that its appropriate to do it since nobody’s objected to that is or its appropriate to not to. I’m not telling you which way to vote. But you can support both ways.


Gerald Cartmell asked, how much is that going to change his taxes though?

Director Weaver stated, I can’t tell you that, by the way I understand they tax on the use anyway, not on the zoning, so I don’t that it will make any difference.

The results of the vote were as follows: 7 affirmative and 0 negative.

Edward Heath stated, thank you.


Attorney Altman stated, thank you.

****

#07-10 Mimar Development, LLC; Requesting Secondary approval of a Planned Unit Development to be known as Mar Casa Townhouses on 1.385 acres, Part of Lakeside Heights Subdivision 17-27-3, located North of Indiana Beach Road off of West Shafer Drive on Pony Lane.

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

Mike Scheurich stated, Mike Scheurich.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I would just like to go on record saying that I’m going to recluse myself from voting at this time.


Attorney Altman stated, that means you’re down to 6 votes.

Mike Scheurich stated, probably should have had some more people here, vacation time must be here.


Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know other than I do know we only have 6 votes.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, state your name again please.

Mike Scheurich stated, Mike Scheurich.

Director Weaver stated, you have most recent copies of the plat, it was laying on the table tonight when you got here. Jerry’s got your copy.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, Jerry’s got my copy.

Director Weaver stated, and Denny, could you maybe give a report for the committee?

Dennis Sterrett stated, about our tech meeting?

Director Weaver stated, yeah.

Dennis Sterrett stated, why don’t you give it.

Director Weaver stated, that’s no fair.

Dennis Sterrett stated, we had 3 requirements wasn’t it, the last meeting.


Mike Scheurich stated, yeah, there was the wording on the cover sheet, it was basic typographical change, then we had the designated area, limited use, however that term was limited use designated area behind the garage, and …

Director Weaver stated, unit numbers.

Mike Smolek stated, unit numbers and that’s been taken care of.


Mike Scheurich stated, unit numbers.

Dennis Sterrett stated, yeah.

Mike Smolek stated, so I’m good with it.

Attorney Altman stated, certainly looks like he’s got unit numbers on these.

Dennis Sterrett stated, yeah but they were supposed to be on the …

Director Weaver stated, architect site plan.


Dennis Sterrett stated, yeah, and you were going to put this, right, attach it to the architect.

Mike Scheurich stated, to the set of plans. Really I got in, I thought I was going to replace it, I was going to include it in there as a sheet, so, and he sent it up and changed it with, on the site plan.


Mike Smolek asked, you got 4 prints?

Director Weaver stated, yes, they have them right here.


Attorney Altman asked, as to the 3 requirements of the tech committee, have you been able to review this to see whether they now comply with the requirements that you have?

Dennis Sterrett stated, yeah, the only thing we haven’t seen is the architect’s plans, front sheet of the architect’s plans.

Director Weaver stated, is that good…

Dennis Sterrett stated, which is going to be recorded and they, in the bylaws it says that the unit numbers are on the architect plans.


Mike Scheurich stated, which those have been changed and forwarded. I just had them on 11 x 17 and he was making them and putting them into the full set of plans.


Director Weaver asked, since our committee meeting?

Mike Scheurich stated, mmm hmmm.

Director Weaver stated, I did not receive those.

Mike Scheurich stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, the only things I received were from Bob Gross.

Mike Scheurich stated, okay, I know that they’re done, you know, and that was just, that was just, that was just the numbering of the units, which he did it, but those were the ones that were being recorded with the numbers on it that really are probably since they’re part of the final plat and the site plan that they would over rule a set of architectural drawings but they are on those and have been changed.

Mike Smolek asked, they got to record the “as builts” too right?

Mike Scheurich stated, yeah.

Director Weaver stated, once this is built they will have to record ad’s.

Dennis Sterrett stated, and it hasn’t been to the drainage board yet. It’s on the review right now, so…

Mike Scheurich stated, so it’s a vote on contingency upon drainage board approval.


Director Weaver stated, if the board chooses to do so, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, as well as the architect showing the units and what else Denny? Just the unit numbers, okay.

Mike Scheurich stated, and the unit numbers are on …

Attorney Altman stated, that’s pretty simple, the unit numbers. But what I’m saying is that’s real simple to do, drainage approval is of course a contingency we can certainly put on this and I see no trouble about doing that if you decide you want to vote I see no trouble putting that on as long as the tech committee feels comfortable where we are. I hear Denny saying that in his report that’s right, right Denny?

Dennis Sterrett stated, that’s right.

Attorney Altman stated, okay.

Mike Smolek stated, yeah, Mike’s done everything we’ve asked him to do, so.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, then I’d say lets vote.

Attorney Altman stated, obviously I’ve put on your ballot the contingencies…

Mike Smolek stated, for the drainage board approval.

Mike Scheurich stated, and that meets next Monday, isn’t that right, I believe.

Dennis Sterrett stated, yep.

The results of the vote were as follows: 6 affirmative and 0 negative and 1 abstention. Contingent upon drainage approval and contingent upon architect’s plan to have the units being labeled.

Mike Scheurich stated, thank you. I have a question. When does, when does final plat/site plan get recorded? I mean, is there something that I need to do, I don’t know.

Mike Smolek stated, doesn’t the building department have to sign off on it that it’s done, no?

Director Weaver stated, not the final plat, no, I sign off on it.


Mike Scheurich stated, oh that’s the spaces on that cover sheet for that.

Attorney Altman stated, so I would suggest that you need to get rid of all your contingencies so that you, so that you can then do that.


Mike Scheurich stated, right, and I, I just, I didn’t really, I didn’t really have any idea what the process was or the timing, so, and it, and we’ve got the next week for that anyways, very good, thank you very much, appreciate it.


Mike Smolek stated, thanks Mike.

****

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, next on the agenda is business. Diann do you have anything.

Director Weaver stated, on the, only thing that I wanted to mention while we were here tonight is that we’ve been working really hard on our ordinance and…

Mike Smolek stated, yeah, we could’ve bought one right off the internet.

Director Weaver stated, we are set up to have a public open house on April 23, it will be at the fairgrounds. The way that that is going to operate is there’s going to be stations for different stations of the ordinance. That will be from 4 in the afternoon till 8 in the evening. John Heimlich asked me to make sure that all my board members were aware of this on that night, indicating, I think, that he’d like to see you there, at least for awhile.

Mike Smolek asked, can you have the girls call?

Director Weaver stated, I can, yes. I am also looking for people to help man those stations either for a 2 hour interval or 4 hour interval.

Mike Smolek asked, do we get double time?

Director Weaver stated, Mike, I thought maybe you might represent the agriculture area.

Mike Smolek stated, I’m not sure I’m still agreeing with it all.

Attorney Altman stated, hey, that’s even more important to have somebody that…


Director Weaver stated, basically what you need to do in these stations is just write down the comments that people have and maybe answer a few questions.

Greg Bossaer made a motion to adjourn.

Dave Scott seconded the motion.

Respectfully submitted,

Donald W. Ward, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Document Prepared By: __White County Area Plan, _______________________________________________

 

 

“I AFFIRM, UNDER THE PENALTIES FOR PERJURY, THAT I HAVE TAKEN REASONABLE CARE TO REDACT EACH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IN THIS DOCUMENT, UNLESS REQUIRED BY LAW.”

_____________________________________