Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, July 28, 2008, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were: Jim Mann Jr., David Rosenbarger, Charles Anderson, Donald W. Ward, Dennis Sterrett, Greg Bossaer, and David Scott. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Weaver.

 

Visitors Attending were: Faye L. Lowring, Deborah Emmeloth, Brooke K. Moore, Martin N. Culik, John Koppelmann, Randy Douglass, Anders Douglass, Mike Rupel, Steven Tolley, and Connie Neininger.

The meeting was called to order by President Charles Anderson and roll call was taken.

****

President Charles Anderson stated, replacement of the zoning ordinance and subdivision control ordinance. I don’t know if we have to go ahead and read all this but, as far as objections we got 1 objection was filed with us here tonight, right.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, on it. You want to read that into the record.


Attorney Altman stated, sure do. “Petition against White County Ordinance I.C. 5-3-1 by Boxman Landside Town, Subdivision Number 2 in Liberty Township, White County Residents as owners and residents of Boxman Lakeside Subdivision we are opposed to the proposal that would not allow us to build pole barns or garages on our lots. Since we are not allowed to build a residence on these lots they were purchased with the sole intent to build storage buildings for property owner’s use. We as property owners of Boxman Lakeside Subdivision do not support the plat to reveal the current ordinance and adopt and the adoption of the new ordinance as written. Signed by 12 persons in the subdivision I think it’s Mark Connell, if I mispronounce that please somebody straighten it out.

Member of the audience stated, Carrel.

Attorney Altman stated, Carrel, I’m sorry. Donald Petris, Darryl Jameson, Ron Edwards, David Sue Hill, Thomas M. Condage, Diann Prene, John Crain, Lorane Douglas, Avern Law, Faye Lowerig, and Dean Fleck.


President Charles Anderson asked, we have, I think a couple people here who signed as, you want to explain what your objection is to this part of the ordinance and then…you want to come forward and state your name for the record.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, okay, I’m Debbie Emmeloth, Dan Emmeloth is one of the signatures and we have out lots across from our homes that are for the sole use of pole barns and if you pass this ordinance, you’re saying we wont be able to build a pole barn unless theirs a residence on the same property which we cant build residences there because they don’t, subdivision ordinance does not allow.

President Charles Anderson asked, how large are these lots that you are talking about.

Debbie Emmeloth asked, how large are they?

Member of the audience stated, half acre probably, I’m one of the residences too.

President Charles Anderson stated, just a second here, we have one more board member coming. Okay, Don Ward’s here now too and this is one of the objections we got in writing to our new subdivision ordinance because there about a half acre lot and they were originally designed to,

Debbie Emmeloth stated, for storage, right.

President Charles Anderson stated, storage or pole barns and such.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, now most people have pole barns up, but there’s probably 5 underdeveloped lots that still are vacant and the people do have plans to put up a storage building.

President Charles Anderson asked, but you have homes right across from these lots…

Debbie Emmeloth stated, right, but they are separate…

President Charles Anderson asked, were they also designed for sewage at one time too or just for pole barns and…

Debbie Emmeloth stated, just for pole barns.

President Charles Anderson stated, pole barns only.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, and, like I say, if this passes we have a wasted piece of land that will just mow grass on forever.

President Charles Anderson stated, it will be sitting there with no purpose. You know, the ordinance we have right now can be amended tonight too in situations like that. Brooke you want to explain what can be done about that.

Brooke Moore stated, yeah, we can just, that’s on page 4.2.

President Charles Anderson asked, what’s written up in your, in your contracts on those pieces of property. Is there anything written up on the purchase agreement on those pieces of property.

Dennis Sterrett stated, there are restrictions in the covenants.

Randy Douglas stated, in the covenants.

President Charles Anderson stated, of the subdivision covenants.

Randy Douglas stated, not allowed to build any homes or any trailers, campers, it’s strictly, my understanding was so that the property owners in front own all the back lots, whoever purchases those (inaudible) with the sole purpose of basically your only thing your going to do back there would be to build a pole barn or garage to store boats or…

President Charles Anderson asked, is that, are those covenants registered or recorded?

Debbie Emmeloth stated, I’m sure they are in…

President Charles Anderson asked, wouldn’t that grandfather something like that? Or would that grandfather, well we ought to ask her…

Dave Scott stated, well, I don’t see it on there, unless its

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t know that it grandfathers it. I think there’s separate lot of record if owned parcel has…

President Charles Anderson stated, so that wouldn’t grandfather them, just being recorded in the covenants…

Brook Moore stated, no.

President Charles Anderson stated, that that was the purpose of those properties across from their original purchases on that.

Brooke Moore stated, no, and that’s undesirable to build barns and garages on out lots.

Greg Bossaer stated, if you own that back lot…

President Charles Anderson stated, theirs nothing else you can do to it.

Randy Douglas stated, it’s absolutely worthless if you pass this with no exceptions or in able to…

President Charles Anderson stated, because you can’t sell that or do anything with that because you’re restricted by your covenants in that subdivision that…

Randy Douglas stated, is that something that is specific to any one single district or that might occur anywhere.


President Charles Anderson stated, it could of, there are other areas on the lake that they have bought, purchased ground across from them for septic systems and have storage sheds over the years if I recall.

Randy Douglas stated, would those all be in the lake district though?

President Charles Anderson stated, they’d be pretty much in the, yeah as far as im…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, no necessarily but they could be.


Director Weaver stated, I don’t think so, I think, I think they…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, different scenarios.

Brooke Moore stated, ok. The only thing probably to do would be to revise this 4.3.1 and reword anything and everything that included that.

Randy Douglas, excuse me, prohibit what.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, prohibit…

Brooke Moore stated, to take out anything that would cause this hardship.

President Charles Anderson stated, in that, that particular part of the ordinance. So that you would be allowed to put one.

Brooke Moore stated, in other words, they’d get better.

Dave Scott asked, is that something that needs to be left in the ordinance for other places around the county though and maybe they need to get a variance or special or because of what their covenants say maybe they need to go thru the zoning board to get approval for this or to get a…

Brooke Moore stated, they can’t get a use variance.

Dave Scott stated, they can’t get a use variance.

Brooke Moore stated, APC’s cant grant in an area governed by an Area Plan Commission you’re not allowed to grant use variances but since this is an accessory use we would need to revise this to allow it if that was the case.

President Charles Anderson asked, so how would that read then?

Brooke Moore stated, oh I could sit here and word while you guys discussed and come up with a proposal …

Director Weaver stated, could maybe the answer be that unless it is in a platted subdivision designated as an accessory outlaw or something of that nature. Because the ones that I know of are designated across from a lot on the water. They are not all zoned…

Dave Scott stated, but what if you get on a case where there’s maybe a subdivision behind a subdivision and the people in the other subdivision don’t want the buildings. I mean does it need to be in the ordinance, I'm trying to think of every scenario I guess there’s always a …

Randy Douglas, can I ask a question? What is the reason or the intent that you want to restrict it to 10 acres, I mean, what are you trying to stop that’s presently happening in White County.

Director Weaver stated, well the 10 acres really has nothing to do with the accessory structures. It doesn’t matter what the acreage is the way its stated in the ordinance says that you can not build an accessory structure without having a primary structure first. Okay, so it has nothing to do with the 10 acres. Those are 2 different areas.

President Charles Anderson asked, what though, if you had a house and you want to buy a lot on it next to it to put a garage on it then what happens?

Director Weaver stated, well you could, you could combine the 2 lots into 1 parcel of ground.

Brooke Moore stated, you do an administrative subdivision and join them.

President Charles Anderson stated, join them together but you could do that then.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but you couldn’t if they are across the street.

Director Weaver stated, I do know that we have 3 possibly 4 subdivisions in White County that are set up for this kind of purposes either for septic or accessory buildings and they are across the road from other lots. The intent is for those lot owners.

Brooke Moore stated, if you went back to, right here in these general provisions before you even start off with accessory uses you just said with the exception of an approved subdivision with covenants specifying exactly that situation then this would all other situations leave that alone and then this would apply. If you just excluded those types of situations it’s an approved subdivision. Those outlaws were designed specifically for that.


President Charles Anderson asked, so then if you made your own subdivision and decided to cross the road you wanted a garage could you make your own covenants?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, what would that do to future subdivisions?

Brooke Moore stated, well it would have to be an approved subdivision.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, well I understand approved, we approve lot sizes and all of that but we don’t get into the covenants of it. We ask for a copy a lot of times but they still…

Brooke Moore stated, well this wouldn’t require you to govern their covenants.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, no, what I’m saying, and I understand theirs, now I’m looking at new. Someone comes in and I do a 20 lot subdivision but then in my covenants I stick in there that certain lots can be used for accessory buildings. Would this cover that? The way you’re writing it up is that if it’s in the covenants can somebody starting a new subdivision that we approve and then they write their covenants. Because we don’t get into roof pitches and all that stuff in covenants.

Brooke Moore stated, well to have an approved subdivision though they would have to number the lots and the lots would all have to be build able.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, correct.

Brooke Moore stated, these aren’t build able.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yeah they are. Aren’t your lots big enough?

President Charles Anderson stated, they’re not build able because of the covenants that they have on them.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, we’re going by size, by lot size you could, if you didn’t have your covenants a home could be built on your back lots. You’re talking about the ones behind you Fay?

Faye Lowring stated, right.

Brooke Moore stated, so what’s happened is their covenants have forced a hardship.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, correct.

Director Weaver stated, well but some of these subdivisions have gone thru us and been approved specifically for accessory uses.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, right.

Dennis Sterrett stated, and I think that one has, right.

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

Dennis Sterrett stated, maybe not.

Attorney Altman stated, that would be grandfathered if it’s gone thru us and been approved. That doesn’t mean it gets rid of every problem they might have, but if they’ve been, gone thru and been approved by subdivision by this body by, and under our previous ordinance it would be, but that doesn’t…

President Charles Anderson stated, but their lots weren’t on, those lots, were they in the subdivision itself.

Dennis Sterrett stated, 2nd, that was a 2nd subdivision wasn’t it?

Faye Lowring stated, right, right. Laura Boxman is the older one.

President Charles Anderson asked, you know when, how long ago that was done.

Faye Lowring stated, I can’t tell ya. I’d have to look at the …

Dennis Sterrett stated, I can go get it, get the copy of it if you want.

Brooke Moore stated, it seems like this entire 4.3.1 will just have to go away in order to accommodate this and those types of situations that have been approved and passed.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so then you’re not going to address accessory buildings at all.

Brooke Moore stated, no, you still talk about, you know, what to do for domesticated animals, livestock, swimming pools, storage of r.v.’s, theirs just, you’re no longer…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, now were not going to regulate that they can’t just build a pole barn on a lot.

Brooke Moore stated, that’s what would happen. Unless you can come up, unless we can come up with a way to exclude, permit that, but not something else.

Dave Scott stated, personally I don’t see anything wrong with that. If a guy owns a lot why shouldn’t he be able to put a pole barn on it if he meets the back, the setbacks and everything?

President Charles Anderson stated, the only problem would be then…

Dave Scott stated, and then when they write their covenants for their subdivision if they don’t want it in there they need to put it in their covenants.

President Charles Anderson stated, then you get into the same problem with people trying to live in the pole barn. But I don’t disagree, I think if I had a lot and I wanted a pole barn on it I would want to be able to build a pole barn on it.


Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, as long as it fit I guess is our biggest thing is, as long as it fits in the setbacks.

Brooke Moore stated, and it would have to.

Greg Bossaer stated, that’s our whole issue because the way our covenants written, if I understand it correctly, even though the sewer went thru now, we have the sewer in our area, I don’t believe that you could, the lot would be big enough to put a home on there. But since our covenants say that you cant have a residence back there, even though the lot would be now big enough because the sewer eliminated the lot size problem for all your beach goers, finger system.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I think we have to be sensitive to these types of situations because this is 1 of conceivably many that could be a problem with people make the purchase of a piece of property, covenants, what the deed reads, all those types of things, you know, I think we have to be sensitive to that and how we have this set up.

Greg Bossaer stated, I mean you could severely impact my property, well all of us sitting here because that’s what makes that appealing is the fact that you cant build a residence behind me and you do have a nice big lot back there, that several of us have pole barns that you know you could use for storage, you know boats, R.V.’s, that kind of stuff.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, well what I'm referring to is what Dave was talking about. We’re not in a position where do we know every set of covenants and restrictions that are available are in force and so for this document to be something that is meant to counter and deal with every one of those situations I don’t think that is the premises of this document. It’s a living breeding document and we’ve talked since we have been working on this that it’s bound to also have some changes and tonight is a great example of that. You know, its one of these things that we put our best foot forward and spent along time in the making to change this document, to prove it, so I don’t, I’m in a position that, I agree, that we should be sensitive to these situations that exist around this county because there are a lot of them. Whether it’s the lake or not, really there are.

President Charles Anderson asked, any other commissions have any response to that? About dropping the, what is it.

Director Weaver stated, it would be 4.3.1C, correct.

Brooke Moore stated, well, if you look at all 4.3.1 it all kind of leans towards you have to have a primary structure on the same lot. All of that reads that way. So…

President Charles Anderson stated, you’d about have to drop the whole 4.3.1.

Brooke Moore stated, which you’re not, you’re not, you’re not totally eliminating any control you have over accessory uses. You still have control over the rest of this list. It’s just those general blanket provisions that’s causing this pickup.

President Charles Anderson stated, so do…

Director Weaver stated, but if you do that, now realize that you’re taking out that clause where it says that it can’t be greater than 50% 1000 square feet or the height, where you’re referring to the height requirements.

Brooke Moore stated, we can pull; we can keep 1, 2, and 3.

President Charles Anderson asked, as far as the height? Is that what…

Brooke Moore stated, mmm hmmm, yeah, you should, you could keep 1, 2, and 3. The formatting would change.

Greg Bossaer stated, you’d still have setback area and height.

Brooke Moore stated, yep. You could still do just those, just those as general provisions.

President Charles Anderson asked, does that satisfy…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, isn’t that fair though that, that be the case?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, now that makes sense, but okay, now, now you have an accessory building on a lot by itself. This has nothing to do with…

Brooke Moore stated, 50% of what right.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, they’ve got a 3 4 acre lot across the street, they want to put up a 40 by 60 tool shed, storage building, its 50% of what, is it now an accessory building since its on a lot by itself or is it a primary structure.

Brooke Moore stated, primary structure.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, I mean, can a pole barn be a primary structure if that’s the only thing on the lot.

Brooke Moore stated, where you interrupt it as a primary structure and it’s no longer an accessory use.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, see that’s, reading that, is it become a primary structure?

Brooke Moore stated, and then everything you can say…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, it doesn’t say a house, it just says a primary. So it would be the primary building for that lot.

Dave Scott stated, a couple attorneys would have a lot of fun with that.

President Charles Anderson asked, you got a question back here?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, the way our accessory buildings they go on the same lot, what we are used to as the same lot as our residences. We call them an accessory building whether it’s the little lawn mower shed, 2 car detached garage, whatever. The way its written is that structure can’t be more than 50% of the size of your house. If you got a 2000 square foot house it cant be bigger than a 1000 square foot building, but getting back to that other, if its, is it a primary building if its on a lot by itself. No matter what it is.

Brooke Moore stated, but a detached garage is a permitted use in all of the residential and agricultural districts meaning that it’s interpreted as a primary structure, otherwise it would have an a like it does for an attached garage. It has a P therefore it's its' own use. Which means it can be a primary use.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, in their case, a building across the street would be a primary, not an accessory.

Brooke Moore stated, it's an accessory to you in its use.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but it would still be a primary…

Brooke Moore stated, but in terms of the zoning, it’s a primary structure.

President Charles Anderson stated, on that lot.

Brooke Moore stated, on that lot.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, on that lot.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, now if they build any other building…

Brooke Moore stated, if you build another shed next to your pole barn, that’s an accessory use.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, if you build another shed next to your pole barn, that becomes an accessory building.

Brooke Moore stated, and that has to be 50% and that has to …

Greg Bossaer asked, what about if you add onto your existing pole barn?

Brooke Moore stated, it has to stay within the building footprint. That’s still under your control, under your jurisdiction as to what the addition could be and it would be.

President Charles Anderson stated, so that would be considered, if they decide to build on that, that would be the primary structure. These are all lots separate from your allotted self. There other lots.

Faye Lowring stated, yes, across the street. Lot of record and a garage is a permitted use.

President Charles Anderson stated, so it’s a non issue.

Director Weaver stated, what that would do though guys, as a board, allow that height of that garage to be as tall as 35 feet.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, sure.

President Charles Anderson stated, but it’s the primary…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but it’s a primary, you let a house go 35 feet.

Director Weaver stated, that’s why I’m pointing this out, I want you to understand, I’m not saying right or wrong.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I understand that, no, and I understand that and I guess there again you hope that whoever puts up a pole barn as a primary building they build a nice decent one if it’s in a residential area.

President Charles Anderson stated, and these don’t obstruct the view of the lake or anything, they’re across the road. So, that’s a non-entity now.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t think when we worked on the schedule of uses that we realized that that’s what a permitted use would do.

President Charles Anderson asked, what do you feel about that Diann?

Director Weaver stated, I think you’re asking for trouble.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, in what way though, I mean.


Director Weaver stated, you’re going to have people getting permits for garages and living in them.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, but that can be stopped though.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, that’s our building inspectors …

Director Weaver stated, only if you can prove that they’re living in it. And that’s where the trouble is.

Attorney Altman stated, and we file suit and that is a question of fact and it’s not always easy to prove.

Director Weaver stated, it’s not easy to prove and then you’re tied up in court for a couple years. But if we do these as a permitted use and they can go as tall as 35’ we have to consider that in all of the residential zonings not just your area.

Randy Douglass stated, I guess the bottom line is as far as would I be allowed to add on to my pole barn.


Director Weaver stated, as long as it meets the requirements for a primary structure.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, as far as setbacks and as long as you are so many feet from

Director Weaver stated, and setbacks for primary structure are more restrictive than the setbacks for an accessory structure.

Randy Douglass stated, its 10 foot from the sides and I think 25 feet from back to front, according from my plat plan. Which I got room to add on another 3 base if I choose to.

President Charles Anderson stated, your kids are grown up and moving away, what are you planning on coming back home and stuff. We got a question back here.

Mike Rupel stated, the 50% I really wasn’t aware of that, so if these guys want to put up like a 30 x 40 pole barn on their property they’ve got to have 2400 square foot house to have that, is that what you’re telling me?

Brooke Moore stated, it can be no more than 50%. It could be less.

Mike Rupel stated, that’s what I mean. That’s the maximum they can put up on their own property, just a half of whatever square footage of the house is then.

President Charles Anderson stated, in the residential, how about in agricultural.

Brooke Moore stated, agricultural use isn’t different.

Mike Rupel stated, just because the lot says ag, they can do what they want basically?

Brooke Moore stated, they’re protected by, they’re protected by state statute.

Mike Rupel stated, okay but you got a residential lot, you’re down to only 50% of whatever your house size is for any accessory building.

Brooke Moore stated, that’s correct.

Dave Scott stated, and see I don’t like that either because the house I built when I lived by myself was only 960 square feet. Well I wanted to build a garage out behind it I could meet the setbacks but my garage is going to be 24x24 which is how much 675, so I can’t put a garage on the same lot with the house that I live in.

Don Ward stated, it was 2 story house?

Dave Scott stated, no, no, it was just a little. Oh yeah it was, I had a lower level in it.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but what if your garage becomes primary?

Dave Scott stated, well I don’t want to move out there.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I’m sorry Dave.

Dave Scott stated, no, but I’m just bringing an example of why, what Mike’s saying. I don’t like it and I know a lot of houses, places in Monon where people have pole barns that are at least more than 50% of their…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, why did we add that, I wasn’t on that…

Director Weaver stated, why did we add which?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, the 50%.

Director Weaver stated, that I cant really, I don’t, I don’t…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, in the past it’s always been as long as it met setbacks between the primary structure, sides, rear, everything, if your lot was big enough you could build a garage 3 times bigger than your house.

Director Weaver stated, that’s the way we’ve done it in the past, yes, and I can’t tell you what the rhyme or reason was on this.

President Charles Anderson stated, that’s another thing that can be changed right now if you want to change that right now.

Mike Rupel asked, do you have a percentage of the lot that you can’t cover up, let’s say do you need 60% of a lot left as a lot?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, it’s actually the front, side, and rear setback.

Mike Rupel stated, that’s it, okay.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so you’re limited by the size of your lot, if you’ve got a 3 acre lot in the middle of town….

President Charles Anderson asked, which number was this on the ordinance, on the 50%.

Dennis Sterrett stated, 4.3.1.

President Charles Anderson stated, still on the same one.

Brooke Moore stated, same area.

Director Weaver stated, yeah.

Brooke Moore stated, number 2 area, so the consensus was that you don’t care if an accessory building dwarfs the primary structure then we just delete 2.

Director Weaver stated, we do have a lot requirement, maximum lot coverage in the R zoning, in the residential zonings yeah. It’s 60%.

Mike Rupel asked, can I talk about 2 other things.

Dave Scott asked, does that include the accessory buildings.

Director Weaver stated, yes, yes.

Brooke Moore stated, oh yeah.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but the bigger your lot the bigger the building could be.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, number 1 what’s number 2 then.

Mike Rupel asked, what you guys consider rear setbacks on the lake is basically the roadside.

Director Weaver stated, Mike and I did talk about this today, he mentioned this to me, the accessory structure that the setback being 6’ on an L-1 zoning is not enough, and I looked back in my notes Mike, and I don’t know where it got dropped but somewhere it was supposed to be 20’ for an accessory building or a primary building in an L-1 zoning.

Dennis Sterrett stated, we did that for parking purposes.

Director Weaver stated, that’s, that’s exactly, and that was Mikes concern as well. But somehow when we did our schedule it didn’t get on the schedule that way.

Brooke Moore stated, but it’s there now.

Director Weaver stated, but yeah, I mentioned it to Brooke earlier.

Mike Rupel stated, okay, the next thing is the height, building height on the accessory building and its going to go back to 17.

Brooke Moore stated, where.

Mike Rupel stated, R-1. Accessory building, R, anything but ag.

Brooke Moore stated, well its 17’ with the exception of industrial and agricultural districts.

Mike Rupel stated, but normal people just putting up accessory buildings not in commercial use are not in 17’. I guess my problem with that is, a lot of houses anymore 7/12, 8/12, 10/12 pitch, if I was going to put up a garage that is 24’ deep I’d need an 8’ garage door for a van means that I have to have 9 foot walls. At 7/12 pitch comes out to 8’2 with a truss, 5” heel, 9’ for the wall, that’s 17’8 and I’d need to be out of the ground at least 6” back up. That’s on my 28’. That gets me up to 18’2” on a 28’ in height. If the garage is only 24’, I’m right at 17’ and a 24’ is not that big of a garage really and that 7/12 pitch, that’s your 17 foot. I guess a lot of people are forgetting the 6” out of the ground and the heel height when they go to figure the height of the building.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, but we're going with Al Gore, we’re going to put little tinier vehicles in there.

Mike Rupel stated, that’s nice.

Brooke Moore stated, what do you think, do you think that it’s an issue across the board. I would suggest changing the 17 to something. If you think that this is something that won’t be typical you can always grant a height variance.

Director Weaver stated, Mike is our assistant building inspector, so he probably has a pretty good idea of whether that will be…

Brooke Moore asked, is this across the board.

Mike Rupel stated, at least 1 or 2 a week don’t reach the 17’.

Dave Scott asked, what do you recommend?

Mike Rupel stated, I like 19. Diann’s got in there where you can’t use it for living anyway, so that’s getting rid of your making apartments and everything else. The 19, they can go with a pitch that more or less meets the pitch of the house. You can get a 28’ garage and you’re still right in there without getting a variance. A variance just wastes 6-8 weeks and cost a couple hundred bucks. Otherwise you put up a 8/12 pitch house and they got to put up a 4/12 pitch garage and that doesn’t look to nice for a new building. That’s just a suggestion.

President Charles Anderson stated, change it to 19 feet.

Brooke Moore stated, okay.

Dave Scott stated, the way it used to read before we changed it to footage, can somebody explain that to me how that worked because I talked to Dave Anderson about it before and he liked that. It had, it was relevant to the width of the building.

Director Weaver stated, you mean how to measure it, is that what you’re saying.

Dave Scott stated, it had something to do with…

Mike Rupel stated, it was the mean height.

Dave Scott stated, the mean height.

Mike Rupel stated, you take your plate height and the ridge height and the height of the building is basically halfway in between. That’s the main height of the building, it’s not the ridge, and it’s between the plate and the ridge, that’s the height of the building by the residential code. But you guys don’t go that way and we understand that.

Dave Scott asked, is that a better way to do this and then…

Mike Rupel stated, no it doesn’t matter.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

President Charles Anderson stated, the 19’ would do a lot better than the 17.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, would take in most garages.

Mike Rupel stated, yeah, you get most, yeah.

President Charles Anderson stated, and if they wanted to go higher they could get a variance then.

Mike Rupel stated, like I said, I probably see at least 1 a week, if not more, that you got to go in and tell the guy you cant have a 6/12 pitch, you got to drop it down to 4/12 or 5/12 pitch.

Brooke Moore stated, and that’s not what this ordinance was intended to do.

Mike Rupel stated, well I mean, people really hadn’t gone away from a 4/12 pitch roof in a 24 foot wide garage, I mean, back in the 50’s that was kind of standard but its not like that now.

Director Weaver stated, we have too much stuff.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, toys.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, we got those, so we really, what was the first one.

Director Weaver stated, first was to amend the rear setback requirement for the accessory building in the L-1 zoning to 20 feet.

President Charles Anderson stated, and then.

Director Weaver stated, 2nd one was to amend the maximum height for an accessory height in a residential zonings and I believe business zonings too.

President Charles Anderson stated, but we had 3 of them. The third one was the size of…

Brooke Moore stated, Diann, do you want to do 19 across the board of do you want to…

Director Weaver stated, I think the ones that are 17 now need to be raised to 19.

Brooke Moore stated, because the c-1 and l-1 was also 17.

Director Weaver stated, I think the ones that are 17, is that what the board wants. 17-19.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, that’s alright with me.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, that’s fine.

President Charles Anderson stated, how about the size of an outbuilding on …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I don’t care for the 50% size.

President Charles Anderson stated, what do you want to, what do you, you got any suggestions?

Don Ward stated, I think it should be limited somewhat but possibly do it by the percentage of the lot.

Director Weaver stated, which we’ve done in schedule B by maximum coverage of 60%.

Brooke Moore stated, it could go away and you could still have that 60% of ...

Jim Mann Jr. stated, you direct people to refer to that part of the ordinance so there’s a tie to everyone understanding the 60%.

Brooke Moore stated, we can do that.

Jim Mann Jr. asked, is that what we need to do or do we need…

Brooke Moore stated, we’ll just say that there’s no area limitation except for the lot coverage …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, and that’s where the 60% is at, is in appendix B.

Don Ward stated, if you have a 3 story house though, all floors count?

Brooke Moore stated, it’s just a footprint.

Don Ward stated, it’s just a footprint.

Mike Rupel stated, that’s not fair.

Don Ward stated, that’s not fair.

Brooke Moore stated, well it has to do with a courteous service.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, what do you mean not fair. That you still go and do 60% of the footprint unless he wants to put a bigger outbuilding there.

Don Ward stated, you don’t want to…

President Charles Anderson asked, do we have any more questions about the ordinance? You want to come forward and state your name. We have 1 behind you first. You want to come forward and state your name.

John Koppelman stated, John Koppelman, I own Scenic Mobile Home Park. Question on the, Chapter 3, Section 3.5. Currently my mobile home park is zoned A-1. It was apparently developed into a mobile home park prior to, whenever it was needed to be into it, but I’m told I’m grandfathered. Mine has a state license Mobile Home Park. My question is 3.51 and 3.52. The way I read 3.51 storage space is I’m supposed to provide, park owners supposed to provide storage area. Whereas in my park the tenants provide their own storage but it has to be certain guidelines. I was just, and the 2nd one is emergency shelter. I understand unfortunately mobile home parks seem to be the magnets of tornados but it just, it just seems, if I want to put mine into, make mine…

President Charles Anderson stated, come into compliance.

John Koppelman stated, that’s what I’m trying to say. Then I would have to provide storage spaces for all of them and then also put up a storage building, or a emergency shelter, which I don’t think its required by the state is it?

Brooke Moore stated, not yet.

John Koppelman asked, is it going to be?

Brooke Moore stated, what would you, what would you, other than just being a good neighbor, what would you be doing to need to compliance with this?

John Koppelman asked, as far as my part?

Brooke Moore stated, mmm hmmm.

John Koppelman stated, really, I mean, as far as I know I’m in compliance with most things, I’m now hooked up to Twin Lakes Regional Sewer District, which I’ve got 7 acres, so I have 20 lots, which at this point now with the sewer district, if I chose to add some lots, but to do that, I know I have to come a conforming use.

Brooke Moore stated, you’re talking about possibly expanding.

John Koppelman stated, yeah, my concern with emergency shelter is, and I know not all parks are the same, but my park, I got a combination of great people, great tenants, and I also have a combination of some that unfortunately are poster people for mobile home park people. There are sometimes that there is a trailer that gets foreclosed on, it becomes vacant, people break into it. If I have an emergency shelter it’s just going to become ransacked possibly because there’s also a park right next to mine, Vally Hue, there close, people come and hang out. I mean because the thing is, if you got emergency shelter, you couldn’t keep it locked because people would go in, use it, tear it up.

Brooke Moore stated, I believe their locked.

John Koppelman stated, well then it’s not going to do any good if they need to get in there.

Brooke Moore stated, I think, I don’t, I’m not a mobile home expert but my in-laws live in one and you cant, it’s not a free for all.

John Koppelman stated, but it’s supposed to be for emergency purposes.

Brooke Moore stated, I think in times of like adverse weather there are procedures that are then in place for when it’s unlocked, then if it was unlocked then it would be manned. It’s not like a public restroom.

John Koppelman stated, no, I, I figured that. I just, I don’t know how there going to get into it, its locked, because I mean, they can keep a key, but what if the kids get a key or somebody leaves it unlocked.

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t think residents get keys. I mean, if we wanted to, we could look into it, about how that actually shelter works, but I really do think that you’re picturing a very very worse scenario that there’s no management of this structure. The 2 that I drive by when I go, its not a free, their locked.

Dave Scott asked, do any of our mobile home parks have emergency shelters in them now?

President Charles Anderson stated, you’re talking about….

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, this is new.

President Charles Anderson stated, this would be new and everything…

Brooke Moore stated, this would be new.

President Charles Anderson stated, else would be grandfathered to where they are right now.

John Koppelman stated, but any of these existing parks want to expand then they have to come into compliance.

Brooke Moore stated, could he do it as a second phase and only provide that for the new phase.

President Charles Anderson stated, why does the park owner have to have storage for people though, I don’t understand that.

Brooke Moore stated, the 5.13.5.1 it helps to better control …

John Koppelman stated, so they don’t clutter. I’ve got storage buildings but they clutter still too. And I try to keep all my people to put stuff away, but it seems like as soon as I leave it’s a matter of …

Brooke Moore stated, unfortunately we can’t write ordinances even with the best intended landlords. They are typically for a more of a worst slumlord.

John Koppelman stated, I understand that completely.

Brooke Moore stated, so I don’t want you to take that personal.

John Koppelman stated, I don’t take that personal.

President Charles Anderson asked, the Commissioners have any thoughts on…

Brooke Moore stated, you’re shelter would have to accommodate all of your residents. Well, if you expanded, existing and new. Which could be done if you expanded, correct.

John Koppelman stated, it could be done I just don’t understand the logistics though, I mean, like I’m saying, if its an emergency shelter and people need emergency, how do they get in, because its probably not going to be probably left unlocked. Are they given keys or they...

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t know the logistics of it, but I know that it works.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, maybe the premise of this is that the idea of someone being there managing the park is going to have access to the key and will open the shelter for the residents.

Brooke Moore stated, I mean, you know, you may not be able to predict every tornado, and its not even just tornados, its storms. Anytime there’s an alert. I mean, you guys have sirens right. So if sirens are going off then the manager knows to go unlock the shelter and people that feel uncomfortable in their home can go in the shelter and when the alert or warning has passed its locked back up and...

John Koppelman stated, but the primary kind of idea is for severe weather tornados, really and truly shouldn’t the shelter be under ground.

Brooke Moore stated, they’re built into the ground, actually.

John Koppelman stated, okay, I didn’t get that from here so that’s why I…

Brooke Moore stated, well this isn’t meant to spec out what that shelter looks like, only to require and I don’t have specifications but they are built into the ground.

President Charles Anderson stated, State of Indiana doesn’t require that at all. They don’t require the storage areas either?

Brooke Moore stated, not yet.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, some towns do. One town does, Brookston does.

Director Weaver stated, require the shelter or the storage?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, require the storage where there’s 2...

President Charles Anderson stated, by the owner or the provided by the …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, the land owner, whoever owns the park, theirs 3 parks in Brookston and they’re required, and it’s not only them, its also apartment buildings, we did that several years ago just because of the trash in the back. The tenants had no place to put anything and most of them were just a small cubicle out back and they put in some small containers.

Brooke Moore stated, or there’s lockers inside or...

President Charles Anderson asked, any Commissioners have any thoughts on this at all. During the storm…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I like the idea of a emergency shelter, but you’re splitting hairs by saying that a mobile home is more important than a pretty shabby apartment complex. If we’re not going to require one why are we requiring the other one?

President Charles Anderson stated, at least the homeless got bridges to…

Don Ward stated, well apartments are safer, supposedly.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but my thought, I guess, my feeling is...

Brooke Moore stated, apartments aren’t brought in on a chassis, I mean, on a skirting.

John Koppelman stated, yeah, but state law requires that I have them strapped down. And a tornado doesn’t care what’s on.

Dave Scott stated, if the state doesn’t require it, why do we? That’s the only thing. The state doesn’t require it then I don’t know why we would.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I would wonder if we took an inventory of the counties mobile home parks, whether there would be many that actually have storage in the way that this is being defined and whether they have a special building in a case of and emergency.

Brooke Moore stated, but you don’t want to write your ordinance based on existing and only continue on existing, you want to look to the future.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, but the same thing is going to be faced by any of the rest of the owners should they wish to expand, because it…

Brooke Moore stated, assuming, but you would also want to poll them and see if they even have room to expand.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, well I guess the premises I’m speaking to is that they do have the room to expand. So, I don’t know.

Dave Scott stated, I mean, the thing, I just, this just keeps sticking in the back of my mind is that, lets assume this fellow doesn’t have a trailer park and he wants to build one. The median income in White County is different than the median income from somebody in Howard County or something. If he’s got to put in a $50,000 storm shelter for 20 trailers, he’s got to pass that onto the consumer and the people that live in those things, and I don’t, sometimes aren’t wealthy, you know, we’re requiring them now to put something on the property he’s going to have to pass on to his renters, and you know when a storm comes up, maybe those people need to go find shelter somewhere.

Brooke Moore stated, the intent of this ordinance is to, and this is buried in state statute is to promote the public health safety and general welfare of the citizens of White County, not help them, I mean…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, one side of the fence is how much do you push the landowner and the other one is how much safety do we require?

Don Ward stated, we don’t have any specifications; we don’t have any designs for what you have to do.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, the other one is provide a structure suitable. Who regulates suitable.

Dennis Sterrett stated, who regulates the mobile home.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I mean, somebody’s got to regulate that, is it our building department, is it this board that has to come up with. So we’re, where does the building inspector get a suitable, is that just, is he going to just make that call.

Brooke Moore stated, there are mobile, just like you would do with anything else that’s new, there are mobile home parks out there with suitable storm shelters, I think your splitting hairs. If you don’t want them, if you don’t want to burden this gentlemen or any future...

President Charles Anderson stated, eventually the state is going to do it for us anyways, probably.

Brooke Moore stated, I wouldn’t be surprised.

President Charles Anderson stated, but the state doesn’t require it right not.

Brooke Moore stated, hmm mmm. But you should be forward thinking not just do the minimum.

President Charles Anderson stated, any other…

Don Ward stated, where do you get the plans and specifications because that really needs to be…

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t have that answer.

Don Ward stated, if we are going to require something, we really need to say you have to comply with such and such. Otherwise a suitable storm shelter is what he thinks it is or the next guy thinks it is. We don’t really control that.

John Koppelman stated, the problem with the storm shelters you got to build it underground. A lot of areas around the county got high water levels.

President Charles Anderson stated, then you got to get into reinforced concrete and everything else trying to build a storm shelter and I don’t think we ought to be in the business or storm shelters. The commissioners have any other thoughts on this. Okay, and this was, what ordinance was this one.

Director Weaver stated, this was…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, 3.51 2.

President Charles Anderson asked, you guys want to take a hand vote on whether to leave that in or strike that from it and leave it up to the State of Indiana to, I’d say lets take a hand vote. Everybody in favor of striking it…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, which one.

President Charles Anderson stated, both of them.

Brooke Moore stated, well do one at a time.

President Charles Anderson stated, one at a time. The first one is…

Director Weaver stated, 3.5.1 is storage space.

President Charles Anderson stated, all in favor of striking that from the new ordinance, raise your right hand. So that’s a …

Attorney Altman stated, that’s in.

President Charles Anderson stated, it stays then.

Don Ward stated, we don’t have anything in there about the storage, how much storage is in there.

President Charles Anderson asked, do we want to get into that?

Don Ward stated, it needs to be really.

President Charles Anderson stated, so it does need to be in there.

Don Ward stated, yeah, I mean, if you’re going to say you need something then you need to say minimum of what you’re asking for.

President Charles Anderson stated, most sheds that they have are 8 x 10 aren’t they. Or 10 x 12. How about on your, what kind of storage do they have?

John Koppelman stated, most of mine have like 8 x 10 storage sheds. I don’t allow metal sheds because they get dented and rusted so I prefer like a, but it states on here where the storage space. It could be space behind the skirting. Does that mean you can do something …?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, you can put a trunk under it.

John Koppelman stated, getting into size you can’t make a height or anything, if you’re just going to put it under the skirting.

Brooke Moore stated, it just calls for some enclosed outside storage somewhere.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, and is that something that when somebody gets ready to go though, is that something that the …

President Charles Anderson stated, well he’s got mailboxes for all of them. That would be outside storage.

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t think, isn’t that…

President Charles Anderson stated, that’s federal law though, you’d have to use the paper box. How is it stated in other ordinances?

Brooke Moore stated, it’s pretty generic.

President Charles Anderson stated, generic.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, do they leave it up to each proposed trailer park?

Brooke Moore stated, you look at, well you leave it flexible for the developer, the owner to come forward and propose something and then that’s when you have the conversation, not in these what if scenarios.

Dave Scott stated, there shouldn’t be a minimum amount of space.

Don Ward stated, where’s our power to force something bigger. Do we have power or we just say we won’t approve it if they don’t do it.

President Charles Anderson stated, that’s your power, that’s the only power you have.

Several members are speaking at once.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but I think he’s wanting, there in town, all of those apartments having central…

Director Weaver stated, Brooke, that’s something we haven’t really done in the past, so that’s kind of new to us.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I understand what you’re saying.

Brooke Moore stated, okay.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I understand that.

Brooke Moore stated, the passing of this ordinance isn’t the only leverage you have from here forward. You will have other opportunities to review actual proposals on actual parcels of land on actual circumstances. I think the more flexible this is, the easier it will be to administer and enforce. This particular lot…

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, but somebody can count them up and say, well I’ve got a little trunk that they can shove under there and that not really be a storage area though. Then try to pass it that way.

Brooke Moore stated, well if you, so are, would you be happy just too…

President Charles Anderson stated, I already voted to strike it. These guys want…

Dave Scott asked, can we revote?

Director Weaver stated, would it help if it just stated approved…

Brooke Moore stated, if you just struck space behind the skirting and left on each home site…

President Charles Anderson stated, that could really be a disaster behind the skirting because you have to have a lift out door and the skirting and that’s going to be blowing out all the time.

Brooke Moore asked, aren’t they just locked doors.

John Koppelman stated, none of mine have storage under the skirting because they have it insulated and then the pipes heat taped to make sure the pipes don’t freeze.

President Charles Anderson stated, so we’ve already taken care of that already voted in. But as far as adding how much storage in there, you want to do that.

Several Members stated no.

Director Weaver stated, would it make you feel better if it stated something about as approved at site review or site plan review.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, the way that’s written it’s pretty open ended, you’re going to have to come in here and …

Dave Scott stated, you’re still going to have to set some down to standard.

Director Weaver stated, I think they already, I think this ordinance requires them to come in for site plan review.

Dave Scott stated, you have to have some kind of consistency when people come in. You can’t tell one person he can have 1 box and the other guy he’s got to have an 8 x 10.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, right, but I think what you’re going to get into is whether it’s a central area or you going to put 1 at each trailer.

Dave Scott stated, about the smallest I’ve ever seen probably would be about a 5 x 5. Why don’t we just say it’s got to be a minimum of 25 square feet or more?


Don Ward stated, or so many cubic feet.

Dave Scott stated, you could do cubic if you wanted to make sure they had some height to them. I don’t know what those plastic things are.

Dennis Sterrett stated, rubber maid.

Dave Scott stated, rubber maid thing. I think there should be some kind of minimum.

President Charles Anderson stated, what are you going to do with those in a tornado.

John Koppelman stated, I can’t ever remember seeing one of these come in before.

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t think rubber maid counts as an accessory building.

Dave Scott stated, I was being cute.

President Charles Anderson stated, we have another question here.

? stated, well I’m just asking, if someone is living in a mobile home, why is it the owner’s responsibility to provide storage when they know when they move into it what they are getting into it.

Director Weaver stated, this is only mobile home parks.

? stated, I know, and that’s what I’m saying. They know their moving into a mobile home park, so they know what storage they have before they move in there. So why are we requiring the owner of the facility to provide x amount of storage space.

President Charles Anderson stated, the only thing would be to help straighten out that mobile home park, but if that persons not going to provide his own storage anyway he’s going to let that shed go to pieces anyways.

? stated, and that’s the owners call correct? It just seems like questions that were putting regulations in that we really aren’t in a position to do. Is it really our position to do?

Brooke Moore stated, yes.

? stated, yes, I mean, to me I, well I know, I know we could do it…

Brooke Moore stated, the park, but…

? stated, I don’t know, just a questions.

Director Weaver stated, I think the boards already answered that question when they said they wanted to keep this.

President Charles Anderson stated, voted to keep. Does anybody else have any questions about the zoning ordinance in the audience?

Dave Scott asked, what if we say they have to have an outbuilding.

President Charles Anderson stated, then you’re laying it out on the people that can’t afford the out ability anyways probably.

Brooke Moore stated, they don’t read these by the way. They wouldn’t even know that existed.

Dave Scott stated, pardon me.

Brooke Moore stated, they wouldn’t exist.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, a renter doesn’t have any control over that.

Director Weaver stated, and we wouldn’t have any way to go after a renter that didn’t have it, the person we go after if there’s a problem with the property is the owner.

Dave Scott stated, well their…

President Charles Anderson asked, would you like to take a revote on that. Can we do that?


Attorney Altman stated, yeah you can.

President Charles Anderson stated, all in favor of a storage area being provided by the trailer park. Not in favor or it, raise your right hand.

Dave Scott stated, what.

Don Ward stated, that sounded like a trick question.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, all opposed to having the owner provide a storage area.

Dave Scott stated, opposed to having the owner provide the storage.

Don Ward stated, okay, let’s just let it go.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, now we have how many hands.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, wait a minute, wow.

President Charles Anderson stated, we want to strike this from the ordinance. All in favor of striking the…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I already voted on that.

President Charles Anderson stated, which one was it.

Attorney Altman stated, 3.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I voted on that.

Director Weaver stated, 3.51.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay, go ahead.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, okay, you’re going to revote something we voted on a few minutes ago.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, they said we could do that.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, yeah. Okay.

President Charles Anderson stated, our lawyer did anyways.


Dave Scott stated, we already did.

President Charles Anderson stated, no we didn’t because I couldn’t get a count of hands could you. All in favor of striking the proposal as far as the owner providing storage for the trailer parks raise your right hands.

Don Ward stated, alright, lets get rid of it.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, that’s the same one we voted on before.


Attorney Altman stated, 4 to 3.

President Charles Anderson stated, give it away.

Director Weaver stated, that’s delete it 4 to 3.

Brooke Moore stated, it stays.

Director Weaver stated, it removes it.

Brooke Moore stated, it removes it.

Don Ward stated, removes it.

President Charles Anderson asked, okay, any other questions about the ordinance, want to come forward and state your name.

Connie Neininger stated, Connie Neininger, I have some questions on Chapter 7, the wind energy conversion systems. I’m going to start with the easiest first. On page 7.17, section 7.12G2, under construction survey.


Director Weaver stated, Connie can you, I’m sorry, can you repeat that. Chapter 7.

Connie Neininger stated, its Chapter 7, page 7.17.

Brooke Moore stated, there should be (inaudible)

Connie Neininger stated, well there is in mine and this is printed off of the new copy you just sent.

Brooke Moore stated, no, but seriously.

Connie Neininger stated, this is the copy I picked up from Diann last week.

Brooke Moore stated, I heard a 7.127, sorry.

Connie Neininger stated, oh, I’m sorry. 7.17. At the top, section 2, preconstruction survey. It states that survey shall include photographs and a written agreement to document the condition of the public facility.

Dave Scott stated, stand by a minute. I still don’t know where we’re at.

Connie Neininger stated, page 7.17.

Don Ward stated, I don’t have that.

Dave Scott stated, there isn’t a 7.17

Brooke Moore stated, 7.17.

Attorney Altman stated, 7.7.

Dave Scott stated, oh, okay. Yeah, right here.

Connie Neininger stated, preconstruction survey.

Director Weaver stated, number 2 at the top of the page.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I’m here, I got it.

Don Ward stated, I don’t see it.

President Charles Anderson stated, you want to read it to us.

Connie Neininger stated, it’s talking about pre construction survey, identification of, it’s talking about public, the applicant shall conduct a preconstruction base line survey acceptable to the highway superintendent to determine existing road conditions for accessing residential future… damage. The survey shall include photographs and a written agreement to document the condition of the public facility. Is a video tape acceptable or must it be photographs.

President Charles Anderson stated, I would say a video tape would be fine, you can probably see it better with a video.

Several members talking at once.

President Charles Anderson stated, she wanted to know if a video would be fine instead of photographs, and I think video would probably show it better anyway as long as the quality of videotape and how far up in the air it was taken from I guess or on the ground.

Don Ward stated, what are we in, oh, wind conversion.

Attorney Altman stated, wind conversion.

Don Ward stated, why don’t we have the same damn numbers.

Dave Scott stated, 7.1, ill go back further.

Attorney Altman stated, ill put this back Diann.

Director Weaver stated, okay.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, is that going to be in place of or as an option.

Connie Neininger stated, photographs or video.

Dave Scott stated, or and or.

President Charles Anderson stated, okay. Now what’s the hard one.

Connie Neininger stated, oh, there’s still one more, easy one. Page 7.13, 7.13, and this is just clarification section F is calling for a site plan, drawn to scale, can we include the scale at a footnote at the bottom.

Director Weaver stated, I thought we did that.

Brooke Moore stated, I thought we deleted that, I deleted that.

Director Weaver stated, no, we were supposed to add it.

Connie Neininger stated, the scale is listed in 2 other places.

Brooke Moore stated, yeah, we can add the footnote.

Director Weaver stated, where was that at again.

Connie Neininger stated, actually at the bottom, on the next page, there are the scales. 7.14.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, what section number?

Connie Neininger stated, 7.13. in the page, section 7.11 .1 F.

Brooke Moore stated, in the scale she’s referring to where the footnote appears on the next page at the bottom, so that’s where we will insert.

Connie Neininger stated, and then the last thing I noticed on that, we have a question on page 7.5 regarding equipment type. Section 7.6.1A all turbines shall be constructed with new commercially available equipment. In discussions, I know we put this in here because of the commercial web, but as technologies change and our modified there is a chance to have high quality used equipment, so the question is can their be something used equipment if its certified to meet certain standards.

Brooke Moore asked, do those standards exist? There’s standards for used.

President Charles Anderson stated, you going backwards on the amount of kilo watt hours or you going forward or produce more or produce less.

Connie Neininger stated, standards do exist. There’s standards for used.

Martin Chulik stated, like any other piece of equipment there’s going to be engineering requirements.

President Charles Anderson asked, but are you going backwards on the amount of kilowatt hours that comes out of it or you going forward. Does it produce less cause it.

Martin Chulik stated, they would be certified as far as the production output.

President Charles Anderson stated, it would be the same production output that you get from the newer equipment or it would be less.

Martin Chulik stated, the other thing is the used turbine’s in aftermarket sub sector within that industry is one of the fastest growing. You know, sub sectors within the industry right now, it’s very new right now, but given that ours is 30 years 40 years out.

President Charles Anderson asked, why are they becoming used though. They don’t work in those areas or that company went broke or…

Martin Chulik stated, I think it’s just a, kind of a natural occurrence for any industry that’s maturing beyond its kind of initial use ages.

Brooke Moore stated, so if we added all turbines shall be constructed of new or used equipment which has been certified to have the same production output. Is that the right thinking?

Members of the board stated, no.

Connie Neininger stated, it’s not certified to have the output. It’s certified to be a …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, you’re talking more, not, not, you’re not taking one of yours down and putting a used one in. It would be like buying 20 used turbines and putting at new sites. Is that what you’re talking about?

President Charles Anderson asked, what, did they run out of wind there. Is that their…

Brooke Moore stated, well this doesn’t have anything to do with location.

Martin Chulik stated, it says used equipment. Does that address that?

Connie Neininger stated, yeah, so it’s really. I mean, do we need both of those statements in there or just one.

Martin Chulik stated, why don’t you just take out the new on A. All improvements shall be constructed of commercially available equipment and then you’ve got the C down below.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so you’re just striking the new.

Martin Chulik stated, it looks like C requires a variance. Is that true.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yep.

Connie Neininger stated, they would be new unless a variance is required to put in…

Don Ward stated, I don’t know where they are, mine’s all mixed up for some reason.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, and I don’t….

Jim Mann Jr. stated, this is referring to something that is still in a testing mode under C.

Connie Neininger stated, well but it still says used, experimental or prototype. It doesn’t say and …

Martin Chulik stated, the prototype is still in testing not the used.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, but there’s a strong inference that it’s still in testing, maybe they took a used one and readapted it for some other purpose.

Connie Neininger stated, but it says used or prototype, so.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, is there anything you can put in here just that it meets commercial standards.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, but what is commercial standards.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, Mark, is there a complete set, there’s a complete set of standards for…

Martin Chulik stated, 7.602, yeah, that’s basically what 602 says is conform to all applicable industry standards as well as all of the state and federal regulations. And frankly the 602 is, well, you know, what we go by and have no problem with it.

Brooke Moore stated, if we struck the word new from A and used from C.

Martin Chulik stated, that’d be good.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, to where you still want experimental and prototypes to go thru BZA.

Brooke Moore stated, the level of review. We can. Well, BZA can ask for help in reviewing a prototype. The actual BZA members don’t have to decide, they can seek assistance.

Martin Chulik stated, if a manufacturer bought a new piece of equipment prototype, is the BZA going to have a say in that. If the wind industry wants to bring in a prototype for test equipment, why the differentiation.

Dave Scott stated, what if it, what if it, I don’t know, I’m just thinking, what if it looks different. Is it something the county wants to look at if you have it sticking up?

Member of the audience stated, well it’s different than what’s approved. So you want, the only recourse they have is to require a variance so then they can throw in another level of review.

Connie Neininger stated, but if it’s a new company that comes up and wants to start a new wind farm in ten buck to and they are going to use prototype equipment. They have to come and ask for a special use variance.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, unless they meet industry standards.

Brooke Moore stated, unless the prototype meets industry standards and then their in a catch all.

Dave Scott stated, all the test towers have to come in for approval and stuff like that.

Member of the audience stated, it has to meet industry standards in 6.1c, so…

Director Weaver stated, that’s why they are saying that it needs to have a variance.

Member of the audience stated, but those are 2 different things though.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but the 2 offset each other.

Member of the audience stated, you’re saying if it meets industry standards they don’t have to, but yet according to this paragraph they do have to no matter what if it’s a prototype.

Director Weaver asked, can it be experimental or prototype equipment that does not meet industry standards? Maybe approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, who makes the industry standards for Winds…


President Charles Anderson stated, the industry.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I understand that.

Connie Neininger stated, they are listed down there. 6.2.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, doesn’t it seem appropriate that if something goes outside the standards that some way some how someone should have an opportunity to make sure it’s acceptable.

Connie Neininger stated, yes, if it’s outside standards, yes, and so that’s why we need to change the wording on 6.1.

President Charles Anderson stated, and I think she’s doing that right now.

Brooke Moore stated, so experimental or prototype equipment still in testing which does not fully comply with applicable industry standards may be approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Variance.

President Charles Anderson asked, does that satisfy you Connie on that. How about the industry. Does that…

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I understand that to the fact of who on Diann’s office or where’s these standards going to be where somebody can look at and see…

President Charles Anderson stated, the company that’s doing that is, the company that’s in business to do that is in business to make money so there not going to put something …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, and I understand that.

Brooke Moore stated, you guys can seek the help of an outside consultant or anything.

Connie Neininger stated, and I do, we are putting these restrictions in here for an industry that is new to our area that we have not dealt with before, but on the other hand and I’ve said this in our meetings what other industry have we ever put this many restrictions on. If a company that’s already here puts a new piece of equipment inside that facility, we do not set standards the way we have for this.

Director Weaver stated, but the reply that you have gotten on that same statement is that they don’t stand 400 feet in the air above us either.

Brooke Moore stated, and they are not inside a building.

Connie Neininger stated, but again, its an industry that’s different and were setting different standards.

Director Weaver stated, for safety reasons.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I think what we’ve come up with here is reasonable and I think that John agrees that’s its reasonable.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, were not wanting to be different, were just wanting to make sure because it’s so visual…

Dave Scott stated, and not necessarily for these guys, I mean you got to set standards for all possible….

Several members are speaking at once.

President Charles Anderson stated, besides that, a lot of the ground that’s being tied up is real good agricultural ground too and what’s happening to corn prices and everything right now to, even though…

Several members are speaking at once again.

President Charles Anderson stated, we’ve got one more question.

Paul Cardwell stated, I’m Paul Cardwell, I’m the hospital CEO. I have a question about 6.1 and 6.2. The airport hazard overlay district. The section specifically is 6.0.3 Use Restrictions. The following use restrictions shall apply to that portion of the approach zone within a horizontal radius of 10,000 feet from the airport reference point as identified by the airport. If we look thru these prohibited uses we can see some that obviously that obviously would be a concern since we are within that 2 mile radius, that is nursing home, assisted living facility, retirement center, daycare center, which we could certainly have there, hospital which is already there, the clinic, school, university or college, we have the new … go ahead.

Director Weaver stated, hang on, this was supposed to be corrected.

Brooke Moore stated, well,…

Director Weaver stated, what happened.

Brooke Moore stated, no, it is. The following types of uses shall be discouraged. That used to read prohibited and we softened it to discourage. Which we need to do with the title and then the 10,000 feet stays and you just monitor how many of these uses go in and around that area.

Paul Cardwell stated, we just as one of the largest economic drivers certainly significantly more than the airport at about 50 million annual revenue and 300 plus employees don’t want to come back and ask for any airport person, especially if there lake people permission for nursing homes, assisted living, and retirements, any add on clinics. We’re definitely going to expand, we have 30 plus acres, we have a plan, a master plan pretty much handle it for all that property. I think we will do good things out there. We don’t want to be restricted by something that, I don’t know, I don’t know if it’s necessary. I’m just saying that we’d hope this was out and it’s not out.

Brooke Moore stated, I think my softening this language to discourage…

Director Weaver stated, I thought the footage was changed too, I thought it was supposed to be 500 feet.

Brooke Moore stated, well it was a suggestion. Would 500 feet be away from the hospital?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah.

Brooke Moore stated, it doesn’t, I mean…

Director Weaver stated, 500 is not far but you got the city limits right off their property as well.

Paul Cardwell stated, well the way it reads, it says prohibited uses and then right under it says discouraged and …

Brooke Moore stated, yeah, the title didn’t get changed.

Paul Cardwell stated, and the titles just…

Brooke Moore stated, the title should be discouraged but now the question is do we make the horizontal, I guess with the, do you have a marker up here.

Jim Mann Jr. asked, Brooke is the 10,000 kind of a industry standard?

Brooke Moore stated, there’s kind of this cone if you will or their take off and landing and that industry standard is the 10,000. You’re not doing anything really but weakening the overlay to shorten that because planes can’t take off in a shorter distance or gain altitude faster just because that says 500 or 5000 so the idea was instead of outright prohibiting them because we do not want to adversely affect the hospital or I think any number of those uses is within that 10,000 foot radius.

Attorney Altman stated, how about every one of them.

Dave Scott stated, can, can you do it, we only have 1 runway, is that correct, that runs North and South, can you make that 10,000 laterally would that make it help if you still cover landing and taking off.

Brooke Moore stated, but if this is your runway, you’re still looking at like a football field if you will. And this part, it goes up, it forms like a bowl, so, this would be the bowl, this is the bowl…


Dave Scott stated, so that’s not a 10,000 foot radius then.

Brooke Moore stated, you’re right.

Don Ward stated, that’s not a circle.

Brooke Moore stated, that’s not a radius right.

Dave Scott stated, no.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, so did you mean to, did you intend to, is radius the intentional word?

Brooke Moore stated, this was the industry standard.

Dave Scott stated, if you had runways coming from all directs I could see how you’d use a radius but why tie, why restrict a 10,000 foot radius when you only need.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, is that 10,000 feet for Indianapolis International Airport also or a county…

Brooke Moore stated, I don’t know, I don’t know about Indianapolis.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, by classification of…

Brooke Moore stated, I’ve never dealt with any of the international airports.

Don Ward asked, is that circle or an ellipse? You have an ellipse drawn there. You talking about a circle or?

Brooke Moore stated, when we talked to the airport they said, you know, here something can’t be 500, that’s the FAA.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, right.

Paul Cardwell stated, on 6.02 they had, a least a little bit, the approach zone, the transition zone, the horizontal zone, and the conical zone. But has it been identified by the airport.

Brooke Moore stated, they know what those zones are. Those are regulated by the FAA. They are approach zones.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, I understand, so that has to be the minimum…

Dave Scott asked, so why even have it in here then?

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, so that, that’s the minimum period. We’re asking for more.

Brooke Moore stated, what you’re saying is, these uses that attract a lot of people should be looked at just for, not prohibit, just discourage…

Connie Neininger stated, how are you going to discourage and…

Brooke Moore stated, when they come in with a proposal and you want to put that many more people next to this use that already has this many people. Maybe it would be more appropriate in another part of the county.

President Charles Anderson stated, maybe the airport would be more appropriate.

Dave Scott stated, well, I don’t think…

President Charles Anderson stated, I think that’s too restrictive myself.

Dave Scott stated, we don’t want people to come in and have to …

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, is it already, without that being in there, we have to follow FAA guidelines.

Attorney Altman stated, no, not our ordinance. Our ordinance doesn’t have to reflect that.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, we can go shorter? We can okay a house at the end of the runway?

Brooke Moore stated, no.

Attorney Altman stated, the answer is we don’t have to regulate that.

Brooke Moore stated, no, you could strike 6.0 the entire airport hazard overlay and just go with whatever the airport has, which you will never, this doesn’t, this is just dealing with uses, where you can put things. So typically you don’t put…


President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, but we're not having 747’s flying into our airport either. Midway airport landed in 1 square mile and their around the outside edge, they got to be hospitals within a 2 mile radius.

Brooke Moore stated, I mean, the first, the first instinct is to shorten the radius, but you really haven’t done anything so it’s whether or not …

President Charles Anderson stated, but you want 2 miles or 10,000 feet, which is approximately 2 miles…

Dennis Sterrett stated, you only have that shown as a diameter, not a radius.

Brooke Moore stated, I can tell you the City of Columbus has an airport hazard overlay and they have closed the University of IUPUC right on the airports property, so…

President Charles Anderson stated, I don’t think we ought to be…

Dave Scott stated, I think it either ought to be, well I guess you can, I can’t see doing a 10,000 foot radius, I can see you doing what the airport is now, but I don’t know that that needs to be in the ordinance or does it?


Attorney Altman stated, does it have to be in the zoning ordinance.

Brooke Moore stated, do you want to keep uses with with large groups of people away from the airport.

President Charles Anderson stated, well the whole Monticello is dang near, not the whole Monticello, but the south end of Monticello is within that 10,000.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, the High School is.

Paul Cardwell stated, just barely.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, but it’s real close to the flight path straight on.

Several Members speaking at once.

Brooke Moore stated, you can have developments, this isn’t prohibiting any developments on any land, you just have to then look at heights.

Director Weaver stated, Brooke, maybe what we should do is, we had a discussion once before about omitting this overlay district at this time and adding it at a later date.

Brooke Moore stated, that sounds good.

Director Weaver stated, maybe that’s what were…


Dave Scott stated, no I think it ought to be addressed while everybody’s sitting here. I mean, at a later date, what do you mean?

Director Weaver stated, well we can get a committee together to decide…

President Charles Anderson stated, to decide if theirs a problem when larger planes come into the area, then their might be a problem, but right now.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, the current ordinance doesn’t address this, I ...

Director Weaver stated, not in our zoning ordinance. There is a ordinance a high structures ordinance that does regulate it.

Dave Scott stated, I can see wanting to regulate height in that flight patter there that you’ve drawn, that makes good sense but a radius doesn’t make sense to me.

Brooke Moore stated, this is proposing to also limit the types of uses that can go in that whole.

Dave Scott stated, and that kind of makes sense, in that picture up there but when you draw, when you say radius…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I don’t think we want to get into limiting uses because its been said and its so true that were going either south in this city, were going to go west a little bit and we might possibly be going north, you just don’t know. We’re certainly limiting our self though if we put in regulations that are going to stifle growth and we certainly don’t want to do that.

Paul Cardwell stated, and we need that land that’s on the east side of ours as well, maybe not the hospital but certainly medical office, complexes, assisted living, all that where the power line runs directly down that. You know that will all be developed and problematically be affiliated or some, whether that be hotel or restaurant

Brooke Moore stated, I would recommend striking it for now until there is a problem.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, well if we do that, its not that were going to leave it, I think we do it with the premise that we’re going to study what we can do and take into consideration the concerns that have been raised.


Dave Scott asked, what if somebody wants to put 10 stories right at the end of that.

Director Weaver stated, they can’t because the high structure ordinance.

Dave Scott stated, what’s that?

Director Weaver stated, the high structure ordinance. We have a high structure ordinance. So if we scratch this now we aren’t abandoning the airport we have something in place.

Brooke Moore stated, and then you can simply invent this chapter and pull it back in later.

Paul Cardwell stated, the FAA has complete control over airspace. County doesn’t have control over land and air space so we know where we can build and where we can’t.

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, so id say lets.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, so what do we do, do we need a, take action.

Attorney Altman stated, yeah, just…

Jim Mann Jr. stated, motion to remove or…

Attorney Altman stated, yeah.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, or what do we need to do Charlie?

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, say we just vote on it. Whether we want to leave that in the ordinance or not. All in favor of taking that out raise your right hand. Any other questions about the ordinance.

Attorney Altman stated, we did have a question on the high structures act if you remember we had a request to come in and build structures in that area and the specific one I’d like to read, refresh your memory is where they put in the winery. They were going to put in a apartment house and they were denied the right to do that because of the high structures act and its restrictions there. And I can’t think of another right now on the BZA where that was allowed or denied but it has come before us at least 2 or 3 times where we’ve ruled on that and I think we’ve stopped most of it there so that yes it does have some…

Faye Lowring stated, so I know what to tell Dean when I go home.

President Charles Anderson stated, he can build a pole barn on there if he wants to, or a structure.

Faye Lowring audience stated, he has a pole barn but theirs other property owners that do not have.


President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, that would become the primary residence, or not residence, primary structure so that they...

Faye Lowring stated, so we can, the rest of them can if they want.

President Charles Anderson stated, after if passes we will come back and say that you can’t.

Faye Lowring stated, I don’t want that, do you want him up here too?

Attorney Altman stated, Faye, it hasn’t been voted on yet.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, yeah, but that’s the direction its going.

Attorney Altman stated, yeah, that’s the, it is...

President Charles Anderson stated, it goes thru us then it’s got to go thru the county.


Director Weaver stated, then it goes on to the County Commissioners and the Town.

President Charles Anderson stated, town boards, they all have to adopt it too. This isn’t the final say right here, this is just us voting on it to get it started.

Fay Lowring asked, and the vote will be when.

Director Weaver stated, tonight.

President Charles Anderson stated, tonight, right now.

Fay Lowring stated, tonight, okay. For this…

President Charles Anderson stated, if there’s no other questions.

Fay Lowring stated, for this body.

President Charles Anderson stated, for this body.

Fay Lowring stated, and then Commissioners next step and...

Jim Mann Jr. stated, will be Monday.

Fay Lowring stated, and then the town boards of the specific city.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, yeah.

President Charles Anderson stated, another question, state your name and, or do you want to ask another question.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, yes, you want me to come up here?

President Charles Anderson stated, sure.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, if you already have a pole barn but you have enough land to put up another one is that an accessory building?

President Charles Anderson stated, that would be a secondary then you’d have to…

Debbie Emmeloth asked, can you do that?

President Charles Anderson stated, yeah, you can’t tell…

Brooke Moore stated, you can’t have 2 primary structures on any lot of record.

Debbie Emmeloth stated, but it would be an accessory building. A smaller pole barn, okay, thank you.

Dave Scott stated, on that lot, even though it’s …

Brooke Moore stated, on that lot as long as it doesn’t exceed the maximum lot coverage.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, which is…

Members of the board stated, 60%

Brooke Moore stated, depends on the district.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, well in their district it…

Randy Douglass stated, well, for clarification, Randy Douglass, if you’ve got an existing barn but you want to add on to the barn, maybe double the size of it.

President Charles Anderson stated, as long as it fits.

Brooke Moore stated, as long as it fits in the envelope and it’s not too high.

Randy Douglass stated, and meets the setbacks. Triple my size and its still within setbacks.

President Charles Anderson stated, if theirs no other questions I’d say lets go ahead and vote.

Director Weaver stated, no, there is, we’re not done. We’re not done. Brooke and I both have something to bring up. Um, height on accessory buildings in RR A1 and A2. We’ve had a lot of discussion on this and currently in Appendix B it says 50 feet but it says that the setbacks are 6 foot from the side and 6 foot from the rear and I believe a 60 foot front. Since we’ve done this and made the changes to this ordinance we’ve had some discussions and actually Dave Scott had a recommendation of not having a requirement on the height of the farm buildings but for every foot of height they are they had to have the same footage of setback for your side and rear property lines.

Brooke Moore stated, so, so right now, appendix b says that a accessory structure, the maximum height it can be, and were only talking about the A1 A2 RR so I guess the more rural of all the districts. So the maximum of the accessory structure can be the maximum height currently is proposed at 50 and what we’ve discussed and their has been discussed that we’ve talked over to remove that maximum height limit and say that for every foot high it has to be so far back form the established setback. So depending on how high the building was….


Dave Scott stated, if you’ve got a 50 foot building you’d have to be 50 foot off the property line.

Brooke Moore stated, unless the minimum is 60 then its 60.


Dennis Sterrett stated, but you said off the setback, you mean off the property line.

President Charles Anderson stated, off of all the setbacks.

Director Weaver stated, the sides and rear. I think the front we probably keep as it is.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, wouldn’t grain bins fall under that.


Director Weaver stated, yes. If you’ve got a 75’ grain bin you want to put up then you’ve got to be 75 feet back from your side property line and your rear property line.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger asked, how far from the next grain bin that’s that height?

Director Weaver stated, we don’t regulate that, that’s building department that regulates distance between buildings.

Dave Scott stated, I personally think.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, we’re only regulating from the property line.

Director Weaver stated, from the property lines, that’s right.

Dave Scott stated, I personally think that ought to include grain lakes and everything.


Director Weaver stated, I think lakes are exempt from height requirements.

Dave Scott asked, are they exempt from setbacks?

President Charles Anderson stated, but anything that’s in there right now would be grandfathered.

Director Weaver stated, right.

Dave Scott asked, can I, san somebody put a grain lake, 100 foot grain lake 10 feet off the property line. If I was a neighbor, I might not like that. If I was a neighbor I might not like that.

Brooke Moore stated, what’s that.

Director Weaver stated, the grain lake going right on the property line.

Brooke Moore stated, well it couldn’t go right on the property line.

Dave Scott stated, well, whatever the setback is, what is the setback for a grain lake?

Brooke Moore stated, say there is a 60’ setback, the building, even if the building was only 50’ it would still have to be setback 60, but if it was 75 then you would have to go back 15 more feet of setback. It will never be less than the minimum setback.

Dave Scott stated, right.

Brooke Moore stated, and if they want to go high then they have to start stepping it back.

Dave Scott stated, from the property line though. As long as they meet the minimum.

Director Weaver stated, yes. They can’t go closer than the minimum.

President Charles Anderson asked, do I have any discussion from the Commissioners on this?

Don Ward stated, no, looks good to me.

President Charles Anderson stated, vote on changing that.

Brooke Moore asked, did you print that email off Diann?

President Charles Anderson stated, all in favor of changing that raise your right hand. Did we have an observation there?

Brooke Moore stated, there was some discussion of; there was a lot of conversation about condominiums actually. In all of the steering committee meetings and there was a question about whether or not you could require condominiums to go thru the PUD process and just for a refresher the PUD process is kind, is both site development plan review and rezoning packaged as one. So I don’t believe you can force people to go thru a rezoning. Remember condominium is a real estate term more than a land use or zoning term. So rather than force them the idea to make them go thru the PUD process is so that you would know about that and you could review that. I don’t think you can force them to go thru the PUD process but you can require that they be, that they go thru the site development plan review and that is prescribed by Indiana code if you want to use that and all we would simply have to do is add condominiums to the list of developments in section 12, well its on page 12.29 12.142 at the very top of that page A site development plan review shall be required for any and then theirs a long list we would just add condominiums to that list so you would know about them, you could review them, and you’re not overstepping your bounds by forcing them to do a rezoning which is just spot zoning anyway and that’s not good planning practice.

Don Ward stated, I don’t think we’d want to force them into a PUD anyway. Makes a lot of work for us.

Brooke Moore stated, no, but you did want to know about them and this is one way to know about that.

President Charles Anderson asked, board have any other discussion about that?

Jim Mann Jr. stated, I think it makes sense.

President Charles Anderson asked, you want to go ahead and change it then? All in favor of changing it raise you right hand. Now have I got any other hands out there? Any questions here?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t have any more.

President Charles Anderson asked, Brooke have any more questions?

Brooke Moore stated, I’m good.

President Charles Anderson stated, I’d say lets go ahead and vote. On the amendments part of this just put as written down by our director…

Director Weaver stated, I wrote them down, I wrote them down.

Attorney Altman stated, and reflected in the minutes.

President Charles Anderson stated, and reflected in the minutes. So you want to approve it with the following amendments.

Attorney Altman stated, mmm hmmm, if you approved them.

Greg Bossaer, it was this day?

Attorney Altman stated, the 28th.

Greg Bossaer stated, 3 years ago that we started this.

Director Weaver asked, are you serious?

Greg Bossaer stated, it was right after the fair.

Attorney Altman stated, well, you’re not done yet.

President Charles Anderson stated, we’ve got the proposed fee schedules coming before us too.

Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting on this matter. We have 2 votes vote that we approve the amendments and 1 indicates as recorded by director and indicated by the minutes tonight. We have 2 votes indicate approved and approved subject to amendments and then again as reflected by the or written by the director and reflected by the minutes and we have 3 votes vote that the approval should be granted with the following amendments, 3 votes are that and as based upon the minutes of the meeting, based on this, it is obvious to me Mr. Chairman that this was approved subject to the amendments as reflected by the record and written down by our Director.


President Charles Anderson stated, and now we have to discuss the fee schedule.

Attorney Altman stated, by 7 to 0 vote.

Director Weaver stated, all we have to do is look over this fee schedule and again agree if this is what we want to forward on as a recommendation to the County Commissioners. They are the ones who will actually take a vote on this and approve this.

Dennis Sterrett asked, which one we looking at for…


Director Weaver stated, the proposed.

Jim Mann Jr. stated, legal size.

Dennis Sterrett stated, oh, ok.

Director Weaver stated, we had a committee get together and this is what we have reviewed.

Connie Neininger asked, can we see a copy of it?

Director Weaver stated, sure, I have extra copies here.

President Charles Anderson stated, but we don’t vote on this, Commissioners…

Director Weaver stated, the Commissioners will actually do the voting on this, yes.

President Charles Anderson stated, all this is, is a proposal we send to them so…Is there any discussion from the Board on the proposal? Except Don would want to raise up the Planned Unit Development.

Director Weaver stated, Don was in on the discussion part of this, so hopefully…

Greg Bossaer stated, I know this is probably off subject, but are we going to actually get our committees formally put together for the PUD and all these things.

Brooke Moore stated, well, you would want to use your technical committee um, as, I don’t think you want a separate PUD committee.

Greg Bossaer stated, no but we don’t…

Director Weaver asked, you mean to review this?

Greg Bossaer stated, no, we don’t, we don’t have a formally tech committee.

Vice President Dave Rosenbarger stated, we do case by case don’t we?

Director Weaver stated, we will with this new ordinance. We will have a formal tech committee and it will have to be put in place, yes.

Greg Bossaer stated, I know we’ve used stuff, but where they’re actually outlined, their responsibilities …


Director Weaver stated, it is in this new ordinance.

President Charles Anderson asked, is there any other discussion about these at all? Anybody in the audience have any questions, I suppose they can. You have any questions you want to state your name for the record again.

Connie Neininger stated, Connie Neininger, regarding the WECS permits. It’s stating $500.00 for a commercial WECS, is that per turbine, per phase, per project…


Director Weaver stated, per turbine.

Brooke Moore stated, are you sure it’s not per project, because it doesn’t really state.

Director Weaver stated, that’s not what we discussed in our committee meeting.


Connie Neininger stated, because the ordinance is talking about aggregated projects that each phase would be considered an aggregate project.


Director Weaver stated, but the permits don’t have to be done that way.

Brooke Moore stated, but I guess it doesn’t really make it clear.

Director Weaver stated, Jim am I correct? The cost…


Brooke Moore stated, the aggregate cost is for reviewing the proposal, what this is, correct me if I’m wrong is for the actual permit to…

Director Weaver stated, this is the building.

Brooke Moore stated, this is 2 different things.

Director Weaver stated, Jim, am I correct on when we discussed the fees on the WECS that that was going to be per tower.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, yes ma’am, that’s what we discussed.


President Charles Anderson stated, this goes on, we don’t vote on, this goes on to the Commissioners.

Director Weaver stated, I was thinking even more than that.

Greg Bossaer stated, I thought Benton was more than that, 11.


Connie Neininger stated, they ended up being 17,050.

Greg Bossaer stated, per tower.


Connie Neininger stated, per tower because they actually had a per megawatt fee that they had.


Jim Mann Jr. stated, but the reason they did their fees, as I understand is it’s different. The reason for the amount was done for a different purpose.

Connie Neininger stated, I just wanted to verify.

Director Weaver stated, I can clarify that on here before we present that to the Commissioners.

President Charles Anderson asked, you got another question?

Steve Tolley stated, Steve Tolley, my question was, who actually cracks these violations? I noticed you have violation of $5.00 no more than $300.00 for each violation; each day after that violation exists shall constitute a separate violation...

Director Weaver stated, violations are handled thru my office.

Steve Tolley stated, your office actually …


Attorney Altman stated, that’s the way it’s been, actually since 72. Just that sort of thing, that language, and the fine, the dollar spread is just exactly what was in the 72 ordinance and the day, each one being, each day being a violation is the same also.


Steve Tolley stated, okay, thank you.

President Charles Anderson asked, any other business we need to discuss?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t think so, I think that wraps it up.

President Charles Anderson stated, someone want to move to adjourn.

****

Don Ward made a motion to adjourn.

Jim Mann Jr. 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

 

 

 

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.”

 

_____________________________________