Get Adobe Flash player

 

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, July 13, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were Gary Barbour, Ray Butz, Carol Stradling, Jerry Thompson and Jeff Saylor. Also attending were Attorney Jerry Altman and Director Diann Weaver.

Visitors attending were: Donald D. Coonse, James Plunkett, Diane Atkins, Carl Robinson, Charles Leslie, Jeff & Carol Hardebeck, Aaron Malchow, Steve Qualley, Don Hoefelmeyer and Dan Sublette.

The meeting was called to order by President Jerry Thompson and roll call was taken. No minutes were available to be approved. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.

****

#1116 Aaron Malchow; Requesting a 50 square feet space variance and a 20’ front setback variance from South Street and a 17 ½’ rear setback variance to build a duplex on lot #30 in Charles A. & Sarah H. Holladay’s 2nd Addition. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 601 East Street.

President Thompson asked, do we have anyone here representing the variance this evening?

Aaron Malchow was present to represent this request.

President Thompson asked, do you have any additional information to present to the Board tonight, sir?

Aaron Malchow stated, no.

President Thompson asked, is it pretty much the way that she has described it?

Aaron Malchow stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, any correspondence on this?


Director Weaver asked, Jerry, is there a note in there from Bob Braaksma? I know that he called, I don’t know what he discussed.

Attorney Altman stated, there is a note.

Director Weaver stated, he just called asking us what it was for and why he was requesting a variance but, otherwise I don’t believe that we have had any calls on this. I did have one thing that I had questioned after I looked at this survey the other day. For duplexes you are require to have 4 on premise parking places, do you have room to do that with this request?

Aaron Malchow stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, you will have to do that, you understand that’s not part of your variance?

Aaron Malchow stated, right.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone here opposed to the variance this evening?

Carl Robinson stated, I’m opposed to it because, it’s too close to the street. I live right behind that at 602 Terry Ho Drive.

President Thompson stated, we have a plat here, just so we understand where you are coming from.

Carl Robinson stated, my house is the one that is described right behind it.

Carol Stradling stated, it would be number 15.

Attorney Altman stated, would you mind coming up and locate it on this map.

Carl Robinson stated, his faces South Street and mine faces Terry Ho, the corner of South and Terry Ho.

Attorney Altman stated, would you mind showing the Board on the plat there exactly where your house is so they can see it?

Carl Robinson stated, mine sits back here, and my complaint is, this is the alleyway here and this is my house here. I don’t care how far you stay off of this street, the subdivision requirements that, right behind that this is the house here, my complaint is, he is wanting to go within 12’ of South Street which we have a school that is right across the street from that. He is going to be right up across from there and he is going to block the view from my street plus block the view from the other street. Kids go across there constantly and people drive South Street it’s suppose to be a 25 mile and hour zone which people go 40 or 45 most of the time and kids running back and forth. There they are not going to be able to see them coming across there, the playground is there across the street from the school, and it’s just going to be dangerous. Plus with a rental property, I don’t like it being that close to my property line, they are not going to have any yard at all for that house, that apartment building there. I’m just worried that with a rental unit being right there what I’m going to have right in my back yard plus, the danger of the school.

President Thompson asked, does the Board have any questions for him while he’s available here?

Carol Stradling asked, how far does you property sit from South Street?

Carl Robinson stated, 20’, and I’m required to keep that.

Carol Stradling asked, is that 20’ from the pavement line?

Carl Robinson stated, from my property line, 20’ from my property line so there is another 10’ to the center of the street to my property line.

Carol Stradling stated, the survey shows an 18’ grass strip before the pavement.

Carl Robinson stated, I don’t know where that is at, that’s for his, I guess.

Aaron Malchow stated, all of the property lines in that area should be in line.

Carol Stradling asked, do you know what that 18’ grass strip reefers to, Aaron?

Aaron Malchow stated, yes, that’s the right-of-way or whatever you want to call it, from the edge of the street to my property line.

Carol Stradling asked, so if your house, or if this duplex is 12’ from the property line, it’s actually going to be 30’ from the pavement?

Aaron Malchow stated, right.

Carl Robinson stated, it doesn’t show it right there because, his is closer than, and he has a jog in the front of that house that sits 12’ from his property line.

Carol Stradling asked, do you see where the 18’ grass strip is?

Carl Robinson stated, no, I don’t see it. There is no 18’ grass strip in-between my property line and the street, there is maybe 2’ my from my property line to where the street is, there is maybe 2’.

President Thompson stated, why don’t you look at hers and what we’re looking at and let the Board look at what you’re looking at.

Carol Stradling stated, this shows an 18’ grass strip here.

Carl Robinson stated, there is no 18’ grass strip from the property line. My property line is right here by the telephone pole and there is 2’ to the street. There is a 2’ section that I mow from the telephone pole to the street.

Carol Stradling asked, there are no sidewalks on that side of the street?

Carl Robinson stated, no.

Carol Stradling stated, it’s gravel kind of.

Carl Robinson stated, it’s pavement t no, there are not any sidewalks at all. The sidewalks on the side where the school is at and that’s it, they stop at Louie field, right behind, they stop at Louie field with the sidewalks. I don’t know where there is suppose to be an 18’ grass area because there is not. To the property line is not 18’.

Director Weaver stated, a surveyor did this so it should be accurate and he doesn’t now show the telephone pole over there to give us any idea.

Attorney Altman stated, I think that we should have that established.

Director Weaver stated, I think, in my personal opinion when I looked at the lot, it’s deceiving it looks large.

Carl Robinson stated, my property stake is right next to where the telephone pole is and it’s within 2’ of that street, the telephone pole is. There’s no, I don’t know where they get the 18’ grass strip because, there is none there.

Gary Barbour asked, is there an existing house on this?

Carol Stradling asked, it’s torn down, there’s not house on this, is there?

Carl Robinson stated, there was one 3 years ago, it was tore down 3 years ago.

President Thompson asked, so, what are you saying, does it exist or doesn’t it? You’re saying that there is an 18’ grass strip in front of you?

Aaron Malchow stated, yes, I have a stake survey and the flags are there, 18’ from the property line to the edge of the pavement.

President Thompson stated, and you say that there is not.

Carl Robinson stated, there’s not 18’ there.

Jeff Saylor stated, if that’s the case then that is in line. I would like to know where this came from.

Director Weaver stated, that’s off of the Internet, the county mapping.

Carl Robinson stated, that flag is almost in line with the street right here.

President Thompson asked, what is the consensus of the Board? How do you want to handle this, do you want some more information? Do you want to act on it how it is presented, or what are your thoughts.

Ray Butz asked, are these blocks laid out on a curve here?

Director Weaver stated, no, the street goes straight.

Aaron Malchow stated, my lot is 98’ front to back and 102’ deep.

Director Weaver asked, there is no jog in that street, is there?

Aaron Malchow stated, no.

Director Weaver stated, I didn’t remember one being there.

Aaron Malchow stated, it goes straight and that area there is just a straight line.

Carol Stradling asked, your lot is 98’ by what?

Aaron Malchow stated, 98’ x 102’ deep.

Carol Stradling stated, well, on his survey it says that his lot is 61’ 69” plus the 18’ to the pavement, that would be I’m sorry, 79’ wide for his lot if yours is cut the same or laid out the same as his then it appears…

Aaron Malchow stated, no, my lot goes quite a bit further than what his property line, stops deep wise from South Street. I was talking about the stakes that start the lot from the street is not 18’ from the street.

Jeff Saylor asked, sir, do you have a survey or your property by any chance?

Carl Robinson stated, no, I didn’t bring it.

Jeff Saylor asked, do you have one?

Aaron Malchow stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, what are you thinking Jeff?

Jeff Saylor stated, I think that I would like to see the adjacent survey.

President Thompson stated, yes, we need more information.

Ray Butz stated, I agree with him.

Carol Stradling stated, I think that 18’ would make a big difference, if it’s there, or if it’s not there.

Carl Robinson stated, I’m suppose to be 20’ off of my property line which would be 18’ more, if there is an 18’, wherever it’s at.

Carol Stradling stated I don’t understand that you’re….

Carl Robinson stated, so he’s going to be closer than what I am anyway.

Carol Stradling stated, I don’t follow you.

Carl Robinson stated, my house is 20’ back from my property line, not from the street, do you want me to show you again?

Carol Stradling stated, sure. This is your house right? This is Oaklawn School, this is the property in questions and this is Terry Ho correct?

Carl Robinson stated, right.

Carol Stradling asked, so this is your house?

Carl Robinson stated, yes, see mine is 20’ from my property line, which is directly in line with his edge of my house, is, have 20’ there. Plus, if you imagine an 18’ here then he’s going to be sticking out, has it laid out that he is right here which he is not going to be right here, if he’s just 12’ off of that street.

Carol Stradling stated, this is 12’ and this is 6’ so he is, just most of his proposed duplex is only 2’ beyond the edge of your house, if this survey is correct, this is 12’ and this shows another 6’. So that puts him back for the most part, 18’ off of the property line if you’re is 20’, then he is just going to be 2’ past yours.

Carl Robinson stated, that’s my backyard and they are going to be right in my back yard with no yard for them to use at all.

Carol Stradling asked, there are several duplexes across the street, across South Street, are you having any problems?

Carl Robinson stated, they have big back yards, every one of them has at least 30’ or more of back yard for each one of them. What I’m worried about is him taking up all of this to this line with building. The other duplexes I know which ones your talking about, there is about 6 of them in a row and everyone of them have a big back yard for each unit to use, at least 30’ or more for each one of them.

President Thompson asked, I don’t mean to cut you short sir but what is the discussion from the Board? What are you thoughts?

Carol Stradling stated, if we’re discussing the 20’ from the property line, if you look at the survey he is just asking for 2’ more than what this gentleman has whether that 18’ is there or not.

Attorney Altman stated, he’s asking for 12’ not 20’. Understand that some of it is 18’ but, the fair amount of it is, well a 1/3 of it is 12’ and that’s what he’s asking for.

President Thompson asked, Jeff?

Jeff Saylor stated, I think that I would like to make a motion, that the Area Plan Office send a copy of this information, both sides, to Mr. Milligan and ask him to address the issue of the 18’ grass strip. If he could provide any additional information in terms of the layout on the street and at that point, I move that we table the request until our August meeting.

President Thompson stated, I have a motion does anyone care to second that motion or would you like to have it restated maybe?

Carol Stradling asked, do you see our concern, Aaron?

Aaron Malchow asked, yes, you don’t think that it was there, you don’t agree with the survey?

President Thompson stated, basically I guess, not sure that we don’t agree but, we feel like we are short some information. So therefore, if that gentleman can bring a survey of his property and contact Mr. Milligan and maybe he can put some more landmarks, be more explicit and then it could be clearer to the Board.

Attorney Altman stated, specifically the telephone pole that your neighbor is talking about should be located on here. It would generally be required anyway and I think that it would help the Board if it showed up in the pictures and then right away we would know if it was misconception or if there is 18’ there. I think that it would help us a lot.

President Thompson asked, do you understand?

Aaron Malchow stated, sure.

Carl Robinson asked, when do you want me to bring my…

President Thompson stated, our meeting in August would be the 3rd Thursday.

Attorney Altman stated, probably the best thing about your survey is that if you got it to the department tomorrow or next week, they could include it with the mailing that the Board members get for the next meeting. They would have it ahead of him and would be able to study it.

Carl Robinson stated, okay.

President Thompson stated, August 17th.

Carl Robinson asked, bring it where then?

Director Weaver stated, bring it to my office, we’re on the second floor here, we’re caddy-cornered from this office. I won’t be in but, talk to Angie and we will make sure that she is aware that you are bringing that in.

President Thompson stated, next months meeting will be on this subject then. We had better have a vote on that. Would you like to highlight please, you wrote it down.

Director Weaver stated, Jeff motioned that the Area Plan send a copy of the staff report to Mr. Milligan, ask for a clarification on the grass strip. Jerry Altman asked that we also have him show the telephone pole and probably the adjacent house.

Attorney Altman stated, right.

President Thompson stated, all in favor signify by saying I.

The Board stated, I.

President Thompson stated, all opposed the same. Motion carried.

Carol Stradling asked, did we get a second on that?

President Thompson stated, I’m sorry back up, you’re right Carol. Do we have a second to that motion?

Ray Butz seconded the motion.

President Thompson stated, we have a motion and seconded all in favor signify by saying I.

The Board stated, I.

President Thompson stated, all opposed the same, motion carried. Will he get contacted then?

Director Weaver stated, we don’t send another letter out, no.

President Thompson stated, okay, I just want to make it clear to them.

Carl Robinson stated, August 17.

Attorney Altman stated, same place same time here, different date.

****

#1117 Jeff A. & Carol B. Hardebeck; Requesting a special exception variance as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to have a communications tower on 0.11 of an acre. The property is located on the West edge of Wolcott on the North side of U.S. Highway 24.

President Thompson asked, and you are?

Terry Smith stated, I represent the owners and the prospective leases, which is, we’ll call it GTE Wireless. This is another request for a 285’ self supporting tower in Wolcott and the primary purpose is to pick up calls in between an existing site in Mount Aire Indiana and Brookston, there’s a dead spot currently along I-65 and they are trying to pick up coverage obviously. This is the same type of structure that has been put up on Buzz Horton’s Farm, if you remember that. I didn’t know if anyone has driven past that one on Quarry Road. They also have one in Monticello on a N.I.P.S.CO. tower, they have one in Brookston, they have one in Reynolds at the Furrer property, and I believe that is it in White County. Currently, the property is zoned B-2 we have received, we received Monday night a preliminary approval to take it back to A-1 so we can make this request. We go before the County Commissioners on Monday for final approval on that request so what we’re asking is that you would approve the special use subject to the final approval on the rezoning. Do you have any questions?

President Thompson asked, are you still GTE, didn’t I just see where someone bought you out?

An audience member stated, Belet Lenny and GTE merged and now they are called Verizon but,, business as usual for us.

President Thompson asked, have we had any correspondence on this?

Director Weaver stated, we did have a call from a neighbor, Charles Matthews called this morning, and he just wanted to know what the special exception was for. He didn’t have a problem with it and he didn’t think that it would interfere with his farming so he was fine with the request. I also want mention to the Board that the booklet that you have, we did not get it in time to mail it to you, so that is with this request also. Also, I have only one copy tonight of our map of where we currently have towers located in the county, if you would like to see that I have do have that with me.

Steve Qualley stated, I do cellular acquisition work, if you were to turn to page 16 of your book that was handed out this is a regular propagation map of GTE’s current coverage each one of these being a cell site of GTE’s.

Attorney Altman stated, the red that you are referring to, just for the record.

Steve Qualley stated, the red is the strong signal yellow is okay and green is poor. That’s the way that it is now, that’s what GTE’s coverage looks like at this point and time. Then if you were to turn the page then to 17, then we have added the Wolcott site and as you can see our main objective is to cover well, there is two, we are wanting to cover between the Brookston site and the Mount Aire site on the interstate. Then also cover the Town of Wolcott. So with that in mind they have given me a search area, the first thing that I’m looking for is an existing tower to co-locate on. It’s cheaper for us to do that then to go build a new tower but, there were none close to where we needed to be. I propose 3 good site candidates to GTE, they run radio clocks that construction people come out, look at it and they say okay this is the one we would like to pursue a lease on. That’s how Hardebecks then got involved in it, by me talking to them. So I think that this is a pretty decent visual aide, as to the need for this specific site and location.

Attorney Altman stated, I have a phone like what you are talking about and it comes on with marks on the bottom that gives strengths and signals.

Steve Qualley stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, roughly speaking what would the green area show on those cell phones?

Steve Qualley stated, I’m not a radio engineer but, being well familiar with green areas I would guess that it would be second from the bottom one, then not only is it a questions of weak signal. If you get a large amount of traffic or users using the existing towers at the same time, running down 65 they are probably going to be dropped once they get into this area where it is the worst. So there’s a number of issues and again, I’m not a radio guy. There are a number of things that determine how far a signal will transmit from an existing site, the terrain how many callers are using the site. So there’s a couple of different things, there’s coverage, then there is capacity, the more folks that use phones the closer these towers end up having to be closer together in order to meet the needs of the customer. So as you can see from what we are trying to do here this is more of a coverage issue than capacity.

President Thompson asked, I’m currently dealing with Williams Communication, are you familiar with them?

Steve Qualley stated, I have heard of them.

President Thompson stated, underground cable, telecommunications.

Steve Qualley asked, fiber?

President Thompson stated, fiber optic, to air their version of it, we are not going to need these towers much longer. They are laying these cables beside Amoco’s pipeline, the pipeline was installed in 1941. Amoco’s man told me yesterday, that in the next 5 years they will abandon the pipeline and they will shoot fiber optic down through this pipeline and this is his words, I’m just going on hearsay. We won’t have a need for these towers. We have over 20 towers in White County right now, isn’t there another chance for one Round Grove Township coming up?

Director Weaver stated, we have had 2 to 3 companies talking to us recently but, we have not had anything filed, yes.

President Thompson stated, Chris Heldery is a possible site and Don Morehouse is a possible site. I have had 3 or 4 calls of people saying that they have been contacted for towers.

Steve Qualley stated, technology I could not say what things will be like in 5 or 10 years. However, in our lease agreement here, we do have with the Hardebecks, if within 180 days we are not using the tower, we are obligated to take it down.

Terry Smith stated, I was going to point that out too Jerry, if at least these lease agreements, I don’t know about the other agreements that people have for towers, if for instance, if this does come about these towers are going to be down. They have to take them down and restore the site to the original condition and if they don’t they pay.

Steve Qualley stated, not for the county, GTE is willing to let county emergency equipment on the tower at their expense but, charge no rent, if that is an issue or would be an opportunity for you folks, that would be fine with us.

Attorney Altman asked, what about the tower that is East of Wolcott, why is it not acceptable to be on?

Steve Qualley stated, let’s go to my search area that I have in the book, it’s actually my location map.

Attorney Altman stated, that’ s page 16.

Steve Qualley stated, page 14. As you can see, my search area covers the section that we are in. The Southern ½ of the section North, it’s looks like the Southeast quarter of the section Northwest and the Western 2/3 of the section to the West of the Hardebeck section if we go to far you said to the East?

Attorney Altman stated, it’s right outside of Wolcott to the East, about ½ of a mile.

Director Weaver stated, yes, it’s not very far, I don’t even know if it’s a ½ of a mile.

Gary Barbour stated, ¼ of a mile.

Carol Stradling stated, it’s not a GTE tower, it’s another communications tower.

Attorney Altman stated, I didn’t know.

Steve Qualley stated, then you go through our propagation map here, you can even see from where we’re at, our red is not getting I-65. If we were to go further East then we would fall away from that and then our objectives are not met.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone here opposed to the request, or in favor of?

Director Weaver asked, is this tower not as strong as the one in Reynolds, it looks like your red area on the tower in Reynolds covers a much bigger area than this one will?

Steve Qualley stated, yes, that’s an Omni site, another words, it just the whip type antenna where it’s radiating in all directions. Again, let’s go to the propagation map, you see the little symbol, how they have that set up there. This is a sectorized site where they’re actually aiming the signal in the direction that they want it to go, instead and all of these round ones like this are Omni types where they are just a whip type that can radiate in all directions where this would be a panel type setup of antennas. They can steer them if you will to the direction that they are trying to cover.

Carol Stradling asked, why would you not get, if the Omni site has a bigger red area, why would you not use one and move it a little Northeast so you fill in these green areas? I’m sorry Northwest of Wolcott?

Steve Qualley stated, I think what they are thinking is that if you go back again to the page where the site does not exist, this is their main objective right here along the interstate. I think that they are thinking that by pointing them in the directions that they can go they can direct the signal in this Northwest Southeast direction. If they were to put an Omni type setup it would, cover a portion but, then down here and up in here the signal would not be as strong as the way that they would like for it to be because, of the circular radial of an Omni type antenna.

Carol Stradling asked, so you have gaps at both ends?

Steve Qualley stated, that’s correct.

Carol Stradling asked, what about moving it Northwest?

Steve Qualley asked, and then putting another tower down here?

Carol Stradling stated, it looks like you have coverage here, it seems like it overlaps to the Southeast but, then you have some green area up here on the Northwest, a few green boxes not even a mile square.

Steve Qualley stated, that would be terrain issues there, to where maybe there is dip in the road, dips in the road where you’re going down into lower elevations. Therefore, the signal is not tracking as well at the bottom of those hills. It’s what I think is the issue there.

Carol Stradling stated, I guess that if you take the difference and split it you’re Southwest of middle.

Steve Qualley stated, somewhat, yes.

Carol Stradling stated, I’m sorry Southeast of the middle.

Steve Qualley stated, and again, me not being a radio person why it’s not exactly split in the middle, I cannot say. It could be a terrain issue where they feel like if they are in this area they are doing an optimum job, as if they were to move further North then maybe there is a terrain issue down here somewhere that would not work or would work even worse than the way that they have it set up here.

Carol Stradling asked, are there other companies signals that you would hit a roam on I-65 so you would have coverage for a customer would have to pay a roaming charge because, you going into a different…

Steve Qualley stated, I think not.

Carol Stradling stated, wireless.

Steve Qualley stated, each area that is licensed by the F.C.C. If you go into an area where you’re roaming, I know that when I come up from Bloomington, head North of Indianapolis, get between Indianapolis and Lafayette and I’m going, there must be another license issued by the F.C.C. in that area that GTE legally can not cover. I think in this case you would not get a roam, if they can get a signal strong enough. If you’re in GTE coverage right now and you’re getting your roam signals because, GTE’s coverage is so weak that the competitor in the neighboring county that is not part of this RSA, if you will. Rural Service Area maybe bleeding over into GTE’s territory not because, they are so strong it’s because GTE is so weak in that particular spot.

Carol Stradling asked, getting back to that though, if there is another phone wireless supplier that is strong in that area, then the customer will get coverage there, no? Wouldn’t that switch over to roam?

Gary Barbour stated, not necessarily. I have GTE service and right now, if you run up and down I-65 the signal is not good from basically just North or Remington down close to Brookston and the Lafayette area. What they are trying to do is just cover that quarter right there.

Carol Stradling asked, so there is no one covering that… not just GTE?

Director Weaver stated, no, there are two towers out there.

Gary Barbour stated, sure that towers out there but, it’s I think, one of them is cell or something like that, the signal for GTE to get to these other towers still strong enough that you don’t go to roam in that area, you just have very poor reception.

Director Weaver stated, there are towers there and the Board has granted those variances for those towers since I think, that I have been director, on both of them.

Steve Qualley stated, what I can say about this is, everyone’s system is engineered differently. They use different equipment our objectives may be different, lets take for instance spec type outfit. For instance an American tower, someone that puts up towers to lease space off they are probably looking at all of these different carriers, radio plans. Saying this one looks like this would be a good spot for most folks to be, if we can get a tower site here and they are probably right. However, if because of the way that GTE has their other sites set up, if we can not be in this area we are going to leave holes we’re going to need another site some where else and it’s a colossal waste of money.

Jeff Hardebeck stated, we have 2 cell providers ourselves at our building in Wolcott. I do have GTE but, we also have Nextel and the reason that we have both is we run a trucking company out of there and our signal for GTE at this time is, unacceptable to reach our drivers. So we had to go to another system, which is Nextel, which is very good in Wolcott. I was setting in front of my building yesterday or the day before and I received a call on GTE and I lost that person 3 times before I said to that person, here call me back on this one, this is the Nextel, you won’t loose me on this one. We set there and visited for about 15 minutes because, on a different phone system and they won’t intermingle with each other. Thank you.

Steve Qualley stated, when the F.C.C. auction, well didn’t auction, this was prior to PCS auctions, this was the original cell companies. GTE and Cell One I think, is the other long carrier up here, when they were issued licenses, the F.C.C. said okay you guys are obligated now to get coverage. So we are of course their revenue generated and revenue, they are not going to build a site where they can’t make money but at the same time, if they get enough complaints in a critical area like this along I-65, they figure they have to get this taken care of.

Director Weaver asked, it’s not cost efficient to co-locate on one of these existing towers?

Steve Qualley stated, it would be, if it were in the right spot.

Carol Stradling asked, who owns this number on here, do you know?

Director Weaver stated, I think that it’s the Cable Company but, I don’t know for sure.

Attorney Altman asked, is that the one west of Wolcott?

Carol Stradling stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, as I understand, it’s the Cable Company that owns that and TV cable, is what I’m trying to say.

Carol Stradling asked, are you familiar with that location?

Steve Qualley stated, it was not in my search.

Carol Stradling stated, this is the tower that they are saying is the cable tower and you want to put one right there?

Steve Qualley stated, yes, and as you can see, my search is up in here.

President Thompson asked, is there any other discussion from the Board? Any questions?

Carol Stradling asked, who decides your search area?

Steve Qualley stated, GTE, radio engineers.

Carol Stradling asked, is there an optimal search in the area and then a fringe search area? Like if you say, I can’t get a site in this area this area ½ mile away will work?

Steve Qualley stated, usually not because, we need a site here and if we move one way or another then we’re overlapping and interfering with an existing site. We’re leaving holes, these are strategically considered for their location.

Director Weaver stated, you have other towers that are overlapping now, according to your map here. There are other towers that are overlapping and it looks like the one that you just put up over there on Horton’s farm, Buzz Horton’s farm, that it’s almost overlapping with the Reynolds area.

Steve Qualley stated, we need to have them connect up if they don’t…

Director Weaver stated, yes, but the red areas almost overlap, I mean they are almost adjacent to each other.

Steve Qualley stated, that’s good coverage. I’m sure they would like to have that all over the place and when we do sites in Indianapolis and you look at our coverage maps it’s completely red there isn’t, if you have a yellow spot then you probably are in trouble.

President Thompson asked, they are all new sites?

Steve Qualley stated, new sites.

President Thompson stated, they are new sites installed by you, you didn’t team up with anyone in the Indianapolis area.

Steve Qualley stated, no, we don’t co-locate whenever we can since they are so much closer together, then it becomes a capacity issue. If GTE had any coverage, years ago as far as being able to say okay everything is yellow but, then there are so many users and one site can only handle so many calls. If they don’t get another site in, then it happens that people are dropped if you get that cross top going and they have to keep adding sites even though the Indianapolis area is completely red.

Carol Stradling asked, are you going to want to come in and fill in that green that is left?

Steve Qualley stated, probably, eventually, yes.

President Thompson asked, that’s in Benton County isn’t it?

Carol Stradling stated, I mean this green.

Steve Qualley stated, what the deal is here, this is outside of the GTE a service area is why this is so poor in here. That is it right there, that’s why they are doing this type of a set up here because, they cannot radiate over into here by law because this is not their territory.

President Thompson asked, is there any other discussion? If there is not any other discussion, is the Board ready to vote?

The Board stated, lets vote.

Attorney Altman stated, we received into evidence the site in Wolcott Indiana 0651 rezoning and variance hearings for GTE wireless subject to the evidence.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is currently zoned B-2, General Business.

2. That the lot is a lot of record and properly divided.

3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.

6. That the request is for a special exception variance as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to have a communications tower Part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 27 North, Range 6 West, Princeton Township, White County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows:

Commencing at the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 24; thence North 88 degrees 45 minutes 01 seconds West (all bearings in this description are based on Geodetic North) on the South line of said Southwest Quarter, 42.69 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 173.32 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence South 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 70.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 70.00 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 70.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 70.00 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 0.11 acre, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located is located on the West edge of Wolcott on the North side of U.S. Highway 24.

7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.20 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 1 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, the variance is adopted and passed. You need to get your building permit before you proceed.

Terry Smith asked, I assume that it’s subject to rezoning?

Attorney Altman stated, obviously, yes. You said that in your original presentation and it hardly works without that.

Director Weaver stated, Angie would be taking that to the Commissioners Monday Morning.

Terry Smith asked, is that 8:30?

Director Weaver stated, 8:30.

****

#1118 Donald D. Coonse; Requesting a 6’ rear setback variance, 7’ side setback variance and a 12’ front setback variance to build a new home on lot #3 in Camp Tippecanoe Addition. The property is located in Liberty Township at 7652 E. Camp Tippe Court.

President Thompson asked, do we have anyone representing this request?

Donald Coonse was representing this request.

President Thompson asked, do you have any additional information to present to us tonight?

Donald Coonse stated, no, I do not.

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

President Thompson asked, is there anyone here in favor or opposed to this variance? No response?

Director Weaver stated, no, I think that it’s pretty much family right there beside him.

Donald Coonse stated, my parents live right next door to me and the house that is presently there, is like 3’ off of the property line. That’s where the existing house is at, I’m proposing to add the opposite to my parents, and that’s where the side comes in. There is one little discrepancy, I don’t know if you found out the information Director Weaver, on the survey that I had done on the length of the property it is 70’ long. She told me to go ahead and file for a rear setback from the road, which, there is no real problem from the road, from the lane to my house. If you add the distances on that survey together, he messed up in the total sum it should add up to 70’, I think that he has it 14’.

Director Weaver stated, yes he shows the lot being the length of 70’ but, he shows 14’ on the backside.

Donald Coonse stated, I brought that in, Director Weaver called over to him and she said lets go ahead and set it up asking for a variance on that too. I guess to keep everything clean but, there really isn’t any problem with that, it will be the 20’ off of it that is required.

Attorney Altman asked, so that toward the platted drive, it will be off away far enough that you don’t need a variance for the platted drive?

Donald Coonse stated, correct, she just said let’s go ahead and write it on there just so everything was technically….

Attorney Altman asked, so that really should be 20’, correct?

Donald Coonse stated, it would be 20’.

Attorney Altman asked, rather than 14’?

Donald Coonse stated, yes, the surveyor mess up on that. Did he send you a corrected copy of that?

Director Weaver stated, no, I don’t think that we ever got a corrected survey, so that’s why we never corrected anything on this.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s fine, just so long as we know that and we can make that adjustment in our records. So the variance would be, which way Director Weaver, since he doesn’t…

Director Weaver stated, he would not need a rear variance, the 6’ rear setback he would not need that.

Carol Stradling asked, how deep is your property?

Donald Coonse stated, it’s 70’ deep, and then it’s a hill that goes down, and my property stops at the top of the hill technically. The hill that drops down to a level riverbank with seawall, so there is an additional 30’ of property there, out front before the water.

Carol Stradling asked, so you’re moving the structure forward on the survey?

Attorney Altman stated, no, there’s just more…

Donald Coonse asked, from the existing house, I’m adding over to the side property and then it comes into a technicality. My original property is grandfathered, that’s a correct term?

Director Weaver stated, your existing structure is grand fathered.

Donald Coonse stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, he is going toward the water.

Carol Stradling asked, the rear setback is from the platted drive, right?

Director Weaver stated, right.

Carol Stradling stated, the survey is showing 14’.

Donald Coonse stated, this is incorrect, that is actually, 20’ and that’s the way that it presently is.

Carol Stradling asked, what are the dimensions of the new house?

Donald Coonse stated, basically, it will be 32’ x 38’.

Carol Stradling asked, then you have 18’ to the other property line?

Donald Coonse stated, no to the water, to the front property line.

Carol Stradling stated, to the front property line, okay that is 70’.

Director Weaver stated, he is not going any closer to the road, than what you see in the pictures. That’s going to be the roadside, that’s going to be the same as what you see in the pictures.

Carol Stradling stated, I see, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, the survey should, where it has 14’, should actually say 20’.

Carol Stradling stated, okay, I’m following.

President Thompson asked, is there any other discussion? Concerns?

Attorney Altman asked, single story?

Donald Coonse stated, yes, well it’s going to be like a story and a half, it will have a loft upstairs.

Attorney Altman asked, would the present structure be removed?

Donald Coonse stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, so it will be a story and a half present structure, you know that you will need septic and well approval?

Donald Coonse stated, I have that on file.

Director Weaver stated, he has all of that.

Donald Coonse stated, I have been working on this for a while, since last year when you put new carpeting in.

Jeff Saylor asked, if you remove the structure could it be grand fathered?

Director Weaver stated, no, this is bringing it into compliance.

Attorney Altman stated, with a variance.

Director Weaver stated, that’s what the variance is for, the new structures will be…

Jeff Saylor stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, there would be no grandfathering.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is properly zoned L-1, Lake District

2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.

3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.

6. That the request is for a 6’ rear setback variance, 7’ side setback variance and a 12’ front setback variance to build a new home on Lot 10 In Amos Oakcrest Third Addition in Monon Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in Monon Township at 4520 E. Oakcrest Drive.

7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 5 affirmative and 0 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, you need to get a building permit before you proceed.

****

#1119 Virgil K. & Diane Atkins; Requesting a 49’ rear setback variance to build a new home on 1.942 acres. The property is located in Prairie Township, on the North side of State Road 18, approximately ¼ of a mile West of Springboro Road.

President Thompson asked, do we have anyone representing this request?

Diane Atkins was representing this request.

President Thompson asked, do you have anything to add to the description tonight?

Jim Plunkett stated, the description is wrong, is what it is. It’s ¾ of a mile not ¼ of a mile.

President Thompson asked, he says that instead of approximately ¼, you’re saying approximately ¾?

Jim Plunkett stated, ¾ of a mile, I gave this land to my daughter to build a house on and had I walked about 10 more steps out there and told the surveyor this is the line, we wouldn’t be here.

Director Weaver stated, they have an unusual shaped piece of property, they thought that they would be able to meet their setbacks, and then they came in. When they came in for their building permit, we discovered that they were just a little bit shy, so that is the reason that they are asking for the variance.

President Thompson asked, have we received any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, I have not received anything. The letter that we have here is from his applicants and pictures attached. She submitted these with her request, her application.

Carol Stradling asked, on the survey, it says something that the tract is all of the Plunkett land lines something of State Highway 18 from the Southeast ¼, Northeast ¼ of Section 19 shall 5.83 acres, this is an error so that 235.20’ that’s the error?

Jim Plunkett stated, there’s an error of about 5 acres that I have been paying taxes on there, on State Road 18 and they took that off of the tax roles.

Diane Atkins stated, as the property angled up when they actually did this survey they found that there is 5 acres that actually lays in State road 18 that mom and dad have been paying taxes on, that really isn’t there.

Jim Plunkett stated, it has to be in someone’s name.

Diane Atkins stated, it would actually belong to the State, I would assume because, it’s a very thin strip that runs up through there.

Jim Plunkett stated, the West end of it, ends up 2.6’ wide and it’s in the center of State Road 18.

President Thompson asked, are there any other concerns from the Board?

The Board stated, no.

President Thompson asked, no response from anyone? Is anyone here opposed to the variance? If nothing else to discuss is the Board ready to vote?

The Board stated, yes.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is property zoned A-1, Agricultural.

2. That the lot is a lot of record and properly divided.

3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.

6. That the request is for a 49’ rear setback variance to build a new home on That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 25 North, Range 3 West and that part or the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 25 North, Range 3 West, all in Prairie Township, White County, Indiana, described by:

Basis of Bearings: Indiana State Plane Coordinate System West Zone.

Beginning at a Stone located at the Northwest Corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 20; thence North 89 degrees 57 minutes 29 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line, a distance of 616.02 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe set with plastic cap stamped “S0338/WCLS”, hereinafter referred to as an iron pipe set; thence South 00 degrees 02 minutes 31 seconds East, a distance of 34.75 feet to an iron pipe set at Point “A”; thence continuing South 00 degrees 02 minutes 31 seconds East, a distance of 188.23 feet to an iron pipe set; thence along the Northerly Right-Of-Way Line of State Highway 18 the following courses; thence North 72 degrees 09 minutes 14 seconds West, a distance of 11.55 feet; thence North 70 degrees 32 minutes 41 seconds West, a distance of 300.37 feet; thence North 80 degrees 31 minutes 41 seconds West, a distance of 201.56 feet to an iron pipe set; thence North 73 degrees 24 minutes 25 seconds West, a distance of 49.90 feet to an iron pipe set; thence along a curve concave to the Southwest, Having a radius of 2,914.79 feet, through a central angle of 06 degrees 16 minutes 45 seconds and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of N 76° 32’ 48” W and a length of 319.28 feet, a distance of 319.44 feet; thence leaving said Right-Of-Way Line, South 89 degrees 19 minutes 53 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line, a distance of 235.20 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 1.942 acres of which 1.815 Acres is located in Section 20 and 0.127 Acre is located in Section 19.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in Prairie Township, on the North side of State Road 18, approximately ¼ of a mile West of Springboro Road.

7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 5 affirmative and 0 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, you need to get a building permit before you proceed.

****

#1120 Charles & Linda Leslie; Requesting a 4’ South side setback variance to build a room addition onto the existing home and a 4’ North side setback variance to bring the property into compliance with the White County Zoning Ordinance. The property is located in Monon Township at 3258 E. Bailey Road.

Director Weaver stated, I have a clarification on that. You had another agenda laying there on that. They are also going to do a room addition, I believe, which is not on the agenda but, everything was advertised correctly and done correctly but it was just not right on the agenda.

President Thompson asked, that’s an abbreviated version on there?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know but, they are also doing a room addition.

President Thompson asked, did everyone understand that?

Attorney Altman stated, just for the record, make sure you recite exactly what they are getting a variance for.

Director Weaver stated, they are getting both a North side and a South side setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance and also to do a room addition on the property.

Attorney Altman asked, now the existing home, is that grand fathered, the existing home?

Director Weaver stated, I would assume so.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m just trying to figure out that, or whether it’s a violation, that’s all. Is the existing home…

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know how long the home has been there, I can’t tell you that.

Attorney Altman asked, how long has the existing home been there?

Charles Leslie stated, I don’t know exactly how long it has been there we bought it about 6 years ago, I’m not sure back in the 60’s, maybe ‘59 or ‘60 area.

Attorney Altman stated, that would be a non-conforming use. That would be grand fathered, yes.

President asked, have we had any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, I have not received anything.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone opposed to the variance this evening?

Attorney Altman asked, this is presently being served by well water and sewage but, directly it will be by the new septic system right?

Charles Leslie stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, and that’s to go in when?

Charles Leslie stated, I didn’t know, they are working on it out there right now but, I have not received a date on that when they are going to do that.

Attorney Altman asked, so they are actively working on doing it in front of your place?

Charles Leslie stated, no, they are on the road there around Pit Stop Grocery and them places.

Attorney Altman asked, coming your way though?

Charles Leslie stated, supposable, coming down our road.

Director Weaver stated, my understanding is that this is suppose to be functional by the end of the year on that, that’s what I have been told.

Attorney Altman stated, for the record, it should not be very long as the fact of the disposal system.

Charles Leslie stated, no.

President Thompson asked, any discussion from the Board?

The Board stated, no.

President Thompson asked, if there is no other discussion, is the Board ready to vote?

The Board stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, single story proposed addition?

Charles Leslie stated, we talked about maybe adding a room upstairs but, we need to contact a contractor and get some ideas but, possibly go up a room we really haven’t made a decision on that yet.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District

2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.

3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.

6. That the request is for a 4’ South side setback variance to build a room addition onto the existing home and a 4’ North side setback variance to bring the property into compliance with the White County Zoning Ordinance on part of Lot Number Seventeen (17) in the George Spencer Subdivision in Monon Township, White County, Indiana, and described more fully as follows:

Beginning at a point which is North 00° and 01’ East seventy-five (75) feet from the Northeast corner of Lot Number Sixteen (16) in said George Spencer Subdivision and running thence North 41° and 05’ West 187.2 feet; thence North 41° and 07’ East 54.7 feet; thence South 40° 04’ East 134.7 feet; thence South 00° and 01 minutes West 80 feet to the point of beginning.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in Monon Township at 3258 E. Bailey Road.

7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 5 affirmative and 0 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, you need to get a building permit before you proceed.

****

President Thompson asked, is there any other business?

Director Weaver stated, yes, I have one thing that we need to discuss. The ordinance does not address a tattoo parlor. We had a question brought up and that’s what these two gentlemen are here for. They are concerned about this and they want to know what the Boards comments are on this but, I’m coming to you and asking you to help me define what zoning a tattoo parlor can go in and if it would be considered an adult business or not.

Attorney Altman asked, adult business, what is….

Director Weaver stated, that’s what I’m looking at here. Special Qualifications, adult businesses is excluding taverns are limited to one per B-2 zoned area and may not be located closer than 500’ to any school church, daycare center, or residential district. When you go back to page 27 an adult business, limits the age of who can go inside. Definition of an adult business, any business by State law or business policy restricts the access of patrons to the premises by reason of age, said businesses includes but, is not limited to taverns, massage parlors, adult bookstores and etcetera. Tattoo parlor by state law does not regulate the age of who can go in there, they do regulate who can receive a tattoo. They do not allow anyone under the age of 18 to have a tattoo done without parent consent, it’s a little gray whether we want to consider it an adult business or not.

Carol Stradling asked, would you read the definition again?

Director Weaver read the definition of an adult business again.

Ray Butz stated, it doesn’t restrict.

Director Weaver stated, not to enter, to receive service it does but, not to enter.

Dan Sublette stated, if you weren’t going to get a tattoo why would you be in there. There’s nothing in there for, you have to be 18 to even receive one. You can be 18 to go into an adult bookstore, I mean I consider them the same thing. Sheriff Cain came out this morning measured off from their door to the residence across the street its 100’8”. I have building, or housing with children closer than that. That’s all that I have to say.

Carol Stradling asked, where do you want to put this?

Dan Sublette stated, I’m not the ones putting it in.

Director Weaver stated, they’re not the ones wanting to put it in, the people that want to put this establishment in, have not even been in touch with us.

Dan Sublette stated, we’re at 1407 N. Main Street.

President Thompson asked, what is your relationship to this then?

Dan Sublette asked, my business is next door to it, I’m Dan Sublette with Sublette Ribs. Do you know where we are?

President Thompson stated, I know where you are.

Dan Sublette stated, they want to put their business right next door to mine and I don’t want to discriminate against anyone but, I have a lot of older couples that come in. I have worked hard for my business for 2 years and I’m doing a pretty good business right now. The thing is, with that business coming in, it’s got two big windows, I was wanting to tint my windows but, I was afraid that I would loose business because, people can’t see in side of my business. I think that’s what attracts them to it at night, they see that it’s full and people are in and out. I’m afraid that, this business next to door to me also has two big windows right next to mine. They can put neon lights in there they can do anything that they want black lights, I feel that it’s going to throw my business off and it’s just going to make everyone kind of shady in there.

Attorney Altman stated, the first thing that I guess that I want to tell you is, until we get something petitioned before us you are basically hearing 7 people’s opinion that doesn’t have any binding effect on anything. It can be discussed and it just doesn’t mean very much.

Dan Sublette stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, I just want you to understand that. That doesn’t mean that you are out of order Dan, I’m not trying to say that but, until it’s actually before us and someone is on both sides of the issue there is no, like I said it’s just an opinion. After that, like tonight, we had 5 decisions okay and that’s different, we can discuss it but, we’re just advisory.

Dan Sublette stated, I just want to know what guidelines it says.

Attorney Altman stated, I agree.

Jeff Saylor asked, would you read again what an adult business, what the restrictions are?

Director Weaver stated, adult businesses excluding taverns are limited to one per B-2 zoned area and may not be located and closer than 500’ to any school, church, daycare center or residential district.

Jeff Saylor asked, so if he has a liquor license, there’s only one that would be considered an adult business.

Director Weaver stated, not necessarily.

Dan Sublette stated, I’m a restaurant, I’m not a bar.

Jeff Saylor stated, I realize that but, you serve beer right?

Dan Sublette stated, I do.

Director Weaver stated, but, he doesn’t limit the age that comes in. Anyone can come into his establishment.

Jeff Saylor stated, okay.

Dan Sublette stated, I serve children.

Director Weaver stated, anyone could come into his establishment.

Carol Stradling asked, how close is it to a residential area?

Dan Sublette stated, he measured off 100’8”, that’s the one on the other side of the road on Main Street. We do have some apartments South of that, right on the edge, you have probably seen those.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know that the one on the edge is a residential district, I actually think that they are zoned business, it’s not considered a residential district.

Dan Sublette stated, there’s a house there.

Director Weaver stated, right, I know it is, across the street we have just approved a Panned Unit Development in that area.

Carol Stradling asked, you said that it’s 108”?

Dan Sublette stated, 100’8”.

Director Weaver stated, I personally have concerns about this business in its current location but, they are in a business zoning. I did not receive complaints about the location that they went into and they were not close to any residential district, so I did not pursue it at that time. They did not come in and speak to me at that time either, so I have had concerns about the business myself from the beginning. What an adult business required is that it be in a B-2 zoning and it have a special exception variance granted.

Carol Stradling asked, and that is zoned B-2?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, back to the original question, they just want a clarification of the county rule, is what they are here for.

Dan Sublette stated, since the other one did not have that and it was allowed to open, do you see what I mean?

President Thompson stated, yes.

Dan Sublette stated, but, I’m not sure that was at the time that you had to be 18 to get a tattoo. I think that has changed and that might have been why, now we would like to know why.

Director Weaver stated, I explained to them I was not coming to the Board on their behalf, I was coming to the Board to get a clarification for my sake and on their sake. I just informed them that it’s a public meeting and they were welcome to come.

Attorney Altman stated, I just want you to understand that there’s no jeopardy in this…

President Thompson asked, are we looking at something by next month, is that what’s in the works.

Dan Sublette stated, if it has to be.

Director Weaver asked, how soon are they planning on going in there?

Dan Sublette stated, they are working on it now.

Director Weaver stated, I have talked to Linda Russow on this, which she is with the Health Department and she said that the State really doesn’t have a lot of regulations on a tattoo parlor.

Jeff Saylor asked, does the State consider it an adult business?

Dan Sublette stated, they consider that you have to be 18, I know that is in their guidelines.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know what they define an adult business.

Dan Sublette stated, it’s also going to handle biohazards, with needles and razor blades.

President Thompson stated, that’s right.

Director Weaver stated, that’s true, I didn’t think about that.

Dan Sublette stated, the Health Department has to see that their inspections and things they have to see, that they qualify under that.

President Thompson asked, would it be kind of wise to make a couple of phone calls for next months meeting.

Jeff Saylor stated, I was thinking that. I would be interested to see what is happening in other counties and how they deal with that.

Director Weaver stated, whom would we contact? The Sheriff came to us wanting to know.

President Thompson asked, he did?

Director Weaver stated, yes, I have talked to Linda Russow in the Health Department that was originally.

President Thompson asked, who originally, contacted the Sheriff?

Director Weaver stated, I believe that Mr. Sublette did.

President Thompson stated, I was curious.

Dan Sublette stated, I have tried to get a hold of the Mayor and he as been out of town. They said that I need to get a hold of Bill Smith, which I did and I guess they are going to have a meeting on it Monday also.

Director Weaver stated, but, they fall under our jurisdiction.

Dan Sublette asked, they do?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Dan Sublette stated, I’m just saying that they were concerned about it, so they want to at least mention it and see what is going on.

An audience member stated, the first one wasn’t questioned or designated what type of business, we would like to see that this one is.

Carol Stradling asked, what do you mean the first one.

An audience member stated, the one that s operating now in Norway.

President Thompson asked, but, they are currently doing work next door to you know?

Dan Sublette stated, these people use to work down Norway…

Director Weaver asked, so this is not the same operation?

Dan Sublette stated, they split off these guys were employees.

Director Weaver stated, I mis-understood, I thought that these were the same people.

Dan Sublette stated, these were employees. They are younger kids and they were seeing how much the boss was making so they thought that they could do the same. They want to come in and put up their own.

President Thompson asked, to be really fair, how much more could we discuss this and not get ourselves, and everyone in this room, in trouble?

An audience member stated, we understand that.

Attorney Altman stated, I guess that’s what I’m saying, this is just totally gratuitous really and we don’t have a petition before us to respond on it.

Director Weaver asked, that is the question, do we need them to file a special exception variance? That is my question, are we going to treat it as an adult business yes or no? That’s all that I’m asking if they are going to be treated as an adult business, then I need to let them know that they need to file a variance, a special exception.

Gary Barbour asked, so basically you are looking for an amendment to the ordinance to find out…

Director Weaver stated, I just want to know if we should treat it as an adult business.

Jeff Saylor stated, I think that the Board needs some additional information. I would like to know what other counties, how they are handling this issue that would be nice to know. If the State has any thing on it.

Ray Butz stated, if they consider it an adult business.

Attorney Altman stated, to be fair, I think that these other people should be advised of this concern.

Jeff Saylor stated, one way or the other, I would like to know if there is some precedence out there.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know that they are, they have not contacted me.

Attorney Altman stated, I bet they can give us the name…

Director Weaver asked, do you know the name of the people that are doing it?

Dan Sublette asked, all that we’re asking is, is it going to be classified as an adult business. What it’s going to be zoned by and your questions or phone calls, so we can understand how it’s going to go.

President Thompson asked, before we get into names, do we want this on the record? I’m a little skeptical of some of this, not that I don’t care about your situation.

Director Weaver stated, what I could do is, I know the owner, that’s what we can do, and I do know who the owner of the property is. We can contact the owner of the property and let him know that there may be, there have been questions about the business that he is proposing to allow in this building, have him come in and talk to us or have the proposed tenant come in and talk to us. Would that work?

Attorney Altman stated, they could talk to you.

Director Weaver stated, if I contact the owner and have him get in touch with them, to contact us.

Attorney Altman stated, yes, by us, you mean your department?

Director Weaver stated, right.

Attorney Altman stated, it’s beyond our jurisdiction to more than that right now but, I think Jeff’s inquiry about what other counties is legitimate to find out from square one also in just knowing.

Director Weaver stated, I tried to find out the State Regulations and I will go ask again and see if those regulations have changed.

President Thompson asked, I wonder what department does govern…

Director Weaver stated, the Health Department.

President Thompson stated, just the Health Department, okay.

Jeff Saylor stated, find out if there really isn’t any prescience, there aren’t any guidelines and then we can let you know if it’s allowed to go on there.

An audience member stated, I just moved from Highland Indiana, I don’t know if you are familiar to that but, they had a tattoo parlor go in there and they shut it down and I believe that it was considered an adult business at that time, 3 years ago. I don’t know if there was any more than just a tattoo going on but, they were doing younger kids, they weren’t going by the law and they ran into a lot of problems before they got closed down.

President Thompson stated, I’m still concerned about how much in depth we can discuss this.

Attorney Altman stated, we have gone about as far as we can.

President Thompson stated, to keep everyone in good stands here.

Dan Sublette stated, we appreciate you letting us make our comments.

President Thompson stated, it’s new territory for us.

Attorney Altman asked, are we adjourned?

President Thompson asked, not yet but, we can be, do I have a motion?

****

Ray Butz made motion to adjourn.

Carol Stradling seconded the motion.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission