Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, November 8, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.


Members attending were: Jay Clawson, Ray Butz, Charles Anderson, Ron Pollock, Stephen Fisher, Greg Bossaer and Rick Raderstorf. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Diann Weaver. 

Visitors Attending were: Carolyn Vantwoud, Tony Vantwoud, John Hayden and Ben Stefaniak.



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




#242 Bronislaw Stefaniak; Requesting primary and secondary approval of a 2 lot subdivision to be known as Stefaniak Subdivision on 0.269 of an acre. The property is located in the City of Monticello on the northwest corner of St. Mary’s Avenue and North Main Street.


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


Ben Stefaniak was representing the request.


President Anderson asked, do we have anyone in the audience with any questions about this request?


John Hayden stated, 609 N. Main, I have one real main concern. What does he have proposed to do with this property? If he is just wanting to subdivide, it’s already a B-1, why do we want to subdivide a business property already? If that’s the case, if he’s planning on putting another business in there, where does he plan on parking? Along Main Street or who knows.


President Anderson asked do you want to address that?


Ben Stefaniak stated, parking on St. Mary’s Avenue, it’s the same as the duplexes over there just West.


John Hayden asked, what do you plan on building there?


Ben Stefaniak stated, I have no plans at this present time to build anything.


John Hayden asked, why would you want to subdivide a piece of property that you don’t have any plans for?


Ben Stefaniak stated, let’s put it this way, it’s an empty lot there on the corner. It’s not doing anyone any good sitting there so, if I build a building there I can rent it out as a business on Main Street, which is a business area.


John Hayden stated, not always, it wasn’t always a business area.


Ben Stefaniak asked, Main Street isn’t a business?


John Hayden stated, that part of Main Street wasn’t always a business area in fact, before you came there with your real-estate company the house that you have, was a residence. So not all of that was always business down through there. That’s what I’m trying to understand is why do we want to keep adding businesses into our residential areas.


Ben Stefaniak stated, it’s not a residential area sir, it’s business.


President Anderson asked, do we have another question?


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, I live at 107 E. St. Mary’s, so that would be directly East of this intersection. I think a concern here is yes, number 1 what is the proposed development on this piece of property. You have a lot, the lot to the North, if I understand this correctly, they are both zoned B-1, is that right?


President Anderson asked, the whole area, to be subdivided is B-1?


Director Weaver stated, yes.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, so the property in question is lot #7 and part of lot #8?


Director Weaver stated, yes, lot 7 and South ½ of…


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, of 8.


Director Weaver stated, South 10’.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, that’s just how it’s described part of lot #8 is part of this?


Director Weaver stated, South part of lot #8.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, and then lot #8 is also business zoning is that correct, B-1?


Director Weaver stated, yes.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, I think the concern here is, and my other understanding is that the B.Z.A. already gave approval for the proposed 2 new lots which will be known as Stefaniak Subdivision, it was approved that each of those lots did not have to be 125’ frontage along St. Mary’s, is that right?


Director Weaver stated, there was a variance granted.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, variance granted for that.


Director Weaver stated, on one lot.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, on lot #7.


Director Weaver stated, no.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, only one variance needed?


Director Weaver stated, it was on the size of the lot and it was only on one lot of this proposed subdivision.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, was it the lot with the duplex or the lot without?


Director Weaver stated, the lot without.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, because it didn’t matter the lot width. My understanding is that the lot….


Director Weaver stated, he couldn’t meet the minimum size requirement.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, the vacant lot did not meet?


Director Weaver stated, right.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, and the minimum was, right now it’s going to be like 75’ is that on that? Does everyone have that picture?


Ron Pollock stated, 21’ X 75’, yes.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, and the one with the duplex is like 90’?


Ron Pollock stated, 90’ X 71’.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, I guess that I was under the understanding that they both had to be 125’ but, the variance says that the vacant, proposed vacant lot, does it have to be 125’? It can be 75’?


Director Weaver stated, I don’t have the variance file in front of me, I will have to get it from the office.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, okay, that’s probably not the most important thing anyway. There’s a vacant, this way it will be a vacant piece of property if in, he says he does not have anything planned right now.


Ben Stefaniak stated, that’s correct.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, for that piece of property. You want to make use of a vacant piece of property you have. If this subdivision was approved and if someone wanted to build on it how big will that building be, what will the setbacks be? Will it be 20’ off of Main and will it be 20’ of St. Mary’s, unless on the West side, and left is on the North side, that’s what the picture looks like. So after he gets the subdivision it’s possible that Mr. Stefaniak or anyone else that owns that piece of property at any given time could come in and say I want a building permit, I want to put a building here, how big will that building be? What will square footage be and how many parking spaces will it be required to have? Will it have to be paved?


Jay Clawson stated, being a City subdivision the City did not…


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, now requires it?


Jay Clawson stated, yes, it would have to be paved and it would have to meet all of the requirements of the parking because, we didn’t vary with the rest of the county with the parking either.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, right, I think that the concern is, that that could happen, and how many spaces would be required? Where would they be, and in the past this lot has had the parking for your building that use to house Stefaniak, correct?


Ben Stefaniak stated, that’s correct.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, okay, so that use to be the parking for there, so if this happens a building is put up and you have to have spaces, where are the people going park that want to do business in lot #8? Where that house business is now?


Ben Stefaniak stated, they will park in the back of that other business.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, off of the alley?


Ben Stefaniak stated, just like the insurance company does there, Able Insurance, they park in back.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, would that be allowed at that point?


Jay Clawson stated, that lot has access off of Main Street, the Insurance Agency, this will take this property out of compliance with being able to do business. I don’t think that there are any businesses in town that we created have only access off of an alley.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, the concern of people in the neighborhood, and I’m not adjoining but, I use that intersection 6 to 10 times a day for running my children or my errands or whatever I do. Now that we have Arni’s and Dollar General, they’re pretty successful and there are cars coming in and out of that lot. There are cars that go at various speeds going North on Main, I don’t think that anyone goes 25 m.p.h. There are people trying to go West on St. Mary’s, some people try to go East across there to St. Mary’s and there is a lot of congestion. That intersection is busy and it’s dangerous, just by nature of its location. I can’t get the school system to let my child be dropped off on the school bus there anymore because it is too dangerous. I think that the concern would be a building could go up, there would have to be parking where would it be, you have now a business who doesn’t have, there is not any access to Main right now, where would they park? How is it going to effect that intersection and then where would the building, would it block visibility?

I think that there is question there, they don’t have any off street parking obviously, so you can’t park off street at that location and given the nature of where this property is there is great concern there. I would ask that everyone on the Board, I assume that everyone has been by there and everyone knows where it’s at and maybe you don’t use it as often as I do or people down the hill. Mr. Erwin down on the West of that on St. Mary’s might use that road, and it is difficult and I don’t want to deny Mr. Stefaniak the right to do what he wants on his property. Yet we have Area Plan in place, it’s a major responsibility to think about what could happen on that piece of property and how it is going to effect the nature of the neighborhood and the safety of the people in the city, in general using that and I would like that to be addressed.

I was also wondering if in fact a building does go up, is drainage an issue? Now you don’t have ground absorbing drainage from that area. Where would that go, would it go in the street? Even though someone might own all of that I was wondering if draining might be in question and like I said along with visibility.


President Anderson asked, would you like to respond to anything that she is saying?


Ben Stefaniak stated, the big concern about, it’s a 2 lane street there, where she lives at she could use the other lane and where this building is going to be, use the other lane so… 


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, no, if I’m coming West off of East St. Mary’s I want to cross Main I finally decided that I can make it because, I can manage to get myself across St Mary’s. Then all of a sudden I’m on West St. Mary’s with a business there, there would be people possibly backing out, they could be backing out with their rear to the West, they could back out with their rear to the East, I’m going to use that, facing the West, I’m using the right hand lane to get myself to Illinois to possibly come up town or where I’m going.


Ben Stefaniak stated, I don’t see how that would effect you ma’am by going across Main Street because there would be a building there. How would that effect you going across Main Street on St. Mary’s?


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, the building itself would not effect me but people would park at your business, right? I don’t know the answer to how big the building could be and how many parking spaces would be required for that size building. I don’t know those things. I would imagine it’s, 3, 4 or 5, I don’t know the answer. Maybe someone here a little more familiar with how many parking spaces are required, how many square foot to get one space, I don’t know.


Director Weaver stated, that depends on the type of business.


Ben Stefaniak stated, it’s not going to be a Taco Bell ma’am.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, I don’t think that it matters what it is, I know that it’s zoned B-1, it can be anything under B-1, right? Both new lots will also be B-1? Is that correct?


Director Weaver stated, yes…


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, so under the schedule of uses Taco Bell isn’t even an option under B-1. I’m not speculating about what kind of business might be in there and whether or not I would object to the type of business, that’s not my concern. My concern is parking.


Ben Stefaniak asked, let me ask you this, what if I made that like R-2 and made a duplex would that satisfy your concern?


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, there again, Mr. Stefaniak, I’m not concerned with what building that you’re putting there, I would like to know what size, I would assume that it would have to be so far off to be in line.


President Anderson stated, it’s going to be a B-1.


Attorney Altman stated, he could rezone.


Ben Stefaniak stated, I could rezone.


President Anderson stated, that’s not the issue.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, that’s another issue there. There again, how many variances and rezonings do you need to change a piece of property that was designated as such at one point and time. Yes, I guess that you could do a lot of variances and a lot of rezonings to put everything around but that kind of defeats the point of having a Zoning Ordinance in the first place that is in place for an orderly development of property as I understand it.


John Hayden stated, the building can’t be very big anyway.


Jay Clawson asked, Attorney Altman, by subdividing this, if the next lot that is off of this subdivision this was used….


Attorney Altman stated, to the North.


Jay Clawson asked, to the North which belongs to Mr. Stefaniak, by him subdividing this and developing this would that take said property when it was developed out of compliance because it has no off street parking?


Attorney Altman stated, I went over and talked to Director Weaver about this while they were debating and I’m not sure Director Weaver, did you get…


Jay Clawson stated, because with this other property being here your taking away the access to this from people that want to pull up to the front and do business with it. Then you add this other problem here and your creating a problem for everyone in the neighborhood with them trying to do business out of the alley. An alley is not a standard 50’ road, it’s a 16’, I mean there is already enough traffic in that alley behind there that if you create a problem with that trying to be a business you would create more of a traffic problem there.


Attorney Altman stated, I think that’s a pretty important question and we really should have an answer on it before we vote.


Ben Stefaniak asked, would you like the other business zoned to residential then?


Jay Clawson stated, what I’m saying is…


Ben Stefaniak stated, I don’t understand what you want.


Jay Clawson stated, what I’m saying is you use the front of this lot as your parking for your business for the last 15 or 20 years, by you taking this away then your business here does not have any place to operate business, I mean for people to park at. You can’t park out on the street on Main Street, even though it’s not marked no parking with the traffic there and as narrow as that street is, it would create a terrible traffic problem and a safety problem. By you having this lot up front it enables you to keep you’re business in compliance even though it’s not paved you have parking available for whoever want’s to run business in your old real-estate office by you taking that away it’s makes your whole property…


Ben Stefaniak asked, it’s makes the alley dangerous is that what your saying Jay Clawson?


Jay Clawson stated, it takes it out of compliance. What I’m saying is an alley is not designed as a street to handle business traffic to and from, ingress and egress, an alley, it’s a secondary means of access to a residence. I’m sure that our ordinance, every subdivision has to have access by road which this would take, it’s opening a big can of worms, that’s why I asked the lawyer to say if that actually, by us acting on this, takes that out of compliance because we can’t create a situation that would make a property out of compliance with our Zoning Ordinance.


Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know the answer to that and I asked Director Weaver because, I kind of anticipated your question after I heard you mention it and I think that is something that we need to…


President Anderson asked, do you not want to act on this until you find out?


Attorney Altman stated, I really think that he doesn’t want us to act on this until we do because he can be cutting his nose off.


Jay Clawson stated, because with the other situation you were remarking to on the insurance agent which is up the street they have a curb cut, they have 20’ of parking to the North side of their building so it’s not the same situation as they have with this property here because there is not room on either side to put a road in to access this building, the property to the North of this.


Attorney Altman stated, the definition says, usually less than 30’ in width which normally fords a secondary means of access and that looks to me like we had better set down and get an answer before we proceed then. I think that we should table this until next meeting.


Steve Fisher asked, Director Weaver, what is the possibility of the lot variance?


Director Weaver stated, I went and pulled the variance and there was a variance and it was on both lots, it was for the required width.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, so instead of 125’ each frontage on St. Mary’s one was 90’?


Director Weaver stated, one has 75’ and one had 90’, 75.77’.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, so they are considerably smaller than what was, well at least the 75’ one is considerably smaller.


President Anderson asked, wait, they can do this before we subdivide it?


Steve Fisher state, that’s what I’m having the problem with, they have given a B.Z.A…


Director Weaver stated, if they didn’t grant that they couldn't have even come to you with this subdivision because it wouldn’t have gone.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, you said that you were going to find an answer to that question, could it be explored to what, how many parking spaces would be required?


Director Weaver stated, there’s no exploring on that, it depends on what kind of business that would go in there and that would be addressed at that time.


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, so it’s just not standard for a B-1.


Director Weaver stated, we have a table that tells us what kind of business it is as to how many…


Carolyn Vantwoud asked, I’m just curios is there a minimum that you could say, it would have to be this or more?


Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of.


Attorney Altman stated, why don’t you go ahead and talk to Director Weaver and we will go over the ordinance book and she can give you…


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, she said that she can’t answer the range.


Attorney Altman stated, she can give you the ranges and the perimeters and at least you would know that much.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, I would just like to appeal to the Board to just think about the intersection and like I said just by it’s nature of where it is and the traffic that already exists and the character of our neighborhood in general, to consider the possibilities because once it is subdivided and approved, then there is no going back.


President Anderson stated, that’s the reason that we’re going to delay it until next month.


Carolyn Vantwoud stated, okay.


President Anderson asked, do you want to go ahead and table this?


Ben Stefaniak asked, there is no alternative is there?


President Anderson stated, I don’t think so.


Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think so.


President Anderson stated, okay, this will be tabled until the next meeting.




#246 Betty Fisher; Requesting secondary approval of a 3 lot subdivision to be known as Stogie’s Cove on 2.122 acres. The property is located in Union Township on the South side of Chalmers Road, about 1/8 of a mile east of Oakdale Road.


President Anderson asked, is Mrs. Fisher here tonight?


Betty Fisher was present.


President Anderson stated, we looked at this last meeting, we wanted her to increase the size of the road.


Betty Fisher stated, you wanted a 50’ easement, which we did.


President Anderson asked, do the Commissioners have any question for her?


Jay Clawson asked, everything was complied with that we asked for at the last meeting?


Director Weaver stated, I believe so.


Betty Fisher stated, he added an easement and also added a utility easement.  


Jay Clawson stated, is this the update or is this the original one because he still has this marked as 25’ ingress and egress.


Betty Fisher stated, I know along the road he put it 25’ on each side to give you the extra 50’ that you asked for.


Attorney Altman stated, this one is different than that one. I think that setback should be pulled back.


Director Weaver stated, Jay Clawson the only thing that I have down here that we were requesting was a 50’ road right-of-way.


Jay Clawson stated, in here it still doesn’t show, this is the same way a 25’ ingress and egress.


Director Weaver stated, that’s what I was just saying to Attorney Altman, they platted it as an easement included on part of the lots is the way that it appears to me.


Betty Fisher stated, he said that he was showing the easement 25’ on each side of the road to give you the 50’ that you wanted.


Director Weaver stated, but, he’s including it as part of the lots, the way that it looks to me, now, I’m not familiar with his work, that’s why I’m questioning it here.


Attorney Altman asked, the other thing is he needs to put his setback on lot #2.


There was discussion among the Board members and Betty Fisher.


Director Weaver sated, he does have a total of 50’.


Jay Clawson stated, he does have a total of 50’ but, when he pushed this line over here he didn’t keep the 20’. He should have went with the 20’ from the setback line.


Attorney Altman stated, what I guess that I would recommend is, that if we precede that we precede that setback line, this be redrawn with the setback line back 20’….


Jay Clawson stated, this one here needs to be redrawn, too.


Attorney Altman stated, exactly.


Jay Clawson stated, and the wording here.


Attorney Altman stated, here too.


Jay Clawson stated, on this 25’ setback it should be 50’.


Attorney Altman stated, it should be 50’, and also the same thing along lot #3.


President Anderson asked, do you want to read that into the minutes so we don’t have to write that down?


Attorney Altman asked, I will but, does everyone understand what we’re talking about? On lot #1 they would move the setback line back 20’ from the lot line, likewise on lot #2 the same way and then lot #3 the same way and this would change to be 50’.


Betty Fisher stated, this is just a path.


Attorney Altman stated, I understand but, I’m just making sure. That one also needs to be changed but I’m not sure. Is there anything else?


Jay Clawson asked, did you put that lot #2 needs to be setback 20’ also?


Attorney Altman stated, yes, and lot #3, too.


Jay Clawson stated, lot #3.


Attorney Altman stated, from the road.


Jay Clawson stated, yes, from the road right-of-way.


Attorney Altman stated, and that the ingress and egress needs to say 50’.


Jay Clawson stated, total.


Attorney Altman asked, is there anything else?


Betty Fisher asked, Director Weaver, would he be able to come to you and you can show him exactly what you want.


Director Weaver stated, I can talk to him.


Attorney Altman stated, or come to me, well I guess I just say that let me make it this way that we have a motion on the floor that the plat be amended to have the setback lines be 20’ lot from the roadway easement would be 50’. Is a motion on the floor, is there a second?


Steve Fisher seconded the motion.


President Anderson stated, so moved.


Attorney Altman stated, then the vote is subject to the motion and condition on the motion.


Director Weaver stated, now, I want to clarify it was stated in last months meeting that they did not have to do any more improvements to that road, correct?


President Anderson stated, yes.


Director Weaver asked, so they do not have to have a letter of credit?


Steve Fisher stated, yes, because of the situation as long as they have…


Director Weaver stated, I just wanted to clarify that for the record because, I did not get anything for that.


President Anderson asked, that way if the county wants to do something to it…


Jay Clawson stated, or if someone wants to subdivide the property in the back and to put a more substantial road in at their expense.


Director Weaver stated, I did have…


Attorney Altman asked, is there a road way in there now?


Director Weaver stated, it’s a lane, yes.


Betty Fisher stated, it’s been there forever.


Jay Clawson stated, she wanted to be able to use, there was a little turn around in one and as long as everyone gets along that’s fine but, if someone was to subdivide it and say no you’re not going to use that.


Betty Fisher stated, easement is a good idea.


Attorney Altman asked, are there any telephone poles or lines through here already?


Director Weaver stated, he did put on there that this right-of-way was for both utilities and ingress and egress.


Attorney Altman stated, I have that but, I wasn’t sure if there was anything present. Are there any N.I.P.S.CO., gas lines or anything in there?


Betty Fisher stated, when they bought it the back property, she owns it all, the gentlemen who was selling to my contract would not allow them to go across the front property when they brought the gas in. So there isn’t any right now but the utility easement is a good idea so if someone in the future wants to bring the gas back they could do that.


Attorney Altman stated, I don’t have any trouble with that I just wanted to make sure that we didn’t have anything else that should be on this plat that isn’t on it at the present time.


Betty Fisher asked, is it 25’ on each side, is that what you want?


Director Weaver stated, 50’ total.


Jay Clawson stated, once you have a setback you can’t build within 20’ from the easement.


Betty Fisher stated, I see what you’re saying now.


With no further discussion the Board voted.


The Secondary Approval request for a subdivision to be known as Stogie’s Cove located in Union Township, was approved by a vote of 7 to 0, based on a finding of fact that the Standards of the Subdivision Control Ordinance have been met, primary approval has been granted and the subdivision is in compliance.


Attorney Altman stated, subject to the contingencies.


Director Weaver stated, there is a 10-day waiting period before the plat can be signed.




President Anderson stated, next on the agenda is business and we don’t have any.


Jay Clawson made a motion to adjourn.


Gary Barbour seconded the motion.




The meeting adjourned.


Respectfully submitted,





Ray Butz, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission







Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission