Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, December 13, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

 

Members attending were: Jay Clawson, Gary Barbour, Ray Butz, Don Ward, Scott Kyburz and Rick Raderstorf. Also attending were Attorney Altman and Director Diann Weaver. 

Visitors Attending were: Eric & Rachael DeRudder, Joe Farr on behalf of Trustco Development Co, Tammy Demerly, Rose M. Buschman, Charles R. Mellon, Joe Hlatko, Tony Vantwood, John Hayden, Phil Vogel, Ben Stefaniak and Bob Wrede.

 

Attorney Altman stated, I will call the meeting to order. Reason is because, our President and Vice President are not here tonight. Ray Butz is the next person that would take charge. Do you want to take charge?

 

Ray Butz stated, yes.

 

Attorney Altman stated, our secretary will do that.

 

Greg Bossaer made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the July 12, 1999 meeting. Motion was seconded by Jay Clawson and carried unanimously.

 

****

 

#694 Connie Flick; Requesting to rezone from A-1 to B-2 on lot #80 on Market Street in the Original Plat of the Town of Monon. The property is located just North of 7216 N. U.S. Highway 421.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, do we have anyone representing this request?

 

Bob Wrede was present to represent the request.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, do you have anything to add?

 

Bob Wrede stated, no, if there are any questions I would be glad to answer.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, does the Board have any questions? Is there anyone opposed to this request?

 

Director Weaver stated, there is a letter in the file that we received today from an adjoining owner stating that they have no problems with this request. What the intention of this is, they are wanting to put up an off premise sign on this property. The State of Indiana will not issue a State permit for a sign unless it’s on business zoned property so that is why he is wanting to rezone this property.

 

Gary Barbour asked, those mini storage sheds, what are they zoned?

 

Director Weaver stated, they are zoned business but, this is just to the North of those. This is in-between those and the ditch.

 

Jay Clawson asked, is this lot big enough to build a building on?

 

Director Weaver stated, no it is not.

 

Jay Clawson asked, so actually, it’s just a small parcel that will just be for that?

 

Director Weaver stated, yes, the ditch actually goes through that parcel of ground.

 

Bob Wrede stated, it probably should have been rezoned where the other storage buildings were put on there all at the same time I put a lot between those storage buildings and the ditch.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, does the Board have any questions? Are we ready to vote?

 

With no further discussion the Board voted.

 

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

 

Attorney Altman stated, this will be sent with a positive recommendation. It will be certified tomorrow so it will go to their next, go to them and generally that’s handled at their next meeting. You need to check with them about that.

 

****

 

#695 Rose Buschman; Requesting to rezone from R-2 to B-2 on lot #47 and lot #46 and part of lot #45 in the North Addition to the Town of Reynolds. The property is located at 317 N. Clark Street.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, do we have anyone representing this request?

 

Phil Vogel stated, a couple of things, they have missed one lot, it should be lot #44 along with that.

 

Director Weaver stated, the staff report says lot #44, and so does what we advertised. It was advertised correctly, it’s just not on the agenda.

 

Phil Vogel stated, that’s fine. I’m with Vogel Real Estate and this is the building that Rose Buschman has owned and we are selling it for her and I don’t know if your familiar with it, if you went over to the building but, it was part of their old fertilizer plant and for some reason when they rezoned part of it years ago they did not rezone the other part of the other building. I don’t know how many of you have been to the site, I have some pictures. It is strictly a business building and how it’s in an R-2 I don’t know but, it has a railroad spur on it and there’s business right across the street. There’s also the city municipality which is at the end of it where the water tower is and they were putting a new roof on, it must be the pump station or something there but, I’m going to give you some pictures here but primarily we want to just rezone it to B-2.

 

Attorney Altman asked, what was the past use of the building?

 

Phil Vogel stated, it was Buschman Fertilizer and Terra Fertilizer for years.

 

Attorney Altman asked, are these pictures duplicates? Are there doubles?

 

Phil Vogel stated, yes.

 

Attorney Altman stated, okay, I have to sort off and mark only one set of them, Exhibit #1 through #7. In addition to having the railroad spurs there, there are also two railroads immediately in the area, right? And the highway right beside it within a block?

 

Phil Vogel stated, the highway is not right beside it. There’s a business building in between it and the highway which is that green building that is currently used, that is zoned B-2 I believe.

 

Attorney Altman asked, it’s within a block right?

 

Director Weaver stated, right.

 

Don Ward asked, what is the shape of that property? Do you have a drawing?

 

Director Weaver stated, no I don’t.

 

Phil Vogel stated, I have a drawing but, I don’t have it here. It’s an appraisal drawing at one time.

 

Attorney Altman asked, could you help Mr. Ward by outlining that on his map where that is.

 

Phil Vogel asked, I think that I can. Do you have a copy of the lots here?

 

Don Ward stated, undoubtedly there is a right-of-way and the railroad through there, the lots are cut by the railroad?

 

Phil Vogel stated, they actually go on the other side.

 

Don Ward asked, they were there when the railroad went through?

 

Phil Vogel stated, yes.

 

Don Ward asked, this is all part of it?

 

Phil Vogel stated, when I say railroad I might be incorrect, I believe that’s the spur that comes in and that’s on these lots. I think that part of these lots on the back side of the spur that comes in off of here and the building lays kind of here.

 

There was discussion between the Board and Phil Vogel.

 

Phil Vogel stated, this is the building across the street, there is a street that goes right here and that is were this building lays, just like this.

 

Don Ward asked, that’s North South Street.

 

Phil Vogel stated, and U.S. 421 is right here and this water tower sits right here where this street comes out to U.S. 421 right here. This water tower actually sits right here between the railroad tracks and this street that goes North.

 

Don Ward stated, what I was talking about is, this street is shown here going right straight through but actually, it goes up here, you have to turn up Clark Street, cross the railroad tracks and then swing back around that spur in order to get back on Wayne Street over here on the other side of the track. What I was wondering, does the plat show that being there?

 

Phil Vogel stated, no.

 

Don Ward asked, it does not show it?

 

Phil Vogel stated, no.

 

Don Ward stated, so it doesn’t go through like this map shows, it actually does this, goes North, you have to go North and then swing back and go pass where Kenny Firth use to live.

 

Phil Vogel stated, you asked me if there is a street here that goes across the tracks.

 

Don Ward asked, no, but it doesn’t show it on the plat?

 

Phil Vogel stated, I don’t think so. This building is lying cockeyed on there.

 

Don Ward stated, yes, it’s lying with the spur.

 

Phil Vogel stated, you have the lots that lay on this and there’s a 5’ vacated part on one of these lots. This building lays like, this is how that building lays.

 

Don Ward stated, so the lots were there before the railroad so this is really a partial lot, what we’re rezoning.

 

Phil Vogel asked, when you say partial lots, the other part is?

 

Don Ward stated, on the railroad.

 

Phil Vogel stated, part of the lot is on the other side of the railroad spur.

 

Don Ward stated, right.

 

Jay Clawson stated, they might have right of way there but, it would still be a right-of-way, it would just change to a “B” zoning.

 

Don Ward stated, I don’t think that it matters anyway.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, do we have anyone here opposed to this variance? Does the Board have any questions? Are we ready to vote?

 

With no further discussion the Board voted.

 

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

 

Attorney Altman stated, this will be forwarded with a positive recommendation for their next regular meeting.

 

Phil Vogel asked, can I ask, when that meeting will be?

 

Attorney Altman asked, do you know?

 

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know, I believe that they only meet once a month and I believe that it’s the first Tuesday of the month maybe, I can’t tell you that for sure.

 

An audience member stated, they met December the 7th.

 

Attorney Altman stated, check with Sally Zarse, she’s the Clerk Treasurer and she would know exactly when that would be.

 

Director Weaver stated, Phil, we have that phone number in the office.

 

An audience member stated, Zarse is not the Clerk Treasurer anymore, there is a new one.

 

Director Weaver stated, well, we have the Clerk Treasurer’s number in our office. Check with us tomorrow, we can give you the phone number.

 

****

 

#696 Eric DeRudder; Requesting to rezone from I-1 to A-1 on 5.00 acres. The property is located in Prairie Township at 9113 S. 375 E.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, Eric, do you have anything to add?

 

Eric DeRudder stated, I just want to remodel the house without getting the State into it.

 

Attorney Altman stated, this is clearly agriculture basically, all of the way around it and agriculture used all of the way around it.

 

Eric DeRudder stated, right. 

 

Director Weaver stated, this property was rezoned at one time from A-1 to Industrial.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, do we have anyone here opposed to this rezoning? Does the Board have any questions? Let’s vote.

 

With no further discussion the Board voted.

 

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

 

Attorney Altman stated, this will be forwarded with a positive recommendation and that will be next Monday at 8:30 a.m. right here. So if anyone is interested in being here, I would suggest to be here.

 

Eric DeRudder asked, do you want me to be here?

 

Attorney Altman stated, I would recommend it, if it was mine I would be here.

 

Director Weaver stated, I will present it to the Board of Commissioners but, they will ask if anyone is present so you can speak at that time.

 

****

 

#697 Trustco Development Company; Requesting to rezone from R-2 to B-2 on lot #7 in Turner’s Addition. The property is located in the City of Monticello, just South of 826 N. Main Street.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, is there anyone here to represent this request?

 

Joe Farr stated, I’m representing Trustco Development Company. I don’t have anything to add.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, nothing to add?

 

Joe Farr stated, it has been commercial property for, I think about 30 years, the leases were all grandfathered in. We had the zoning on several other lots and I just missed this one in the legal description, just a formality.

 

Jay Clawson stated, the Hardee’s parking lot.

 

Joe Farr stated, yes.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, is there anyone here opposed to this request? Does the Board have any questions?

 

Attorney Altman stated, obviously this is a business area.

 

Joe Farr stated, yes.

 

Attorney Altman stated, business all of the way around it.

 

Joe Farr stated, yes, it’s been a shopping center for…

 

Jay Clawson asked, we rezoned the other properties and you just left out one lot?

 

Joe Farr stated, yes, it’s been commercial property for many years now and it’s just a formality.

 

With no further discussion the Board voted.

 

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

 

Attorney Altman asked, that’s when?

 

Director Weaver stated, Monday.

 

Jay Clawson stated, next Monday at 7:00 p.m.

 

****

 

#698 Bronislaw Stefaniak; Requesting to rezone from B-1 to R-2 on lot #7 and 10’ off the South side of lot #8 in Hughes Addition and 50’ off the North side of Lot #8 in Hughes Addition. The property is located in the City of Monticello on the Northwest corner of St. Mary’s Avenue and North Main Street. 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, is there anyone representing this request?

 

Ben Stefaniak stated, just rezoning from B-1 to R-2 because everyone is objecting to the B-1, so just to make everyone happy we will just rezone it to R-2. It would be too much traffic if it was zoned business.

 

Secretary Ray Butz asked, is there anyone opposed to the rezoning? Does the Board have any questions?

 

Jay Clawson asked, this was for Attorney Altman the last time, with that being a business property North of that, that they use as parking for the business property and if we zoned it differently and they allow that to be built on, will that take the business property out of compliance?

 

Director Weaver stated, wait a minute, let’s back up a step. This includes that lot to the North. This rezoning is what was presented to you…

 

Jay Clawson asked, is that the whole building to the North?

 

Director Weaver stated, yes.

 

Jay Clawson asked, the house that use to…

 

Director Weaver stated, where the duplex is now and where the parking is plus, the parcel to the North of that which is the parcel that was formerly used for the business. It does include that.

 

Jay Clawson stated, it just said part of lot #8.

 

Director Weaver stated, well, there are two descriptions, part of it we broke it down as how they are using the property and part of it is lot #7 and part of lot #8. Then part of lot #8 is on it’s own piece, it’s on it’s own tax bill and tax records and that’s why we broke it down this way so it does include both.

 

Jay Clawson stated, okay. I just want to make sure that’s downgraded so that won’t be used as a retail business if they are going to build there because, there is no on street parking on Main Street at this time and I think that in our ordinance you can’t have ingress and egress for a business out of an alley.

 

Director Weaver stated, right.

 

Attorney Altman stated, if it’s zoned R-2 it could not be a business. As I understand the applicant does not intend to use it…

 

Ben Stefaniak stated, there are two other people that live right around the corner that is zoned right off of the street there is Beula Call and she goes in…

 

Jay Clawson stated, I understand that but the thing is, if you take away your parking where you have it out in front and if that becomes later on, we’re not talking this year or next year, zoning is for pepetutility or what ever you call it.

 

Don Ward stated, perpetuity.

 

Jay Clawson stated, perpetuity, that 20 years from now someone might have a high traffic area in there and there’s no place. If you have 200 cars a day leaving a business it becomes a hazard to the whole neighborhood.

 

Ben Stefaniak stated, it’s all being rezoned to R-2.

 

Jay Clawson stated, that’s the reason that I asked if it’s being downgraded to change the whole complexity of the whole vote on the zoning. That’s why we didn’t act on it last month because I wanted the lawyer, Attorney Altman was absent and he was not here to answer the question that I had at the last meeting. I would like to see when you send stuff over to Area Plan, that the plot map with those lots. I want to see the whole thing when we vote on it next week to make sure that both lots are on there before it’s final vote.

 

Director Weaver asked, you want to see a copy of the plat?

 

Jay Clawson stated, yes, if you could send just a copy of the plat.

 

Director Weaver stated, we can do that.

 

With no further discussion the Board voted.

 

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

 

Attorney Altman stated, next Monday. 

Director Weaver stated, I do want the Board know that on this property there is an old variance, it does allow for a second duplex to be placed on that property on the corner. 

Jay Clawson asked, don’t they lapse after so many years? 

Director Weaver stated, the variance is still valid. I wanted to let the Board know that.

 

Jay Clawson stated, I want to go on the record to say that a lot of the variances that they have been having is not good zoning in my opinion.

 

Attorney Altman stated, you need to appear at the meeting.

 

Director Weaver stated, there will be no meeting.

 

Jay Clawson stated, it’s already a done deal.

 

Attorney Altman stated, no, I mean at other variances.

 

Director Weaver stated, that was done in 1978.

 

Gary Barbour asked, so that 10,000 square foot makes no difference.

 

Jay Clawson asked, so what is to stop everyone in the county from putting their hand out and saying okay I want to subdivide and put a duplex. I have a house in the front and I want to put a duplex in the back yard for everyone to start dual use on all of their lots? It’s one building per lot.

 

Director Weaver stated, the old ordinance did not allow for that but, this one does. It does not stipulate anywhere, at least I have not found it.

 

Jay Clawson asked, how can they do it on the last ordinance if it wasn’t allowed.

 

Director Weaver stated, they went through the variance to do it.

 

****

 

Ray Butz asked, is Joe Hlatko here?

 

Joe Hlatko stated, it’s not condominiums, I just want to be able to sell duplexes separately like they do in Lake County and Porter County and they are very successful about doing that. I have some flyers, if you’re interested in seeing them that I will pass around. I have been looking at duplexes, I looked at one the other day and it sold for 438,000 dollars. That’s only a ½ of a building.

 

Jay Clawson stated, we still haven’t received any copies of the condominium ordinance.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, it’s not condominiums and I have tried to get them to write me some letters, Porter County will not send a letter out on advice of their attorney. Lake County, I know that he talked to Director Weaver today but, he was on vacation last week and I thought that he was going to send me something.

 

Jay Clawson stated, the thing that has held us back so long on this is, we were wanting to see what kind of ordinance that they do to allow those to be there. That’s the whole idea, is the legal use of the whole thing, is to figure out how to allow this to go through us.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, this guy in Lake County is a really nice guy but, what he says is once the house is built the Building and the Planning Commission is out. Then it’s up to the owner which would be the builder and then he sells each one separately and the surveyor just does the surveying right through the party wall. The people that own the land with a condominium, it would be common ground around the house.

 

Jay Clawson stated, but, there has to be certain things written in there for how to describe the lot lines because right now on those buildings you will have to have the minimum of 13’. We don’t have any provisions in our ordinance to allow this at this time and I’m sure that there are things in other county ordinances that has it all stated out how they do that because, it’s not in our ordinance to allow us to do that.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, when they built the original building, you have to be, your property lines from each side, front and back have to be within codes.

 

Jay Clawson stated, that’s what we need more than anything is to see some type of ordinance of how they have it written that they allow these to be done in certain counties. That’s what I’ve been waiting to see since the first time that he has been here. I wouldn’t try and I don’t want to try to, we’ve tried to do committee rezoning ourselves and unless we want our consultant, whoever it was that wrote our book to come up with it, or see some other kind of counties zoning ordinance on how they do these and then amend it to meet our needs. As far as us trying to draw it up and then allow it, I don’t see how we can do that at this time and that’s what I’ve been waiting on this whole time. 

 

Attorney Altman stated, I agree. We don’t have any business on doing this on our own. It’s just not good planning. I guess that the one thing that I might recommend is if the County Commissioners want to do something like this since they’re going to be the ones that are going to pay the bill.

 

Jay Clawson stated, to allow it. I don’t have a problem with it becoming part of our ordinance and to allow these things but it’s not our, the County Commissioners are the ones that say they have to expend the money to have that written into our book.

 

Attorney Altman stated, because we would really need a consultant to, I’m sure that’s what we have to have to get the property ordinance drafted to take care of the health, safety and welfare needs and septic and etc.

 

Jay Clawson stated, just to make sure that it’s done right when someone comes up with a plan in front of us that we know what the criteria is. If someone wants to do that you say here, you need all of these requirements and you can build these things. I have no problem with that but as far us drawing it up, because it’s not up to me to write up the…

 

Don Ward stated, someone is learning from experience, the right way.

 

Jay Clawson stated, there’s a lot of other counties and that’s why I wish that someone would fax us their ordinance, I won’t think that it was that big of a deal.

 

Director Weaver stated, I’m sorry, I wasn’t here, but Lake County is going to send us a copy of their Zoning Ordinance and their Subdivision Ordinance. I talked to him today.

 

Jay Clawson stated, if we can have that in our packets for next month so we can look at it because we would be a lot more educated on how it’s done. Right now it’s something that is totally foreign to us.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, this fella in Lake County, he says that their fear is that once the house is built they don’t want anything to do with it the Plan Commission and the Building Department is out of it. It’s up to the owner and he says that if we did otherwise we may be in trouble, the Plan Commission, someone may go after them.

 

Attorney Altman stated, that’s the way that it is with anything that we do here. If it’s done properly then it’s up to the private developer that’s the way that we basically work here. So if you get that and next meeting we can look at it and all be up to speed at least as to how one county has done it, okay?

 

Joe Hlatko stated, okay.

 

Attorney Altman stated, I certainly would think talking to the County Commissioners would be, they are going to have to adopt it if nothing else. If it doesn’t cost them a dime they are going to have to adopt it, so are the City Council and Town Councils throughout this county so that would be a decent place to at least put your oar in.

 

Joe Hlatko asked, let’s say that I have an existing duplex and I want to sell each half right now. Could I go through the variance procedure?

 

Attorney Altman stated, I wouldn’t say that you can’t but I would recommend, as an Attorney for that Board, I would recommend unless it’s on city water and sewer and the city consents to it I would say don’t, to the city or whoever is going to take care of that. That would be my recommendation to them until we find out how someone else has done it and see that these problems are in fact taken care of. I’m not telling you that you can’t file it, I’m just telling you that would be my recommendation right now to that Board.

 

Joe Hlatko asked, I can go through a condominium process according to Indiana law which gets expensive for me and it’s expensive for the people that buy it because you have to have these monthly fees and that stuff and that’s why I don't want to do the condominium thing.

 

Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I’m saying maybe you should wait a month and see what Director Weaver gets.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, okay, like I say I can’t bend their arm up there all that I can do is wait.

 

Jay Clawson stated, maybe she can make sure that when she gets a copy that she can stuff it in the Commissioners thing and let them look at it too. That way when you contact them they might have an idea of what your talking about when you do contact them.

 

Greg Bossaer asked, is this allowed in Tippecanoe County?

 

Director Weaver stated, I don’t believe so.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, no they don’t and personally I think that it’s a mistake.

 

Don Ward asked, what about Baxmeyer. Do you think that he would be interested in bringing ours up to date? 

Director Weaver stated, I have tried to contact him since I have been in the Directors position with no luck. I don’t know where he’s at or what he’s up to.

 

Attorney Altman stated, once you get them they are gone. When their paid their gone.

 

Rick Raderstorf stated, that’s why you don’t get much cooperation out of the other people. They paid for that, why do they want to pass it on to you, you pay for it yourself. That’s the impression by the firm that they bought it off to not do that also. 

Attorney Altman stated, we will see what we get but, I will say again to go talk to the Commissioners and the Council people because they are going to have to pay no matter what we get because, they are going to have to adopt it.

 

Joe Hlatko stated, it’s a win situation for all of those involved, the seniors love them.

 

****

 

Attorney Altman stated, next thing on the agenda, we have amendments to our ordinances. The first one that we have is the organization and procedure for the Board of Zoning Appeals and this, we’re just making the notice go to the right people.

 

Director Weaver stated, that’s what all 4 of these amendments are, for the notification.

 

Attorney Altman stated, the notification just to get the notification to the right segment of the population surrounding the variance. A yes vote obviously means that you’re in favor of it and no means that you’re not.

 

Director Weaver stated, on the subdivision amendment and I’m not sure which one that you’re on right now.

 

Attorney Altman stated, we’re on the Board of Zoning Appeals.

 

Director Weaver stated, that’s for the variances. We switched it back to where it’s just the adjacent property owners is what we have done there and in the current ordinance it says within 300’.

 

Attorney Altman stated, let’s keep on B.Z.A. first.

 

Director Weaver stated, that’s what I’m talking about.

 

Don Ward asked, does this mean across the street, adjacent, across the road?

 

Attorney Altman stated, it has always been adjacent, the word adjacent. If a street is a street and it’s dedicated to the public it stops, it’s no longer adjacent. If it’s an easement and such of course, it’s adjacent. It’s the way that it always has been since 1972.

 

Don Ward stated, sometimes they are effected and they aren’t adjacent.

 

Jay Clawson stated, I agree.

 

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing that I can say is there is notice out there in front, as far as something being in the mail, it’s always been that way.

 

Don Ward stated, I could see that.

 

Attorney Altman stated, that is just the way that it has been since square one, until this last ordinance came and they really balled up all of the notices.

 

Gary Barbour asked, if we would want to go with that would we have to turn this down? The way that it’s written and then Director Weaver can come back with that?

 

Attorney Altman stated, you would have to redraft an ordinance, yes. You need to vote if you want this changed you vote “no”. If you like this and you like the way that it is then you vote “yes” but, no it can’t be amended to something else and be adopted tonight. Well, it will be passed on again to legislative bodies.

 

Jay Clawson stated, the way that is written your not notifying people across the street.

 

Attorney Altman stated, if it’s an easement yes, if it’s a dead end road…

 

Jay Clawson stated, if there is someone across the street from me, if I live in the county and someone across the road wants to rezone then you’re not going to notify me.

 

Attorney Altman stated, in the county you probably would be because that’s an easement most of the time.

 

Jay Clawson stated, but, if it’s a dead end road…

 

 

Attorney Altman stated, if it’s a state highway, no.

 

Don Ward stated, or a railroad.

 

Jay Clawson stated, or in town, if someone wanted to do that and it’s a street, I think that people are better off to stay with what we have.

 

Attorney Altman stated, that’s why your voting, I’m just trying to explain it, that’s all.

 

Jay Clawson stated, okay.

 

Attorney Altman stated, 7 votes cast on the amendment to the ordinance of the Board of Zoning Appeals, 7 votes are negative, and it will be forwarded with no recommendation. The next matter that I have before us is the rules, practice and procedure on the White County Area Plan Commission. This is the one that allows the owners, the adjacent property owners, to be notified.

 

Gary Barbour stated, all of these are going to be the same.

 

Director Weaver stated, it states, as interested parties is how I have worded this, in this one.

 

Don Ward stated, but, it says that the interested parties shall include all adjacent properties so it’s the same thing as the last one.

 

Attorney Altman stated, says adjacent. This is the way that it has been?

 

Director Weaver stated, no, this is for the rezoning, currently on rezoning we don’t do any notification at all.

 

Attorney Altman asked, mail notice?

 

Director Weaver stated, we don’t mail any notices to any owners at all.

 

Jay Clawson asked, just the sign up?

 

Director Weaver stated, right, and then the advertising.

 

Attorney Altman stated, so this is an increase to adjacent owners.

 

Jay Clawson asked, they are still going to have to have the sign, this is going to be in addition to?

 

Attorney Altman stated, in addition, yes. This doesn’t have anything to do with the signage.

 

Don Ward stated, it’s the same as the last one, it needs to go to the guy across the street, the owner. So someone doesn’t say that they weren’t notified and I’m the one that has to look at it. 

 

Jay Clawson stated, we have had to table several requests because, people didn’t get proper notification.

 

Gary Barbour stated, even though it’s an increase…

 

Don Ward stated, increase of work alright, there’s no doubt about that.

 

Rick Raderstorf stated, I guess that it is better than what we have but, you want it to include the same as the first one.

 

Don Ward stated, across the street or across the railroad, across a stream.

 

Ray Butz stated, you want to notify everyone around you.

 

Director Weaver asked, a complete circle around the property is what you’re wanting?

 

Don Ward stated, basically, yes.

 

Ray Butz stated, within 300’.

 

Don Ward stated, the 300’ thing, covered things pretty well.

 

Director Weaver stated, when you get into town that’s a big area.

 

Jay Clawson stated, but, the person across the street has just as much in or just as much impact as the person behind that person.

 

Director Weaver stated, then we could change the footage instead of being 300’ we could say…

 

Ray Butz stated, 200’ or 100’.

 

Director Weaver stated, 150’.

 

Don Ward stated, across the street is about 60’.

 

Jay Clawson stated, 100’ from the property line would catch any other…

 

Don Ward stated, I will tell you the bad part about saying footage and I have to go through this with the D.N.R. You hit a joker that is right on the line, do you notify them or don’t you. You take a chance that the D.N.R. is not going to jump all over you.

 

Director Weaver stated, when in doubt you go ahead and notify.

 

Don Ward stated, everything within a quarter of a mile, so your bridge is on one quarter mile, a quarter mile away you have another property you have to notify the guy because your afraid not to.

 

Ray Butz asked, who does the notifying?

 

Don Ward stated, I do.

 

Attorney Altman stated, the applicant, or the engineer.

 

Don Ward stated, I have to do it registered mail and then I have to turn all of that into them, plus the guys name, address, phone number and anything else and they can call and see that I did it.

 

Attorney Altman stated, I guess that since there is a real pattern developing here, do you want to table all of these and have them modified? The only thing that I can tell you is you have to give her some guide lines so that if it comes back 100’ or 150’ your satisfied because, we weren’t satisfied with 300’ because of the extra amount of…

 

Director Weaver stated, and an extra burden on us.

 

Ray Butz stated, notification.

 

Don Ward stated, like we said the property adjacent or property across a railroad, a highway, a stream or some other barrier that is opposite the property in question. If it is not opposite, then they are not notified. That would cut down on the number of people.

 

Attorney Altman asked, do you want me to pull the ballots in Director Weaver and do that?

 

Director Weaver stated, if that’s what they are wanting to do, yes. The one on the subdivision, I don’t know if they want to go ahead and vote on that, that’s just putting that back to 300’ as it was in the original ordinance.

 

Jay Clawson stated, on item 4 indicates where written comments will be received and I think that you should add comments and petitions and or petitions maybe.

 

Attorney Altman asked, on the subdivision since it’s 300’ do you want to go ahead with it?

 

Director Weaver asked, or do you just want to table it as well?

 

Don Ward stated, no, I think that we should table it and I think that you should try to cut it. Like I said, cut down on your amount of work but, make sure that anyone that abuts, adjacent, across the street in other words, is the street perpendicular across that street, off of it you don’t notify them.

 

Director Weaver asked, so you want all of them to be on the same grounds as to who is notified?

 

Don Ward stated, yes, if you go 300’ you might get 10 people.

 

Jay Clawson stated, I agree, I think that this zoning directly effects the people that are straight across or subdivision should be notified.

 

Don Ward stated, actually, the guy that is across the street is the one that is going to be the most. He is going to look at it the most because he is sitting there facing the sign but, he is also the first one that is going to be in here and say that he was not notified like everyone else.

 

****

 

Attorney Altman asked, is there anything else Director Weaver?

 

Director Weaver stated, A.P.C. needs to reappoint a member to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

 

Attorney Altman asked, the present member is?

 

Director Weaver stated, Gary Barbour.

 

Greg Bossaer stated, I would like to recommend that he continue.

 

Jay Clawson seconded the motion.

 

Attorney Altman stated, I think that I accept that as a nomination and a second. A motion to close nominations and to ask that the secretary to cast an unanimous ballot in favor of Gary Barbour right?

 

Jay Clawson stated, exactly.

 

Attorney Altman asked, is there anything else Director Weaver?

 

Director Weaver stated, that’s all that I have. 

**** 

The Board voted unanimously to adjourn.

 

****

 

The meeting adjourned.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

 

Ray Butz, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission