Get Adobe Flash player



The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, August 23, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioner’s Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: R. Joe Roach, Emma Conwell, James R. Haworth, Bill Isom, Kevin Page, Lanna Page, David G. Brechbiel, Mike Mekos, Bob Roth and Arthur Vogel.

The meeting was called to order by President Jerry Thompson and roll call was taken. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.

Carol Stradling made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the May 24, 2001 meeting. Motion was seconded by Gary Barbour and carried unanimously.

President Thompson stated, move on to June, is there any discussion on the 21st of Junes minutes.

Carol Stradling stated, the only thing that I had seen was on page 4, Attorney Altman asked, for the record, Ron is a member of the Board and for this matter he has reclused himself because, he is an applicant. Is that excused himself?

Attorney Altman stated, usually it’s reclused as a judge…

Carol Stradling asked, reclused?

Attorney Altman stated, yes.

Carol Stradling stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, and that’s how they set here, as a judge.

Carol Stradling stated, then I move that we approve the minutes.

Gary Barbour seconded the motion.

President Thompson stated, it’s been moved and seconded to approve the minutes of the June 21,


2001 meeting. All in favor signify by saying I. All opposed the same, minutes approved. On to July, the July 19th, is there any discussion concerning the July 19th meeting? Are there any corrections or additions?

Carol Stradling stated, the only thing that I saw, on page 20 it says in that middle paragraph the big long paragraph something about co-location, well, we do have a cut, cut that the application has been filed, curt cut, do you see that Director Weaver?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, anything else Carol?

Carol Stradling stated, on page 31, the tower is a mono-pole instead of a, I think that it’s lattice…

Director Weaver stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, I think that he did say lattice, yes.

Carol Stradling stated, that’s it.

President Thompson asked, nothing else, any other corrections from the Board? If not do I hear a motion to accept the minutes with the corrections?

Jeff Saylor stated, so moved.

President Thompson asked, second?

Gary Barbour seconded the motion.

President Thompson stated, it’s been moved and seconded, all in favor signify by saying I, all opposed the same, motion carried. Minutes approved.

****

#2033 Twin Lakes School Corporation/High School; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on an area 150’ x 150’. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 300 S. Third Street.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone here representing the variance tonight?

Dave Brechbiel stated, I’m the Information Systems Director for Twin Lakes School Corporation.

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

Dave Brechbiel stated, other than I can help to answer any questions to help describe the tower in any way.

Director Weaver stated, I would like the Board to know that this property has to be rezoned because, the way that our Ordinance is written, they have requested that rezoning. It has gone to our Area Plan Commission where it was recommended for approval to the City Council. It went to the City Council meeting this past meeting and the City Council has tabled this request.

President Thompson asked, and for what? Do you know what reason?

Director Weaver stated, yes, I’m sorry, my understanding the reason for tabling the request was the City of Monticello has an Ordinance that they have adopted, that limits the number of towers within the City of Monticello. They are doing further research on this Ordinance to know whether they can allow these towers or not.

President Thompson asked, when will they meet again do you know?

Director Weaver stated, they meet the first and third Monday of each month, I would say probably the first Tuesday of the month I would assume because of Labor Day.

President Thompson asked, and that’s the city?

Director Weaver asked, yes, is that when they put it back on the agenda, do you know?

Dave Brechbiel stated, they put it on the agenda for the next meeting.

Director Weaver stated, okay.

Dave Brechbiel stated, I believe that the tabling was for more information, the Ordinance requires us to give them more information than what we had. I don’t believe that the Ordinance in the way that I read it, limits the number of towers but, simply is requesting us to provide them with more information.

President Thompson asked, have you had any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, not to my knowledge.

Carol Stradling asked, can you explain how this system is suppose to work and why you need all of these towers?

Dave Brechbiel stated, okay, the system primarily is there, so that our out lying elementary schools and the administration building which, would be Woodlawn, Oaklawn and Eastlawn could receive a higher speed access to our internet connection in order to basically, improve our information literacy program, with the ultimate goal of improving student learning. As you well know, the Internet is vast growing. It is also starting to contain some quality skills, based practice and remediation that is a free cost, meaning that your traditional software purchases are going to down, just because, there is a lot of these types of materials available. We’re seeing that trend as well as just needing to start to teach kids as young as fourth grade how to access that vast amount of information cut it down, judge whether it’s the best. Currently, right now, we’re connected via the telephone lines, the 56K, dedicated modem circuit, which is costing the taxpayers of White County approximately 800 to 900 dollars a month. It only enables students in classrooms to access probably about 8 workstations, a single school building can access the Internet before, and it really slows down and bottoms out, very similar to your connection at home. That is the speed that they will get if not less than that 4 or 5 others come on board. We feel that by providing a wireless network, sort of like cellular telephone where you basically have radios on both ends, they transmit and they receive it runs on a very high frequency way up in the high-end 5.8 gig hertz. Your use to, like short wave radio being, if you look at the radio spectrum it’s short wave here and wireless is way out here. They really don’t see each other and it enables you to, not only to send data but it enables us to send voice transmissions over the air as well as do video conferencing down the road. For our folks over at Eastlawn for example, truly using a wireless communication system, those folks who live in Burnettsville who have to dial long distance to reach their local school will be able to dial a 583 number to Monticello. Using those towers their voice transmission will be sent to Eastlawn free of charge. Think of the folks in Idaville, who have students in the middle school and the high school, they will be able to telephone the middle school and the high school via Eastlawn. A local number and be sent via the wireless to those various schools between, like the hours of 8 and 10 in the morning there is a lot of communication between the teachers and the administrators at Twin Lakes. We have to use standard telephone lines, Meadowlawn for example, has two telephone lines incoming, can you imagine if we pull out all of those telephone calls and we can put them up over the air how much freer those two lines will be for our patrons? So it’s going to improve communication that way also.

Carol Stradling asked, so how would someone in the Administration Office speak to someone in Eastlawn, would they be on the phone?

Dave Brechbiel stated, they would use their telephone and using just a 4-digit number. For example, they could dial a 4 digit number and their phone system there at the administration building would catch that and say well, I don’t need to use a standard phone line to get out, I can just go up over the tower. So you’re not using a standard dialing telephone to go out there, your using the wireless connection between the two.

Carol Stradling asked, I have been one of those people who had to call the school in the early morning hours and with two lines it’s not easy. How would I, what would you have more phone lines?

Dave Brechbiel stated, well no, really if you think about the number of calls that we make between buildings in the morning, I’m just saying, let's say that between teachers and administrators. We tie up those phone lines when you call, you get those busy signals, let's pull out those phone calls, that’s going to free those lines up for more incoming calls for…

Carol Stradling asked, okay, and so how would they talk to each other, would they be on a phone, or would they be on a radio or would they be on their computer too?

Dave Brechbiel stated, they would be on a standard telephone but instead of their transmission going through standard phone lines it will go up over the air wireless between the buildings.

Carol Stradling asked, but, if you have, I guess where I’m having a problem is you have 2 incoming lines, does anyone else have the same problem I have?

David Brechbiel stated, we’re not changing that…

Carol Stradling stated, if you have 2 incoming lines and both of those are busy whether they are going above the air or the ground, you still only have 2 lines.

David Brechbiel stated, what I’m saying is, there is a lot of phone calls that are happening, for example a principal at Oaklawn talking to someone at Eastlawn, a teacher in the morning wanting to call in town, all of those phone calls will be put over the wireless network. That would simply eliminate that many calls being made in the morning freeing up some of those phone lines a little bit more. There are still only 2 lines but there is not as many people accessing those two lines.

President Thompson asked, I’m wondering, with respect to the Town Council, the City Council of Monticello, they have tabled this for certain reasons. Nothing against what you’re asking Carol because, we do need to know that is there anyone other than I, that’s concerned about the City Councils concerns as well? It takes both of us if I’m right doesn’t it? Anyone else care to…

Carol Stradling stated, someone has to go first…

President Thompson stated, you’re right.

Carol Stradling stated, and he’s here tonight to present this we could hear it and make a decision contingent upon what the City Council does.

David Scott asked, has there been any public opposition to this?

Director Weaver stated, there was not at the Area Plan Commission, no. We have had people call with concerns asking what the purpose of the towers was and once we explained that then they and they realized that it was for school use only, that’s made a difference when we’ve talked to people.

David Brechbiel stated, may I frankly address what I think the City Council’s biggest concern was. Obviously, they have had an Ordinance that has been in place for a couple of years, that they built, I believe in order to curtail the amount of request and the number of towers. It appeared to me that, the attention centered around, more of the esthetics of those towers and whether or not we needed to add another tower. I think what they want the school corporation to do is provide them with some more specifics on what that tower is going to look like and how large it is. I think that we may have the idea that it’s going to be as large as the REMC tower which, is far from the truth. Plus, the esthetics of it and I think that key issue beyond all of the technical jargon is what it’s really going to cost in order to get this high speed access. Whether they approve the towers or not, we’re going to have to do something in terms of speeding access. We can either own our own equipment, pay for it in 6 to 8 years, by not paying for telephone cost or we can buy and rent telephone access at a high speed. It’s going to cost the taxpayers more dollars or we can dig fiber under the ground, which is going to be a great cost. We’ve got to do it somehow it’s just a matter of doing it what I feel is the most efficient way to get the job done and I hope that the City Council will recognize that too. We just need to do a better job of explaining it.

David Scott asked, where are these towers coming from?

David Brechbiel stated, the freestanding towers are probably going to be a 3’ base, it’s a 3’ base. I mean if you think about your TV antenna a standard TV antenna, double the size of the base of it and put it in a concrete block 6’ x 6’ x 6’ and it will go straight up and will be guide or tied to the building. None of those guides go down to the ground, we have made sure that they don’t go down to the ground because it is a school area, it’s close to where kids are at. We have a fence around it, a climb fence, 6’ high with climb guards on the lower portion. Now obviously, if someone really, really wants to work at it, they probably can climb that tower, nothing is perfect but, we’re going to do the best that we can at providing safety around that tower. Keeping in mind that we did check insurance wise to make sure that we were meeting all of the right things so that if something should happen we’re covered also and we need to do that. The one on the high school in fact, we were going to go with a free standing but, it was in the area that football games, concession and that type of thing and it was better if we move it up on top of the roof. Do a roof mount or a guide pole grafted to the side of the gymnasium as opposed to being on the ground and I think probably our folks wanted it on the ground but, safety reasons we pulled it up and there wasn’t any need to have that.

David Scott asked, if we adopt this or allow him to do this and then the school goes the other way they can stop him from doing this, we’re not going to do something that Town doesn’t want?

Director Weaver stated, they can’t do it without the Cities approval of the rezoning and the approval of the BZA.

David Scott stated, they can’t do it without the Towns approval.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s right.

Director Weaver stated, they have to have both.

David Brechbiel stated, except at Eastlawn.

Director Weaver stated, yes, except at Eastlawn.

Carol Stradling stated, it wouldn’t be any good to have it at Eastlawn if you don’t have it…

President Thompson stated, right, it’s going to take two approvals.

David Brechbiel stated, very true, yes, it takes a, transmit and receive, you’re correct, exactly.

Charlie Mellon asked, it’s just as simple, two or three years ago the city put out an Ordinance of no more towers because Sprint and Public Service both within a year they are wanting to put in another tower. That’s when that Ordinance came out and I don’t know whether the utilities are any more important in a school system or not but, you can go ahead and okay the Burnettsville thing, it’s out of the city.

David Brechbiel stated, may I answer to Charlie, may I answer? In all do respect, I believe that the City Council wrote the Ordinance and the way that it’s written it makes it very difficult for someone like Sprint, it doesn’t limit it but, it makes it a lot more difficult. It’s more costly to get a tower within the City limits and we know that now that we have studied the Ordinance it’s going to cost us a little more to get it there…

Charlie Mellon stated, it’s one of those things that most people didn’t know about.

David Brechbiel stated, right, exactly, they never imagined that the schools would do this and another point Charlie, is that really we’re not in business of making money here…

Charlie Mellon stated, oh, I know that.

David Brechbiel stated, and we’re wanting to improve student’s education, not make money. We’re not going to make a dime off of these towers and we’re more than happy to share it with someone…

Charlie Mellon stated, all that you have to have to is, get it through the council.

David Brechbiel stated, yes…

Charlie Mellon stated, City Council.

David Brechbiel stated, yes sir.

David Scott stated, I make a motion that we allow him to put the towers up, I don’t see anything wrong with what he is doing here.

Carol Stradling stated, I don’t know that need to make a motion as much as we need to discuss…

Attorney Altman stated, subject to the results of the rezoning of the City is what we would do. We have often times done that…

Director Weaver stated, yes…

Attorney Altman stated, yes, that’s what we often times do we either adopt or reject a matter like this subject to and of course if we adopt it they adopt it subject to the City Council in this case adopting it also, the rezoning.

President Thompson asked, repeat the height again, what was that?

David Brechbiel asked, which one? We’re talking about, are you talking about the High School, this is for the High School now…

President Thompson stated, yes.

David Brechbiel stated, that is a 90’ and it’s a guide tower. Now the total of that one when you stand it up on top of that first floor roof okay, that’s going to put the total up about 110’, 110’ out at Eastlawn…

President Thompson asked, the roof will support the tower?

David Brechbiel stated, yes, the roof, will support the tower. Remember that it’s bracketed and it’s not a freestanding 3-leg tower, it’s a bracketed pole type. You can’t call it a mono-pole because, a mono-pole means that you’re guiding it or that your not guiding it at all. We’re guiding it down so, there is a difference between a mono-pole and guide tower. The guide tower that we’re talking about, a heavy post and that’s built on a freestanding structure on top of that roof and that was, there was a structure that they had designed engineer designed, it’s a very popular way of doing them on top of roofs. It does require a brow wall and that wall is pretty high, you think about the gymnasium and then lower floor and then it’s like 2 floors that make up the total gymnasium so that’s, you’re going up another about 35’ in bracketing so it makes it rather solid. The Administration Building it replaces freestanding, freestanding because we can’t drill basically, you can’t add structure to that historic structure so you have to make it freestanding. At Eastlawn it’s 110’ because of the distance. At Woodlawn it’s 100’ because of the trees there is heavy trees that surround Woodlawn, you have to have it that high and at Oaklawn it’s 90’, allotting again because of the old growth. We haven’t placed them out around where it’s the base can be seen from the road in any place except maybe the High School if you look high. We have tried to tuck them in around the buildings so we have spent a lot of time looking it over and I just feel badly that we didn’t know about that Ordinance quite well enough when we hit the City Council meeting or we could have been prepared.

Carol Stradling asked, Roosevelt doesn’t need a tower? It will be connected to the High School?

David Brechbiel stated, Roosevelt and Meadowlawn are already connected via fiber optic cable that we dug under a year ago and so that’s seen as one large campus, if you think about Meadowlawn, Roosevelt and the High School it is one.

Carol Stradling stated, okay.

Jeff Saylor asked, I’m just going to ask if it’s possible to tie these requests together or do we need to still address them individually?

Attorney Altman stated, we will have to vote on them individually so that it’s about, it’s about as broad as it is long. I think that he is just gone over them all together but, I think that it’s, the simplest way would be to vote on them individually.

Carol Stradling stated, I have heard the other tower people say that 110’ is not going to be tall enough for them to co-locate. I think that his information said that he would be willing to co-locate or was I just reading something else?

President Thompson stated, no, you didn’t.

David Brechbiel stated, we would be willing to co-locate…

Carol Stradling stated, I’m not sure that you are going to be tall enough for anyone to do that.

David Brechbiel stated, in the City Ordinance there are some specific guidelines, that they have written also about height and there are some instances where those heights would work. Out at Eastlawn obviously because of the distance of where it’s at probably not but the 110’ tower on top of the High School possibly could be used. The issue with Woodlawn would be because of the heavy trees and pushing it up and over that. I guess that it depends on where they were wanting to go from what point to what point. It would make more sense to me obviously if I was looking for a tower to use, I would cajole REMC or NIPSCO or the ones that are 250’ to 300’ in the are that you can see from the skyline but, are there other reasons for that? There is a possibility, public library as close as it is the Court House as close as it is being able to tie in at any given time and we’re all governmental agencies so I’m going to say that there are some possible future uses for those towers.

Carol Stradling asked, are there other schools that are addressing it this way?

David Brechbiel stated, oh, many schools in Indiana are addressing it. In the local area, I don’t have that information, locally Frontier, Tri-County, North White but, in Indiana this is a very popular way because, they are finding it out just like we are it’s an inexpensive way to do this, we own our own equipment, it doesn’t cost a lot. Digging fiber is expensive and then the upkeep and the possibility of it getting cut and dug at.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone here opposed to the variance this evening? No response from anyone you said earlier right?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Thompson asked, Jeff, Gary and Carol? Any other discussion?

Carol Stradling stated, I’m still not sure how we get the two lines going but, that’s okay…

President Thompson stated, other than make it a condition.

Attorney Altman stated, clearly, yes, I think that’s exactly the way that this vote will be, it’s contingent upon, the results on rezoning by the City Council.

David Brechbiel stated, yes, it has to be.

President Thompson asked, would someone like to make that…

Attorney Altman stated, I just did.

President Thompson asked, you would really rather have that made by a Board member?

Attorney Altman stated, no, I think that’s given.

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

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential with a rezoning to I-2, General Industrial pending with the Monticello City Council.

2. That the lot is a part of 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 special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on that part of Lots 29 and 30 in McCuaig’s Addition, Lot 2 in Block 4 in J.C. Reynolds Third Addition and part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 27 North, Range 3 West all in the City of Monticello, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the Southeast corner of Lot 26 in said McCuaig’s Addition; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the West line of Third Street 196.60 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 231.00 feet to the point of beginning;

Thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 150.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes East 150.00 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 150.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 150.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.517 of an acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 300 S. Third Street.

7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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

Attorney Altman stated, subject to the contingency of the results of the rezoning by the Monticello Council. The only thing that I would add is, with a special exception, it must be substantially commenced within 1 year or it’s gone, lost.

David Brechbiel stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, you will need a building permit also.

David Brechbiel stated, all right.

****

#2034 Twin Lakes School Corporation/Oaklawn; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on an area 150’ x 150’. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 402 E. South Street.

President Thompson stated, again, would you name please.

David Brechbiel stated, Information Assistance Director, Twin Lakes School Corporation.

President Thompson asked, any other information different?

David Brechbiel stated, the Oaklawn one is a 90’ it is a guide tower and the reason for guiding rather than free standing at Oaklawn is due to the sidewalks that surround the building and the entryways that are pocketed in around it. We would have chosen a freestanding but we had to go with the guide bracketed because we didn’t want to deal with the entrances and the sidewalks.

President Thompson asked, again, any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, we had calls with questions but, no concerns.

President Thompson asked, anyone here opposed to the variance?

Attorney Altman stated, I would suggest that we incorporate by reference all of the relevant record of, #233 in #234, just to save time.

President Thompson asked, discussion from the Board?

Attorney Altman stated, obviously again, it would be subject if we vote favorably it would be subject to and contingent upon the rezoning request vote by the City Council.

President Thompson asked, if there is nothing else, are we ready to vote? I believe that we are.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential with a rezoning to I-2, General Industrial pending with the Monticello City Council.

2. That the lot is a part of 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 special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Monticello, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Section 33; thence North 02 degrees 28 minutes 43 seconds West along the section line 183.20 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 122.47 feet to the point of beginning;

Thence South 63 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 150.00 feet; thence North 27 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 150.00 feet; thence South 27 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.517 of an acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 402 E. South Street.

7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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

Attorney Altman stated, again, subject to the contingency of the result, favorable result of the City Council. Again, same building permit and one year requirement.

****

#2035 Twin Lakes School Corporation/Eastlawn; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on an area 150’ x 150’. The property is located in between Idaville and Burnettsville at 47 S. 1300 E.

President Thompson stated, and you are again for the record.

David Brechbiel stated, Information Assistance Director, Twin Lakes School Corporation.

President Thompson asked, and again, this is a different site, any…

David Brechbiel stated, the Eastlawn site is 110’ due to the distance to freestanding lattice type tower again, 6’ x 6’ x 6’ concrete base, fences and climb guards. Probably beige in color, you try to match the surroundings.

President Thompson asked, response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Thompson asked, anyone here…

David Scott asked, will this have to go through a Township Board or another Town Board?

Director Weaver stated, no, this one does not. This property is properly zoned for a tower.

Attorney Altman stated, so it would be adopted given a vote tonight.

President Thompson stated, yes. Any discussion? If not…

Attorney Altman stated, again, I would like to incorporate by reference all of the relevant material of special exception #233 in this matter before us.

President Thompson stated, we shall vote.

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 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 special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 2 West in Jackson Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 35; thence South 221.00 feet; thence East 215.00 feet to the point of beginning;

Thence East 150.00 feet; thence South 150.00 feet; thence West 150.00 feet; thence North 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.517 of an Acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located between Idaville and Burnettsville at 47 S. 1300 E.


7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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

Attorney Altman stated, this matter is adopted, not contingent.

****

#2036 Twin Lakes School Corporation/Administration Building; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on an area 150’ x 150’. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 565 S. Main Street.

President Thompson stated, once again please.

David Brechbiel stated, Information Assistance Director, Twin Lakes School Corporation. The tower is a 70’ tower it’s freestanding lattice. One specific point about the administration tower is that it replaces the current tower, which has the bus communication antenna on it. This antenna is not currently high enough. Sometimes when the weather is bad we get crackly and it’s very difficult to hear putting it higher on this tower is definitely going to improve communication between busses and central office.

President Thompson asked, I’m sorry I missed that, what was the height again on that?

David Brechbiel stated, 70’.

President Thompson stated, 70’.

David Brechbiel stated, right.

President Thompson asked, anything again?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Thompson asked, anyone here opposed or to speak in favor of? Discussion from the Board, questions or concerns? Nothing? Ready to vote, with the contingencies right?

Attorney Altman stated, right, this is a contingency and I would also like to incorporate into the record all of the relevant information and evidence given on #233 on to the record of #236.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential with a rezoning to I-2, General Industrial pending with the Monticello City Council.

2. That the lot is a part of 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 special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on that part of Lots 1, 2 and 3 in Cochell’s Addition in Monticello, White County, Indiana described by:

Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 3; thence North 146.00 feet; thence East 141.00 feet; thence South 146.00 feet; thence West 141.00 feet to the point of beginning.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 565 S. Main Street.

7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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

Attorney Altman stated, again, this is subject to the result of the voting on the rezoning of the Monticello City Council. Again, subject to that contingency.

****

#2037 Twin Lakes School Corporation/Woodlawn; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on an area 150’ x 150’. The property is located in the City of Monticello at 300 S. Beach Drive.

David Brechbiel stated, Information Assistance Director, Twin Lakes School Corporation.

President Thompson stated, once again, any specificates…

David Brechbiel stated, the Woodlawn is 100’ freestanding lattice the high height of this one is due to the old growth, maple trees that exist in that area.

President Thompson asked, once again, is there any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Thompson asked, anyone again, speak in favor or opposed of? Discussion from the Board, concerns or questions?

Attorney Altman stated, this one would also be contingent upon the result of the balloting on the rezoning at the City Council.

President Thompson asked, is there any other discussion? We shall vote.

Attorney Altman stated, also incorporate a reference of all of the relevant information and evidence given on #233 into the record in this matter #2037.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential with a rezoning to I-2, General Industrial pending with the Monticello City Council.

2. That the lot is a part of 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 special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a communications tower on That part of Lot 20 in J.C. Reynolds Fourth Addition to Monticello, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the Southeast corner of Lot 9 in C.W. Teeter’s Subdivision of part of Lots 19 and 20 in said J.C. Reynolds Fourth Addition; thence North along the West line of Woodlawn Avenue 112.00 feet; thence East 148.00 feet to the point of beginning;

Thence North 150.00 feet; thence East 150.00 feet; thence South 150.00 feet; thence West 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.517 of an acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 300 S. Beach Drive.

7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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


Attorney Altman stated, again, subject to the contingency of the vote by the Council.

David Brechbiel stated, I greatly appreciate your support, it will help, thank you.

****

#2043 John K. Freeman, Owner; Arturo Vega, Applicant; Requesting a special exception as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a restaurant in a B-2 zoning on part of lot #42 in the Original Plat of Monticello. The property is located at 131 A. North Main Street.

President Thompson asked, what does the, A, stand for?

Director Weaver stated, there is more than one business in this building.

President Thompson stated, okay.

John Freeman stated, I thought that the, A, meant a 90’ antenna.

Attorney Altman stated, not this time.

John Freeman stated, I own the building, the subject property is where the stuff it in balloons was. On the corner is Help U Buy, then the proposed restaurant, then Mickey B’s and the Antique Mall and then the Hispanic Grocery Store and then the bank, then the world’s best pizza and then it goes on. Across the Street is a restaurant, across the block is a restaurant, Abe’s is across the block so, there is a lot of restaurant in the area. Arturo I have known for a long time, Arturo has moved his family here he has bought a home so this is a permanent resident of Monticello. His wife will be running this restaurant and it will be primarily carry out, tacos and chicken so beyond that, I’m just the landlord. This is Arturo Vega.

President Thompson asked, do you have anything to add to that sir?

Arturo Vega stated, I was trying to get permission to open this small business and I was working in Indiana Beach for 8 years in the Skyroom, now I’m working for him and now I want to run my own business.

John Freeman stated, correction, don’t tell my wife that, he works for my wife.

Attorney Altman asked, you want to open a restaurant at this location?

Arturo Vega stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, it will have seating and it will also have carry out?

Arturo Vega stated, maybe a couple of tables. Everything will be carry out small place to carry out food and maybe a couple of tables inside.

Director Weaver stated, so that the Board is aware the way that our Ordinance is written a restaurant can go is permitted use in a B-2 zoning. This property is zoned B-1 and the Ordinance does require for it to go in a B-1 zoning but, it has to have a special exception.

Attorney Altman stated, with a special exception once we establish the use qualifies for a special exception and the must prove that in other words they have a burden and I would suggest that they probably done that and then we’re obliged to vote that’s what they’re allowed to do.

President Thompson asked, any response from any of the neighboring notices?

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

President Thompson asked, does anyone here care to speak either in favor or, yes sir.

Jim Hayworth stated, I own the antique mall at 127 North Main Street. Parking is still a problem on the street and I’m glad to hear that this is primarily a take out. If this is granted though will it remain a take out place? Can they change that at anytime? That is not my main objective though, the White County Board of Health is not inspecting a lot of restaurants and those kind of operations in Downtown Monticello. I have had personal experience with the White County Board of Health and I’m just wondering, one more it’s not going to get any better, thank you.

John Freeman asked, can I respond to that…?

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing that I can say is, quite frankly, a point of view of a special exception in our Ordinance whether the Health Department inspects or not and all, or whether it’s carry out or set down doesn’t really have any particular problems. It’s whether it’s restaurant and if it’s a restaurant we allow it because it’s a special exception in a permitted zoning area. I don’t mean to diminish your concerns but, I’m saying is…

Jim Hayworth stated, I’ve never been to a meeting like this so I had no idea…

Attorney Altman stated, I understand…

President Thompson stated, that’s fine.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s fine, glad to hear it but we don’t vote on that.

Jim Hayworth stated, okay, thank you.

John Freeman asked, can I make a comment…

President Thompson stated, just a second please. Carol I know that you have something.

Carol Stradling asked, I was just wondering how the parking is addressed I know some places when we have to provide for adequate parking…

Director Weaver stated, the way that has been done in the past is if it’s a new type of business going in it or a new building and this has been a retail establishment for years, there again, maybe we should be addressing parking.

Carol Stradling stated, there is still plenty of parking around back.

Director Weaver stated, there is a parking lot in the back.

President Thompson stated, okay, then will you have a rear entrance?

John Freeman stated, yes sir, there is a rear entrance to this restaurant from the back parking lot. Very few of the stores along there have rear entrances. The bank does Papa John’s does….

Attorney Altman stated, not an entrance but, you have a rear…

John Freeman stated, I mean customer entrances, where they can actually access, well, Help U Buy has access to that too and actually have customer doors much like the bank but, let me make something clear. I have restaurants in four counties in Indiana and in my experience the White County Board of Health is the best of the four that I deal with just for the record. So I don’t agree with Jim.

Kevin Page stated, we own the radio station right across the street and I want to address parking, two hour parking on the street and behind the bank, behind Norwest Bank that parking lot is only about 1/3 full everyday. I park back there every day so there is plenty of parking.

President Thompson asked, is there anyone else here care to address the issue? Any other concerns from the Board?

Carol Stradling asked, is something happens and Mr. Vega no longer has a business there, then this would…

Attorney Altman stated, no longer has a restaurant…

Carol Stradling stated, no longer has a restaurant…

Attorney Altman state, no longer has a restaurant, then the special exception in a year would be gone.

Carol Stradling asked, expires?

Attorney Altman stated, yes, this is only for a restaurant in this zoning.

Carol Stradling asked, Mr. Vega, Mr. Freeman mentioned that you would be serving chicken and tacos, what else would you have on your menu?

Arturo Vega stated, we have tacos, roasted chicken, taco and little Mexican food.

President Thompson asked, anything else? If not, are we ready to vote?

Arturo Vega stated, all kinds of desserts too, Mexican desserts.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the property is currently zoned B-1, Business 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 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 as per Section 10.20, Article 10.2001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance to allow a restaurant in a B-2 zoning on that part of Lot 42 in the Original Plat of Monticello, Indiana described by: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 42; thence South 16.50 feet to the point of beginning; thence East 113.00 feet; thence South 13.50 feet; thence West 113.00 feet; thence North 13.50 feet to the point of beginning.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 131A N. Main Street.

7. That the special exception 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 special exception 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 special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.

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

Attorney Altman stated, you need to apply for probably a building permit for your adjustments and you need to know that you need to being, substantially commence your special exception within 1 year or it’s gone.

Arturo Vega stated, thank you.

****

#2044 Jeff Saylor; Requesting a 32’ front setback variance to build a roofed porch onto the existing home and an 8’ side setback variance to bring the existing home and deck into compliance with the White County Zoning Ordinance on part of lot #3 & #4 in Block 10 in the Original Plat of Burnettsville. The property is located at 305 S. Main Street.

Jeff Saylor stated, I’ll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

President Thompson asked, would you also Jeff, address the issue that you’re withdrawing yourself from the voting.

Jeff Saylor stated, yes, at this time, I have withdrawn myself from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

President Thompson stated, thank you.

Attorney Altman stated, for #2044.

Jeff Saylor stated, yes.

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

Jeff Saylor stated, yes, in the addition to the paperwork that the Board has in front of them, I have some other papers that I would be happy to submit.

President Thompson stated, you realize that we keep them.

Jeff Saylor stated, what I’m passing out is a rough draft of the porch that would go on the front and I have also too, photographs.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m marking the schematic Exhibit A.

Jeff Saylor stated, the front property line of my home is approximately 16” on the East side of the sidewalk. The gabled roof that would, I proposed to come out over the porch area would come out to that line the actual deck and steps would be about 1’ further East which would be a small porch about 5’ deep.

President Thompson asked, any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, we have not received anything on this request.

President Thompson asked, anyone here opposed to the variance this evening? Any questions or comments from the Board?

Carol Stradling asked, the survey shows the porch going the full length of the house.

Jeff Saylor stated, at the time that I requested the survey, I wasn’t certain how the porch was going to be built so I asked for a variance to cover the entire front of the house knowing that I could make it smaller but, not larger. What I am actually requesting tonight is just half of that amount. If you’re looking at the little drawing, the column, which would be on the South side in the front of home, is exactly in the centerline. I did various designs and I thought I couldn’t come up with anything that looked very well for the entire width of the house just covering the steps looked a bit small but, I was happy with the design that took up roughly half of the frontage of the house.

President Thompson asked, anything else? Does the Board have any questions?

Attorney Altman stated, the proposals would all be single story?

Jeff Saylor stated, absolutely, it ties into the original roofline of the house.

Attorney Altman stated, ties to the present roofline of the house.

President Thompson asked, you haven’t already started or anything.

Jeff Saylor stated, if you look at the, I can answer that. If you look at the photographs, there was 3 wooden steps that were in front of the house, to the front door those have been removed when I installed a perimeter drain to control some moisture problems in the basement but, nothing else has been started, no.

President Thompson asked, if there is nothing else, is the Board ready to vote?

Attorney Altman stated, I marked the two photos Exhibit B and Exhibit C, for the record.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the property is properly zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential.

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 32’ front setback variance to build a roofed porch onto the existing home and an 8’ side setback variance to bring the existing home and deck into compliance with the White County Zoning Ordinance on 48.00 feet off the South end of Lots 3 and 4 in Block 10 in the Original Plat of Sharon, now Burnettsville, White County, Indiana except 32.00 feet by 33.00 feet in the southeast corner of said Lot 3.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Burnettsville at 305 S. Main Street.

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 4 affirmative and 0 negative.

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

Jeff Saylor stated, thank you.

Attorney Altman stated, I might tell the public, generally we don’t have this very often with a member being involved that this is the second meeting in the row that happened, the last one had to resign.

****

#2045 Billy Jack & Ruby J. Isom; Requesting a 30’ front setback variance to place a boat house on 2.104 Acres. The property is located in the City of Monticello 304 Oak Park Drive.

President Thompson asked, and you are?

Bill Isom stated, I’m representing my parents. The property is located on the lake between the two bridges. We’re building the new bridge at U.S. Highway 421 and we removed one of the buildings from Mr. Luses’ property. We transported it up to that, up at my dads house and we built a boathouse. My dad felt that he could put it on top of boathouse but, they had to have some kind of an exemption that had, the bank wasn’t steep enough for a 40’, if the bank was 40’ high within 40’ of it, he could have done it. It wasn’t that steep but, my dad’s not in very good health and what we were wanting to do is, we was going to set this back at the back of the boathouse and the top of the boathouse would be like a deck in front of it. Then he could go down with the grandkids and stay down without going up and down the hill.

Attorney Altman asked, is there a boathouse down there now?

Bill Isom stated, it’s the frame, he has not finished it. It’s setting on top of the, right now the building is setting on top of what is the boathouse.

Attorney Altman asked, so they take that off of there…

Bill Isom stated, and move it back over the ground and then that part will be the deck.

Attorney Altman asked, it will be a 22’ x 25’, the whole area?

Bill Isom stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, this building and the deck?

Bill Isom stated, no, the deck will be over the lake, just the building is, the 22’ x 25’ or whatever it is.

Attorney Altman asked, the deck will go to the…

Bill Isom stated, lake side…

Attorney Altman asked, East?

Bill Isom stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, so you will be on the S.L.F.E.C.C. property?

Bill Isom stated, yes, the deck will.

Attorney Altman stated, you will have 0’ setback on part of the built is what you propose?

Bill Isom stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, we had one neighbor call just inquiring about the request, no indication that they were against the request at all.

Attorney Altman asked, S.F.L.E.C.C. is agreeable to this?

Bill Isom stated, yes.

Joe Roach stated, I’m the Land Manager for the S.F.L.E.C.C. and we’ve granted permission for Mr. Isom to put a deck out on lakes property in conjunction with this. We support the setback variance on that. If you have any questions I will be happy to answer those.

Attorney Altman asked, so the 0’ lot line there is consistent with what, you granted this easement for the rest of his structure.

Joe Roach stated, yes, it is.

Attorney Altman asked, and how tall will the rest of the structure be all total?

Joe Roach stated, for us on our property, we have, unless it is a special exemption and it’s very rare that we have ever granted anything like that. A standard boatlift, boathouse can be 10’ at the top of the steel, the deck and the railing above that can extend an additional 4’ above that.

Attorney Altman stated, so that’s what we’re talking about now.

Joe Roach stated, yes, on the lakes property, sides can come down within 4’ of the water if they desire to put on sides. So that although, when your setting down you can see out but, when you raise your boat up, it is fully enclosed and protected at that point.

President Thompson asked, does anyone here care to speak in favor or oppose this variance?

Attorney Altman asked, the height of the proposed building will be how much?

Bill Isom stated, it’s going to be probably 17’ from the ground to the top of it. There won’t actually be anything under it, he’s going to have piers supporting it but, you will be able to walk under it. It has a flat, basically a flat roof on it.

President Thompson asked, any comments or questions from the Board?

Director Weaver asked, what is it going to be used for?

Bill Isom stated, no living quarters, just for fishing and if he wants to rest in it or something it does have windows and stuff but, he will have electricity but, no water or anything like that.

Attorney Altman asked, there won’t be a stool?

Bill Isom stated, no.

Attorney Altman stated, so obviously without water, he can’t have…

Bill Isom stated, right, basically when we got the bridge contract the building came with it and we tried to find a use for it and that’s what we came up with.

Attorney Altman stated, we don’t want any visibility problems from neighbors and apparently not but, we also don’t want to have a septic problem or a sewage problem either.

Bill Isom stated, no, right.

President Thompson asked, once again to the board, any discussion? Any concerns?

Carol Stradling stated, we’re looking at some pictures and the Madam Carroll building is sitting out over the water.

Bill Isom stated, yes it is right now.

Carol Stradling asked, on piers?

Bill Isom stated, on what is the boathouse, we drove steel piles into the ground.

Carol Stradling asked, what is going to happen then is this crane is going to take it back…

Bill Isom stated, yes.

Carol Stradling stated, just even with the top of those…

Bill Isom stated, yes.

Carol Stradling asked, okay, then you’re going to add more piers…

Bill Isom stated, similar ones to that yes, to support the building.

Attorney Altman asked, then the height of the whole thing will be a maximum of 17’?

Bill Isom stated, yes.

President Thompson asked, how did you get that across the river?

Bill Isom stated, floated it on a barge.

President Thompson asked, did you?

Bill Isom stated, yes. You should have seen us taking those trusses off of the bridge.

President Thompson asked, if there is nothing else, is the Board ready to vote on this? I believe we are.

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 30’ front setback variance to place a boat house on commencing at a point fifty (50) rods East of the middle of the Lafayette and Michigan City Road on the centerline running East and West, of Section Four (4); Township Twenty six (26) North, Range Three (3) West in said County and State; running thence South Two Hundred Fifteen (215) feet thence East to the water line recently surveyed and fixed by the Indiana Hydro-Electric Power Company, on the West bank of the Tippecanoe River; thence North along, and with, the meanderings of said line so fixed by said Hydro-Electric Power Company to the South line of the City Park, in said Section, thence West to the place of beginning, containing Three (3) acres, more or less.

ALSO:

A tract of land extending from the platted roadway circle at the junction of Oak Drive and Shady Lane in the Platted Subdivision known as Oak Park Addition, in Union Township, White County Indiana, across the Northwest corner of Tract “A” and adjacent to an existing platted twenty (20) foot easement, more fully described as follows:

Beginning at a point located South twenty (20) feet from the Southeast corner of Lot Number Seven (7) in aforesaid Oak Park Addition, thence South and West along the existing twenty (20) foot easement one hundred two (102) feet; thence North and East parallel to and twenty (20) feet from said existing easement one hundred twenty (120) feet, more or less, to a point forty (40) feet South and Twenty (20) feet East of aforesaid Southeast corner of Lot Number Seven (7); thence North twenty (20) feet to an existing twenty (20) foot easement Line; thence West along last said easement line twenty (20) feet to the place of beginning, containing Five Thousandths (0.005) of an acre, more or less, in Union Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 304 Oak Park Drive.

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.

****

#2046 Walter O. & Rosalie Marohl; Requesting a 70’ rear setback variance to build an addition onto the existing home on 1.00 Acre. The property is located west of Monon at 1501 W. State Road 16.

President Thompson asked, and you are?

Emma Conwell stated, I’m Walter and Rosalie’s granddaughter. It’s going to be an 18’ x 32’ addition, it’s for a bedroom, bathroom and utility room. We did go to the Drainage Board because ¾ of the house is on their 75’ right-of-way so we have been to them for the variance for that. The septic has been done, Mr. Sparks, Jerry Sparks has completed the septic system and this is just the last thing that we had to do.

President Thompson asked, you said that you are the granddaughter?

Emma Conwell stated, yes, I’m the granddaughter.

President Thompson asked, any response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no, I have not received anything on this. I just want the Board, this property is triangular shaped and the railroad runs right behind it the highway is right in front of it so it really limits what they can do on this property.

President Thompson asked, what is the railroad right-of-way?

Attorney Altman stated, 33’…

President Thompson stated, measured 16.5 from the center. No response from anyone?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Thompson asked, anyone here in favor of or opposed to the variance? Any discussion from the Board, concerns? Let's vote.

Attorney Altman stated, obviously, you know the septic has to be approved for this addition too. I presume that’s what you put in.

Emma Conwell stated, yes, that’s what we did, from the Health Permit.

Attorney Altman stated, I just wanted to make sure it was for the whole thing.

Emma Conwell stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, single story addition?

Emma Conwell stated, yes, single story.

With no further discussion the Board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the property is properly zoned A-1, Agricultural.

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 70’ rear setback variance to build an addition onto the existing home on all that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 4 West, being all that part of said land South and West of the Chicago, Indianapolis and Louisville Railway, lying North of the public road, and East of the West bank of the Winkley Ditch, containing one acre, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located west of the Town of Monon at 1501 W. State Road 16.

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.

Emma Conwell stated, thank you.

****

#2048 Chrisie D. Helderle, Owner; Crown Castle, Applicant; Requesting a 30’ front setback variance for the equipment buildings for an approved communications tower site on 10,000 square feet. The property is located on the North side of C.R. 500 S., approximately ¼ of a mile West of US. Highway 231.

President Thompson asked, has been tabled officially until the next meeting?

Director Weaver stated, yes, until the next meeting.

President Thompson stated, okay to the next meeting, which is going to be September…

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know.

President Thompson stated, I’m not sure.

Director Weaver stated, September the 20th.

President Thompson stated, September the 20th. Is there going to be 2 next month?

Director Weaver stated, I’m afraid that we’re going to, we have 5 that are tabled already for next month, until the next months meeting.

President Thompson stated, while we’re fractionating on this, could I say something or add something here. Just like the lady there, I have been on the Board a long time and I’m not sure that I have had this explained. Where do we draw the line on who represents who, Attorney Altman? I mean, I’m not opposed to what she did but…

Attorney Altman stated, we have always been very, very generous about that. They say that they do, we have almost allowed it. I don’t know that we actually have anything that what people say, if you can’t be here you get a lawyer to handle it.

President Thompson stated, I mean, I shouldn’t doubt her but, I don’t’ know that you’re the granddaughter, you know what I’m saying?

Attorney Altman stated, I happen to know that she is but, I would suggest in many counties they consider practicing law and you need to have a lawyer.

President Thompson stated, we have had a lot of different relationships to the applicants.

Attorney Altman stated, because this is a judicial body and that’s…

Director Weaver asked, what if we had something in writing from the owner saying that they grant permission for this person to represent them and have it signed and notarized, something like that.

Attorney Altman stated, I understand…

President Thompson stated, you know, we’re very strict upon having an official survey when they present us something but, yet it’s not going to summarize but we pretty much let anyone come off of the street and represent.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s right.

Jeff Saylor stated, but, they also swear an oath.

President Thompson stated, that’s right.

Director Weaver stated, that’s true and I hate to see if it’s not a complicated matter I hate to see someone have to hire an attorney to do it, to represent them. There are situations where they can not attend.

Carol Stradling stated, if it gets too complicated, they can always request to table it until…

Director Weaver stated, until they can get legal council.

President Thompson stated, on this variance #2048 I went out to that site just curious what was going on.

Director Weaver stated, the variance is not for the tower.

President Thompson asked, I know but, have you been out there?

Director Weaver stated, I was out there this morning.

President Thompson stated, when they clear the ground before they actually started construction, they pushed, they got on the wrong side of the fence line, do you know that Charlie?

Director Weaver asked, oh they did?

President Thompson stated, yes, they went onto the neighbors, pushed his soybeans back about 200’ with a bulldozer.

Director Weaver stated, it looks like they did some damage to the road too.

****

President Thompson stated, this CDC I got a mailing, if Attorney Altman can decipher.

Attorney Altman stated, just they filed the return which is the equivalent of the record and we have a hearing Monday and I would suspect that it would be set for a disposition hearing after that and the judge will decide that and I don’t know any more than that.

Director Weaver stated, Dave, so you are aware of what they are referring to is we had a hearing in July, no June, earlier this summer and they have appealed the Boards decision so it goes on to, they file in court. While we’re on discussion of that, did you file against Terry Babka?


Attorney Altman stated, yes.


Director Weaver asked, and we have heard anything?


Attorney Altman stated, at least not, I’m confused…


Director Weaver stated, Terry Babka is the garage that is too tall.


Attorney Altman stated, I know who Terry Babka is, I’m not sure, I filed it on the 9th and I’m sure that is in. Remind me tomorrow and I think that I owe you a look at it and then we’ll going to file it.


President Thompson stated, you told me earlier, fill the Board in on the Wall situation.


Director Weaver stated, the variance that we heard the special exception that we heard last week on Ed Wall with the outdated mobile home that had already been moved on the property. We fined him 200 dollars, we have not heard from Mr. Wall. Attorney Altman and I was discussing this, this morning, I guess that we give him a certain amount of time and if we have not got any response I will turn that over to Attorney Altman to pursue further.


David Scott asked, is there a specific time?


Director Weaver stated, we did not give him a specific time. The thing is the mobile home that is sitting there has been sitting there and the purpose of the special exception was to bring it into compliance. He has even been occupying it that is his residence.


Attorney Altman stated, I think that it’s time to pursue. If you want to bring that over tomorrow I will send a letter.


Carol Stradling asked, maybe in the letter indicate that he needs to set up some kind of arrangements if he doesn’t have the 200 dollars or just set up some kind of time frame if he can’t do it then.


President Thompson stated, I agree but I think that we have been more than fair with him to this point.


Jeff Saylor stated, unless he is just waiting for a bill to pay.

President Thompson stated, I hope that’s the only reason.

Director Weaver stated, we can do that he was told to come in and get it paid but, we can attempt that first, we can send a statement to him.

David Scott asked, does he have to get a permit?

Director Weaver stated, yes he does.

President Thompson stated, he has not made an effort even for that. Anything else?

Director Weaver stated, something else that we were discussing before the meeting, I think we need to give this some thought when we fine people for violations, I think that it would be helpful to the Area Plan to the Board to somehow get this out in the newspaper.

President Thompson stated, exactly.

Director Weaver stated, that are fining people so that they are aware…

David Scott stated, in fact, I was looking in the paper to see if the results of this meeting, was in there.

Director Weaver stated, the newspaper use to attend our meetings and they no longer do that.

President Thompson stated, thankfully they were here but they haven’t for over a year or better.

Director Weaver stated, so I don’t know, we may want to give some thought to that, how we want to handle that.

Jeff Saylor asked, is it possible to just send the results of the meeting to the paper?

President Thompson asked, what has happened there that they don’t attend?

Attorney Altman stated, good question, I don’t know. The news release would be a good thing.

Jeff Saylor stated, it’s good reading if it’s really contested decision otherwise, I’m sure it’s not, it’s expensive to the paper to have someone here and cover this stuff.

Carol Stradling asked, could you simply copy like we do and then just say approved or denied?

Director Weaver stated, yes, we can probably do that.

Carol Stradling stated, I think that would be a simple thing for you to do.

Director Weaver stated, yes, and simple is better.

President Thompson asked, anything from anyone else? If not is there a motion to adjourn?

Carol Stradling made motion to adjourn.

Gary Barbour seconded the motion.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Stradling, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission