Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, April 15, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: John Jurisa, Charles R. Mellon, Pamela A. Burt, Imogene Clerget, Bob Young Ford McDaniel, Lee D. Miller, Marc King, Connie Wiese, Tom Wiese, Doug Barnard, Timothy J. Plantenga, Dave Rosenbarger, and Charles Bossung.


The meeting was called to order by Vice President Carol Stradling and roll call was taken. Carol Stradling made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the February 19, 2004 meeting. Motion was seconded by David Scott and carried unanimously. Carol Stradling made a motion to dispense with the reading and approve the minutes of the February 26, 2004 meeting. Motion was seconded by David Scott and carried unanimously. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.

****

#2280 Patricia A. Adkins & Kenneth S. Turpin; The property is located on Lot 47 in Gingrich Addition, South of Monticello at 5307 S. Gingrich Court. Tabled from the February 19, 2004 meeting.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 24’ front setback variance and an 8’ South side setback variance to replace the existing home on the property.

Carol Stradling asked, is there anyone here representing the Adkins and Turpin?


Director Weaver stated, I have not heard. They tabled before the last meeting and I have not heard from them since the last meeting.


Carol Stradling stated, we will table this until the May meeting.


****


#2292 Ford & Margie McDaniel; The property is located on .17 and .17 of an acre, more or less, East of Monticello at 6658 E. Riverview Road.


Violation: Detached garage was built 3’ from the road right-of-way.

Request: They are requesting a 57’ front setback variance to build a room addition to attach the existing garage to the house and a 10’ side setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anyone here to represent this request?

Ford McDaniel stated, I’m Ford McDaniel.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything that you would care to add to?

Ford McDaniel stated yes, for the variance for the garage, when I put that garage in I don’t know who I was told by, but it was suppose to be the back of the house and I was told that NIPSCO said their line was 4’ from the pavement and I set my garage 7’ from that. I’m actually 12’ from the edge of the road to my garage. The back corner of the garage, their pole is 5’ off and I’m 7’ from the back of the garage also. I thought I had plenty of room and 2’ to spare really.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the NIPSCO pole is not on your survey.

Ford McDaniel stated, not on the one I’ve got.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, sorry I interrupted you.

Ford McDaniel stated, the variance for the room addition is between the house and the garage. This is to tie the garage to the house so we can get off of the steps and things in the wintertime. They are very hard, and my wife almost fell 3 times. This would be in the inside coming from the garage to the house. It will be the same structure as the house with the same type of siding. It will be 10’ to 12’ wide and I think 19’.

Director Weaver stated, this property is zoned A-1. It is zoned agriculture and I think our office is guilty on some of this. As he is saying it was his understanding roadside was the front, I mean the rear. On the water most of the property on the water is zoned L-1. In an L-1 zoning the water is the front and the roadside is the back. For a detached garage you only have a 5’ setback from the rear property line. Even when we were working on this we had a hard time remembering in his situation that his roadside is his front not the back. I think that is part of the situation with the garage.

Ford McDaniel stated, I know just West of me there the neighbor there, actually his garage is only from the pole area of 26”. The road to his actual garage is only 7’ from the road to the garage.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I know that they are really close there and close to the road, but there is not much room to build on either before you have to drop down below.

Ford McDaniel stated, that is why I set back and had the foundation built all down the hill. I thought I had at least 2’ to spare there.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, you did not have a survey done before you built the garage?

Ford McDaniel stated, I didn’t have a survey, I just came in and got it and took the measurements from who ever told me from the road to the pole to the back and I measured off and I thought I allowed myself 2’.

David Scott asked, when was the garage built? How long ago?

Ford McDaniel stated, it is about 2 years ago.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I think the permit says 1999.

Ford McDaniel stated, 1999.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, 1999.

Ford McDaniel stated, okay that is probably right.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, time flies doesn’t it.

Ford McDaniel stated, yes, I know it is quite expensive to build the concrete and stuff in there.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, typically we have two issues. 1. Is the violation and the other is the variance.

David Stimmel stated, help me understand this violation. He was issued a building permit.

Director Weaver stated, we did issue a building permit and the building permit did tell him he only had to be 6’ from the road.

Attorney Altman stated, from the road.

Director Weaver stated, well that is what he is submitted to be from the road and we approved it.

David Stimmel stated, well according to the survey that I have in front of me it only says that he is 3’.

Director Weaver stated, right.

David Stimmel stated, so he didn’t build according to the building permit.

Director Weaver stated, he did not build according to his drawing that he submitted.

Attorney Altman stated, and that is the violation.

David Stimmel asked, do you understand that Mr. McDaniel?

Attorney Altman stated, where the cheese really gets binding is the fact as you can see in the photographs that we are looking at, the ones that has the set of 6 on there. The one on the right hand side really shows how close that really is to the roadway. The top and the bottom show how really close he is to the right-of-way.

Director Weaver stated, in that area that is not uncommon.

Ford McDaniel stated, excuse me.

Attorney Altman stated, I hear you, but.

David Stimmel stated, that the drawing, but what I’m really trying to tell you is that the survey shows that you are 3’ off of the boundary line. Your building permit was issued with the understanding that you were going to be 6’ off of that boundary. Did you not find the boundary properly when you built the garage?

Ford McDaniel stated, I had no idea because the road makes a turn.

David Stimmel stated, I’m not trying to be argumentative, but I think it might have been in your best interest to find the boundaries before you start construction. You know what I mean.

Ford McDaniel stated, I thought the measurements from the road, I thought I had 12’.

David Scott stated, it looks like there was a mix up in the office and but again like Dave explained, even with the mix up he is 3’ short of the setbacks.

Ford McDaniel asked, can I ask a question? How far is that setback supposed to go from the pole or from the highway? How far is it supposed to go?

Attorney Altman stated, actually neither one, it is from your lot line.

David Scott stated, it is from the lot line, the survey line.

Attorney Altman stated, it is from your survey lines.

Director Weaver stated, or from the right-of-way.

Gary Barbour asked, where is the right-of-way?

Director Weaver stated, the lot line in his situation could go to the center of the road. He has meets and bounds description.

Attorney Altman stated, the survey doesn’t show it.

Director Weaver stated, no it doesn’t show that.

Attorney Altman stated, I’ve got to go by what the survey says and even the meets and bounds describe a 0.17. It shows the calls, and the meets and bounds are outlined by Mr. Milligan in the survey. He doesn’t go any further than what the survey says.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, can you repeat for me please how far you are from the edge of the pavement?

Ford McDaniel stated, I’m 12’ from the edge of the pavement to my garage. I’m 7’ from where the pole is that sets right at the back of my garage.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay.

Ford McDaniel stated, it is not hardly 5’.

David Scott stated, because of the mix up and the misunderstanding I will make a motion that we reduce the fine from $500 to $100.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there a second?

Gary Barbour stated, I will second it.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, is there any discussion?

David Scott asked, is there any discussion or what do you think?

Gary Barbour stated, I think it is in line.

Attorney Altman stated, I guess the one thing I really look at here and Diann is saying it is maybe, it is the same to what goes on in this neighborhood. It really concerns me is how his parking along that garage is really getting close to that roadway.

Director Weaver stated, let me tell you that is my red truck, not his truck.

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing that I’m saying is, if he had a group of people there someone would be parking there Diann.

Director Weaver stated, there is quite a bit of parking area on beyond.

Ford McDaniel stated, if I could say something. I park my van and car and still have from where they set 8 to 8’5 before the paint starts. There is a lot along there that is closer.

Attorney Altman stated, there is one picture here that shows you.

Director Weaver stated, the van is beside the truck.

Attorney Altman stated, beside the truck. Where the van is there is plenty of room. Where Diann’s truck is, is pretty close to the highway.

Director Weaver stated, it does.

Attorney Altman stated, that is the real concern I have.

Gary Barbour stated, that is really not uncommon in that area.

David Scott stated, they don’t have much choice there.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, even to the East of you there is a fence. To the East of the garage there is a fence.

Ford McDaniel stated, just decorated fence. It is a little rod iron that I stuck there just to separate the garden from the road. It is nothing sufficient. It is just a little rod iron fence I stuck there.

Director Weaver stated, there is quite a stretch of gravel between your garage and your neighbor to the West. Is that used for parking there?

Ford McDaniel stated, in front for when people come and down and they can park in there and sometime they use it when they come down. He just re-graveled it last year.

Attorney Altman stated, he would have room to park off in that area, where you are talking about that fence.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, in the garden area and take the garden area out, but I guess what I’m saying there are other places to park then right on the road. That worries me.

David Stimmel stated, my issue with the whole thing is, and I’m being argumentative with Gary and David about the point. I feel that the point ought to be a little for significant in the sense that regardless of what happen, he didn’t follow the issue of the building permit no matter what happened. He did not follow the building permit at all. Regardless of the other things and that troubles me a lot because what that does is open the door somewhat to someone else. It is just a slap on the wrist of $100.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, to me this is the exact situation that we imposed the automatic fine for. As when people put that they are going to be 6’ off of the line and they actually end up being 3’ off of the line, then that to me is where we instituted the $500 fine. However, in 1999 and they sign to the fact when they come in for the building permit. In 1999 that was not in effect and I think typically.

Attorney Altman stated, the fine was though. The fine structure.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the fine structure was there, but the procedure that we have making it an automatic $500 was not in place. People did not sign to that effect when they came in for their building permit. Typically Dave I’m where you are now, but I’m also seeing that they are very close to the road at that point. Didn’t get a survey. Are we ready to vote on the fine? It has been moved and seconded to reduce it to $100. Anymore discussion? All in favor say “aye”. Two “ayes” and 2 opposed.

Gary Barbour stated, I’m opposed because I’m in agreement with what he said. I want to be consistent with what we are doing here. I guess I’m more or less seconded it try to move things along because I know we have a lot going on here tonight. I’m in agreement with what Dave Stimmel said here.

David Scott stated, I am too, but I made the motion.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, well with it being a tie, what is the proper procedure.

Attorney Altman stated, I would suggest the motion, I would revote and see if the vote stays the same for the next vote, if not the motion would die for lack of a majority.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, all right, so we will try this again. All in favor of the reduced fine at $100 say “aye” I’m saying “aye” All of those oppose 2 no’s. Dave Scott?

Dave Scott stated, “nay”

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, all right, so that didn’t pass, now we need an alternate suggestion.

David Scott stated, I think that the $500 is too high.

David Stimmel stated, I agree, I guess the number I had in mind was $250 or $300. That is my way of discussion.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you want $250 or $300.

David Stimmel stated, I will move that we access the fine at $300.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do I have a second?

Gary Barbour stated, I will second that.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, anymore discussion. All in favor of the fine being set at $300 say “aye” that is 3 “aye” and 1 “nay”.

Ford McDaniel stated, can I ask a question or is it to late.

Attorney Altman stated, as far as the fine goes, yes it is to late.

Ford McDaniel stated, I was wondering is there anywhere in Area Plan or the zoning that I should have been notified that I needed a survey on it for a garage.

Director Weaver stated, we don’t require a survey.

Attorney Altman stated, unfortunately it is to your determent that you are wrong.

Ford McDaniel stated, all I had to go by was the drawing, which shows 6’, and I’m 12’ away.

Attorney Altman stated, that is the problem you have when you don’t have a survey. Survey gives you the answers.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are we ready to discuss the variance now? Are there any questions? The variance to recap again would be for the proposed addition that is listed on the survey as 12’ x 18’ and it would be situated between the house and the garage. It would have its own roofline, since the garage is at one level and the house is at one level.

Ford McDaniel stated, the contractor is going to tie them into the house and the garage and it will tie into the garage.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything Diann?

Director Weaver stated, no we have not received anything.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are there any comments for or against this variance? Are there any questions from the board?

David Stimmel asked, my question is about the survey. My interpretation Mr. McDaniel is that some of this sidewalk is on your neighbor’s property, from the looks of the survey.

Ford McDaniel stated, yes, it was like that when I bought the property and it was setting on the property. We have papers showing that has been settled.

Director Weaver stated, we did not request to bring that into compliance so it should be removed and put back it would have to be in accordance with out setbacks. I had asked him about that when he filed.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else?

David Stimmel asked, is that fence in compliance?

Director Weaver stated, no it would have to be 10’ back and we did not do anything about that.

David Stimmel stated, I know, but is it maybe something to address off as a side item?

Attorney Altman stated, you understand that if this variance is granted that you have at least two tracts that are a part of this parcel and you can not sell off any of that subject to this variance.

Ford McDaniel stated, yes, I understand that.


Without 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 57’ front setback variance to build a room addition to attach the existing garage to the house and a 10’ side setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance on Part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 27 North, Range 3 West, in Union Township, White County, Indiana, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which is South 0 Degrees East, 1914.86 feet; South 75 Degrees 52 Minutes East 39 feet; South 72 Degrees 29 Minutes East 50.8 feet; South 75 Degrees 20 Minutes East 382.5 feet North 82 Degrees 20 Minutes East 440 feet from the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the above said Section 34; running thence North 82 Degrees 20 Minutes East 50 feet; thence South 04 Degrees 20 Minutes East, 167 feet to Lake Freeman; thence in a Westerly direction along the waters edge to a point which is South 07 Degrees 0 Minutes East 164 feet from the point of beginning; thence North 07 Degrees 00 Minutes West 164 feet to the place of beginning, containing 0.17 acres, more or less.

The above described real estate is also known as Tract 12 in an unrecorded survey known as Lakeland Hills.

Also:

Part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 27 North, Range 3 West, in Union Township, White County, Indiana, being more particularly described as follows:

Beginning at a point which is South 0 Degrees East, 1914.86 feet; South 75 Degrees 52 Minutes East 39 feet; South 72 Degrees 29 Minutes East 50.8 feet; South 75 Degrees 20 Minutes East 382.5 feet; North 82 Degrees 20 Minutes East 490 feet from the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the above said Section 34; running thence North 82 Degrees 20 Minutes East 21.9 feet; thence South 83 Degrees 04 Minutes East 28.1 feet; thence South 02 Degrees 10 Minutes East 164 feet to Lake Freeman; thence in a Westerly direction along the waters edge to a point which is South 04 Degrees 20 Minutes East, 167 feet from the point of beginning; thence North 04 Degrees 20 Minutes West 167 feet to the place of beginning, containing 0.17 acres, more or less.

The above described real estate is also known as Tract 13 in an unrecorded survey known as Lakeland Hills.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located East of Monticello at 6658 E. Riverview Road.

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

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.

****

#2293 James M. & Pamela Ann Burt; The property is located on Lots 35 and 36 in Kean’s Bay North Subdivision, North of Monticello at 5300 E. Bay Front Court.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 27’ front setback variance to build a room addition on to the existing home and a 30’ front setback to build a detached gazebo on the existing deck.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and you are?


Pamela Burt stated, I’m Pamela Burt. Unfortunately my husband got called out of town today and I drove over from Ft. Wayne. I hope I can answer questions properly.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you have anything to add to what I read?


Pamela Burt stated, the room addition is just a sunroom, it is not a heated room, no plumbing, nothing like that. I don’t know if that is of any importance.


Attorney Altman stated, sure is.


Pamela Burt stated, it will have windows, so we can close it off. It is basically a sunroom. On the survey out in front of there where it says deck and boathouse, that is a little deceiving because I don’t know did you guys all have to go out there and look or something. That boathouse is an old boathouse probably 50 years ago, it is been filled in and cement floors and way back from the water line as you can see there. There is a seawall out front there. I don’t know if that matters, that is not setting over water, if that is a question. I don’t know, I don’t know much about this. Just so you know they call that a boathouse, but there is no boat that can go in there.


Attorney Altman asked, what is it used for then?


Pamela Burt stated, for life jackets and that kind of stuff.


Attorney Altman asked, is it living quarters?


Pamela Burt stated, no, we just use it for storage during the summer not the winter. We just want to add this room to get away from the mosquitoes and bugs.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, this is a letter of consent to encroach from the SFLECC.


Pamela Burt stated, right. That was an existing deck when we bought the house. We had no idea that was even a problem. Anyway they did except it and we paid out fee to leave it. That is where the gazebo will be down at the end.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, according to your survey that boathouse that you say is storage and then the boat lifts are built on property that is not yours. Do you understand that.


Pamela Burt stated, yes, it belongs to SFLECC. We do have a permit to use that. The $50…


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, yes, that is what the consent to encroach allows you to do.


Pamela Burt stated, right.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are there any questions or comments for or against from the public?


Director Weaver stated, the consent to encroach from the SFLECC they are aware that you are wanting to put the gazebo on there and that is for the gazebo and sunroom.


Pamela Burt stated, yes, they had the plans for this when it was approved. If it falls down we just could not put it back.


Attorney Altman stated, another thing you really need to look at that survey carefully. We have had a misunderstanding with surveys that somehow have gone through on lake properties that had to do with SFLECC. I have looked at it.


Director Weaver stated, it has the same dates too.


Attorney Altman stated, that is something that you really need to be careful about.


Pamela Burt stated, I’m sorry I didn’t understand that.


Attorney Altman stated, I’m comparing the survey you given us from Mr. Milligan with the survey that is attached to the letter


Director Weaver stated, to confirm that they are the same.


Pamela Burt stated, well they are the same, right.


Director Weaver stated, it appears to be.


Pamela Burt stated, they better be, we only had one done.


Attorney Altman stated, we have run into places where there has been more than one survey and it has made quite a difference.


Pamela Burt stated, I’m sorry.


Attorney Altman stated, no it is not you.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I would like something cleared up for the record. It doesn’t have to be done tonight, but the letter from, the consent to encroach from SFLECC is has a stamp of a notary public and one is Diane Burtchler and residing in Carroll County and the other one is that Kim Lake.


Pamela Burt stated, she is the one that notarized.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, she did not fill in that she was a resident of Allen County.


Pamela Burt stated, oh, she is in Allen County.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it would be appropriate for her to…


Pamela Burt stated, to fix it.


Attorney Altman stated, very appropriate.


Pamela Burt stated, they have already recorded it.


Director Weaver stated, they have recorded it, I’m surprised they didn’t catch that.


Pamela Burt stated, I can get that, then what would I do.




Director Weaver stated, you can take it back down and have it recorded again.


Pamela Burt stated, she just didn’t fill that out.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anymore questions or comments from the board? Are we ready to vote?


Without 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 27’ front setback variance to build a room addition on to he existing home and a 30’ front setback to build a detached gazebo on the existing deck on Lots 35 and 36 in Kean’s Bay North Subdivision in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 5300 E. Bay Front Court.


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

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.


****

#2294 John L. Jurisa; The property is located on Part of Tract A in Downey Dale Subdivision containing .767 of an acre, East of Buffalo and North of State Road 16 on the Southwest corner of Downey Drive and Dale Court.

Violation: None

Request: He is requesting a 15’ front setback variance to build a new home and a pole building on the property.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, you are?

John Jurisa stated, I’m John Jurisa.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you have anything you would care to add too?

John Jurisa stated, it is zoned A-1 and that would call for a 60’ setback and when you do that the triangle that you can build in is a lot smaller and any house would be real close to the garage or pole barn. With the 45’ setback then I will have 35’ between the house and the barn. There is nothing there now but trees. Just looking for setback on one road. It is surrounded on 3 sides.

Director Weaver stated, at the time that we filed this, he asked me if it was possible to ask for the pole barn to go up on that same line as the home. Since it was drawn on there I did not require him to go back to the surveyor since the line was drawn on there. I did not require him to go back to the surveyor to move that pole barn.

David Stimmel asked, by the same line what do you mean?

Director Weaver stated, it would be the same line as the dotted line that he has indicated on there, the surveyor has indicated on there. He actually wants to put it closer to the road than what is shown here. To the South correct?

John Jurisa stated, yes to the South.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, will it be in the same? You have a strange looking lot.

John Jurisa stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, would the corner be at that dotted line or are you shifting the angle of the barn.

John Jurisa stated, no, actually the West part of that would be further than the 45’ because of that angle.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay. So the western edge of the pole barn will remain parallel to the western edge of your property

John Jurisa stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anyone here with any comments for or against this variance? Does the board have any questions?

Director Weaver stated, he has also provided soil tests that he has done to the board.

John Jurisa stated, I have talked to Mr. Banes about this and the neighbor has a license to put in septic.

Attorney Altman stated, so the pole building will be the garage area?

John Jurisa stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, you will go to the 30’ road.

John Jurisa stated, Downey Drive would be the address and the driveway will be there.

Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system?

John Jurisa stated, no septic. Eventually, 2009 maybe.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, you want to live there before that.

John Jurisa stated, I’m putting in a septic, not taking any chances.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are we ready to vote?

Without 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 15’ front setback variance to build a new home and a pole building on that part of the Tract A in Downey Dale Addition in Section 11, Township 28 North, Range 3 West in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana described by: Commencing at the Southwest corner of Lot 35A in said Addition; thence South 63 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds West (S 63 Degrees 00’ 00” W) 25.00 feet; thence South 25 Degrees 19 Minutes 19 Seconds East (S 25 Degrees 19’ 19” E) 25.00 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe w/I.D. (I.P.) set at the point of beginning; thence North 63 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East (N 63 Degrees 00’ 00” E) 22.00 feet to an IP set; thence North 60 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East (N 60 Degrees 00’ 00” E) 140.00 feet to an IP set; thence North 82 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East (N 82 Degrees 00’ 00” E) 37.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 36 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East (S 36 Degrees 00’ 00” E) 88.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 30 Degrees 59 Minutes 15 Seconds West (S 30 Degrees 59’ 15” W) 181.00 feet to a wood corner post; thence South 39 Degrees 42 Minutes 33 Seconds West (S 39 Degrees 42’ 33” W) 69.00 feet to an IP set; thence North 25 Degrees 19 Minutes 19 Seconds West (N 25 Degrees 19’ 19” W) 214.96 feet to the point of beginning, said described tract containing 0.767 acres, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located East of Buffalo and North of State Road 16 on the Southwest corner of Downey Drive and Dale Court.

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.

****

#2295 Timothy J. Plantenga & Roxanne Morrison; The property is located on 11.520 acres, more or less, West of Idaville at 10598 E. U.S. Highway 24.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a special exception for a dog kennel.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, you are?


Timothy Plantenga stated, I’m Timothy Plantenga.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything that you care to add?


Timothy Plantenga stated, we have plenty of property and we are planning on building a 30’ x 40’ building and spend about $40,000 on it. All we have is little miniature dachshunds. I have had them my whole life and my fiancée, which we are getting married tomorrow. She likes them, we are animal lovers and… There will be no big dogs nothing like that. We are not going to board any dogs, it is just for breeding small, and we call them lovers and kissers.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so you will not be a boarding facility?


Timothy Plantenga stated, no, we plan on, we want to build a kennel and then build a 3-car garage on to it and house on the other end of it. That is why we got the land and the 11.5 acres. There is also 5.37 acres on one side and 5.9 on the other side, which we are going to purchase of as of January 2005. The people have a contract with the farmer because it is tillable property. We couldn’t buy it until then, so we are going to buy it, so we will have 23 acres. We will have a lot of room. I don’t know if you have the survey.


Director Weaver stated, they have the survey that you provided.


Timothy Plantenga stated, just that one.


Director Weaver stated, and the pictures that you provided.


Timothy Plantenga stated, here is the pictures that you have right here and this here is the piece that fits in there and that is the tillable property on that side.


Attorney Altman stated, we can only go with the piece of property involved here. If you had the contract to buy then we would recognize that. It isn’t today, so we have to go with what you have.


David Stimmel stated, Mr. Plantenga can I ask you a couple of questions?


Timothy Plantenga stated, sure.


David Stimmel stated, just looking at this, are these buildings occupied residences I see across the road from you off of 24 down here at the next cross road. (He is looking at the survey.)


Timothy Plantenga stated, we have talked to them and they do not have any objections. There are two little houses back there and they don’t have any objections.


David Stimmel asked, what are these buildings here?


Timothy Plantenga stated, I believe that is the tiger farm is.


David Stimmel stated, okay. I know where you are now.


Timothy Plantenga stated, we have talked to all of the neighbors and they don’t have a problem with it. We have spoken to them a lot.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that is a lot of kennels or spaces for breeding. Do you have dogs currently?


Timothy Plantenga stated, yes.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, how many do you have?


Timothy Plantenga stated, we have 16 and we just had 4 puppies today. That makes 20. We breed 3 dogs last week, but we are going to sell them.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, you have been raising dachshunds for how long?


Timothy Plantenga stated, about 2 year, when we started this, I have had them my whole life. I did have one at the time I meet my fiancée and she had one and she just loved it to piece and I told her if you love them so much let's start raising them. We went to Area Plan and found out what we had to do and they said do you have a building and the place we were at had to big pole barns, my fiancée did. They said well they didn’t say anything about having a kennel license, so we went to Flora and came back with 4 dogs. My friend raised them down there. We kept all of the puppies and we bought a couple of dogs from different kennels and one of the neighbors complained about the dogs. It really wasn’t the dachshunds, they complained about the 2 shelties that my fiancée had and they ran the fence line. Anyone who walks down the road they are barking at them and they are the ones that got us in trouble. Anyway that is when we found out if you have more than 4 dogs you have to have a license for a kennel.


Attorney Altman stated, so now you are looking at a place to have a license for a kennel.


Timothy Plantenga stated, exactly, we are selling her place and moving to a new property.


Attorney Altman stated, in a sense that doesn’t matter as far as what you are proposing to do here. This is what you are proposing to do here.


Timothy Plantenga stated, exactly.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there any fan mail?


Director Weaver stated, no I have not received anything.


Timothy Plantenga stated, the neighbor across the street is nice and they got a brand new pole barn and real nice house. We have talked to them a couple of times and they have been over to the house. We have been doing new plumbing and electric and fixing the house up. The other two people way in the back far corner, you can’t even see their house. It is probably a good quarter mile away. It is way back in the far corner and they don’t have a problem with that.


Attorney Altman stated, we understand that the proposal is based on your testimony tonight on what you are going to do and your survey as to where you are going to locate the building and your schematic showing what you are going to put within that building.


Timothy Plantenga stated, correct.


Attorney Altman stated, okay that is all we need.


Timothy Plantenga stated, the schematic and I drew up this wall here, the future wall here for garage door and build a house.


Attorney Altman stated, you would have to come in and have a variance for that.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there any more questions? Does the board wish to vote?


Without further discussion the board voted.


The Board finds the following:


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

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


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


4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.


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


6. That the request is for a special exception for a dog kennel on that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 27 North, Range 2 West in Lincoln Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the intersection of the North right-of-way line of the TP and W Railroad and the North/South Quarter Section Line of said Section 29 (said intersection being 0.63 feet South of a corner post); thence North 83 Degrees 31 Minutes 00 Seconds East (N 83º 31’ 00” E) (assumed bearing) along said right-of-way 244.84 feet to the point of beginning (said point being 0.54 feet South of a corner post);

Thence North 0 Degrees 25 Minutes 34 Seconds West (N 0º 25’ 34” W) 621.70 feet to a wood corner post; thence South 84 Degrees 36 Minutes 49 Seconds East (S 84º 36’ 49” E) 64.39 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe w/I.D. (IP) set; thence North 2 Degrees 05 Minutes 09 Seconds East (N 2º 05’ 09” E) 261.07 feet to an IP set on the South right-of-way of U.S. 24; thence South 87 Degrees 36 Minutes 44 Seconds East (S 87º 36’ 44” E) along said right-of-way 284.17 feet; thence South 3 Degrees 29 Minutes 07 Seconds West (S 3º 29’ 07” W) 88.00 feet to an IP set (passing through an IP set at 1.70 feet); thence South 29 Degrees 23 Minutes 18 Seconds West (S 29º 23’ 18” W) 68.00 feet to an IP set; thence North 88 Degrees 59 Minutes 16 Seconds West (N 88º 59’ 16” W) 152.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 2 Degrees 17 Minutes 28 Seconds West (S 2º 17’ 28” W) 114.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 84 Degrees 36 Minutes 49 Seconds East (S 84º 36’ 49” E) 690.00 feet to a large iron pipe found; thence South 1 Degrees 44 Minutes 57 Seconds West (S 1º 44’ 57” W) 219.43 feet to an IP set; thence South 1 Degrees 17 Minutes 19 Seconds West (S 1º 17’ 19” W) 227.70 feet to an IP set on the North right-of-way of TP and W Railroad; thence South 83 Degrees 31 Minutes 00 Seconds West (S 83º 31’ 00” W) along said right-of-way 838.16 feet to the point of beginning; said described tract containing 11.520 acres, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of Idaville at 10598 E. U.S. Highway 24.


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 10.12 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 4 affirmative and 0 negative.


****

#2296 Lee & Diane Miller; The property is located on 3.00 acres, South of Monticello, North of 4481 E. Luse Road.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting an 8’ height variance to build a detached accessory building.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and you are?


Lee Miller stated, I’m Lee Miller.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you have anything to add to the description of that?


Lee Miller stated, no.


Director Weaver stated, I need to clarify something on the pictures. After I got back I think the pictures are a little deceiving. This property does not include the house that is showing in the pictures. That house is the 4481 and that is a separate parcel of ground. This is a vacant lot right now.


Attorney Altman asked, is that the house on the survey?


Director Weaver stated, yes.


Attorney Altman stated, that just puts it in perspective.


Lee Miller stated, on the survey for the location of the building, I actually want to move it I think what it is 6’, I want to move it 10’ in and about 15’ or 16’ from the East side to move it more to the West.


Attorney Altman stated, so you are moving it.


Lee miller stated, I little further in.


Attorney Altman stated, it says 9’ so you are going to be 15’.


Lee Miller stated, yes.


Attorney Altman asked, are you going further South?


Lee Miller stated, yes, going further South about 10’.


Attorney Altman stated, it is less than on the variance.


Director Weaver stated, the variance isn’t on the setbacks it is on the height.


Lee Miller stated, there is no setback variance now. It is for the height.


Attorney Altman stated, okay.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, there is nothing currently on the property?


Lee Miller stated, no


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so it is just going to be a pole barn.


Lee Miller stated, that is correct.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, how do you, here is the drawing, is there an access drive back to the property?


Lee Miller stated, yes.


David Stimmel stated, there is a 30’ easement for the drive.


Lee Miller stated, that is correct.


Director Weaver stated, the left top picture that I have taken is that easement that you see in the picture.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, who use to live there?


Director Weaver stated, he lives in front of it now.


Lee Miller stated, 4481 for another 15 days. Then I’m moving to the one directly in front of that house.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there any questions or comments from the audience? Are there any questions from the board? Are we ready to vote?


Attorney Altman stated, the height of the building is what?


Lee Miller stated, it is 21’.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else?


Without further discussion the board voted.


The Board finds the following:


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


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


3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and

proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

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


6. That the request is for an 8’ height variance to build a detached accessory building on that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 26 North, Range 3 West in Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at a brass rod at the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 8; thence North 89 Degrees 17 Minutes 44 Seconds East (bearing from previous survey) along the quarter section line 1022.00 feet to a railroad spike found; thence North 00 Degrees 42 Minutes 16 Seconds West 429.71 feet to a capped ½ inch iron pipe (I.P.) set and the point of beginning;

Thence South 89 Degrees 09 Minutes 30 Seconds West 604.25 feet to an I.P. set; thence North 00 Degrees 02 Minutes 52 Seconds East 213.58 feet to an iron pipe found; thence North 88 Degrees 32 Minutes 40 Seconds East 601.50 feet to an iron pipe found; thence South 00 Degrees 42 Minutes 16 Seconds East 220.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 3.00 acres.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located South of Monticello, North of 4481 E. Luse Road.


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

****

#2297 Imogene Clerget; The property is located on Lot 21 in McCuaig’s Addition, in the City of Monticello at 401 S. Third Street.

Violation: None

Request: She is requesting a 6’ rear setback variance to replace an existing fence with a 6’ privacy enclosure and a 3’ picket fence.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and you are?


Imogene Clerget stated, I’m Imogene Clerget.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything that you would care to add.


Imogene Clerget stated, I don’t have anything to offer.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay. Can you describe the fence to us?


Imogene Clerget stated, it is going to be 6’ tall vinyl fence in 3 areas and it encloses up to the house. It goes down and across and back up. Then there is a 30’ extension going to the East.


Director Weaver stated, it is going to be a privacy fence.


Imogene Clerget stated, the 30’ is the picket fence and it is only 3’ tall.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so the privacy fence, will just in our pictures, the privacy fence will actually go where you have the vertical slatted fence currently.


Imogene Clerget stated, yes, there is an existing old wooden fence. I want to tear the wooden fence down and put in vinyl. Replacing wood with vinyl.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the picket fence will be, I don’t know is there a woolen wire fence there now.


Imogene Clerget stated, no it is also vinyl.


Director Weaver asked, what is there now?

Imogene Clerget stated, wooden, some of it is torn out because it was rotten.

(She is going over the survey and showing them where the fence is going to be.)

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are there any comments from the audience? Any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no I have not received anything.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the board? Are we ready to vote?

Without 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 6’ rear setback variance to replace an existing fence with a 6’ privacy enclosure and a 3’ picket fence on Lot 21 in McCuaig’s Addition to Monticello, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 401 S. Third 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.

****

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, next on the agenda is Business and the Town of Chalmers. I see folks representing Chalmers. I believe what happened is we granted a variance #2276 at the last meeting, for construction of an out building located on 43. I guess there are some questions as to whether or not the construction fence that was put up is the appropriate response to the boards wishes as approved at the last meeting. I’m not real sure how to proceed here. Jerry would you like to present the issue.

Attorney Altman stated, the issue is the, I will state what the pictures show. The evidence of the matter that the fence that was put up is the orange construction fence that is shown in the pictures that Diann took. On 3/31/04 and that is the copy of the photos that we have there. How that squares with our, what we heard from the applicants about the fence to be constructed on site. Again this goes to representations that were presented before the board at the meeting March the 18, 2004. The third matter is whether after the site was posted with a stop work order whether work continued in violation of the stop work order. Diann am I missing anything of the issues that were set forth in your letter and the information that you and I have talked about and you shared with me.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t believe so. I think it is accurate.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, very good, I just want to make sure. You were the eyes, and ears on this as far as what occurred on the site obviously what occurred in the board here. There is a proposed draft copy of the minutes and I guess that is it. I guess what we would like to hear from and I guess since the parties that did things would be the town or their construction company. I think it would be appropriate to hear and ask Ken Smith to come and maybe testify about what happened.

Director Weaver stated, he is not here.

Attorney Altman stated, he is not here, do you have anybody from the engineering company?

Any reason why they did not come before us?

Marcus King stated, I don’t know why Ken isn’t here.

Attorney Altman stated, I understand and I don’t ask that you speak for them, but if you know I would like to know.

Marc King stated, I’m Marc King. The issue of the fence and I was here obviously and we went the next day and my recollection and first of all what happened we found out the fencing companies are real busy. To get a contractor there we were looking at and called around and they were going to be at least a week out to look at it and order materials. We were looking at 3 weeks. We have been holding this project up since January this work here. My recollection at that time is that we had to have a permanent fence installed prior to the construction. My thoughts were at that time, what is reasonable the intent of the fence was to establish a boundary to complete the construction. My reason was we can put up the construction fence and that boundary is established. We will get the permanent fence up as soon as we can. I’m responsible for that, that was my decision at the time. It wasn’t based on any malice, wasn’t based on any intent to follow the permit, I didn’t recall the specifics at that time. The application doesn’t state, it just states a fence. That is the back ground on the fence.

I also talked to Jerry Thompson on the issue and told him what we were doing and I came in and talked to Diann. The issue on the construction continuing after the red tag, there is no construction continued on the building. The construction that has continued is on the permit from IDEM to complete the project and that is not covered under the building permit. We have from the county is just the structure. That is what has been going on since then. I discussed with Jerry Thompson and I discussed it with Diann that we are to continue on the IDEM permit. That is what they have been doing there.

Attorney Altman stated, what about the use of adjoining neighborhoods, or neighbor’s property to build from or upon the property.

Marc King stated, we have not done that Jerry. We stayed within the fence. It has been a big, the distance as close as it is a real problem to do it, but we have. I thought we were more than reasonable when your neighbor request you put a fence on your property for them. I thought we were more than reasonable in agreeing to do that. Also on this.

Attorney Altman asked, have you got the chain link fence up now?

Marc King stated, yes it is. The chain link fence is up as requested, we will complete it around and put it around the property at a later date, but what is requested is there.

Attorney Altman asked, do you have photo’s of this, I have not been out there.

David Stimmel stated, I drove by there this afternoon.

David Rosenbarger stated, two sides are up.

David Stimmel stated, yes, two sides are up, the South side is not up, but the posts are there, but the fence is not up.

Marc King asked, do you have any more questions from me?

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think so now.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I’m very concerned with your response because I, we read into the record a letter from Linda Rockaway, the last paragraph. “Since this property is adjacent to my farm and I originally deeded the parcel to the village, I have supported the village request in the past however, I am concerned that the use of my farm ground, not be disturbed by construction of the meter building as it was during the past construction by the village. Therefore I will support the zoning request only if a fence is constructed along the property line in order to protect my property. Erecting this fence will serve two purposes, it will define the boundary for future use, which would explain a delay in the fence building, but as well as insure that the farm land will continue in production as it has in the past without disturbance or soil damage.” I’m looking at pictures of tire tracks to the South edge of that building.

Marc King stated, those are not ours.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they are not yours.

Marc King stated, if they are outside the fence, we put up, I do not know where they came from.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I believe there was a question. If the fence is put up can you construct that building with the fence there and the indication was yes, it would be challenging, but yes it could be done.

Marc King stated, and we have.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I’m looking at equipment tire tracks. I don’t know who else would put those there.

Marc King stated, I asked the contractors about this and they assured me if there are tracks there they are not ours.

David Scott stated, the reason I thought the fence should be there is I have a real problem making a 2’ setback because you can’t even wash your windows without encroaching on the neighbor’s property for the most part and so by you putting the fence up that kind of guaranteed us that you would work in that 2’ area. That is why you are responsible for the fence and not the property owner. The other thing that bothers me from the start is, I don’t like giving a 2’ setback, that is too close to the neighbors and the permit should have, you guys should have been in here for a permit before you broke out the gold shovels for the ground breaking ceremony. I have been involved in a lot of projects and land acquisitions and easement were required before anything was ever done. It disturbs me that wasn’t done before all of the building started. We did make an exception to let you work, we decided to let you have a 2’ setback, if you agreed to stay off of those peoples property. That was the idea of the fence. I didn’t say anything, I just talked a lot.

Marc King stated, we did fence it from the beginning. My assumption was reasonable, what would a reasonable person do here with what I was looking at. To me it was reasonable to have the construction fence establish that boundary. That aspect does it just as good as a permanent one.

Gary Barbour stated, I’m going to step in here now. I’m going to tell you what from the get go we have tried to work with the town of Chalmers and you came in here and told us that you were going to do certain things. It didn’t happen, now we are back here again because what was stated in this meeting. They would like a fence put up on the South and the West boarding right now before construction goes any further. Marc King stated from my perspective that is fine the fence gets put up, not a temporary fence, the fence. Quite frankly how do we know that you are going to go back and really do what you say because how many times have you been in here.

Marc King stated, the fence is up.

Gary Barbour stated, I understand that it is now.

Bob Young stated, the fence is not up on my side, unless they did it after dark.

Gary Barbour stated, all we required them to do is put it on the property surrounding the farm ground, right now until the construction is done.

Marc King stated, I guess I see my background before this board is just my second meeting. Someone else was doing this.

Gary Barbour stated, we are just telling you that it is a continuing problem.

Marc King stated, I understand.

David Rosenbarger stated, there is another one Gary. There is another problem. I would like.

Attorney Altman stated, okay you will come forward, but with that. On this do you want to say anything.

Doug Barnard stated, I’m Doug Barnard. I’m also on the town board of Chalmers. The only thing that I want to respond to was Mr. Scott’s comment as far as easements and acquisitions. All of those legalities were address before anything ever took place. As far as us not meeting setbacks yes, then our variance was to be able to put the building closer to the highway and closer to property lines than what currently county ordinance allows. Because we had to replace an existing structure on the same little lot that it has been on for 30 years, without, yes we were in error in not coming and getting that permit totally in advance. Same thing with the Building at the Sewer plant. That permit was an issue because granted the County level and State and something there, it has been a nightmare from a permit process as far as we as a Town is concerned. Dealing with this Board has just been another step through all of the hurdles that we have gone through in the last 2 years. We are not here trying to do any disrespect, we don’t want to offend the surrounding property owners. We have settled with one farmer already for a 3 year period for crop damage. We are more than willing to settle with anyone else who feels there has been damaged from our construction. Don’t want to encroach for, tear up, or do those things. I’m also involved as one of the builders on the job and our instructions from our General Contractor.

Attorney Altman stated, right here on this site here.

Doug Barnard stated, yes, we built the little building behind the snow fence. I’m sure we crossed that line a couple of times, never with a vehicle by my crew. That is not to say that I have not seen other vehicles and other equipment across that line during the time of construction. I’m around town a lot more during the day than Mark is.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, what was your response when you saw vehicles across that line.

Marc King stated, since the fence has been up.

Doug Barnard stated, to ask a couple of questions and.

Marc King asked, across the fence or the line?

Doug Barnard stated, across the fence. I know Theinaman was there last week with a backhoe. I think they took some of the fence down so they could clean some things up to get ready for the chain link to go in. There has to be some grading done.

David Scott stated, that is exactly my point.

Bob Young stated, I was trying to fish yesterday when my wife come screaming over the cell phone that the concrete truck was down in the driveway and got it blocked and can’t get out and they are mixing concrete to pour down on the job yesterday. The backhoe was working the back side of it and there is not fence on my side. All I want is for them to stay out of my driveway so I don’t get 10 phone calls a day.

David Scott stated, that was my point about I don’t like giving a 2’ setback and that is the reason. If you would have come in and applied for the permit when you should have, you would have had to come before this board and you probably had to do and then if construction hadn’t started. I will tell you right now I would not have voted for 2’ setback and you would have had to done some land acquisition for utility easement or something so that you had 5’, 6’, or 7’ what ever it takes to work between without getting on the neighbor’s property. That was my point.

Doug Barnard stated, I guess the only point I would come back too is, if damage has been done we are willing to compensate for that damage.

Attorney Altman stated, Dave do you have something you want to talk to us about.

David Rosenbarger stated, she is just tired of it. The last 2 days your fence builders have been parked in the fields, I asked them to leave. My opinion is the Town of Chalmers is the owner of the project and they are solely responsible, whether they hire a construction engineer that is beside the point. The last meeting on the setbacks there was some discussion on the survey. Mr. Young questioned it, I questioned it was a certified surveyor that did the survey. I accepted that for the time being for Linda. That was on Thursday night and on Friday the corner stake was moved about 12’ back North.

Attorney Altman stated, tell us what corner.

David Rosenbarger stated, it would be the Southwest corner of Young’s. Got more in line, but it is still way off.

Attorney Altman stated, further North.

David Rosenbarger stated, the southwest corner of Bob Young’s.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, southeast.

David Rosenbarger stated, I don’t know it got moved. Bob and I made fun of it because.

Marc King stated, the surveyor came back the next day after the board meeting.

Several talking at once.

David Stimmel stated, Bob hold on a minute.

David Rosenbarger stated, the way the field lays out South of Bob’s lane. That grass strip there has always been an assumed property line. If you go to that corner and the farm goes North that railroad spike was about 12’ to 13’ out South into the field. Bob and I kind of laughed about it. We brought it up here and Ken made the comment that they were certified surveying crew. Okay we will live with it because where it was setting the property line went straight through the building due East. Friday evening after you had put your post up, I went… The post for the building was that a Friday or the next Monday or whatever.

Doug Barnard stated, it would have been the following Monday. I was out of town.

David Rosenbarger stated, the day I saw the poles up, I drove down the lane and Bob said come here and look and it was right at the corner of the grass. The spike it is closer and we are still a little bit off. Your people put your post in yesterday evening for the fence.

Attorney Altman stated, the chain link fence.

David Rosenbarger stated, the chain link fence, I looked at it and chucked and as I came to the meeting tonight I saw you had chain link fence installed on the North and West sides. Go down to that post that your surveyor is saying the new survey line and the post that the highway your fence goes a 1’5 off into Bob’s property or driveway. They have missed it by a foot and a half.

Doug Barnard stated, bad contractor’s is not the issue here.

David Rosenbarger stated, I understand that, but what Linda is requiring is let's make it right because she will make you tear it down.

Doug Barnard stated, if it is wrong, it needs tore down. I don’t have a problem with that.

David Rosenbarger stated, that is why we are here, somebody needs to be held accountable, we are just putting this stuff up.

Doug Barnard stated, we paid the surveyor $3000 to didn’t get the survey right, I understand and that is why, until someone can prove to me by somebody else with the proper credentials that, that is wrong

David Rosenbarger stated, okay, what I’m saying right now is there is another problem. I’m going to go with your surveyor tonight.

Doug Barnard stated, we have to.

David Rosenbarger stated, your fence is going up is a 1’5, your northwest corner of the fence is a 1’5 on Bob Young’s property according to your survey. I ran a pink tape this evening before I came up on a string.

Doug Barnard stated, to respond to that I need those people on the site to explain that to me and show it to me. I don’t want to answer that here without….

David Rosenbarger stated, I’m saying that is going to be a problem, you can stand at the post and look down at the other one.

Doug Barnard stated, my comment to that still is this has nothing to do with our variance.

David Rosenbarger stated, yes it does because Linda wants you off of her property and she wanted a fence. You need to have the fence up and in order to put the fence up it has to be right. Right now according to your survey it is wrong.

Doug Barnard stated, I have two issues with that.

David Rosenbarger stated, okay.

Doug Barnard stated, this isn’t the board that would enforce whether the fence is located properly. Second of all the guys if the guys were on the property the fence builders asked to leave and didn’t leave that is a legal action and you should have called the cops.

David Rosenbarger stated, we are trying to get this project done right.

Doug Barnard stated, all we are getting is delays.

David Rosenbarger stated, you are right because it is not right. That is the whole issue, it is not right. The other thing is your saying a legal issue okay, but if that fence is wrong, it is square with your measurements that means your setbacks are wrong on the back side. If that fence needs to go like this to match your lines it changes everything.

David Scott stated, I’ll tell you what I would like to see and we don’t have the authority to tell you to do that, but I would like to see you acquire either through easement or purchase enough ground that you can properly, and meet your setbacks and I’m not even sure.

Doug Barnard stated, she has stated very plainly she does not want us on her ground, she doesn’t want to loose any ground, she doesn’t want to give up anything. In order to do that it would have to be a legal procedure.

Bob Young stated, Dave we need to resolve the boundaries.

Doug Barnard stated, if Ken Smith as our Engineer or Theinaman Construction as the general contractor or I don’t even know who the fence company is. One of them should have had the surveyor come out and locate that fence line needed to go.

David Rosenbarger stated, right, but what they did if you look when you go tomorrow morning, when you see that post which that is a dispute also. That white cement post by the highway they lined it up with the big corner post back by Bob’s property, which is real close to the real property line. The stake from the surveyor is 10’ to 12’ South of there. When you go to the true stake and cement post it runs at an angle.

Doug Barnard stated, like I said if the fence is in the wrong place.

David Rosenbarger stated, that is why I’m telling you now, why waste the money.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, who is in charge of the project Doug?

Doug Barnard stated, Fanning and Howey Associates are the Engineers that is construction managers.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is the city of Chalmers contracting with them to take charge of this project.

Doug Barnard stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the board and the property owners would like to see it done properly according to the legal documents, according to the letters of request, according to permits and according to what you have been granted. We have not seen that on several levels and you can talk about reasonable and I’m sure from the Town’s point of view and perhaps it was reasonable for you to pursue this without getting the fence in place. That is not what we agreed too. If you agreed to keep people off of other peoples property and you have seen them there and you are saying that they are not there and we are seeing tire tracks, somebody needs to take responsibility for this project and be there on site. He has seen other people on the property, you’ve seen people, obviously it is happening. It is someone’s responsibility to take care of it. It shouldn’t be Mr. Young’s responsibility to keep and eye on you. Linda is out of town and she shouldn’t have to contact Dave to keep an eye on you. You have agreed according to permits, according to legal documents on what you will do and what you will be responsible for and we are not seeing that.

Gary Barbour stated, I can’t speak for the rest of the board but it is my own personal opinion that you as a Municipality really ought to be setting an example for the rest of the community because you are the government.

Bob Young asked, who owns this piece of property?

Gary Barbour stated, the Town of Chalmers.

Bob Young stated, the Town of Chalmers or the Chalmers Utilities. There is a difference there.

Gary Barbour stated, well.

Bob Young stated, who owns.

Attorney Altman asked, do you know who owns this?

Doug Barnard stated, I believe it is in the Town of Chalmers name.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, what would it take to get this fence in place where it belongs and finish up the building?

Doug Barnard stated, the fence in question as far as the location, unless you are saying that, that one is wrong then everything is out of squire.

David Rosenbarger stated, that is what I argued at the last meeting and to be honest with you from everything that I have talked to of everybody else.

Several talking at once.

Attorney Altman stated, just one talking at once please.

David Rosenbarger stated, from everything that I have seen and everyone I have talked, and there again I’m just going by the old timers and landowners.

Doug Barnard stated, the whole property moves to the South, so the 2’ setback….

David Rosenbarger stated, it isn’t an issue, but the way your surveyor has set it, it is an issue, but now you are not staying within the survey.

Doug Barnard stated, coming back to Mr. Altman and the boards point over a lot of different things here tonight and other different examples. We hired a surveyor and we have to trust what they tell us.

David Rosenbarger stated, that is what I said our problem now is, I trust your surveyor tonight and if that is the case your fence is in the wrong spot.

Doug Barnard stated, I appreciate that.

David Rosenbarger stated, I don’t want you guys spending money, you need to stop it before they put more up, unless you can figure out that it is their fault for putting it in the wrong spot, but it doesn’t match your survey that was done. The other issue later down the road is going to be the survey will be protested, but I think it needs to be done right. I don’t feel that it is being done right. Linda doesn’t feel that it is right.

Marc King stated, if the fence is in the wrong place we will certain put it where it belongs. I wasn’t aware of that.

Attorney Altman stated, we were told at that last meeting that no one would be on Mr. Young’s driveway. We are hearing tonight that a cement truck was on it. The fence would be, well maybe the fence is done.

David Rosenbarger stated, it is half done.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, what I guess I would say to the board is if we have issues about whether the survey is correct, that may make what we granted kind of nebulous and not very helpful to the city for their variance. Like you are saying Dave, or hearing you saying that it may make their variance….

David Rosenbarger stated, to go a different direction or not even need one, that’s the whole thing.

Attorney Altman stated, we don’t know, so I guess I would suggest that this site be staked by a surveyor of the town’s choice or the contractors. That be brought back to us at the next meeting, showing where the lot is, where the improvements are, where the fence is, and then I think we will know something. Right now I don’t think we know anything.

Marc King stated, Jerry….

David Rosenbarger stated, it is staked Jerry.

Marc King stated, what would we do different it has already been done.

Attorney Altman stated, then I would like to have it reduced to written presentation.

Marc King stated, that should have been submitted at the last meeting.

Attorney Altman stated, an as built survey that would show us, that shows where the improvement is on the property. Then we can know something. I don’t think it is, or I think it is. We are just setting here spinning out wheels listening to the uncertainty of both sides of this. I think a good as built survey would help us know and you guys know whether it is as built correctly. It seems to be a step forward.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that wasn’t one of the issues that you raised at the initiation of this meeting. The boundary lines were raised during this meeting and I’m not sure whether the board can determine that or not, but there were 3 issues that you mentioned and one that the fence that was constructed was not the fence that was agreed too. My understanding is that has been taken care of. Second one was that construction would take place only on your property and that is definitely not the case. You have said so, there are 3 people in this room that have seen construction equipment outside the property bounds. The other issue is the stop work order and continuing, but we definitely have two issues here that have definitive proof that things took place against what we agreed to at the last meeting. The fence is up, that issue is taken care of and the property issue is going to be between surveyors. I would propose, we initiated that $500 fine when people built outside of the perimeters of their building permits. At last months meeting we set the perimeters and that permit and these folks have obviously built outside the ramifications of that permit. I would like to, or I would move that we charge $500, they have taken care of the fence, property issues will be taken care of at another time. I’d like not to see these folks here again.

David Stimmel stated, in way of discussion I have a couple of questions.

Attorney Altman stated you have a couple of seconds before you can do that.

David Stimmel stated, okay.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it could die for lack of second.

Gary Barbour asked, can we have a discussion before the second?

Attorney Altman stated, generally we operate that, the fact that you second it doesn’t at all limit your discussion afterwards. You don’t have anything to discuss.

Gary Barbour stated, I’m going to second it so we can go into the discussion. I guess the $500 fine for the Town of Chalmers, who are we penalizing with that. You are penalizing the taxpayers, it isn’t necessarily theirs.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they can pass it on to the contractor.

David Stimmel stated, the questions that I have are per Dave, or Bob. The discussion about the survey stakes being moved and I mean I have to go back to that. That really bothers me. I would be upset if they did that.

David Rosenbarger stated, to me that proves that the variance just went out the window.

David Stimmel stated, we have the town of Chalmers that spend $3000 on a survey.

Marc King stated, …. and I agreed to that.

David Stimmel stated, I guess, I’m wondering if I have know idea who moved the stakes and I don’t think that you guys do either. It sounds like we need to get them out and put some permanent something that can’t be moved, I don’t know what that would be.

Doug Barnard stated, I don’t know what was set with the survey.

David Rosenbarger stated, all it is a railroad spike.

David Stimmel stated, railroad spike which is the typical I think.

Marc King stated, the stakes I saw were drilled in the ground below grade.

David Rosenbarger stated, right, they have an orange cap. That one was railroad and it shows on the survey, railroad spike.

David Stimmel stated, surely those guys would come back out and reestablish those points is all I’m trying to say because for $3000 you spent all they have to do is come out and just make sure those points are where they are suppose to be. I would think. Say look we need to see them.

Doug Barnard stated, there is a real argument there.

David Stimmel stated, maybe in the ways of comment. If you have already paid these contractors, surely not, there has got to be some retain.

Doug Barnard stated, there is on the whole job.

David Stimmel stated, it seems to me that it would be prudent for you guys to bring their feet to the fire somewhat on this and say here are the problems. List them 1,2,3,4,5 or whatever they are. You will get a check when these issues are resolved.

Doug Barnard stated, to be honest those things do need to happen. Something you don’t throw out there quiet until you get the thing up and running. Because that is the ultimate goal.

David Stimmel stated, I agree.

Doug Barnard stated, as far as holding their feet to the fire, you shouldn’t have been on their property. You really screwed this job up and yes we have tried to be on them certain guys. Jeff of street Supervisor and Town guy has stopped in my office a couple of times and said or told somebody you better not get across that property and they just say what the heck. Well, yeah somebody probably should go over there an enforce it. At some point you just shake your head and say that they are idiots and just let them go.

David Stimmel stated, I don’t know what enforcement power the board has in this and I feel that it is just set here to smack you guys back and forth about things that have been done poorly. They have been done, you have admitted it. It seems to me that we could also buy someone by showing some good faith by getting to get a quorum or something in the next week so we don’t have to delay this another month. Get 3 or 4 of us together.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, what do we have to decide?

David Stimmel stated, the only reason I’m saying this is for somebody to show good faith in the fact that number one the survey has been done and the stakes be reestablished to be where they should be and the fence has been rebuilt and surely in a week they can get the fence back to where it should be. Those two things.

Bob Young stated, you need to get the survey determined before you can move the fence.

David Stimmel stated, that was the first thing that I said Bob. That was exactly the first thing that I said to reestablish the survey boundary, exactly where they should be.

Doug Barnard stated, my understanding is that as part of the construction process the fence needs to be located properly before construction on the building will continue. It never should have started with the fence not up properly. That was a miscommunication between the town and we won’t go there. Dave Anderson as the building inspector, it should be as simple that we have to call Dave out and Dave has to say okay you are meeting what is showing on the drawing. Proceed on.

Director Weaver stated, Dave has no way of knowing where those property lines are.

Doug Barnard stated, and neither does the board.

Director Weaver stated, Dave is going by what you say, what that property line is.

Doug Barnard stated, but if we can show him survey stakes, if we can get our fence located and we can run a string down and show him the fence isn’t across the line. That is what we are after and you want someone from the county to say that. Dave is the guy that you appoint for that.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the utility pole is shown on the survey, is it not.

Bob Young stated, no ma the survey that you gave me and you were telling me that this is right I will accept that. I would accept their survey. Let's pretend that their survey was right. It is a real simple reading off of the southwest stake that Dave was mentioning. It is 0 degrees due East and if you run 0 degrees due East off of that and because I paid a guy last week to shoot it with a transit. You are barely missing the building that they have got built. Half of the place is on the eave which I know that is not right, but if you go with that survey map that you have 0 degrees due East off of the southwest marker you are going to take off half of their 50’ because you are going to move my East boundary 16’ South. Which isn’t mine. I thought I had enough room, originally that is all I came over here for was would you put my culvert back that you dug out so my yard doesn’t flood. Everybody agreed to that it is on the minutes. Well you are not going to put no culvert back now because you have a fence line running down it.

Dave Scott stated, you guys have an RPR man on this job.

Bob Young stated, I would like to make one other statement and then I will shut up.

Marc King stated, I don’t understand what you are asking Dave.

Dave Scott stated, the inspector that is usually with your engineering firm that oversees the project.

Marc King stated, that would be Ken Smith.

Doug Barnard stated, that would be his main responsibility at this point.

David Scott asked, is he on site all of the time?

Doug Barnard stated, no, not 8 hours a day.

David Scott asked, how do you know if the job is being done right? Does someone do an inspection report?

Marc King stated, yes he does.

Doug Barnard stated, at critical stages.

Bob Young stated, Sunday morning at 7:00 there is a tractor and loader in my driveway scooping up the stone off of Dave’s field and they take it usually in my driveway, which is okay. Then they spread it in the mode area, which is okay, I’m not sure what the boundaries are there because I know I have to rake it back in order to mow the front of the yard. That is the town men and there are suppose to be not using other people’s property, but that was Jeff.

Marc King stated, there was a stone there that was there prior to the last meeting and we had to get it out.

David Scott stated, I don’t know where we go from here.

Bob Young stated, what do you mean that you have to do, I don’t understand that part. What you have to do according to what they told you was put up a fence so no one falls in the man hole, quit pumping poop out on my yard, and stay out of my driveway.

Marc King stated, Bob to move that stone unless you know another way, we had to go up there and get the stone. It was there prior to our last meeting.

Bob Young stated, well the contractor was up there and raising cane about where his stone went because that was what he was going to use on the driveway.

Marc King stated, that is why we moved it.

Bob Young stated, you are still trespassing on other people.

David Scott stated, I think really we need to make sure the easement, I mean the survey is correct and make sure everything of yours is on your property.

Bob Young stated, another thing that bothers me is that replacing an existing building. The building that they are replacing was a cover building for a 6-cylinder engine that was never permitted either. It was nailed up on sheet tin because the noise was so loud from the motor and the pump going that no one could operate it. Show me where there is a plotted out building there before.

Gary Barbour stated, alright, where are we.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, well there is a motion and a second and do we want to vote on the fine.

David Scott stated, I don’t see anything wrong with the fine but it is not the answer to all of the problems here.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it is not the answer to all of the problems, except that I think my perception is, you have several… The town of Chalmers had a plan and changed the plan to save money and that is their purgative. I’m not sure though who is in control of this project.

Doug Barnard stated, IDEM.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they are not on site Doug.

Doug Barnard stated, actually they are, not everyday, not 8 hours a day.

David Rosenbarger stated, ultimately the town, the municipality is in charge of the project. It is your project.

Doug Barnard stated, ultimately yes.

David Rosenbarger stated, that is what she is getting at, who is the ultimate, you’re the owner.

Bob Young stated, we haven’t determined that yet have we?

Director Weaver stated, yes, I have a copy their deed and the Town of Chalmers is the owner.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, if the town of Chalmers has contracted with this firm to take care of this particular aspect of it. We have put a lot of time in addressing this issue and it keeps coming back and essentially we had an agreement and that is not what happened.

Marc King asked, what do we need to do from here.

Bob Young asked, how did the stop work order get removed?

David Rosenbarger stated, it has not been removed.

Bob Young asked, how are they working everyday?

Director Weaver stated, the stop work order is on what the County permitted, not for what they were permitted through IDEM.

Bob Young asked, what did the county permit?

Director Weaver stated, the building and the fence.

Bob Young asked, did they ever get access off and on the island.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know.

Bob Young stated, the guy was telling us at the last meeting that would definitely be taken care of in a couple of days. They would have access on and off of the highway.

Attorney Altman asked, do you know if that has been approved?

Doug Barnard stated, do not know status.

Bob Young stated, because where they park there now they were talking about this other guys driveway because when they park there you can’t get out of the driveway.

Marc King stated, I know the permit has been applied for.

David Scott asked, what was the motion again?

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I move that they be fined for $500 for building outside the perimeters of the permit. I still think that they need to take care of these other issues. Jerry is that utility pole of the survey? Isn’t there a utility pole just South of the building. If that utility pole is marked on there you can take measurements from that.

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t see it on there.

Bob Young stated, what does that have to do with anything.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, well Dave Anderson can measure it.

Several talking at once. People talking to each other in the audience and the board is talking to each other.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the utility pole is on the survey.

Attorney Altman stated, it is to the South.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so are building inspector I believe could measure off of that utility pole.

Bob Young stated, you can’t measure a survey off of a utility pole.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, well it is a spot locator.

David Rosenbarger stated, the question to what they need to check into is did they start at the right spot.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that they started at the right spot.

David Rosenbarger stated, if they didn’t start at the section marker than none of those marks are right.

Gary Barbour stated, yes, the utility pole would be in the wrong place.

Marc King stated, we need the survey who we paid to do this survey come back and.

David Rosenbarger stated, and show you where the markers are

Doug Barnard stated, there is no argument there. I agree whole heartily.

Attorney Altman stated, they said they did, whether they did or not, I don’t know.

Bob Young stated, it is under asphalt Jerry. It is still buried in the alley.

Marc King stated, we will get the surveyor out there to remark this.

Attorney Altman stated, that sounds like a real good move, but as far as taking care of the issues.

Doug Barnard stated, the issue is that we are red tagged from working on the building now until the fence is done properly. We want to complete the fence properly, we want somebody from the county Dave Anderson as the county inspector whoever to tell us that the fence is completed properly and we can now proceed with the building. That is all we want.

Gary Barbour stated, we have to deal with the issue of the fine.

David Scott asked, can we send the County Surveyor out there?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know that is what I just asked.

David Scott stated, to verify the marks.

Attorney Altman stated, we can’t send him, but we certainly can request that he check it.

Director Weaver stated, he doesn’t do land surveying anymore.

Attorney Altman stated, that is right.

David Rosenbarger stated, my suggestion to the town would be have your surveyors come out and I know Denny has done a lot of surveying around Chalmers.

Several talking at once again.

Attorney Altman stated, Carol, you have a motion and I think we need to talk about. Dave what you are saying here about correcting the problem.

David Scott stated, yes,

Attorney Altman stated, maybe we ought to have vote on the motion and then go to your issue Dave that you are talking about of remedying the problem.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, there is a motion, a second and a discussion are we ready to vote.

David Scott stated, one more questions.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, one more question.

David Scott stated, if we vote for the $500 fine and they pay their fine and pass it on and whatever happens I don’t know how to do this for sure. They want to proceed as quick as they can also, but I don’t want to charge them $500 and that be it.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, no, no

Attorney Altman stated, the second issue is that they have to prove the compliance.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they still have to meet the perimeters of what we approved.

Director Weaver stated, my understanding is the stop work order doesn’t come down until they do that.

Gary Barbour asked, how come we are fining the town of Chalmers and not the contractor too.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, at some point and time.

David Scott stated, we did that to another guy because they can pass that on to the contractor.

Director Weaver stated, we have done it both ways.

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing is we only have one motion, obviously….

Bob Young stated, you guys are looking at a couple million-dollar job, $500 is going to….

Attorney Altman stated, why I know that, we are trying…

Bob Young stated, I would just like to see the problem cleared up. If the fence is on my side, I honestly don’t care if they leave it, give or take. All I want is to stay out of the driveway with the truck. To much hassle. I want the culvert back, which I don’t know how they are going to do now because I don’t’ think I own the property anymore. I gained it on the other end. If we don’t get a culvert in there and get the ditch dug up which is what they promised me the first meeting then it is all going to be under water anyway.

Director Weaver stated, they have to provide a culvert. That was part of the conditions, they have to put that culvert in.

Bob Young stated, if they do they are going to have to get it to fit on the fence poles then.

David Scott stated, they have some work to do and to find out where the survey is.

Attorney Altman stated, back to the motion.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, all of those in favor say “aye” and all of those opposed. it was 1 affirmative to 3 negative. Motion fails.

Marc King asked, what was that motion for? We talked about it.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the fine.

Marc King stated, what do we need to do.

Attorney Altman stated, you need to get the surveyor out and establish where you are and where you should be.

Marc King stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, if it is consistent with what you have done and requested and what has been approved. If it has and there are no other violations such as driving on Mr. Young’s property or Linda’s property. The fence is up and the egress and ingress is approved by the State and the sewers put in and dipped out and what else. Is there anything else that I’m forgetting.

Director Weaver stated, the gutters.

Attorney Altman stated, the gutters put on.

Marc King stated, the stop work order.

Director Weaver stated, we will have to have the stop work order off.

Attorney Altman stated, the stop work order off and that be part of the whole settlement. Is there anything else.

Marc King stated, Jerry would it work better after we get the survey done if someone from the county was there.

Attorney Altman stated, someone from the county would have to be Mr. Sterrett.

Marc King stated, I’m asking.

Director Weaver stated, we can ask him.

Doug Barnard stated, Diann issued the stop work order to me it is her that needs to take it off.

Attorney Altman stated, oh yes.

Director Weaver stated, that is right.

Doug Barnard stated, so you have to come out and see it and be happy with it.

Attorney Altman stated, that is right.

Doug Barnard stated, if you have to bring a professional with you to certify you that is your call.

Attorney Altman stated, these things have to be done. It is a part of the whole deal.

David Scott stated, the county shouldn’t have to pay to send a professional to verify.

Doug Barnard stated, we are going to have out professional out there certified saying this is it.

Director Weaver stated, if there is a fee for Denny to go out there and if Denny wants to go it should be at their expense.

Marc King stated, I disagree.

Doug Barnard stated, I disagree too. We have our professional standing there that is certified as a surveyor that is all I should do.

Several talking at once.

David Scott stated, Diann is not a surveyor. If you are comfortable with, I don’t know.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m just suggesting that they do that and the stop work order will come off and if they don’t I guess it won’t. That is all I have to say.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, if you would have put up the fence first before you constructed the building the stop work order would not be in place. You started the ball rolling by doing the building before you had the fence in place, which is now requiring the County to hire a surveyor because of the survey question has a risen.

Marc King stated, those are two totally different issues.

David Scott stated, can we make sure that your surveyor, are the post corners there.

David Rosenbarger stated, the posts are there now, I will go back in the morning and take pictures to show you exactly where they are. If they are moved then something is the matter. Where they are right now they need to move the fence.

David Scott stated, if you have your surveyor mark those corners then Diann, we don’t need to send the surveyor, Diann can go out there and measure them off.

Bob Young stated, she can stop at Walmart and buy a kite sting and run it from one post to the other post.

David Scott stated, it needs to be legal.

Director Weaver stated, we need a surveyor.

Doug Barnard stated, again we need to locate these corners and we need to have our surveyor come back and locate the corners and tell us if the fence is in the wrong place. If it is, we need to move it. Once it is moved if that varies from what we had applied for in the variance, then yes there is still an issue. If it matches what was applied for there shouldn’t be any issues.

David Scott stated, the other issue at hand, I have been through a couple of projects, if the contractors where doing something that they are not suppose to be do and told them not to do, then they don’t do it. If you told them to stay off of that guy’s property, what are they doing, you are paying them.

Marc King stated, from my perspective, I know some of them are a bunch of idiots, but I became and I have talked to those guys at that meeting and I told them no trespassing here. Stay off of the property. I was not aware. I’ve hearing different tonight.

David Scott stated, well this gentleman here, I suggest that you go and talk to him and try to work something out. It is obvious you can’t do the job without getting on this property. I think the thing to do…

Bob Young stated, they have a foreman on the job that gets along with my family real well. What is his name?

Marc King stated, Dave Sweet.

Bob Young stated, Dave Sweet comes up and tells me we are going to have the driveway blocked here for a while, if you want to park out back so you can get out. This guy has been handling real well through.

David Scott stated, all I can tell you…

Bob Young stated, there are half a dozen contractors coming in there. Yesterday the fence building crew was in there mixing concrete in the driveway and told them to stuff it.

David Scott stated, they need to keep a handle on that. I think you are going to have to bear with them until they get done with this project and hope when it is done that they leave it like they found it. It is not right what has happened from the beginning.

Doug Barnard stated, we hope it is an improvement in every way shape and form from what we had in the big picture.

David Scott stated, I think it is essential that you keep those people off of that ladies farm ground. She doesn’t want them there.

Marc King stated, if I knew in the beginning what I know now they never would have been on her ground.

Several talking at once.

David Scott stated, develop some kind of communications when you are doing things and have an idea of what is going on, if you have to be on his property. You are in the middle of this now and you are going to have to work it out.

Several talking at once.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, one person at a time please.

David Stimmel stated, Bob is doesn’t do any good to talk when someone else is talking. We can’t hear either one of you, not a one of you. Have we agreed that the town is going to get the surveyor back up there and are we going to ask Denny to come out or not?

Director Weaver stated, I will ask Denny to come out.

David Stimmel stated, to verify that the section corner is being used.

Marc King stated, I’m not certain.

David Stimmel asked, Dave is that what we are talking about?

David Scott stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, to verify where the fence is going to go.

David Stimmel stated, right.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, and then the fence needs to go there.

David Stimmel stated, that plus the line items that Jerry ticked off a while ago.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, you all understand what those line items are.

Marc King stated, could you repeat them please.

Attorney Altman stated, 1. Stay off of Mr. Young’s property.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are you writing them down?

Attorney Altman stated, 2. Stay off of Linda’s property. 3. The fence up. Obviously get the survey done and it be correct and then be consistent with the application and culvert be put in and it be dipped as indicated and obviously no human residue be put on anybody’s property.

Marc King stated, Jerry, there has never been any human waste. There was….

Attorney Altman stated, we are just going to say none. Then was there anything else?

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the gutters.

Attorney Altman stated, the gutters be installed and that would be afterwards after the red tag has been lifted. The gutters be installed and run into the proper drainage. Is there anything else.

Director Weaver stated, access from the highway.

Attorney Altman stated, access from the State Highway.

Director Weaver stated, they have to have a stone parking area.

Attorney Altman stated, the stone parking area on your property. The Board and Diann is there anything else you can think of.

Doug Barnard stated, one clarification.

Attorney Altman asked, Bob is there anything else at all to be on the list.

Bob Young stated, no, just get the drainage to go out of there so it doesn’t go on my property.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what is required with the sewer. Dave is there anything else you can think of I need to have on this list.

David Rosenbarger stated, no.

Attorney Altman stated, okay the clarification, yes.

Doug Barnard stated, fence we currently have it going up on 3 sides. The North, South, and West. We agreed to as the terms to the permit South and West correct. The reason I asked that is if we need to remove what we have on the North line in order to make the drainage work properly that may be what we have to do, we may not end up with a fence on that North side.

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t believe Mr. Young asked for a fence last time.

Bob Young stated, no, is it my turn.

Attorney Altman stated, if I remember that is what you said.

Bob Young stated, I didn’t care if they put a fence there, the way it was read into the minutes I brought up the point of the lids being left open and it being a safety concern. That is when they said they would fence it and gate it so that they didn’t have this pit problem. I think you will find that in the minutes from the last meeting.

Attorney Altman stated, the fence…

Bob Young stated, they would have to put a fence on 4 sides of it that is why I agreed to it.

Attorney Altman stated, and gate it. Do you hear that.

Marc King stated, yes.

Bob Young stated, I don’t care how they do it, but that was what was in the minutes.

Attorney Altman asked, Board is there anything else? Obviously let us know right away so we can get Diann’s schedule and Mr. Sterrett’s schedule available to do what you want done, so we can get this done and everyone would be tickled to death to raise that red tag. Anything else?

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else?

Attorney Altman stated, thank you very much.

David Stimmel asked, do we have something on the Indiana Beach?

Attorney Altman stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the Indiana Beach lawsuit.

David Stimmel stated, Bob you need to take it outside, please.

Attorney Altman stated, we have work to continue with. Indiana Beach lawsuit. I sent you a proposed settlement that they had, you and I looked it over. Remember the one?

Director Weaver stated, the open door.

Attorney Altman stated, no, this is the one you and I talked about that they were saying as to the…

Director Weaver stated, oh, what they had proposed.

Attorney Altman stated, what they had proposed to the judge and there were several issues in there about…. The proposal to the Judge it essentially said that is request in our ordinance would be and I think I can get that pretty quickly and it would make more sense.

Anyway there were several request in there that what we did was outside the power of the State Law and our ordinance was above and beyond what was allowed by the State. Rules, and State Statue. There were several things in there that was essentially just saying that we were over stepped our bounds of authority. I talked to the attorney’s and we all basically Mr. Justice and I ganged up against them and said get that out of there because the Statue does say that we can do that. We can make our ordinance more severe than the State Law can. This is one of the unusual circumstances that allow that. It has been pulled out and basically it comes down to the Judge, if he agrees then he will make his order.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, what order is that?

Attorney Altman stated, the order that didn’t allow for the variance on the height restriction. That is the only one that is up in the air right now. I think the issue is whether the Judge accepts that or not.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I guess I thought that was all dropped. One was, there were two. One was the special exception to allow them to operate and the other was the height variance. We approved both.

Attorney Altman stated, and the Judge said that the special exception was okay, but the height variance wasn’t. That is what Judge Smith said.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I guess I thought it was settled and that Judge.

Attorney Altman stated, no completely because Indiana Beach wants to protect their height variance and so do we. We granted them.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I guess Jerry I thought those sisters withdrew their complaint.

Director Weaver stated, the Judge had already ruled.

Attorney Altman stated, the Judge has already ruled.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the Judge had already ruled.

Attorney Altman stated, we have a ruling and until the ruling is reversed or vacated it is there. We of course are trying to get that to happen. This one-step for doing that. The other thing is and Gary and Dave know it particularly I have been working on amending the ordinance. One of the things that I have been working on is to raise the height restriction on amusement rides.

Director Weaver stated, I sent them a copy of that.

Attorney Altman stated, okay. The Area Plan Commission has essentially looked at that and said boy that is a lot of height. Are there any setbacks? If they are going to go up that high under B-2 there are 0 setbacks. That would be in essence like I could come up to Carol and get real big 250’ big this close to her. The board is concerned about that. I’m working to figure out someway they are not sure if they are going to agree with the 250’ either. That is all I can say Diann. Is there anything else I have left out?

Director Weaver stated, the attorney fees.

Attorney Altman stated, propose something and I understand that you have talked it over and tell me what you are doing I don’t think, if I go right now and say Indiana Beach or the two sisters paid our attorney’s fee, they will say go fly a kite.

Director Weaver stated, explain to us why we should pay that $6000.

David Scott asked, why didn’t the Judge say, or don’t they normally say who is going to pay what?

Attorney Altman stated, usually everyone pays their own fees.

Gary Barbour stated, this was a game of money and you are legalizing extortion game is what it was. Why should the County be responsible for their game, when they both profited off of it?

Director Weaver stated, all the county is doing is losing.

Attorney Altman stated, I understand that. The only thing that I can tell you is as little as I like to say it that is the way it often works.

Director Weaver stated, then why can’t we tell them that they need to cover out costs and let them tell us to go fly a kite.

Attorney Altman stated, I certainly can and you brought this up that you talked to them recently about this.

Director Weaver stated, I personally have a problem with this. Why should my tax dollars go to pay for a lawsuit that was to benefit them?

Attorney Altman stated, I’m not arguing with you, I’m jus telling you what the reality of it is. You tell me what you want me to do and I’ll do it.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the same reason we pay a Superintendent, we have made a contract and you need to fulfill the contract and I mean in West Lafayette they are paying that Superintendent $100,000 some and I believe Twin Lakes did that with a past Superintendent. I don’t like it.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t look at that as the same thing.

Gary Barbour stated, it is not the same thing, but it is not right.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, no it is not right.

David Scott stated, Jerry did the work and he ought to be pad.

Director Weaver stated, Jerry has been paid.

Attorney Altman stated, I have been paid.

Director Weaver stated, we have paid Jerry.

David Scott asked, well then, do we have a legal, can we sue someone?

Attorney Altman stated, I don’t think so.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, essentially anybody who brings forth a variance, if they don’t like our judgement, they can sue us. We would have to pay our legal fees and it is not right.

David Scott stated, it comes with the territory.

Attorney Altman stated, it does come with the territory and don’t get me wrong.

Gary Barbour asked, why can’t you counter sue?

Attorney Altman stated, you generally can not counter sue for attorney’s fees. You pay your own attorney fees unless there is a statue that requires the other or a contract or an agreement.

Director Weaver stated, that is what we are saying, why should we agree to pay our own.

Attorney Altman stated, because…

Director Weaver stated, we did not benefit.

David Scott stated, no, but we can not have legal.

Attorney Altman stated, you did benefit

Director Weaver stated, they just sued to get more money then we wouldn’t have had to have the attorney.

Attorney Altman stated, I agree with you and you know I do, but I’m jus telling you, you are beating a dead horse.

Gary Barbour stated, I wouldn’t be up in arms over it, if it wasn’t strictly for the sole fact that this whole thing from the start reeked because it was about money.

Director Weaver stated, that is why I agree.

Attorney Altman stated, I totally agree, but I’m jus telling you guys I’m not going to go anywhere with this. I suspect that the County Commissioners would say….

David Stimmel stated, let me ask you this, is part of the new zoning law could it have some stipulation in there that attorney’s fee and some how it could be worded that the plaintiff in the situation like this, to address that in the future.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, could that work against us also, I’m thinking of the landfill issue where they took us to court and we lost. Does that mean we are liable to pay their legal fees.

Attorney Altman stated, it certainly can.

David Stimmel stated, all I’m thinking about the zoning law itself, if someone new up front that if they brought a suit against, if this was a suit about money they could be liable and if they won or lost they could be liable for our attorney fees as well. It is just a question.

Director Weaver stated, a lawsuit for personal gain.

David Scott stated, that was what it was about.

Director Weaver stated, that was exactly what it was about.

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing is you will have to prove that and I understand that we all agree that it is, but proving it to a Judge will be very hard. Even in this circumstance.

David Scott stated, even if it didn’t come out of the court, couldn’t you the next put that I mean next time put that in and if they are negotiating this and that, you say our County wants their attorney fees back. Whether they split it or how ever they do that you can’t do that now, but in the future can we do that.

Director Weaver stated, the settlement is not done.

Attorney Altman stated, their settlement is. The only thing that they don’t have done is they don’t have the variance and that is why they are still working on it. I’ll do it guys, don’t get me wrong, I’m just telling you the reality.

David Stimmel stated, sounds to me if you cross that bridge it will be $6000.

David Scott stated, if there is no legal teeth, it would be a waste of paper sending the bill.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, plus more time and more expense incurred. Can we write a nasty gram, you can’t even do that.

Gary Barbour stated, some point and time it becomes the principle of the matter of what you are paying for.

David Scott asked, what do you do?

Attorney Altman stated, its not that I don’t want to do it, but there is no way…

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, if it hadn’t been settled Jerry, let's say for an instance if it weren’t about money and they didn’t settle it could be protracted and there could be more expense. If we won we still wouldn’t get any of that back would we.

Attorney Altman stated, that is right.

David Scott stated, the scaring thing is if the case goes on and on and racks up the fees, how do you protect against that.

Attorney Altman stated, it is very difficult and you try to get a handle on it. That is what the board does. You guys don’t have and I don’t have complete, even…

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, ma did you have anything in particular you wanted to address the board about? We don’t usually have visitors stay this long.

Jan Conwell stated, I’m President of the SFLECC board and I’m just concerned about an issue that we have that our shorefront committee is having fits over and I thought it might come up this evening.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there a piece of property that you are concerned with?

Jan Conwell stated, John Samoska.

Attorney Altman stated, we are concerned about that one too.

Director Weaver stated, we are waiting on stuff from you guys.

Jan Conwell stated, we are waiting on stuff from you guys. I’m the neighbor that is the president and I get all the… I want to get this settled.

Attorney Altman stated, why don’t you go and meet with Diann and Joe and Dave Anderson. We are certainly working on that.

Jan Conwell stated, okay, I think someone needs to get together on that and I’m not sure how to resolve it.

Attorney Altman stated, let's try that.

David Scott stated, that Chalmers thing is the most messed up thing I have ever seen.

Attorney Altman asked, are we adjourned?

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Gary Barbour, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission