Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, April 21, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: Don Tribbett, Veronica Flores, Charles R. Melon, Dan Hunt, Mark Coty, Joe Ruemler, Chris Hanenkratt, Mary Minier, Bill Pyle, Phil Chiafos, Milton Cole, Brad Smock, Bill Reiff, Georgia Day, Jennifer Garetto, Russell Woodard, Leae Williams, Essy J. Williams, Don Williams, Scott A. Simons, Jeff VanWeelden, Andy Stoll, Don Wright, Alan Sickler, John Noe, Larry R. Noe, Noel F. Lyons – Deputy Sheriff, Robert Kinser, Robert G. Kinser, Jim Farley, Herb Parrish, Laurie Saltsman, Charles Edwards, Don Pauken, Myron Barnes, Terri Raines, Kitty Robinson, John Raines, Dewitt Robinson, Floyd L. England, Dan Hanenkratt, Frances Deno, Bob Musall, and Joe Roach. Also attending but not signed in are Matt Fluke and Terry Thompson.

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

Attorney Altman stated, the presiding officer shall be a member of the Commission selected by the members present.

David Scott stated, I make a motion that David Stimmel be President.

David Stimmel stated, no, no you mean Gary Barbour.

David Scott stated, I make a motion for Gary Barbour.

David Stimmel stated, I will second that.

Attorney Altman stated, all in favor signify by saying “aye” and all opposed. Motion carried.

****

#2398 Rangeline Properties, Inc., Owner; Jeff VanWeelden, Applicant; The property is located on 4 acres, West of Monticello on the Northeast corner of Division Road and County Road 300 E. Tabled from February 17, 2005.


Violation: They are currently using this property to store dumpsters without having an approved special exception for a waste facility.

Request: They are requesting a special exception for storage of business equipment.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do we need to discuss what was done with the Commissioners?

Attorney Altman stated, you might ask for some action from the board at this time.

David Scott asked, can we ask about the Commissioners decision?

Attorney Altman stated, the Commissioners at this time, there is sort of coupled with this, it involves the same applicant a request for a rezoning that has been forwarded to the County Commissioners of White County. Their last meeting they tabled the request to May 16, 2005 at which time they will act on it.

David Scott stated, I would like to make a motion that we table this until such time that the Commissioners have had time to decide. I apologize to all you people out there, I’m tired of looking at this variance.

Attorney Altman stated, would you couple that with petition number 2402.

David Scott stated, yes.

David Stimmel stated, I will second it.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, all of those in favor signify by saying “aye” all opposed?

Motion was carried to table both 2398 and 2402 by a 3 to 0 vote.

****

#2402 Rangeline Properties, Inc., Owner; Jeff VanWeelden, Applicant; The property is located on Lot 1 in Korpita’s Corner Subdivision, West of Monticello at 19 S. 300 E. Tabled from February 17, 2005.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a special exception for a waste facility.

****

#2407 Hanenkratt Grain Company, Inc.; The property is located on Lots 61 and 62 in the original plat in the Town of Idaville at 304 S. East Cross Street.

Violation: None.


Request: They are requesting a 60’ front (East Cross St.) setback variance and a 10’ rear (South) setback variance to build an addition and to bring the existing building into compliance. Also, a 25’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance to build a scale.


Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone here to present either for or against?

Don Tribbett stated, I’m Don Tribbett, attorney in Logansport and I’m here on behalf of Hanenkratt Grain. With me tonight is Dan Hanenkratt, Brad Smock and Chris Hanenkratt. All three of these petitions were discussed the last meeting. Mr. Smock went into a good bit of detail in regards to each one of these. Unfortunately, I don’t think Mr. Scott was present, I wasn’t present either the last time.

David Scott stated, I was here the last time.

Don Tribbett stated, so all three of you were here.

David Scott stated, yes.

Don Tribbett stated, the main reason I became involved is because I think there were some issues raised regarding some legal matters specifically the transition yard issue and also I have discovered an issue with the height variance that Mr. Altman and I have discussed. I hope it is not necessary for us to repeat the entire presentation that they made the last time. I wouldn’t anticipate that we would do that. What we would like to do is to take each one of the petitions in the order that they were filed. #2407 I understand that there were some objectors, my reading of the minutes of the last meeting indicated to me and perhaps I misread the feeling of the objectors. My reading was that the objectors were not particular opposed to this particular petition. This petition has to do with the construction of an office building on lot 61 and 62, which is the property farther to the East of Hanenkratt property. There is an office building and also scales that were being proposed to be put in there. They are requesting a variance is on the setback because the existing building which was part of the church was itself constructed with 0’ setbacks right on Cross St., which of course is the North Street to the East. The building that is currently there has the same issues, it is not right on the alley, but it is fairly close to the alley. They are proposing a 10’ setback from the alley instead of the required 20’ setback. I think it is important to remember too that the property to the South is also owned by the Hanenkratts and is not going to be utilized for anything. It would be an additional buffer with regards to the other properties. Having said all of that I don’t know what questions the board members might have in regards to application #2407. I guess at this point if Mr. Smock or anyone else has more to say, or if you have questions.

Brad Smock stated, I guess the only thing I would like to say from the last meeting is we just came in here by our selves and I would like for you to see the support that we have. We have a customer list of 300 plus and didn’t feel that we needed to bring all of them in. I’d like for the people who are here to support us to raise their hands so you have an idea that we are just there with people against us. We are trying to serve all of these people out here.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do any of the board members have any questions?

David Stimmel stated, no on this variance, no.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone who wants to say something against it? It has to be something new that we have not discussed prior.

Craig Kelly stated, there have been changes made since the last time. Something about an I-1, which there was no I-1 requested.

Attorney Altman stated, you need to come up if you are going to talk, you have to talk into the mic.

Craig Kelly stated, I’m Craig Kelly. I’m a residence of Idaville.

Attorney Altman asked, Diann has this request changed in anyway?

Director Weaver stated, I think there was an error on what we had for the setback. The drawing has not changed at all. The drawing, you are talking about the survey.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, for height variance dated March 28, 2005. Signed by Register Land Surveyor, James L. Milligan.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, what has changed then Diann to the best of your knowledge.

Director Weaver stated, I believe that we made a correct, well without the information it is hard.

Several talking.

Craig Kelly stated, the zoning said I-1.

Don Tribbett stated, the original staff report indicated that it was an I-2.

Craig Kelly stated, the original from the last meeting…

Don Tribbett stated, it says I-2 right here, we are talking about 2407, not 2408 or 2409.

Craig Kelly stated, I don’t know what that is, but that is not one from the last meeting that was tabled.

Don Tribbett stated, it says I-2.

Craig Kelly stated, I have the original right here and it states asking a request for an I-1 zoning classification for the 25’ setback and rear 5. This isn’t an I-1 it is an I-2 and there is 60’ requirement and there is also a height of minimum of 20’ or the equal of height to the distance.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, hang on, let's, let them look here.

Several are talking at once.

Attorney Altman stated, for the record Diann is checking the file in the office. Just set down and wait until she comes back.

Craig Kelly stated, you don’t want me to say anything.

Attorney Altman stated, no, not until we are done. Not until she has checked out if there is a change or not.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t have the originals, they probably got stuck in another file, but we do have a copy of the original application that Mr. Tribbett had. What was changed was the 25’ front setback variance to build the scale. It was changed from a 15’ front setback variance to a 25’.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what the amended application set forth apparently signed.

Don Tribbett stated, if I can explain the reason is because there is a, the original application only took in to consideration the scales when there is a short ramp of 10’. The ramp right there is what changed it.

Attorney Altman stated, there is a changed and it has been amended and properly advertised.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Craig Kelly asked, when was this advertised? I never saw the new request for rezoning. I just noticed this morning when I came in and read the front door. I’ve been looking for a request, it is not posted on the property that he requested to rezone about any rezoning or request for. The only place I noticed it was on the front door when I came today. There is a whole list of variances that he is applying for because the property, normally when this came to the board to the…. When this was presented it should have been turned down because nothing in this requirement, nothing for that lot that he is trying to do fits in the requirements of the book.

David Stimmel stated, that is why he is asking for a variance.

Attorney Altman stated, the request was advertised March 7 2005.

Craig Kelly stated, March, I’m talking about the new ones that were requested between this meeting and the last one. Is it common to come in and request dozens of variances to bring one piece of property? To be able to do something at the expense of all of us property owners. I just tonight just talked to the person right across from the scale, this road if you look at the original petition, the road has changed side. The road has gotten bigger since the first petition went. It went from 40’ road to now a 50’ road. There isn’t 50’ from this guy’s property to this scale and I have talked to him tonight and he knew nothing about what was going on and he had just bought the property and doesn’t know. There are a lot of people that are uninformed of what is going on. I’m sure you would have a lot more people here raising an issue about it. I mean this is going to affect everyone that surrounds this piece of property.

Attorney Altman stated, this was re-advertised on April 11, 2005.

Craig Kelly stated, what I’ve referring to is the request.

Attorney Altman stated, I’m answering your question, I’m not trying to understand what you are referring too. I’m answering your question.

Craig Kelly stated, but that is not, that isn’t the request that are conjunction with the one that was purposed at the last meeting, which….

Attorney Altman stated, I hear what you are saying.

Craig Kelly stated, you guys have all of our information from the past 5 years about all the way from the petitions of the town all the way to the suit that was settled out of court, to the everything, was that supplied to you. So you can review it so you can see what he town has been going through. We would like to improve the town, we’d like to bring in revenue by improving that part of town and bringing it up, we don’t want to drive it down. A grain bin, storage facility, great. We’ve got a lot of room in White County that you can put up grain storage, grain facility, without degrading a town and a community and people who live right in it. I’m talking about sunshine that people are not going to get in their homes anymore because their homes are to the East and West of this land here.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do you have any more.

David Scott asked, where do you live?

Craig Kelly stated, I live on the corner of Logan and West, I’ll show you.

(Going over the map with David Scott.)

David Scott stated, I still don’t understand. This is Main Street and this is East Street. Where do you live?

Craig Kelly stated, I’m right here. Francis is right here, Jerry Bonnell is right here. The lady who was here the last time, and didn’t make it tonight lives right across from the one going up right here. Another guy who is here, they all just can’t make all of these meetings, they have jobs, and lives they have to, they are hoping on this board to do the right thing. They are all surrounding this facility. This will affect everybody that lives in that area of town. I don’t know of anybody, show me anybody that is from that area that lives in town. I mean he has all of these approvals, but they are farmers who want to use the facility and I can’t blame them for that. I’ve nothing against farmers. They have the right to store their grain, but there is a place for doing that. Idaville, I mean it was mapped in 1895 and all of these are subdivision homes. Then all of a sudden now 100 years later and let's decide to take out the homes in the middle and put up a scale right through the middle of town and elevators, great big silos that are 94’ in diameter. Would anybody want that in their neighborhood? To walk out side and look at this?

Attorney Altman stated, thank you.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone else?

Andy Stoll stated, I’m Andy Stoll and I live North of Idaville. I’m a farmer and I’m the 7th generation of my mother's family to farm in the Idaville community. Families have lived there for over 100 years. I also serve on the board of Directors with White County Farm Bureau representative the farmers in Lincoln, and Jackson Townships. This project has the unanimous support of the Board of Directors of White County Farm Bureau and White County Farm Bureau has something that we would like you to consider as you make your decision. The first thing that we would like for you to consider is that at this point and time everyone involved, the owners of the facility, the farmers that take grain there, and the people in town may wish that this facility was not in town. It can not be moved, what is there is there. The cost to move it would be astronomical. What we would like for you to consider is that this expansion for this elevator, not only for Hanenkratt Grain in Idaville, but also Hanenkratt Grain in Monticello is a matter of survival. Hanenkratt Grain has to compete with large terminal elevators that have rail service both within the county and outside the county. If they can not attract a larger volume of business, then it is just a matter of simple economics. They are eventually going to go the way of other elevators like Whiteman Brothers in Carroll County that recently closed due to lack of business. With that in mind we would also consider that there are many small, midsize farm operations in the eastern part of the County who are very dependent on this facility to buy their grain. For farmers like myself who have semi trucks, we can go other places and I do sell some grain to other places. I prefer to sell the bulk of my grain to Hanenkratt in Idaville because they are convenient and because I believe in doing business locally when ever possible. For the smaller farmers in the community that haul with small trucks and especially who haul with tractors and wagons. There is no good alternative, the next closes elevators are in Monticello, Reynolds, Delphi, Logansport, Star City, Winamac. There is no other grain elevator for a long ways. The other thing we would like for you to consider is there has been considerable emphasis in recent years on stimulating the economy in the county and attracting new business and getting businesses that are already within the county to expand. We have a local owned, family owned business that has been in business in White County for over 50 years, that wants to spend 2 millions dollars in Idaville. People are not lined up to spend that kind of money in Lincoln Township. I will concede to you that the number of jobs that will be created by this elevator expansion are minimal. The impact to the county economy from the farmers that this elevator serves is significant. Tourism industry in White County receives considerable consideration as being critical to the survival of the economy of the county. About a year ago I asked the Lakes Chamber Commerce people for an annual value of tourism to White County Economy, the number they gave me was $20 to $25,000,000. According to the Indiana Ag statistic’s service the net or the gross cash receipts for farms in White County is in excess of $100,000,000. As farmer, as we sell that grain or those products to people like Hanenkratt’s we take those receipts and we spend them, the majority of them here in the county. Patronizing county businesses and paying county taxes. Agriculture industry in White County in a whole, is White County largest industry. It is White County's largest employer, and White County's largest taxpayer. White County Agriculture deserves your favorable consideration in this matter.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, thank you. Is there anyone else?

Charles Edwards stated, I’m Charles Edwards and I’ve the one who lives maybe 40’ from where this is all suppose to take place. My first question would be that all of the support here for this, I’d like to know how many live within a 3 or 5 blocks of what is going to happen. I’m totally against this, I just bought my property in November and I moved to Idaville because it is a nice quiet town and if this happens that will no longer be. I want to know I mean we are talking millions of dollars how much do we sacrifice here for our children walking across the street, trucks running up and down the road, idling right next door to my house until midnight waiting to load and unload. Like the gentleman says is that something that you would want next to your home. This town wasn’t originally built for that. If this goes through this will be a tragedy.

Attorney Altman stated, thank you.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone else?

Scott Simons stated, I’m Scott Simons. I’m the owner of a business in Idaville, auto repair shop, assistant fire chief on the fire department, member of the advisory board for Lincoln Township. My automotive shop is adjacent to Hanenkratt grain, straight to the North. With the predominant winds coming from the South and Southwest, I see all of the dust and the grain chaps that these guys are talking about. At times it is pretty bad, but it is not a dump, it is not a hog processing plant, there are no bad smells, it is not a cement plant like at Logansport with tons of god knows what going up in the air from burning hazard waste. I guess my feeling is for the betterment of the community and especially financially Lincoln Township is not a booming economic area. I think I can put up with the dust for a few weeks in the fall, the truck traffic will be there whether they are there or not. Farmers have trucks and they use the Main Street down through Idaville. I think if Hanenkratts is not allowed to keep expanding it is going to go the other way and it would be a tragedy to lose probably the biggest business that Lincoln Township has.

Frances Deno stated, I’m Frances and I live at 409 S. Main Street. Quite frankly I don’t appreciate getting woke up at all hours of the night and I have to get up at 4:00 in the morning to go to work. I get no sleep from the grain bins, can you image how much worse it will be if he is allowed to expand. I just have my rest and my own home.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone else?

Jerry Bonnell stated, I’m Jerry Bonnell and I live across the street about what we are dealing with and usually when we come up the first thing that they ask is do we live in Idaville. None of these guys live in Idaville that has spoke or what ever you want to say. I deliver to factories and different establishments, stone quarries and stuff like that and when I come in the front gate, they make me wear a hard hat, and safety glasses before I can even go in there to deliver my stuff because of liability. I can’t understand, is Hanenkratt going to supply all of these kids with hardhats so when they ride around town under all of this equipment that goes across the road and everything? What are they going to do when they’ve got to scoop a kid’s body off the road because of one of the semis that come flying through town? There are people in Idaville who are going to send their kids to play there at this establishment. I can’t understand when you get a woman that they’ve got to take his kid off the street because they’ve been ran over by a 16 wheeler or 18 wheeler or whatever. The mother isn’t going to be very happy and she is going to come after you guys because of the liability. You are putting your name on line saying that this is safe and the first time a kid gets ran over that mother isn’t going to be happy and she will come after who ever she can to make things right and you are opening your self up. You are changing everything to make it good for Hanenkratt, changing the laws for the last 5 years that is all this committee, you guys probably wasn’t in there at the time, but you just keep changing things and changing things to make it for him. I can understand the tax money, but Idaville doesn’t see any of that tax money. It goes to Monticello and they distribute it the way they want to. They don’t do much for Idaville, the tax money might go Hanenkratt to help him, but I can’t understand the liability you guys are opening yourself up for a lot of liability suits for these kids going around town. They can ride because of the grain bins being out to the road, they can ride right underneath them one of those snouts breaks and falls on them and kills them, you guys are opening yourself up for a lot of trouble.

Craig Kelly stated, these are going to be partially under ground. You realize all of Idaville are on wells. There is a requirement of a distance between any fresh water wells in any underwater storage. There is also corners, there are set back variance on corners for anything parked on the corner to obstruct a corner. There are a lot of issues in here that….

David Stimmel stated, the storage is not going to be underground.

Craig Kelly stated, the storage bins the ones that are existing right now go underneath.

David Stimmel stated, they are not going to be underground.

Craig Kelly stated, I thought they were partially….

David Stimmel stated, the concrete will be in the ground, there will be footers, but I’m sure…

Craig Kelly stated, didn’t you say the existing go so far underground and then go…

David Stimmel stated, just the concrete.

Craig Kelly stated, well I thought he said at the one meeting that they go so far underground and then stick up. There is the issue, this is a town where people drive and if you look at the lots, they are corner lots. There are corners all around them.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, this isn’t new evidence that you are giving.

Craig Kelly stated, I want it brought up, it is all in the book. You can read the ordinance.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do any of the board members have any questions or comments?

Don Tribbett stated, if it would please the board we would like to focus on 2407 and I don’t think you’ve heard any real testimony against 2407 which is the office and scales.

David Stimmel stated, I think we are ready to vote.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:


1. That the building site is properly zoned I-2, General Industrial

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


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


4. That objectors were present at the meeting.


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


6. That the request is for a 60’ front (East Cross St.) setback variance and a 10’ rear (South) setback variance to build an addition and to bring the existing building into compliance. Also, a 25’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance to build a scale on Lot Number sixty-one (61) and Lot Number sixty-two (62) in the original plat of the Town of Hanna or Idaville.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Idaville at 304 S. East Cross Street.


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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


****


#2408 Hanenkratt Grain Company, Inc.; The property is located on lots 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47 in the original plat in the Town of Idaville at 107 E. South Railroad Street.

Violation: None.

Request: They are requesting a 5’ front setback variance to build a dump pit and a 20’ front setback variance to build a bulk feed bin.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do you have anything that you want to say on this one?

Attorney Altman stated, for the record I think it would be appropriate if we incorporate all of the evidence heard last month and this month on 2407 in the record for 2408 and 2409. I suggest that we incorporate all of that into record to speed this up somewhat.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, so does anyone have anything that they want to add?

Don Tribbett stated, again I think the third variance is the controversy I don’t think you have heard testimony or evidence that is really contrary to the first two.

David Stimmel stated, I have a question for Mr. Smock. Where is exactly the pit and bin you are talking about in the drawing.

(Showing on the maps where they are going to be to Dave Stimmel and Gary.)

Several are talking at once.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anything else? Do any of the board members have anything or are we ready to vote?

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is properly zoned I-1, Light Industrial.

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.

6. That the request is for a 5’ front setback variance to build a dump pit and a 20’ front setback variance to build a bulk feed bin on Lots Numbered 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47 in the Original Plat in the Town of Hanna, now Idaville, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Idaville at 107 E. South Railroad Street.

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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.

****

#2409 Hanenkratt Grain Company, Inc; The property is located on Lots 63, 64, 65 and 66 in the original plat, in the Town of Idaville on the Southeast corner of Railroad Street and Main Street.


Violation: None.

Request: They are requesting a 51’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance, a 53’ front (Main St.) setback variance, a 95’ height variance to build 2 grain bins with a catwalk above. He is also requesting a variance from Article 4.1016 for a Transitional Yard and 4.1023 for Residential Protection.

Don Tribbett stated, Mr. President if I may I would like to interject because I think now we are getting into the legal issues that I have looked at and I have spoke to the council of Mr. Altman. Specifically the first one I would like to talk about is the transitional yard requirement. I would call the boards attention to the definition portion of the transitional yard found under 2.1223, page 24 of your ordinance. It defines transitional as a yard which may be provided on a lot in a business district, which adjoins a lot in a residential district or a yard which must be provided on a lot in a manufacturing district, which adjoins, and again uses the word adjoins a lot in either a residential or a business district. I think in this particular situation you do not have that. You have streets or alley’s separating the lots and you do not have adjoining lots and in an effort to research that I ended up in and Mr. Altman and I kind of chuckled about this because there isn’t much case log in the State of Indiana. I ended up going to Black’s Law Dictionary, which defines adjoining to mean touching or contiguous as distinguished from leaning near to or adjacent to be in contact with. Because it used the work adjacent in that particular definition I went ahead and looked it up and it has an interesting statement. It says adjacent implies that the two objects are not widely separated though they may not actually touch. While adjoining imports that they are so joined or united to each other that no third object intervenes. Again here we have the streets and alleys. I think by your own definition in your ordinance that transitional yard requirement does not apply. If you go on back to the actual requirement for transitional yard which is in section 4.1016 page 37 and it does not use the work adjoin but uses the word which is equivalent to that and that word is co-insides with. If you look at the, unfortunately Black’s law dictionary doesn’t even have the definition of co-insides. I had to look in a general common dictionary. Co-insides says to occupy exactly corresponding or equivalent position on a scale or in a series, so again I think you’ve got a different word used but the same definition so in order for 2 lots to adjoin or co-inside they have to have identical lines. Because of the intervention of alley and streets you do not have that here. The other or probably need to look to your legal council to see if he agrees with me on that but we did talk about it and I think it is a fairly well accepted reading of your ordinance. The other issue that I would like to point out is, I don’t want to make a major issue of this, but they have put in a request for a variance for the height requirement. In reading through your ordinance I came across section 4.1003 which says the height limitations of this ordinance shall not apply to, it has a whole series of structures, one being church spires, but the one I think is important here is grain elevators. So the height limitations of this ordinance shall not apply to grain elevators. So I think even the drafting of the ordinance your County Commissioners recognize that it is going to be pretty difficult for a grain elevator to live within the height requirements that might be imposed on other structures. For those reason I don’t think the height requirement even applies here. Again I anticipated that this is probably the most controversial of the three. This is the request to put up the leg and two storage bins. I think it is important to realize and some of the comments this evening have had to do with traffic. You’ve got an elevator there now, the elevator been there for about 100 years. These new two bins go in or not there is still going to be traffic. There are still going to be trucks coming in to load and unload. A large part of the reason why Hanenkratt needs these particular grain bins is because they do not have the capacity for the storage of the grain that comes into their elevator. It may not mean any additional grain comes in, but it is going to be better service to their customers. It is going to put them in a better competitive situation, which you’ve heard tonight’s testimony how competitive this industry is. My father worked in this industry for 60 years and I can tell you it is competitive because he is one of the guys that closed down. This is a very, very competitive business. What you have is a situation now where Hanenkratt gets grain in and I can’t quote the figures, these fellows here can tell the exact number of bushels that they bring in. When it comes in it has to go right back out. They don’t have the capacity to store it. What that means is, it means that this very truck traffic that some of these people here are complaining about. It has got to go out and it’s got to go out quickly. You end up especially in the fall of the year with a lot of trucks coming in to unload and a lot of trucks to come in and pick up what has been unloaded there so they have capacity to take what else comes in. What this is going to do, this is going to alleviate this to an extent. Now is there still going to be the same amount of truck traffic, I hope so because my client wants to continue in business. The difference would be it would be spread out over a period of time. You want have as much night traffic coming and going and wouldn’t have some of the congestion that you have now. You would have it going out anyway more gradually than it is currently because they would have more capacity to store the grain. By the same token they wouldn’t be forced perhaps to dispose of the grain at prices that might now be favorable because they would be in a position to hold on to some of the grain for longer period of time, again that is where that competitive advantage comes in. They are currently at a disadvantage to all of the large grain elevators because they don’t have the storage capacity. My folks are here to answer whatever questions you might have, respond and I assure you they are willing to work with this board, even with the community in any reasonable way to try to address concerns.


Attorney Altman stated, before we go ahead, I forgot to indicate, I thought it would be appropriate that we incorporate all of the records and testimony of 2407 and 2408 this evening and the last meeting to speed things up.


Jerry Bonnell stated, I have a question. He said something about the alley.


Attorney Altman stated, no, no is there any objector to incorporating all of the testimony and evidence that we heard last time in 2407 and 2408 into the record of 2409.


Jerry Bonnell stated, yes, I have question to ask the attorney here too.


Attorney Altman asked, you have an objection to incorporating all of the testimony and evidence that was given last month and these two.


Jerry Bonnell stated, no I have an objection to what he said.


Attorney Altman stated, I understand that, but we aren’t talking about that. What I’m trying to say is what you said last month in all of these matters will be incorporated in the record to this thing today. What you said last month you won’t have to say again.


All of the evidence and records be incorporated into 2409.


Jerry Bonnell stated, I’ve got a question for the attorney. He said something about that they don’t have to have the yard because of the streets dividing the properties.


Don Tribbett stated, there is an alley here now.


Jerry Bonnell stated, this alley they don’t have enough square feet unless they use this piece of property. So this alley splitting them, so really they are using this so they can have enough square footage for the zoning that they zoned this. They didn’t have enough square foot for the zoning that they had for this because they were using this piece of property.


Don Tribbett stated, I don’t understand that, but. They are here to get a variance to put these grain bins in.


Jerry Bonnell stated, yea but you are saying…


Don Tribbett stated, I’m saying the street for the transitional yard in the ordinance that does not apply because you do not have adjoining residential properties.


Craig Kelly stated, we went through this…


Attorney Altman stated, no, no, one at a time, please sit down.


Jerry Bonnell stated, he is ready the zoning book, but you are kind of contradicting yourself you don’t want to use the streets here because of the transitional yard, but yet you’ve done away with this alley to make enough square footage to zone this property. They’ve used this property and this property to get enough square foot to zone it to what they did. There is a street here so really they can’t use both of these properties to get enough square footage to get that zoning. Do you following what I’m saying.


Don Tribbett stated, you are going to have to show me some authority on that. I don’t understand. My comments address the transitional yard requirement. First of all, they own this property here even if they had to have a 100’ of transitional yard they’ve got it because they own all of that. My point is and they are going to have to look to their legal council, my point is there is no transitional yard requirement applicable here because you don’t have residential lots abutting upon this particular piece of property that they are seeking a variance for.


Craig Kelly stated, I’ve got a comment about what he said. We went through this with the County Commissioners that states right here on the transitional yardage that he is reading, when a site or rear lot line industrial district co-inside with either a side or rear lot line in a residential district that is the catch district. Whole Idaville is a district, residential district. That alley is a residential district. Anything from that alley back is considered a district. This has already been gone through with the Commissioners, so that is settled that is considered a residential district from that alley forward. Just to clarify what he made a comment about the alley. The alley is a residential district. And it is. That has never been changed, and so has all of the land surrounding it. This is a housing addition and that was clarified through the County Commissioners so that is cleared on. It is required and the book does say in here shall be, in the book in the beginning of the definitions shall means no exceptions to that rule.


Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone else? Do any of the board members have anything?


David Scott asked, do you have any plans in addressing the noise issues, if we approve this?


Brad Smock stated, we also brought the gentleman who is going to build the facility for us. If we can get everything accomplished here. They have some information for you guys. Matt I think you looked at the decimal levels and everything so at this time I will turn it over to him and he can or might be able to answer those questions better than I can.


Attorney Altman stated, being accepted into evidence by the applicant a one-page pager that is set up decibel comparison for exhibit A.


Matt Fluke stated, I’m Matt Fluke, I live in Warsaw Indiana. I’m the Sales Engineer for T Square Millering Services. We are the company that is bidding on this expansion of Hanenkratt Grain. Basically what this sheet is, it is a comparison of decimal levels of the existing low speed 25 horse centrifical fans that Hanenkratt now has. First is the 40 h.p. centrifical fans that we would be putting in.


David Stimmel asked, Brad didn’t you say that there were going to be 50’s.


Brad Smock stated, I said 50 when you were out, but I was wrong.


David Stimmel stated, so they are 40’s. Okay I just wanted to understand it.


Matt Fluke stated, what I put on there is just basically a decibel comparison to common everyday items that you can compare this noise level to. As the distance from the fan increases the difference in the fan noises comes down as you get away from the fans. It is my understanding that we are at least 150’ away from the closest residence.


David Stimmel asked, Matt is there anything in the plans to mitigate the noise at all?


Matt Fluke stated, we have discussed a number of things, yes.


Attorney Altman stated, before you leave I want to ask a question. You are bidding on this job so that you don’t have a contract subject to the variance being approved and the proposed fans that I hear are not under contract and could be changed, if someone else got the job?


Matt Fluke stated, yes.


Dan Hanenkratt stated, with the situation in regards to your question there Jerry I mean until we get the variances and everything we can’t bind ourselves to any kind of commitments.


Attorney Altman stated, well we can bind your approval to a proposal and that is what I’m trying to make sure that we have that down into the record. I honestly don’t care who you use. We do care that we are comparing apples to apples here when it pertains to a potential variance proposal.


Dan Hanenkratt stated, we are going to do whatever we need to do to make this thing work. We’ve talked about a privacy fence around the whole thing. Over on the East side we could, we thought about some green space there, we have a little space on the North side of the office across along Cross St. All of those things I think would kind of create a little barrier to everything. Once we get everything accomplished that would be the final step.


David Stimmel stated, Brad you had mentioned the fact that there were silencers available that would cut the decimal level by 20%. Can Matt speak to that or anyone else speak to that possibility?


Terry Thompson stated, I’m Terry Thompson, I’m the owner of T Square Millering Right Services. We are the contractor proposing to do the project for Hanenkratt Grain. I think you kind of caught Matt off guard he was a little nervous up here. I will try to explain this paper a little bit better. What I have here we have readings from 35 feel way and with the proposed 40 horse power high speed centrifical fans that we are proposing to put on the grain bins. You have about an 80 decimal level there, which is equivalent to a washing machine at 35’. The existing fans that they have on the existing bins now, they are 25 horse low speed centrifical fans. What I mean by high speed and low speed is one is 1750 r.p.m.s and the other is 3500 r.p.m.s. The 25 horse low speed centrifical fans they are at 75 decimals at 35’ with twice the speed we are only increasing them by 5 decimals. If we put a centrifical silencer on these fans it would decrease that at the 35’ mark to 55 decimals which is equivalent to a quiet office. Proposed to the way we have done it is equivalent to a washing machine and proposed that the way they are proposed now is like a vacuum cleaner. The silencers will put it down to a quiet office. We have it also at 65’, we have it at 150’ and we have it at 175’. What we are proposing at 35 is 79, 65 is 73, 150 is 66 and 175 is 65. At the 175 mark it is normal conversation, 150 normal conversation, 65 is vacuum cleaner, 35 is washing machine. With the silencers at 35’ it is 55 dBA quiet office, 65’ 50 dBA quiet office, 150’ 42 dBA, which is a refrigerator humming, 175’ is 41 dBA a refrigerator humming. We are proposing to do what it takes to please the town, so we can proceed with this project. We are not trying to create anymore noise than necessary.


David Stimmel asked, Dan would you commit to the silencers?


Dan Hanenkratt asked, on all fans?


David Stimmel stated, go ahead Terry.


Terry Thompson stated, give me that drawing. What we have here is a drawing of the proposed addition and if everyone would glance at it, then we will point out the issues. What we are doing


Several are talking at once.


Terry Thompson stated, okay this is the Main Street.


Acting President Gary Barbour stated, before you present this, let's hang it up over there on the wall so everyone can see it.


Terry Thompson stated, this is the proposed addition to Hanenkratt Grain and this is the two we are talking about. These are the fans, right here are two, there will be two fans right here, there will be two fans right here and two fans right here. This is in my opinion what most to he town is concerned about is over here on this side because Hanenkratt Grain already owns the property over here. You will have the large lot here before you get into the next street. The street right here Hanenkratt Grain owns the property over here. These two fans right here are the two that I feel they should propose putting the silencers on. Over here you will be more than 80’ away from that road. At 80’ away, which we have, it at 65 without the silencers on it is equal to a vacuum cleaner. Then you have the two fans here which are even further away from the road right here and even over here. If we still stay at the same, they all fall in that 80’ realm. Then you have the two right here, if… That is what I would suggest so we don’t have to make him spend the money for the silencer for all 8 fans. I think this would be more then sufficient to keep the noise down in this area right here based on the decimal readings. The other thing that I might add to this is, the longer we prolong this the more less likely that Dan is going to get this project done and get this in by harvest. We’ve been to one meeting and we are here to the next meeting and we are trying to do our best to make it okay for you guys.


Something yelled out from the audience.


Attorney Altman stated, wait, don’t interrupt him, we don’t interrupt you.


A member of the audience stated, I was just answering his comment.


Terry Thompson asked, are there any questions on what we have to offer here?


Don Pauken stated, I’m Don Pauken and I would like to ask you a question relative to, you said the decibel. What frequency?


Terry Thompson stated, at the frequency of these fans.


Don Pauken asked, what is the frequency of the fans?


Terry Thompson stated, this was given to me by the fan manufacturer.


Don Pauken stated, I know, but how many fans will be running at the same time?


Terry Thompson stated, well it depends, all 8 could be running at the same time or they….


Don Pauken stated, that will add to the dBA level as you increase the number of the fans. The frequency is very important because the frequency of 3,000 hertz is more damaging and more irritating to the ear than something at 200 hertz at the same dBA.


Terry Thompson asked, what is OSHSA’s requirements?


Don Pauken stated, I worked in a factory that had OSHSA requirements and at that time it was 80 dBA over no longer than 8 hours a day at 80 dBA.


Terry Thompson stated, and that is everything running in the plant.


Don Pauken stated, yes, and these people are living there all of the time and somebody like a housewife would be in the house all of the time. She would be subjected to this dBA level maybe 24 hours a day, so her dBA as far as the EPA or OSHSA. The frequency is very important.


Attorney Altman asked, do you know what the frequency is?


Several are talking at once.


Terry Thompson stated, I’m not sure I can answer that question, but I do have the frequency, it is a center, the octave bands the solar fan power, inlet power.


Don Pauken stated, that doesn’t answer the question.


Terry Thompson stated, that would be your frequency levels.


Don Pauken stated, there is the hertz, there it is. Show what this is showing as far as the levels go that the higher the octave band or the higher frequency is the higher dBA.


Terry Thompson stated, that is right, and that was based on these specifications right here and that is how they determined the dBA.


Don Pauken stated, so you are saying the highest dBA that is shown is the highest for what ever happens to be the most critical frequency level.


Terry Thompson stated, I’m not sure what you are saying.


Don Pauken stated, at each frequency there is a certain dBA level for a given machine and these machines are running at a high frequency so the levels at the lower frequency there is curve generated for the dBA level for a certain let's call it a fan. If you want to say what is the frequency at 100 hertz then it is going to be a low dBA, but if you want to say what is it at 3000 it will be a much higher dBA level.


Terry Thompson stated, okay, I’d like to submit this for evidence. What this is, this is the engineering data that was compiled by the fan manufacturers for a 40-horse power fan like we are proposing to put on these grain bins. This is how they determined the dBA at these distances with the frequency ratings and everything that this gentleman was asking for. Here it is at 35’, 65’, 150’, and 175’.


David Stimmel asked, Terry what does it cost for silencers?


Terry Thompson stated, about $1500 - $1600.


Don Tribbett stated, I would like for Brad to come up and explain the usage of these fans and how often they are used.


Brad Smock stated, the fans, I don’t know how familiar you are with agriculture I guess. The farmers can test to this. You do not run the fans 24 hours a day. The last time that we have run the fans at the elevator now is would have been December. We might have cooled it again in January. The main objective that we are trying to achieve is you try to cool the grain off and then you run the fans again. That way it keeps the grain cool and it makes it store better. If you were to run the fans the last few days where it has been 80 degrees then you have a bin full of bad corn. The object is to run the fans when it is cool, cool off the grain and then they don’t turn back on until the next year and you do it all over again. I don’t know, I mean I would say to my best knowledge maybe two weeks or 14 days total that we would run those fans. That would be the maximum. They are not continuous.


David Stimmel asked, it would be at night?


Brad Smock stated, yes, mainly at night to try to cool off the grain. We would also run them in the day I don’t know what the total hour usage would be in a year’s time, but if it equal to 2 weeks I would be surprised probably. I guess is there any other questions?


David Stimmel asked, Brad is that how you plan to do the operations in the sense that you are going to fill the grain bins cool them and then ship them out gradually throughout the fall? You are going to fill them one time.


Brad Smock stated, yes probably so.


Dan Hanenkratt stated, instead of moving it out in 3 weeks in the fall we are going to move them out over an 8 to 9 month period of time.


Attorney Altman stated, we accepted in to evidence exhibit D.


Acting President Gary Barbour asked, does anyone have anything else?


Jerry Bonnell stated, they are working on the noise problems I’m wondering about the dust problem. What are they intending to do with the problems of the dust? I can’t even run my pool because it clogs my filters, I can’t run my pool unintended because it burns my pump up. I’m just wondering what they plan on doing with the dust?


Brad Smock stated, I could answer that which has been answered before, by simply not having to load out an extra 900 or 950 trucks during the course of 6 weeks. There goes part of the dust problem. Now while you are at work we are moving out grain and no one even knows the dust exist. Instead of having to do it 24 hours a day for 6 weeks. I mean it takes awhile to haul 950 loads of grain in a 6-week time. You have to run constantly to be able to do it thorough out the year. Now we are doing it 8 to 5 when most people are at work and the dust is eliminated by the time they get home except when during the fall.


Jerry Bonnell stated, but my pool runs through the day, so its got to run or my water will turn green, so it don’t matter if it is day or night its got to be running, you don’t want the water to turn green. If you make dust during the day it is still going to make a half-inch coating on the top of my pool.


Don Tribbett stated, it is there, and what they are proposing to do will actually make the situation better than what it is. You’ve heard that so the grain elevator is not going away.


Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do any of the board members have anything? Anymore questions?


David Stimmel stated, Dan if you will comment to putting the silencers on I would do it. I would do it on all of them or half or more. I’m not spending your money and I apologize for that but I think that is going a little extra to alleviate some of the problems you are facing and down the road if you ever want to do this again.


Dan Hanenkratt asked, are you wanting us to do all 8 fans?


Brad Smock stated, the perimeter fans the 4 perimeters.


David Stimmel stated, I would do it on all of the fans. If you take those 4 fans together and I’m not going to ask Terry because he doesn’t know, there is going to be an increase problem even with the silencers. There is going to be a lot of noise going to the South.


Attorney Altman stated, for the record applicant have modified their request to placing on the site 40 h.p. high speed motors with silencers on all 8 positions on these two grain bins.


Acting President Gary Barbour asked, Dave or Dave is there anything else?


Terry Thompson stated, I have a proposal here for the silencers that you can put in your file so you know exactly what we are proposing to do on each of the fans. If I could get a copy of this, this is my only copy.


Attorney Altman stated, we will accept this as evidence exhibit E.


The board is currently looking over the proposal from Terry Thompson.


David Scott asked, 4.123 in the ordinance where is says residential protection is that going to be not required or?


Attorney Altman stated, I haven’t heard them withdraw their request for a variance on that. I gather that they are still asking for that. I heard council indicate he believes because of the meaning of the words in our ordinance that it would not necessarily a request that they have to make. As to that, and as to the height variance that they are still, I haven’t heard that withdrawn or a modification of their request. I hear him saying that maybe not required and not necessary as he interprets the words and wordage, but he hasn’t withdrawn their request. They are still in there for you board members to consider.


Don Tribbett stated, if I could go one step further. If you are going to deny it based on one of those two the height requirement or that I would appreciate some indications specific indications to give us the opportunity to make an legal argument with regards to that. I think we have gone along with this trying to be as open and everything to you and this is why my client had requested in the first place.


Attorney Altman stated, let me just read this again, so everyone has it in their minds what it specifically says. 4.1003 Height Exceptions, the height limitations of this ordinance shall not apply to church spires, belfries, cupolas, domes, and grain elevators not used for human occupancy; nor to chimneys, radio and television antennas, ventilators, skylights, water tanks, bulkheads, silos, windmills, similar features, and necessary mechanical appurtenances usually carried about the roof level. Such features, however, shall be erected only to such height as is necessary to accomplish the purpose they are to serve. As I understand the evidence before you this is for the board to interpret it. As I understand the evidence it is uncontroverted that this is a grain elevator that Mr. Hanenkratt is proposing through his corporation. The words are Grain Elevators not used for human occupancy. I don’t know that, that has been addressed the human occupancy.


Don Tribbett stated, it is grain.


Attorney Altman stated, I understand, but I presume that you would stipulate that there is going to be absolutely no human occupancy other than people working there.


Don Tribbett stated, absolutely.


Attorney Altman stated, I’m not sure what a grain elevator would be with human occupancy, unless it is for a tenant. They use to do that have someone live there. It answers it self.


I presume you have a question about the residential protection. I will read that. Transitional yards industrial district. 4.1016, Industrial district. Transitory yard, where the side or the rear lot line in an industrial district coincides with either a side or rear lot line in a residential district, a yard shall be provided along such lot line. Such yard shall be not less than one hundred (100’) feet in width. I think is turns on the word coincides. I have read Webster’s Dictionary, it appears to be exactly what Mr. Tribbett had indicated it means or says accordingly. It would have to be nothing between Residential Protection 4.1023 any business or industrial use that abuts an area zoned and used for residential purposes must have a fence or barrier at least eight feet in height. This visual obstruction must be provided and perpetually maintained by the owner of the commercial or industrial property and may be in the form of either a solid fence or natural vegetation.

Does this answer your questions?


David Stimmel stated, absolutely.


Without further discussion the board voted.


The Board finds the following:


1. That the building site is properly zoned I-2, General Industrial.

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


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


4. That objectors were present at the meeting.


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


6. That the request is for a 51’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance, a 53’ front (Main St.) setback variance, a 95’ height variance to build 2 grain bins with a catwalk above. He is also requesting a variance from Article 4.1016 for a Transitional Yard and 4.1023 for Residential Protection on Lots Sixty-three (63), Sixty-four (64), Sixty-five (65), and Sixty-six (66) in the Original Plat of the Town of Hanna known as Idaville, in White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Idaville on the Southeast Corner of Railroad Street and Main Street.

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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


****

#2412 Veronica Flores; The property is located on Lot 20 in Lake Breeze Subdivision #3, South of Buffalo at 5982 E. Redwood Court.

Violation: None.

Request: She is requesting an 18’ front (Lake Breeze Dr.) setback variance and a 1’ West side setback variance to build an attached garage and to bring the existing home into compliance.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone here representing this application?

Veronica Flores stated, I’m Veronica Flores and I come because I want to build a garage.

Director Weaver stated, I would like to mention that there is a violation on the West Side, the letter I sent says the East Side it is the West Side of the home. It is setting a foot to close to the property line. I did send to you a copy of the building permit and included with that is a copy of the inspections that were done by the Building Inspector. If you read in there it does state at one point that the foundation was in and they were not meeting setbacks so they moved the foundation. I’m not sure if they were unable to locate the exact property line. I don’t now what has happened there, but I did want to make the board aware of that so you can act on that tonight as well. It was not on the agenda some how it got omitted. She has been notified of the violation.

David Stimmel asked, is that a separate issue from the variance?

Director Weaver stated, yes it is a separate issue, but I am requesting that the home be brought into compliance.

David Scott asked, can we address it now?

Attorney Altman asked, was it advertised?

Director Weaver stated, we don’t advertise violations. It was not on the agenda.

Attorney Altman stated, no I mean to bring it into compliance?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

David Stimmel stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, tell us why the house was built out of compliance?

Guy Poore stated, I’m Guy Poore and I own the property that adjoins her property. When Light House came in to set the modular home in there and were measuring it all out, there was a fence post that is driven in the ground as a marker, but it is not the property stake and I told them that. I’m positive that the stake is a foot over. They knew everything and I didn’t know anything. They went ahead and measured off of the fence post. The inspector came out and inspected it and he okayed it. I don’t feel that she or they should be fined. As far as their garage goes I have no problem and they don’t bother me and it wouldn’t have bothered me if they had set that house 1’ from my line. It wouldn’t have bothered me a bit. Their house sets fine. They have improved that property a great deal. I wish more of the neighbors would, but the mistake was made was due to… I don’t know why the surveyor did not pull that stake up or put one down there. When they came out and measured they went by the fence post, so that is the reason the house got set in there a 1’ off.

Attorney Altman stated, they are the ones who set the house, Light House.

Guy Poore stated, right.

Attorney Altman asked, was she there at that time?

Guy Poore stated, they were living there, the trailer that they were living in got pulled out and they moved in with me and she was working. Her and her husband.

Attorney Altman stated, she wasn’t there when you told them that and they ignored you.

Guy Poore stated, no, but Light House did all of the measuring and I kept telling them the property line is 1’ away from this post. That is the way I understood it from the surveyor telling me. They just ignored that.

David Stimmel stated, did you say that the property was inspected and it was okayed afterwards?

Guy Poore stated, yes, the inspector came out and inspected it and said it was fine. It is good to go.

David Scott asked, when was that done?

Director Weaver stated, that is my understanding also. From his notes here.

Guy Poore stated, I can’t help but feel that if anyone gets a fine it should be the inspector who gets it.

David Scott stated, I agree.

Attorney Altman stated, the inspector inspected it after it was all there and installed.

Guy Poore stated, exactly, in fact the inspector was the one who told them they couldn’t put it where they had it, they already had the foundation poured and he came out and said it was off because it was to close to the road. He made them move it back and told them it was good to go.

David Scott stated, tonight we are going to bring it into compliance. I make a motion that we do away with the customary $500 fine on this one.

David Stimmel stated, I will second it.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, all of those in favor signify by saying “aye” and all opposed. Motion to waive the fine was passed 3 to 0.

Are there anymore questions on the variance?

Guy Poore stated, I have questions. I don’t understand why they have to get a variance? The only reason they could tell me was because the road was there on the East End. There is no road there.

Director Weaver stated, there is a platted road there, even though the road doesn’t actually exist there is a platted road there and therefore it is still considered a front yard.

Attorney Altman stated, someday there could be a road there.

Guy Poore stated, could be more than likely won’t be.

David Scott stated, it doesn’t mean where the road sits, she still has to build on her property.

Guy Poore stated, right, she has enough room there that to build the garage.

David Scott stated, with the proper setbacks.

Guy Poore stated, the might be minus a few feet, but there will be 14’ there extra after they build the garage.

Veronica Flores stated, there is a parking spot there now, that is where we want to put the garage.

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 18’ front (Lake Breeze Dr.) setback variance and a 1’ West side setback variance to build an attached garage and to bring the existing home into compliance on Lot 20 in Lake Breeze Subdivision #3 in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located South of Buffalo at 5982 E. Redwood 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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


****


#2413 Farmers Co-Operative Company; The property is located on .52 and .96 of an acre, in the Town of Wolcott at 200 W. Scott Street.

Violation: None.

Request: They are requesting a 25’ height variance to build 2 new grain bins 75’ tall.

Joe Ruemler stated, I’m Joe Ruemler.

David Stimmel asked, I want to know why you are only building two?

Joe Ruemler stated, I don’t have that kind of money.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, this is for a height variance?

Attorney Altman stated, yes, quite frankly…

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, the key question here is a grain bin the same as an elevator.

David Stimmel stated, I want to get into the semantics because.

Joe Ruemler stated, have I done this for the 5th time for nothing.

Attorney Altman stated, no quite frankly I would tell you to do it just from the point of someone… They could have withdrawn that and I could have understood that, but I think they buy some insurance and protection by getting the variance.

David Stimmel asked, Joe how would you interpret that. I mean when I say elevator I’m saying and elevator lane, when I say silo I’m talking about a grain bin.

Joe Ruemler stated, I would think so.

David Stimmel asked, is that how you would interpret it.

Joe Ruemler stated, I would have.

David Stimmel stated, the terminology is still in the ordinance but I think there was some discussion that an elevator was referred to grain bins and the elevator in general, I don’ think that is really the case.

Attorney Altman stated, I would keep it in to protect myself.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do you have anything to add?

Joe Ruemler stated, not if I don’t have to.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, does anyone else want to speak about it? Any questions?

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is properly zoned I-1, Light Industrial.


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 25’ height variance to build 2 new grain bins 75’ tall on Part of that certain Block of land situated in the Northeast Quarter (1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of Section Twenty-five (25), Township Twenty-seven (27) North, Range Six (6) West, described as follows:

Beginning at a point 135 feet East of the Southeast corner of Lot No. 45 in the West Side Addition to the Town of Wolcott, White County, Indiana, running thence North One hundred and thirty (130) feet, thence East parallel with the center line of the Main Tract of the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway and fifty (50) feet distant there from; East to a point three hundred twenty-two (322) feet; thence South one hundred thirty (130) feet; thence West three hundred twenty-two (322) feet to the place of beginning, all in the town of Wolcott, White County, Indiana.


A block of land situated in the Northeast Quarter (1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of Section Twenty-five (25), Township Twenty-seven (27) North, Range Six (6) West; described as follows: Beginning on the West line of Second Street in the Original Plat of the town of Wolcott, White County, Indiana, sixty (60) feet North of the Northeast corner of Lot Number One (1), Block H Original Plat to the town of Wolcott, Indiana, as the place of the beginning, thence running North One Hundred and thirty feet (130), thence West one hundred seventy-five feet, parallel with the center line of the main track of the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway; thence South one hundred thirty (130) feet; thence East one hundred seventy-five (175) feet to the place of beginning.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Wolcott at 200 W. Scott 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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


****

Violation #05-01 Michael A. & Cynthia L. Fortune; Former owners of property that is located on .11 of an acre more or less and 0.029 of an acre more or less, South of Lowe’s Bridge at 3682 N. Camp Munsee Court.

Violation: They obtained a permit to build a new home on the property and the dwelling wasn’t built to meet the required setbacks and wasn’t built according to the site plan submitted at the time of application. They also built on the .029 of an acre that they did not own at the time that construction was started.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anyone here representing this violation?

Director Weaver stated, I did receive a check in the mail, paying the $500 fine, but I have not had any contact.

David Scott asked, what did you say?

Director Weaver stated, I did receive a check paying the $500 fine, but I have not had any contact with the owners. They have been noticed, they have been sent certified letters both to Michael and to Cynthia.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, how do we handle that?

Attorney Altman stated, we put it in the bank I’ll just tell you.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, I appreciate that, but.

David Scott asked, how did they know it wouldn’t have been more?

Attorney Altman stated, well they don’t, I guess.

David Scott asked, what does the certified letter say that they have to be here? Did they have an option to just pay it?

Director Weaver stated, oh no, it stated there is still a fine that needs to be addressed and therefore the White County Board of Zoning Appeals is requesting that you attend their next meeting on April 21, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. So we did request their presents at the meeting.

Attorney Altman stated, it does say the fine is due immediately and they sent it immediately going on through the letter and a late fee if we didn’t get it by April 11.

David Scott stated, they built on someone else’s property.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, this has been all taken care of in the mean time.

Director Weaver stated, we did a variance last month that approved for the structure to remain where it is.

David Stimmel stated, this is the one, didn’t they buy property that off of SFLECC.

Attorney Altman stated, you’ve got it.

David Scott stated, I don’t know, if they pay the fine.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, we don’t want to set precedence on this.

David Scott stated, we don’t want people saying doing what we want and paying the fine.

Attorney Altman stated, obviously the board has the option to raise or increase the fine.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, I guess before we raise or lower the fine I would like to see them come in here and address the board so we can hear what happened.

Attorney Altman stated, I hear what you are…

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, can we notice them up for the next meeting? To tell them that we appreciate them paying the $500 fine but it could be more or less than that? That they really need to attend.

Attorney Altman stated, table it and re-notice them and see if they come.

David Scott stated, we went ahead and straightened it up last month.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, it is straightened out, but I’m afraid if you don’t bring them in the next time around they are going to do what you said, another $500 fine and hope it goes away.

David Scott stated, I guess I don’t understand, we didn’t catch it the last time or after we gave them approval to let them do what they wanted to do…

Director Weaver stated, they sold the property, Fortunate where not here at the last meeting. The new owners where here and they are they ones who requested the variance, so they could continue to build the home.

David Stimmel stated, that is right.

David Scott stated, okay then….

Director Weaver stated, by the time this was all discovered they were to far into the purchase to really back out.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, they found out the day they were to close.

David Scott stated, okay then the work was already done…

Director Weaver stated, the home is not complete. The foundation is in and the framing is in.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, any suggestions Jerry?

Attorney Altman stated, make a motion to table it and send a letter out like you said.

David Stimmel asked, has the level of the fine been established?

Attorney Altman stated, no.

David Stimmel stated, so they sent the $500…

Attorney Altman stated, the letter says…

David Stimmel stated, $500…

Attorney Altman stated, immediately before the 11th of April.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, the letter should also say more or less.

Director Weaver stated, it does.

Attorney Altman stated, yes it does, it say it could be lower or more. They complied that much with the letter, they just didn’t come and ask it to be lowered. I suppose in a sense they think it won’t get raised.

David Stimmel stated, well I think if I read Diann’s letter this is standard wording. On behalf of the Board of Zoning Appeals I’m imposing a $500 fine this is due immediately, it doesn’t say it could be higher.

Director Weaver stated, it goes on down and says that you reserve the right to increase, decrease or remove the fine.

David Stimmel stated, okay I get you, the last sentence.

Director Weaver stated, the very last sentence.

David Scott stated, this isn’t soaking into me. They came in and got, the foundation was already in the ground and they were starting to build and built out of compliance and we brought them into compliance.

Director Weaver stated, they stopped, not them. You’ve brought the new owners into compliance.

David Scott stated, okay then,

Director Weaver stated, okay let me, maybe it would help if I went back to the beginning.

They came in and requested a building permit the Fortunes. At that time they told us that they owned the .029 and .11 acres and they were going to meet setbacks. We issued the permit, they started construction, they built the foundation, and the framed it.

David Scott stated, the Fortunes did.

Director Weaver stated, the Fortunes did. They stopped construction, the construction completely stopped for months from what I’ve been told. The Longs and Claton decided to purchase the property. At the time they were going through the purchase is when this survey was done because they were requiring them evidently they discovered that they did not actually own the .029 and they had to settle that with the SFLECC before they were going to purchase property. That is how this survey was originated and that is what brought it to light that the house was not meeting setbacks. The purchase went through and the Longs came in and filed for the variance. Before the purchase went through I cited the Fortunes with a violation. Longs came in and you granted a variance for the Longs and decided to table the violation part of it so we could get the Fortunes in here.

David Scott stated, okay the Fortunes are the original…

Director Weaver stated, they are the original owners.

David Scott stated, and they are out of the picture now.

Attorney Altman stated, except for the violation.

David Scott stated, I don’t like it, but the sack of it let's just take the $500 and go on.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, my concern is that we are going to set precedence, and then you will have someone else to bring in and….

David Scott stated, I agree, just like a contractor say I will pay the $500 and go on.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, we are settling for the $500 and I don’t have the problem with them paying the $500. I think they really need to appear in front of the board.

David Stimmel stated, would it be an incentive if we changed the fine to $5000 and then sent them a letter and if they sent a check then we say or if they show up to appeal the fine. I’m with Gary is there an incentive to get them in here.

Director Weaver stated, send them a letter saying since you did not appear at the meeting the fine was raised to….

David Stimmel stated, to me the seriousness of the violation.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, you built on someone else’s property.

David Stimmel stated, not just a little bit.

Attorney Altman stated, make a motion.

David Stimmel stated, I’m not through talking about it Jerry. I want to get home to.

Attorney Altman stated, no, no, I’m just saying I want to talk when they are here, that is what I mean Dave. I’m not trying to shut you off.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, you are going to end up with someone else doing the same thing, just sending the money.

Director Weaver stated, I agree.

David Stimmel stated, I move that we raise the fine to $5000 for the Fortunes and send them another letter indicating that the fine has been increased to that level and the seriousness of the offense and they need to appear in front of the board. They need a commitment from them saying they are going to be at the meeting.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, they have not corresponded at all have they?

Director Weaver stated, I’ve not had any correspondence with them at all.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, only the check.

David Scott asked, are they in the area?

Director Weaver stated, they never were in the area. They have a Russiaville address, they are not local. Even when the permit was issued, that is where they were.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, do we have a second. I will second it. Any discussion?

Attorney Altman stated, I think quite frankly that this is a serious violation. Accordingly from the point of view of dealing and administratively with problems and issues like this. It is significant. Accordingly I think it is administratively to do this.

Charles Mellon asked, Gary is that in Liberty Township or Monon?

Director Weaver stated, it is in Liberty.

Charles Mellon stated, I didn’t think there was Liberty Township there.

David Stimmel asked, does this have to be unanimous?

David Scott stated, I will make it unanimous.

Acting President Gary Barbour asked, is there anymore business?

Director Weaver stated, I have a question. Do you want that letter to come from me or should it come from our Attorney?

Attorney Altman stated, I will be glad to do it.

David Stimmel stated, I think that will be a good idea.

Director Weaver stated, obviously they are just going to blow me off.

Acting President Gary Barbour stated, I’m not here to scold them, but they need to come before the board.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Gary Barbour, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission