Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, February 16, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: Charles R. Mellon, Walter E. Hough, Terry Beasy, Myron Anderson, Leae Williams, Brenda Woodhouse, Sabrina Williams, Don Williams, Bruce Clear, Sue Clear, Daniel Alvarez, Jon Noe, Larry Noe, Essy Williams, Don Pauken, Marsha L. Mackey, Gerald T. Mackey, Floyd L. England, Jeff VanWeelden, Dow Dellinger, Jerry MacOwen, ?, Pat Carroll, Alberta Gwin, John Raines, Terri Raines, Deloris Sollars, Maurine Wilson, ?, S. Sanford, ? Boardman, Lori Ohman, Lowell Jarvis, Steven Doll, Laura Doll, Brad Smock, Dave Hornback, Larry Marshall, Stan Smith, James C. Smith, Dale Tribbett, Georgia Day, Tom Parsley, Henry Smith, Stan Hockema, Charles Tribbett, Myron Barnes, Stan Gatewood, John Fischer, Brad Stockment, and Shawn Pherson.

The meeting was called to order by President David Stimmel and roll call was taken. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members. The January 19, 2006 minutes were tabled until the next meeting.

****

#2490 Bruce William & Carolyn Lee Vogel, Owner and Brad Smock, Applicant; The property is located on Part SE NW 14-27-3 on 33.123 acres located Northeast of Monticello, on the North Side of C.R. 250 N and on the West side of C.R. 750 E. Tabled from January 19, 2006 meeting.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 338’ (maximum) separation variance from a Hog Confinement Building to the nearest dwellings not located on the same tract.

President David Stimmel asked, who is here to represent this?

Brad Smock stated, Brad Smock and Diann I put my sign outside. I don’t know how much you guys want me to refresh from the last month or if that is still fresh in your mind, or any questions I can answer. I guess I’d like to start just by, I know some of these people maybe not all of them or maybe all of them, I hope not. I guess what I would like to say to them and to you is this is


just, this is not against any of them and I hope this isn’t against me either. This is just how I make my living and it is the part of the business that I have to do. I don’t want any enemies from this when I leave whether you say yes or not. If you say no I’ll move on and figure something else out. If you say yes, then good enough and I hope I can be a good neighbor to them. The only thing I would like to bring to your attention is, I know that this is something that I do feel, if we are going to increase the hog industry which everyone is obviously figured out we can. This will be brought to this board more often. I guess what I’m saying is if we have an agriculture zoned area and we move agriculture in that area and that is what it is for, the problem I see and foresee will be worse is when we get people to move to agriculture area and really don’t want the agriculture there. It is kind of a wash, but that is my opinion. Also I told you guys when I left I would make sure that I clarified what I told you about the state. I did. That is 100’ from a nearest property, a 100’ from the county road and 300’ from open water or open ditch. Those are the 3 setbacks for the state. I did clear that through Venheiser which he makes the permits for IDEM. He is the guy you hire to make them. Any other questions I will be glad to address or answer, hopefully I can address them to the best of my knowledge.

President David Stimmel asked, does anyone else want to address this variance?

Larry Marshall stated, I’m Larry Marshall and I just wanted to recap that last time I presented the board with signatures of 49 residence and owners of the area. I know we had quite a few questions. I’ve also talked to a realtor and a licensed appraiser and I asked them what the off set would be to our property, especially to our houses. He said he saw no advantage to us to have a hog lot there. His comment was that we had two identical houses one, say my house with in 1100’ of the hog lot and I know some area without a hog lot that mine would not sell. The quality buyer out and the two pieces of property. That property would be the one that would sell. With the site and the view of the property, the smell, the traffic and things of that nature. They felt that this would be an undesirable piece of property. We had talked about the water run off and tonight would be a good time to go see with the amount of rain that is out there what becomes of that road and the water running towards Pike creek.

President David Stimmel stated, thank you very much. Anyone else?

Director Weaver stated, I would like to mention to the board that I have done a map and it is over on the wall. I was asked after the meeting last month to try and locate some of the confinement buildings in the area and this is what this is representing. The blue areas are for hogs, there is one pink area which is for poultry and a yellow area which is cattle. I have also marked Pike Creek on there.

President David Stimmel stated, okay and the proposed lot is the black in the middle.

Director Weaver stated, is the black, yes.

Carol Stradling asked, could you point out where the residential concentration is on that map? When I look at the map we have on the front of our notice there seems to be a lot of concentration over on 39.

Director Weaver stated, yes, you have a housing development here, a small area here. You’ve got some areas down in here and a few houses here.

Carol Stradling asked, are there any similar concentrations near the Cartmell, Smolek, and Kilmer’s farm?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Larry Marshall stated, there are several houses on 250 that she didn’t point out and we have 6 on the south side and 3 on the north side.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol did you have any questions?

Carol Stradling asked, would you like to point those out?

(Larry Marshall is showing the board where the houses are on the map.)

Brad Smock stated, my question is can I walk up there or do I have to stay here?

So all of these area out here where the houses are, are they zoned agriculture? This here is probably zoned residential would be my guess, they probably changed that when they put those houses in.

Director Weaver stated, part of those are residential and part are agriculture.

Brad Smock asked, in here?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Brad Smock stated, because from our RKR towards my house happens to be here. Idaville would be here, which is 1.2 miles from my house. So we agree these cluster of houses is probably zoned agriculture which is a mile away from this.

Attorney Altman stated, if you are going to comment you're better off going to the mic.

Brad Smock stated, I’m asking the people who live there it is a mile away from where the cluster of houses are. Which would be the part zoned residential. I guess that would be my thought the part that is zoned residential is where the cluster of houses are and that would be no different then where my house is from Idaville.

Larry Marshall stated, on point B that Brad was pointing to has been a cluster of houses on 39, those people are not in this room. The people who have signed our petition around 250, 800, 750, 400 and 350. That area that is surrounding the area is marked in black.

Henry Smith stated, I’m Henry Smith and I live on 39 across from those cluster of homes that is all zoned residential, not residential I mean agriculture. It is one acre lots and that is the way it was set up, they tried to change the zoning and it never got changed and you are missing one hog confinement on there. I will show you where it is.

Attorney Altman stated, he has marked a rectangle if you will off of 350 about ¾ mile off of East of 39.

Henry Smith stated, some more of the concerns of the whole area I would believe is during the process of putting in the sewer system and everything for all of the houses on the lake and you deal with run off and all of your field tiles where they run to which is to ditches. You get run off to the ditches, where is it all going to go it is all going right back into the lake. That is not going to help the cause of cleaning the lakes.

Carol Stradling asked, would you care to address how you would dispose of the manure or confine it? I know there has been several people mention the run off into the ditches and…

Brad Smock stated, as far as run off there is I mean I guess I couldn’t say 100%, but I can dam well say 99.9% that there is no way with out a stick of diatomite you are going to get manure out of that building. You are, okay I guess when I think of run off I think of a concrete pad with some form of livestock on it whether it be cattle, hogs, goats, or what ever it may be. Water runs off of the building or whatever washes the pad off out into the ground, which that is old school the way things use to be done. Today you have a building which would have an 8’ pit underneath it with concrete and all of that has to be done by IDEM and also has to be okay by the County which would be Dave Anderson to make sure that all of the rerods are in place. You’ve got to use 4,000 PSI on the Walls, but I think it is 4,000 on the walls and 3500 PSI on the bottom which is actually thicker, with 8” walls or a typically septic tank have 4” walls. So you are actually safer. You would have an 8’ pit underneath the whole building. The building is going to be 100 x 100, there is going to be a concrete container underneath that building. All of the manure falls through the concrete slab into this concrete tank. Once a year or actually now they have designed new feeders and waters where you can store your manure for a year and half, but typically everyone is going to empty them once a year, just because you don’t want to get yourself caught on that. That gives you 6 months of 18 months of storage so you are going to empty it every year. You will empty it with some form of a pump. Most of them are vacuum pumps. You will empty it on this case and anything is the amount of livestock and manure that you have today. Very rarely can you get rid of it on the farm that it is built on. You would have to haul it away to other farms you may have or other rips you may have to put manure on. As far as, and I do know this and I was looking through there and I can’t find it, but a typical leach bed from a 300, I’m sorry a 3 bedroom house actually puts more as we would call gray water or waste water or whatever you want to call it into the ground per acre than we would haul in manure in 6,000 gallons to the acre. Which I kind of fix that all along. That is the manure part of it I guess.

Carol Stradling stated, thank you.

Brad Smock stated, I’ve got one more thing to. Probably to if you have read in the papers where you see the big spills of manure of where you do have run off of water most likely what that is, like in North Carolina they had big issue with that. There and even some back 20 years ago we built lagoons with hog manure and you pumped from your building to a lagoon, which is an outside pond which is lined with clay. Those bunkers would get to full if you had rainwater and that would break off the sidewall of a lagoon. Which that a lot of times if you are thinking or referring to run off that could happen or that could happen that is mainly what that is, not in self containment buildings.

President David Stimmel stated, give me just a minute to go through the board and see if they have any questions? Dave Scott?

David Scott stated, the last thing I want to do is keep you from making a living, but I’m going to have trouble giving you a positive vote and I will tell you why. One thing because the proximity to the existing homes that are there. You are only a 100’ from your property line, which even though it is zoned agriculture there is no way to guarantee, you are going to take away from the guy’s property values. I don’t even know who lives there, I would rather see your facility in the middle of your property so you have the setback so you are not decreasing someone else’s property value. Also want you to know I spent a little time looking into to see if there was any technology for, the thing I’ve concerned about is the smell as much as anything and I thought maybe they had ventilating systems that we could maybe put on or something. There just doesn’t appear to be anything out there yet.

Brad Smock stated, actually the easiest way to do that is through a feed ingredient. You can put in a feed ingredient that eliminates the odors. It only cost you $2.00 a ton so it is not that big of an issue to put that in the feed.

David Scott stated, the problem I have with any of these things is we don’t have any way of policing it.

Brad Smock stated, correct.

David Scott stated, I just want you to know why I’m voting like I am.

Brad Smock stated, that is fine.

David Scott stated, I don’t know how these other folks are going to vote, this is just how I stand.

Brad Smocks stated, okay, so it would have been better if you were the one sick today.

David Scott stated, yes you are right.

President David Stimmel asked, is that it Dave?

David Scott stated, yes.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry?

Jerry Thompson stated, I feel like as far as those of us being on the board, I’ve always felt like the variances if there were people who were opposing it, it was our job to work hard to find a middle ground to find a compromising position that would work for everybody. I guess to you Mr. Williams you are telling us this is what you don’t like and those other who are here and don’t care for this, is there a different position for this building that would work for you before we vote on this.

Carol Stradling stated, it was Mr. Marshall.

Jerry Thompson stated, I’m sorry I’ve got Williams wrote down.

Larry Marshall stated, anyway that you move that building which is 85’ x 422’, would just simply move it closer to the two residences that are on the south end of the property. My residence and the one on the corner. It would just move it away from the next house on 750, which is already in the other field. Nothing would keep it from getting farther away from our residence. One question that did come up that I don’t know the answer is how much water does the hogs use. Are our wells going to be safe as far as not running out of water if they are not contaminated? These are the things we are concerned about. The dry weather out water gets low.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anything else Jerry?

Jerry Thompson stated, no I think that is it.

Brad Smock stated, as far as your wells going dry I would say that there is no way that is going to happen. If you have a shallow well I mean I don’t know if you have a 20’ well or whatever, but it is not going to. You are not going to be able to drive a well dry in Indiana by having a hog building. On what they drink in a day, that all depends on the weather and I guess, if memory serves me right, I think it is 1.3 gallons a day or 1.2 gallons a day, you are talking 4,000 gallons a day. I guess and don’t quote me on that. That just seems to be what is in my brain, I can tell you they will east 6lbs of feed a day, but I don’t know what the water consumption will be. I guess any other questions I will e glad to answer. The only other thing I would like to say is and reemphasize I’m not trying to make any enemy’s here. Whether this happens today or doesn’t happen, it is not he end of me and it is not the end of you guys and everything will be cool. Just remember the next time you throw a pork chop on your plate that somebody has got to grow them some where or you are all going to starve to death. That is one thing you’ve got to keep in mind, it doesn’t matter if I grow them or who grows them somebody has got to.

President David Stimmel stated, okay Brad. Yes sir?

Charlie Tribbett stated, Charlie Tribbett and I just wanted to re-iterate that all three people that are within the variance have opposed it. Out of the 50 signatures or so that we got the vast majority of those are within a one-mile radius too. We didn’t go much farther than one mile. I don’t know how in detail you want to go, but I think 2 important things are health concerns and I have some data of studies that show that there is an increase risk of health concerns, not from manure spills necessarily but the odor and the fumes, and some of the toxic gases that can come out of the pit. I think that we have an idea that it is going to be an odor less thing and it is not. Even with confinement buildings the odor zone would be 4 to 5 miles. I’ve got a couple of studies to show that. As far as decrease in property values, I’ve got studies to show it does decrease property values. One study showed only a landfill was worse on property values then a hog confinement building. I would be glad to share those with you if you want them or and I’ve got copies. I think most importantly is that the people who live there will be affected are opposed to it. We are asking that you not grant this.

Carol Stradling stated, if the odor travels 4 to 5 miles and we are in an agriculture zone and the Governor is proposing to increase Indiana as a pork growing state, I guess I’m looking and that is not a complete map of White County, but as we look at our new zoning ordinance trying to place agriculture and confinement lots, and I’m just wondering how we can work this together. How can we compromise or how he can put agriculture facilities, which a hog confinement is, within White County?

Charlie Tribbett stated, you probably are not going to get anywhere you are 4 or 5 miles from a home, but there are a lot of sparsely populated areas out there. I’ve been through Iowa quite a bit and I think what you are going to see is, if you see a growth in hog confinement buildings it is going to be zoned or specifically set aside for that. There is one highway in Iowa where I counted over a 120 hog confinement buildings this size or larger within an 18 or 20 mile stretch. This one highway there is nothing but hog confinement buildings and feed mills, there were no residential homes. I just think it is going very close to a populated area.

Attorney Altman stated, for the record could you tell us your profession.

Charlie Tribbett stated, physician.

Brad Smock stated, yeah I guess I just have one question here. So are we saying we would rather have corporate farming then we would individual family farms. We would rather support 40 buildings within 20 miles and have corporate farming in America instead of having family farms. Correct?

Charles Tribbett stated, how many confinement buildings do you have?

Brad Smock stated, we feed roughly 30,000 to 40,000 pigs a year.

Charles Tribbett stated, then you are probably a corporate feeder then.

Brad Smock stated, no you are talking 20 buildings in an 18-mile stretch. No you said a 120, and I can feed that many pigs in 7.

Charles Tribbett stated, you talk about being a good neighbor, but you are not and you don’t live there.

Brad Smock stated, correct, I understand that.

Charles Tribbett stated, you don’t live within 4 to 5 miles of that.

Brad Smock stated, I would live within 4 or 5 miles of that. My next question would be if we drew a map around everyone of those hog buildings where the hell can you live then. 4 or 5 miles is going to over lap everyone of them.

Charles Tribbett stated, a lot of us moved out there and most of those homes where already there.

Brad Smock stated, that is my point.

Charles Tribbett stated, you are talking about building a building and you don’t even live there.

President David Stimmel asked, are there any more comments from the board? Anybody, any more comments from the audience?

Carol Stradling stated, I would like to ask Brad if he has considered any other locations?

I don’t know if you need to get specific.

Brad Smock stated, actually that is the reason, and I don’t know if I should say this I might be cutting my own throat. It is still a big deal because I would like this because it makes everything fit. We are currently putting in 3 new buildings this exact same way. One of them you will probably see this month or the month after. It will just be further North, the other one or two will end up in Carroll County and it will be some 800’ from Ron Slaven’s house, but in Carroll County that is just done, that is not your problem or Carroll County’s problem. We need 3 to complete the system of making the whole flow work. We have considered other sites and my next option is if this doesn’t work is to try to get two built on one of those other two sites. Instead of having them split.

President David Stimmel asked, are we ready to vote? Yes ma’am.

Susan Sanford stated, I’m Susan Sanford I don’t know a lot of you but I live on 250 and I’ve been out there 24 years and I raised 3 boys and they are great kids. One of these days I hope to have grandkids, I hope to get to play outside and not smell this hog manure and it is like I would rather smell human manure out of my septic tank than you hog manure, sorry. It is a country, we bought our houses out there because we wanted our kids raised in the country not because we want to be by a pig farm. Also you said that manure can set for a 1 ½ weeks out there. You can’t tell me that there isn’t going to be insects and stuff hatching there. There is going to be a smell. I mean 11/2 my god it is going to ferment. As far as the well water, I just put a new well in. I can’t afford well, if you want to by a new well if it goes dry are you willing to do that. It is going to go dry if we have another drought like 1988 and 1989. How many more employees are you going to employ out there?

Brad Smock stated, we will be adding 3 more people.

Susan Sanford stated, so three more people compared to the families out there is like I don’t think it is quite as important as having the families out there. I also heard that you have a Co-op backing your operation is that true?

Brad Smock stated, yes, no, he owns the two grain elevators but that has nothing to do with my hog facility.

Susan Sanford stated, I mean this cost millions of dollar, I mean do you have millions of dollars.

Brad Smock stated, that is what they make banks for. First time you bought a car you didn’t have 20,000. While we are talking about it, there is no way shape or form my father-in-law or the elevator involved in this. If there is going to be any bad blood and I hope there is not, I don’t want it towards the elevator because he has nothing to do with this.

Susan Sanford stated, that is what is happening most of the elevators are backing the pig farmers now.

Brad Smock stated, that is how they make a living to.

Susan Sanford stated, exactly. We have to live out there and you are talking about a 100’ from my house.

Brad Smock stated, we are not 100’.

Susan Sanford asked, how far are you then?

Brad Smock stated, 998’. The State rules are 100’ and 300’ from the water. The county rules are 1320’. I think we are 998’.

David Scott stated, 982’.

Susan Sanford stated, but I don’t want to live across the street from a pig farm a confinement. I mean you should take consideration that we were there first 24 years now. Me and my neighbors do like to be outside and enjoy the summer.

Brad Smock stated, I can sort of relate to your problem to a certain extent. Where my house is quarter of a mile down the road we have a ditch and that is where they’ve ran the Twin Lakes Sewer district and they’ve built a sewer plant ¾ miles from my house and yes I can smell that. That is a part of what happens, that is what makes the country better, we’ve got to have production. If that means we have to put a sewer plant a ¼ miles from my house, I can’t come in here and say you can’t have sewer plants, you all need to have septic systems because I don’t want it, it wasn’t American.

Susan Sanford stated, well at one time they were going to put that at Pike Creek.

President David Stimmel stated, can we keep it on the subject, lets not get off, lets try to keep it.

President David Stimmel asked, any other comments?

Shawn Pherson stated, Shawn Pherson. I’ve got a question for Brad. How many acres do you have to have for that building?

Brad Smock stated, it can set on 2 acres.

Shawn Pherson stated, there are 7 acres for sale just down the road from your house.

Brad Smock asked, where at?

Shawn Pherson stated, right beside Hann’s, right up the long lane. You can set out new front door and watch your hog operation.

Brad Smock stated, okay I will look into that.

President David Stimmel stated, without any other comments we are 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 is a proper subdivision of land as provided by the White County Subdivision Ordinance.


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 338’ (maximum) separation variance from a Hog Confinement Building to the nearest dwellings not located on the same tract being on that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 27 North, Range 3 West, Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Beginning at the Southeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 14; thence West along the Quarter Section Line and the centerline of County Road 250 North, a distance of 1131.31 feet; thence North 01 degree 13 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 834.84 feet; thence West a distance of 208.71 feet; thence North 00 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line, a distance of 491.07 feet; thence South 89 degrees 54 minutes 11 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line, a distance of 1331.42 feet, thence South 00 degrees 08 minutes 35 seconds East along the Quarter Section Line and the centerline of County Road 750 East, a distance of 1323.65 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing, 36.623 acres, more or less.

EXCEPT: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 27 North, Range 3 West, Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Beginning at the Southeast Corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 14; Thence West along the Quarter Section and centerline of County Road 250 North, a distance of 255.62 feet; thence North 00 degrees 08 minutes 35 seconds West, a distance of 596.44 feet; thence East a distance of 255.62 feet; thence South 00 degrees 08 minutes 35 seconds East along the Quarter Section Line and the centerline of County Road 750 East, a distance of 596.44 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 3.500 acres, more or less.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located Northeast of Monticello, on the north side of C.R. 250 N & on the West side of C.R. 750 E.


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 1 affirmative and 3 negative.


****

#2493 Chambers Liberty Landfill, Inc., Owners; Waste Management of Indiana, Applicant; The property is located on 12-28-3 on the S ½ SE ¼ containing 1.377 acres, 29.229 acres and 55.051 acres and the N ½ SE ¼ 80.00 acres, located East of Buffalo at 8635 E. State Road 16.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting to keep the existing Special Exception #2404 and #2477 for the Landfill and Evaporator in place and requesting approval for a Bio-Diesel Production Facility, a Soybean Oil Extraction Facility and a Fuel Blending Facility to support the Bio-Diesel Plant.

President David Stimmel asked, anyone here representing this request?

Terry Beasy stated, evening, Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m Terry Beasy and I’ve come before the board tonight to discuss proposed Soybean Oil Production Plant, Bio-Diesel Processing Plant and Fuel Blending Facility all to be located at Liberty Landfill. We are currently still in the planning stages of projects and as we look to final decisions and preparations we feel the need to seek the special exception at this time in order to clear the zoning needs of the project so we may move forward to the next steps of planning and development. As I stand before you today I can not say, or I can say it is pretty probably that these plans will move forwards. I can not guarantee that they will move from planning to development. The potentials of these plans tie Liberty Landfill into our local agriculture economy in many ways. Since we are talking about 3 different projects. I will break them down and try to explain what each does and the impact on what they have on the local economy and answer questions on each section and then as a whole project. I would like to start out by saying that the project as a hole will need drainage plans and building permits that need to be approved by the county surveyor as well as the county building section, Area Plan prior to construction activity beginning. We do understand that, so.

The first plant that we are talking about, I’d like to go into first is the sow bean oil extraction plant. This plant is used to take in soybeans from the farms or elevators and remove the oil from the beans for the use of Bio-diesel production, the plant would need 3,594,240 bushels of beans each year. With approximate 12,000 bushels per day that means it would take 12 semis a day, 6 days a week to feed the plant. The plant then grinds and uses the pressure from the extrusion to remove the soy bean hauls, and the oil. What is left behind is soybean meal that is used for feed grinding and mixing of beans for livestock. The plant would produce about 275,000 tons a day of soybean meal or 12 to 14 of meal leaving the plant each day. The hauls would also leave the plant daily as they are a feed ingredient and that would require 1 to 2 semis per day. The plant would be approximately a $10 million capitol investment and create 2 jobs. When up and running you must also consider that the construction time from and workers and the trucks feeding and removing the product from the plant also have a huge impact. The State of Indiana currently produces is the number 3 producers of soybeans in the state. Last year the State of Indiana produced 287,040,000 bushels of soybeans. White County produced 6,431,500 bushels of soybeans. This plant would take approximately half the soybeans produced in White County in order to feed it. Any questions on this soy oil extraction plant?

The number 2 would be the Bio-diesel plant. The Bio-diesel plant then will take the soybean oil from the soybean extraction plant and add Methanol Sodium Hydroxide and hold these items in the oil in an add mixture in a tank that would heat the mix. We would use the heat from our generator cooling jackets so there will be no fuel source burned to produce the heat. You can see by the drawing that was given to the board the proximity of the bio-diesel plant is placed directly right behind the power generation plant. Our goal is to recycle the heat that we currently blow off of the radiators and use that to create bio-diesel. Which makes it a little more green friendly if you will. The reaction is done at a temperature at approximately 140 degrees so it is not heating to the boiling point so there is no discharge from the tank. The process takes place bio-diesel or fatty acids are formed. Methanol the bi-product gather together at the bottom of the tank and form a product called glycerin. The glycerin is currently recycled and can be turned into a pharmaceutical grade used in cosmetics. It also has some heat value that can be used. Purdue University is currently doing some studies on whether it can be maniculated separated and the salts used in animal feed and the bio-mass used as a composed ingredient or a fertilizer. It is bio-degradable. As the last steps are to wash the metholuster or the bio-diesel and dry them. Then the bio-diesel can be blended with petroleum diesel or ran straight in some engines. The plant will produce 5.3 million gallons per year of B100. Current blends used in this country are B2 which is a 2% Bio-diesel or 98% petro-diesel of B5 or a B20. They are sold in some areas, Reynolds I believe is putting in a B2 pump station. Bio-diesel has can have several impacts first it is grown and not pumped from the earth. So it is a renewable source. Each year the soybeans are grown they grow a feed stock to create fuel. Second it can reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Third the engine running on Bio-diesel show a significant reduction in green house gas emissions from the tail pipe. It is totally probable that a B30 that you would no longer see the black smoke come from the stack of a diesel. Four is improved engine life because bio-diesel has an improved limbresity that helps lubricate engine parts and extend the normal life or wear. One of the most impressive things about bio-diesel, aside in not sending our money and soldiers to IRAQ to defend our oil, if it is spilled in the environment it dissolves almost as fast as sugar. It is biodegradable, it is not like a petroleum diesel. Questions on bio-diesel?

Jerry Thompson stated, let’s go back on the soybean part, sorry Terry. Your soybean storage capacity?

Terry Beasy stated, we are looking at approximately 120,000 bushel or 2 60,000 bins for the soybeans. Then there will be overhead bins that the bean meal will go to and our main goal… The main reason I gave you the truck counts on coming and going what we would really like to do is have a semi deliver a load of beans and pick up a load bean meal and pull it off. If that happens we would go with 12 trucks in and 12 trucks out to 1 truck in and 1 truck out. It would be a total of 12 trucks for the soybean plant. Any Bio-diesel questions?

Third and last is the blending plant. The Blending plat at Liberty would be used to blend bio-diesel into petrol petroleum diesel so that local uses would have the availability to run on bio-diesel blends in their tractors, trucks, off road equipment and school buses. That ties local producers of soybeans back into fuel produced from their own products. Approximately 80,000 gallons of B100 would be used in the local market at a B20 blend. That is a 1.6 million gallons of B20 available local or 213 trucks per year or 1 truck a day on the average pulling that out. The remaining 5.3 million gallons would be sent to fuel refineries such as possibly the Co-op, or other major fuel venders for blending at their locations. That would take 709 trucks per year or 3 trucks per day. In total this project with all 3 phases would have 20 to 30 semis in local traffic per day and create 9 jobs.

President David Stimmel stated, that is just 9 jobs just the blending.

Terry Beasy stated, no sir that is for the over all project, there will be the 9 jobs that will be created are actually. I guess that is kind of a false number. There will be 2 individuals on 3 separate shifts at the soybean processing plant, that is 6 and their will be 3 individuals on each of the 8 hour shifts in the bio-diesel production facility so we are actually looking at 12 jobs. They will be medium paying jobs as well not low end or low income jobs. Any other questions?

President David Stimmel stated, I was just wondering if you could explain a little bit more of the classifications of the bio-diesel, you mentioned B120 and others.

Terry Beasy stated, basically bio-diesel is burnt currently in America and it is burnt in blends and the engine manufactures in Europe are miles ahead of the engine manufactures in American. Currently John Deere, Caterpillar on new engines under warranty will allow a maximum blend of B5, which is 95% petroleum diesel and 5% bio-diesel. As the market moves forward we anticipate in the next 3 months all of the major engine manufacturers stepping and allowing a B20 blend to be ran across the board. I have checked with our local Caterpillar dealer and the Caterpillar engines and the heavy equipment at the landfill I anticipate running on a B60 blend. So we are going to do away with basically 60% of petroleum fuel that we use and replace it with a bio-diesel fuel that is made from Indiana soybeans. That will greatly reduce greenhouse gases and emissions from our heavy equipment.

President David Stimmel stated, Jerry?

Attorney Altman stated, yes. You presented a tentative plan, how tentative is it? In other words we usually have someone present a special exception based upon evidence presented this evening. I just want to know how far outside the perimeters of the plan do you expect so we know what we are doing in the way of a vote.

Terry Beasy stated, the plan you have before you places a road that comes off of the current landfill driveway to access the bio-diesel and soybean blending plant. Those plans place those apendacies in the most choice area of location for us. They would be subject to change only as needed for compliance with drainage or building plans. As you can see the one bin may require an additional setback variance from the adjoining property owner. We may need to come back to that in order to get a building permit. Other than that the scope and placement are probably 90% accurate.

Attorney Altman stated, tell us about the vaporization area and that process.

Terry Beasy stated, the vaporization area is not affected by this plant. It does not tie in to the evaporator. The evaporator does have value in this plant because as I mentioned there is some wash water where you actually wash the menthol or the bio-diesel it produces. It creates a waste wash water that will go to the evaporator at Liberty and be evaporated. As far as other ties to the evaporator plant there are none. You can see the evaporator on the map and the reason I did that is so everyone would have the correct orientation of where we are at on the landfill.

Attorney Altman stated, you presently have the Landfill gas power generator plant in place so we can also get the perspective on that also.

Terry Beasy stated, yes, it ties into, the reason you will see the bio-diesel tucked in behind it is the radiator are the currently use the heat to dissipate it. The bio-diesel plant will remove that heat from those generators and put it into the reactor vessel to heat that up for the reaction to create bio-diesel.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry Thompson? David Scott?

David Scott stated, I don’t have anything at this time.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol?

Carol Stradling stated, no I’ve been following this for a while.

President David Stimmel asked, did we get any letters or anything?

Director Weaver stated, no we have not received anything.

President David Stimmel asked, are there any comments from the audience?

Jim Smith stated, Jim Smith. Who is going to construct this plant?

Terry Beasy stated, I don’t know if you are referring to the construction technology or the earthwork, or the apparatuses inside the plant.

Jim Smith stated, all of it. Labor basically.

Terry Beasy stated, the labor will be bid out as we always do and we will try to select the most qualified and most economical construction company that can meet the specifications as per the drawings we provide.

President David Stimmel asked, any other questions or comments?

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 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 to keep the existing Special Exception #2404 and #2477 for the Landfill and Evaporator in place and requesting approval for a Bio-Diesel Production Facility, a Soybean Oil Extraction Facility and a Fuel Blending Facility to support the Bio-Diesel Plant on that part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 12, Township 28 North, Range 3 West, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, being a part of the land as described in Deed Record Book 229, Page 656, White County Recorder’s Office, more fully described by, Basis of Bearing; State Plane Coordinate System. (West Zone)

Commencing at the Southeast Corner of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 12: thence North 00 degrees 26 minutes 17 seconds West along the Section Line and the Centerline of County Road 900 East a distance of 1123.75 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 87 degrees 39 minutes 59 seconds West a distance of 300.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 26 minutes 17 seconds, West a distance of 200.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 39 minutes 59 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line a distance of 200.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 17 seconds East along the Section Line and the Centerline of County Road 900 East a distance of 200.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.377 acres.

That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 12, Township 28 North, Range 3 West, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, being a part of the land as described in Deed Record 229, Page 656, White County Recorder’s Office, more fully described by: Basis of Bearings: State Plane Coordinate System (West Zone)

Commencing at the Southeast corner of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 12; thence South 88 degrees 12 minutes 46 seconds West along the Section Line and the Centerline of State Road 16 a distance of 1900.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 88 degrees 12 minutes 46 seconds West along the Section Line and the Centerline of State Road 16, a distance of 978.56 feet; thence North 02 degrees 11 minutes 48 seconds East along the Quarter Section Line a distance of 1299.63 feet; thence North 87 degrees 39 minutes 59 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line a distance of 979.25 feet; thence South 02 degrees 11 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 1308.99 feet to the point of beginning; containing 29.229 acres.


That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 12, Township 28 North, Range 3 West, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, being a part of the lands described in Deed Record Book 229, Page 656, White County Recorder’s Office, more fully described by: Basis of Bearings: State Plane Coordinate System (West Zone)

Beginning at the Southeast corner of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 12; thence South 88 degrees 12 minutes 46 seconds West along the Section Line and the Centerline of State Road 16 a distance of 1900.00 feet; thence North 02 degrees 11 minutes 48 seconds East a distance of 1308.99 feet thence North 87 degrees 39 minutes 59 seconds East along the Fractional Section Line a distance of 1540.31 feet; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 200.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 39 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 300.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 17 seconds East along the Section Line and the Centerline of County Road 900 East a distance of 1123.75 feet to the point of beginning, containing 55.051 acres.


The North half of the Southeast Quarter of Section Twelve (12), Township Twenty-Eight (28) North, Range Three (3) West, containing Eighty (80) Acres, more or less, in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located East of Buffalo at 8635 E. State Road 16.

7. That the special exceptions 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 special exceptions are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.20 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said special exceptions 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.


****

#2494 Gerald T. & Marsha L. Mackey; The property is located on Lot 17, except twenty (20) feet of said lot in Lake Addition, located in the Town of Wolcott on Market St.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 26’ front setback variance form Market St. to build a new home.

President David Stimmel asked, any body here representing that?

Gerald Mackey stated, I’m Gerald Mackey and I would just like to build a new house. The lot is only 90’ across and if you take the 1.22 acres, but it is only 90’ and if you put a rear entrance garage you’ve got to set it up in order to make the swing. That is the only reason for the variance.

President David Stimmel asked, anything on this one?

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

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry Thompson?

Jerry Thompson stated, pretty unique lot.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave Scott?

David Scott asked, you are going to be 14’ off of Market Street?

Gerald Mackey stated, I could probably squeeze another 5’ out if I had to set it back. We had to move the house because there is a county tile that runs through it. When we originally staked out the house we were over the top of the tile. We’ve had to move it to the East to miss the tile.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol anything?

Carol Stradling stated, the only way to do this is put each room side by side.

Gerald Mackey stated, that is right and the one we’ve got picked out is 44’ so if you take the 44’ from the 90’ it doesn’t leave much to work with.

Carol Stradling stated, you did indicate that you could move it to the south a little bit if you needed to.

Gerald Mackey stated, yes just a little bit.

Carol Stradling stated, I guess I would recommend that you try to move it to the South as much as possible. I’m seeing 14’ plus or minus from the edge of you property to the edge of Market St.

Gerald Mackey stated, that is correct.

Carol Stradling asked, that is residential?

Gerald Mackey stated, yes. (Looking at the map right now.)

President David Stimmel asked, any other questions?

Attorney Altman asked, is this on city sewer?

Gerald Mackey stated, yes on city sewer. We are going to have to retap.

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 26’ front setback variance form Market St. to build a new home on Lot Numbered Seventeen (17), except the east twenty (20) feet of said lot, in Lake Addition to the Town of Wolcott, White County, Indiana.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Wolcott on Market Street


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


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


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


****

#2495 Myron C. & Rebecca S. Anderson; The property is located out N NW 8-27-3 on .330 of an acre, located Northeast of Monticello at 3954 N. Dolby Court.


Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 5’ North side setback variance to build a detached garage.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone here representing this request?

Myron Anderson stated, Myron Anderson

President David Stimmel asked, is there anything else that you want to tell us about the variance?

Myron Anderson stated, what we are doing is the house we had put in there, we had to tear the existing garage down, so we could get the house in. Now we want to replace the garage with another one. The old garage was probably right on the property line if not maybe a little bit over.

Jerry Thompson asked, you were here before?

Myron Anderson stated, yes for the house.

Director Weaver stated, the house is now in, it is in the pictures.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol anything?

Carol Stradling stated, I’m just wondering how you would have emergency vehicles if something was to happen and the house how you would access that in case of a fire. With the garage, your garage essentially blocks anything from getting to that house.

Myron Anderson stated, there is a 14’ easement on the South side of the property that use to be part of the property and it got deeded off to the neighbor across the street.

Carol Stradling asked, that is not on the survey?

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

Carol Stradling asked, could you show us?

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

Carol Stradling asked, can anyone else see it? I’m not.

Attorney Altman stated, it is not on the survey.

Myron Anderson stated, it is right here.

Carol Stradling stated, there is a building here, which is 11’ from the property line. I’m not seeing a 14’ easement.

Director Weaver stated, if you look at your map on the staff report you will see that strip through there. I even have his old file here.

Attorney Altman stated, the survey is saying that there is a house.

Director Weaver stated, I’m not saying there isn’t, I’m just trying to show her.

Carol Stradling stated, once again take that parcel there and it doesn’t match this.

Attorney Altman stated, that doesn’t show the 14’ easement either.

Carol Stradling stated, your survey is only showing 5 ½’ between the corner of the garage and the, I guess the Southeast corner of your garage and property line.

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

David Scott asked, is the North edge of the garage on the property line?

Director Weaver stated, that is what he is requesting.

Jerry Thompson asked, no response from adjoining owners?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Carol Stradling stated, where our survey says proposed house that is actually your house now.

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

Carol Stradling stated, so that is not a proposed house.

Myron Anderson stated, the garage that I’m building actually has a 12’ carport on the South side. This will be 12’ all underneath of the roof and this whole span will be open.

David Scott stated, I’m a little concern with the thing setting right on the property line for a lot of reasons. What if you neighbor wants to build right on his property line? There is no, gash there should be something there.

President David Stimmel stated, Mr. Anderson the proposed garage as it is on the drawing the 30’ x 38’ structures is propose to be enclosed there is no carport. You said there was a carport.

Myron Anderson stated, on the South end of the building it will be 12’ open.

President David Stimmel asked, in addition to the?

Myron Anderson stated, no.

President David Stimmel asked, that is included in the?

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

President David Stimmel stated, so still on the North side on the property it would be a solid structure?

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave anymore comments?

David Scott stated, well he doesn’t have many options it doesn’t appear. I don’t know what to think about the zero setback.

President David Stimmel stated, if he wants to stay with the same size garage that he’s got on the plan. The only way to do it is to reduce the size of the garage.

Myron Anderson asked, any recommendations?

David Scott stated, trying to think of one.

Jerry Thompson stated, bring it in line with the house.

David Scott stated that would put him over the other property line.

Jerry Thompson asked, the neighbor to the North, are they year around residence?

Myron Anderson stated, no weekends.

Jerry Thompson stated, you know for sure that they got notified. They are good neighbors if they are willing to go zero.

Director Weaver stated, all I can tell you is we mailed out a letter to them.

Jerry Thompson stated, yes, but certified.

Director Weaver stated, no, not any more.

President David Stimmel stated as I understand it they are asking for 5’ North side setback variance so really if he pulled it back 5’ and didn’t ask for the variance he would still be.

David Scott stated, he would be within 6” of the other property line.

President David Stimmel stated, no I mean by shrinking the building.

David Scott stated, oh.

President David Stimmel stated, I’m talking about make the garage shorter or the carport smaller.

Carol Stradling stated, if you could get rid of the carport, you would gain 12’. Then you could move and I’m looking at the survey and it says that the setback for the garage would be 8’ so that would leave you a distance of 4’ between the corner of the garage, well you would have 9 ½’ between the corner of the garage and property line on one side and you would have 8’ on the other side, but you wouldn’t have the carport.

Myron Anderson stated, I wanted the carport for just an openness.

Carol Stradling stated, I understand, but I’m not sure you are going to get it on the property that you have.

David Scott stated, can we request that he gets a, I don’t know how well he knows his neighbor, he could contact his neighbors if they would give him a 5’ easement that way they would understand they are not going to be able to use 5’ of their property. Then he could use clear over to the property line.

Myron Anderson asked, would a 1’ or 2’ setback surfice?

President David Stimmel stated, I think in a loss Mr. Anderson I think most of us has seen that a 1’ or 2’ setback that we can stand. In the sense it is not good, I don’t believe as a group that anyone believes it is good for the long-term ownership of yours or your neighbors. Safety reasons and property values stand point. My personal opinion is I’m very reluctant to vote in your favor quite frankly. Just to give you a heads up.

David Scott stated, it seems to me the options are to acquire some property 5’ from the neighbor or make the garage smaller.

Carol Stradling stated, if he acquires 5’ from the neighbor though, then his neighbor house would be on the property line.

Director Weaver stated, Dave the neighbor has a shed that is not showing on the survey on that part of his property. It looks to me.

David Scott stated, that is another reason. It appears to me either acquire some property or make the garage smaller.

David Scott asked, do you want us to vote on it like this?

Jerry Thompson asked, do you want to table it and reconsider?

Myron Anderson stated, yes.

****

#2496 Rangeline Properties, Inc., Owner; Jeff VanWeelden, Applicant. The property is located on Lot 1 in Korpita’s Corner, located West of Monticello at 19 S. 300 E.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a special exception to allow business trucks and containers on the lot.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone here representing this?

Dow Dellinger stated, good evening, I’m Dow Dellinger and I’m here on behalf of Rangeline Properties and I believe we are automatically tabled until the next meeting because the rezoning was tabled at the APC meeting Monday. I think we have to be tabled until the next meeting.

President David Stimmel asked, are you requesting that?

Dow Dellinger stated, yes.

Jerry Thompson asked, when is the next meeting?

Director Weaver stated, March 16.

Dow Dellinger stated, you have an appeal and it is at the end.

President David Stimmel stated, yes it is.

****

#2497 Martin & Robin S. VanBuren, Owners; Perry McWilliam, McWilliams Construction, Applicant; The property is located on Lot 1 in Walker Subdivision, located North of Monticello at 4372 E. 400 N.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 28’ front setback variance to build two stories to the existing basement.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone here representing this request?

Dave Hornback stated, Dave Hornback.

President David Stimmel stated, Dave Hornback.

Dave Hornback stated, I’m representing Perry McWilliams.

President David Stimmel asked, do you want to add anything to this variance that hasn’t already been said?

Dave Hornback. Stated, actually I don’t have much to add to it. They want to remove an existing house down to the existing foundation and build a new house back on the foundation. The size of the building will not be increased or moved toward the lake or the property lines to what they now exist.

Director Weaver stated, I want a clarification on this. When you say foundation are you meaning the basement?

Dave Hornback stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, that was my understanding that the basement was going to stay.

Dave Hornback stated, yes.

President David Stimmel asked, should we clarify that Dave is representing this?

Attorney Altman stated, yes. We have a letter in the file that states he is representing them.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry Thompson?

Jerry Thompson stated, not at this time.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave Scott?

David Scott stated, no I don’t have anything.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol?

Carol Stradling stated, I guess now would be the perfect time, the existing house was closer to Lake Shafer and I can understand how that would be, but now would be the time to set it back a little bit.

David Hornback stated, it would be very difficult in fact that they are setting it back on the same basement.

Carol Stradling stated, okay. It is a basement?

Dave Hornback stated, yes, it is a basement.

Carol Stradling stated, I take it that these people have been notified.

Director Weaver stated, as far as I know.

Dave Hornback stated, yes the neighbors have been notified and there are no objections. The neighbor sold this gentlemen the property and the neighbor to the East have no objections to this.

Carol Stradling stated, I’m seeing Lake Shafer to the East.

Director Weaver stated, the neighbor to the South is who built the new home.

President David Stimmel asked, any discussion or questions from the audience?

Attorney Altman stated, one question I have. Is this on the sewer system?

Dave Hornback stated, I believe they are all on the sewer system.

Director Weaver stated, I agree they are going on the sewer system.

Carol Stradling asked, what is this wedge out of here?

Dave Hornback stated, I have no idea, it looks like water, I’m not sure.

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 is a proper subdivision of land as provided by the White County Subdivision Ordinance.


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 28’ front setback variance to build two stories to the existing basement on Lot Number One (1) in Walker Subdivision, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 4372 E. 400 N.


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


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


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

****

#2498 Steve M. & Laura J. Doll, Owners; Perry McWilliams, McWilliams Construction, Applicant; The property is located on Lot 44 in Boller’s Apple Knob Subdivision, located North of Monticello at 6586 Apple Knob Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 30’ front setback variance and a 3’ North side setback variance to enclose an existing roofed porch, to build a second story addition and to bring the existing home into compliance.

President David Stimmel asked, anyone here representing this variance?

Steve Doll stated, Steve Doll.

President David Stimmel asked, anything that you want to add to what I’ve read?

Steve Doll stated, actually we have a structure there, we are wanting to enclose a 6’ x 24’ porch, capture that area and build a second story addition. We are not increasing the footprint of the house as it stands right now. Just asking to bring the current structure into compliance.

President David Stimmel stated, by the drawing do I see that you are over lapping into SFLECC property by 2’.

Steve Doll stated, yes, there is consent to encroach.

Director Weaver stated, yes there is one in the file.

Attorney Altman proceeded to read the letter (see file for the letter).

Carol Stradling stated, that is not the survey that we are looking at.

Attorney Altman stated, that is not the survey we are looking at. Survey here shows that, I’m just looking to see if there are any discrepancies. It indicates that the lot width is 50’ on both ends, it shows it is 100’ dimensions on the sides, it shows the house at 25’ and it actually shows it 10’ off of the North side and doesn’t have a dimension on the South side. It does show a 27’ x 25’ house. It does show it is 2’ into the SFLECC property and that they proposed structure is 6’.

President David Stimmel asked, do we have an explanation on why there is a difference in the dimension between 6’ and 10’?

Attorney Altman stated, other than maybe moved, in other words we don’t have the South dimension, so it doesn’t really matter from a variance point of view. Diann whether that is the 10’ or the…

Director Weaver stated, I didn’t look at it. They are meeting the North setback requirement. It is just the front that we are concerned about tonight. We are requesting a North Side setback variance.

Carol Stradling asked, do you know if your property is 10’ off or 6’ off the property line?

Steve Doll asked, on which side?

Carol Stradling stated, the North edge.

Director Weaver stated, they are putting a second story on and it is probably the overhang.

Steve Doll stated, I can’t tell you for certain, we just purchased the place and I’ve only been there a couple of times.

President David Stimmel asked, Mr. Doll is there, Diann is asking you this is the second story is it going to over hang the existing first floor is that correct?

Steve Doll stated, no we are going straight up.

President David Stimmel stated, straight up with the existing foot print.

Steve Doll stated, yes.

Director Weaver asked, how much of an overhang? Is the drawing done to the foundation or going to the overhang? Our setback requirements go from the overhang and that could possibly be part of the reason that there is a difference.

Steve Doll stated, I believe it is to the overhang.

Director Weaver stated, this is showing the house being 24’ x 27’ do you know if that is correct.

Steve Doll stated, okay then that is the actually footprint.

Director Weaver asked, without the overhang?

Steve Doll stated, yes without the overhang.

Director Weaver stated, there is probably part of it.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave Scott?

David Scott stated, no.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry Thompson?

Jerry Thompson stated, I see that you are from Orland Park. Is your contractor local?

Steve Doll stated, yes.

Jerry Thompson stated, I’m not familiar with the name. Diann?

Director Weaver stated, Perry McWilliams is doing the work and he is local.

Steve Doll stated, Perry wasn’t able to be here tonight, he is the one who set up the majority of this. I apologize for the lack of information.

Attorney Altman stated, the only thing I could say is their consent to encroach is a different footprint then the proposed building and therefor the proposed encroachment. It doesn’t, it would be 4’ more than their consent to encroach, so because of that I would indicate they need a difference consent to encroach if they are going to build where they propose and they are asking for a variance for.

Carol Stradling asked, can we vote on this contingent to clarification of which survey is correct? A new letter of consent if possible from SFLECC if necessary. The one they approved had 10’ if in fact it is 6’ they need the corrected survey if there is correct then we can still vote on it.

President David Stimmel asked, what are the setbacks to be?

Director Weaver stated, a minimum of 8’ on one side with a total of 18’.

President David Stimmel stated, so if the 10’ is accurate then the variance isn’t needed.

Director Weaver stated, unless it was to the foundation.

President David Stimmel stated, so we need to clarify this like Carol said.

Attorney Altman stated, I would say the answer is yes you can if you wish to do that. Based upon that being approved as present to us.

President David Stimmel stated, we would be voting on the assumption that there will be an accurate drawing submitted. Is that what you are saying.

Carol Stradling stated, I know the concern that we have had before where SFLECC looked at one survey and we looked at another survey and we approved it according to what we saw and they approved it according to what they saw and it was not the same. I don’t know if that is the issue here, but I certainly would like to be on the same page before you invest the construction.

Steve Doll stated, so would we.

Attorney Altman stated, if you wish to do so we can make a condition upon SFLECC encroachment to be consistent with the proposed variance.

Carol Stradling stated, with the proper survey, I don’t know which one is correct.

David Scott stated, if it according to this survey he will need a variance to even put the second story on.

Director Weaver stated, that is what they are requesting.

President David Stimmel stated, they are requesting a 3’ setback variance.

David Scott stated, okay.

President David Stimmel stated, the trick is we don’t know if the drawing is to the overhang or the foundation.

Attorney Altman stated, it has to be correct to meet the setback.

Jerry Thompson asked, do you want that in a motion?

President David Stimmel stated, probably do.

Jerry Thompson stated, Carol.

Carol Stradling stated, I move we vote on this contingent upon verification of which survey is correct and a reaffirmation from SFLECC that they are looking at the correct survey when they grant their encroachment.

Jerry Thompson stated, I will second it.

President David Stimmel stated, all in favor signify by saying “aye” and all opposed. Motion passed 4 to 0.

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 30’ front setback variance and a 3’ North side setback variance to enclose an existing roofed porch, to build a second story addition and to bring the existing home into compliance on Lot Number Forty-four (44) in Apple Knob Addition in Monon Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 6586 Apple Knob Drive.


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.


Attorney Altman stated, you need to get your building permit before your proceed. This is contingent upon getting the correct survey.

****

#2499 Patrick N. & Donna L. Carroll; The property is located on Lot 52 and Lot 53 in Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, located North of Monticello at 5171 N. Crabapple Loop.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 7’ North side setback variance and a 4’ front setback variance to build a room addition and to bring the existing home into compliance.

President David Stimmel asked, you are?

Pat Carroll stated, I’m Pat Carroll.

President David Stimmel asked, do you want to add anything?

Pat Carroll stated, our plan is to add a 300’ addition on the lakefront of the house. We are trying to get the variance for the original property line to bring the entire home into compliance. Originally it was built within 2’ of the property line. The house was.

Attorney Altman asked, was that in 1950?

Pat Carroll stated, there about.

Attorney Altman stated, that makes it not a violation.

President David Stimmel asked, have you talked to your neighbors?

Pat Carroll stated, we’ve talked to Don & Carrie Robards they are the neighbors to the North. They don’t have any problems with it, they haven’t expressed any problems. We informed them of the meeting tonight and we informed them of the difference setbacks we were trying to get variance on. We also notified our neighbors to the South and the ones to the West.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry Thompson?

Jerry Thompson asked, your contractor is he local?

Pat Carroll stated, no he is not, my son-in-law builds home for a living. My son-in-law and his labor plan on doing it. He has already built a couple of homes and built a similar addition on our home in Indianapolis.

Jerry Thompson stated, the only reason we ask we have people who say they were not aware of White County’s rules and regulations.

Pat Carroll stated, he has already been in contact with Dave Anderson, he has talked to him about the different requirements.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave Scott?

David Scott stated, I don’t have anything.

President David Stimmel asked, Carol?

Carol Stradling stated, no questions.

President David Stimmel asked, anybody in the audience?

Attorney Altman stated, this doesn’t show it, but does the north boundary been staked by a surveyor. It doesn’t show it, you are so close that you better get this staked and violations start at $500.

Pat Carroll stated, I’ve had Jim Milligan out there on a couple of different occasions. I think it is staked,

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 7’ North side setback variance and a 4’ front setback variance to build a room addition and to bring the existing home into compliance on Lots numbered Fifty-two (52) and Fifty-three (53) in Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, Monon Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 5171 N. Crabapple Loop.


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.


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


****

#2500 Excel Co-op Inc; The property is located on N SE 33-27-4 on 7.30 acres, located South of Reynolds at 646 S. Meridian Road.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 95’ height variance to build 2 new grain bins for the existing elevator.

President David Stimmel asked, anyone here representing this request?

Attorney Jerry Altman swore in Brad Stockment.

President David Stimmel asked, Brad do you have anything to add to this and please state your name?

Brad Stockment stated, Brad Stockment. I run an elevator and feed mill for Excel Co-op. The location that we are talking about here was relocated from an up town site in 1966 and as White County Farm Bureau Co-op back then. Over 40 years it has been expanded 5 times. There are structures on the site now that have requested variances for higher height variance then what we are asking for here this evening. Our purpose is to modernize the facility to serve our patron customers. Basically we are expanding space to store more grain that we are receiving now. This is a storage project. Our business basically originates corn for the Southeast rail market and feed corn for patron customers. 80% of that product leaves this facility by rail traffic. The other 20% is ground and trucked out. As we look back our needs have changed because our customers needs have changed. The speed of harvest is definitely one of the needs of this project. We intend to be the same good neighbors from here on out as we have been in the past.

President David Stimmel asked, Jerry?

Jerry Thompson stated, Brad in the past you have stored grain in the flat will you continue to do that as well or will this replace the flat storage or includes and be over and above.

Brad Stockment stated, this will be over and above the flat storage that has been there since 1986.

David Scott stated, I see on the map here a CL ditch. What is that?

Brad Stockment stated, that is the Kleyla Ditch.

David Scott asked, is that an open ditch or?

Brad Stockment stated, yes it is.

David Scott asked, do you have to re-route that?

Brad Stockment stated, yes we do.

Director Weaver stated, it is my understanding that you have been in contact with the Drainage Board.

Brad Stockment stated, yes we have.

Jerry Thompson stated, explain to Dave how you are going to re-route that ditch if you would.

Brad Stockment stated, right now Paul Couts with C & S Engineering in Lafayette is designing a drainage plan to relocate that ditch on our property North of Meridian Road and then straight West. It will go back to enter a main drainage pipe that runs underneath our load track and then from there that water will go through a pipe that runs underneath the CSX main rail.

Carol Stradling asked, you have permission to go underneath the railroad track?

Brad Stockment stated, that is our railroad track.

Carol Stradling stated, that is your railroad track. Okay. I know in Delphi that has caused some problems.

Attorney Altman stated, you have permission to go to the main rail track now.

Brad Stockment stated, the main drainage is already there. We do not intend to alter the drainage that goes underneath the CSX railroad track and then into under State Road 43. Then back into the Kleyla Ditch.

Carol Stradling stated, I received two of these.

Director Weaver stated, they are different.

Carol Stradling stated, one is a 90’ bin and one has a 105’.

Brad Stockment stated, there are two proposals based on different soil types. There is a proposal for a 90’ diameter bin, there was also a proposal for a 105’ diameter bin. Based on the information we have now from our soil borings it is pretty clear that the 105’ diameter bin will be the one of choice.

Director Weaver stated, he is requesting the variance for the taller of the two. It is for the taller of the two. He wanted to show you both plans, so you were aware that there is an option there of what they are doing.

Carol Stradling stated, so the 90’ bins, I looked at them very quickly would be in the same spot, same location as the 105’, but not as big.

Brad Stockment stated, right, no as big as diameter.

Director Weaver stated, I also want to clarify the drawings that you have is not the same drawings that the attorney is looking at. After packets where mailed out Brad did supply me with a revised plan and my understanding is that one bin is going to set a little bit closer than what is on your drawing.

President David Stimmel asked, did we get any fan mail on this?

Director Weaver stated, yes we did receive a letter it was received in the office. The original is in the file and a copy of it with the pictures.

Carol Stradling asked, can you tell me where the Hendress’s live in relations to your property?

Brad Stockment stated, Northeast.

Carol Stradling stated, Northeast.

Jerry Thompson asked, Brad how are you going to fill these?

Brad Stockment stated, we are going to construct a cap walk and support tower that will run from the top of the existing elevator and then run north to go over the top of bin 1 and bin 2. In those towers and catwalks will be an enclosed roller belt conveyor. Back out of the bottom of them to reclaim it will be the same equipment. It will be an enclosed roller belt conveyor that then reclaims grain above ground back into the house where we can run it back into our bucket elevators and load our train cars.

David Scott asked, are there going to be dryers on these bins?

Brad Stockment stated, there will be aeration, there will not be dryers.

David Scott asked, what is the difference? Someone tell me?

Jerry Thompson stated, well less noise, but what type of fans?

Brad Stockment stated, we are going to install centrifical fans. Centrifical rotor fans, not main axle fans.

David Scott asked, how is that different from what we did at Idaville?

President David Stimmel stated, the same thing.

David Scott asked, it is the same thing?

President David Stimmel stated, the same thing. Have you considered silencer’s Brad?

Brad Stockment stated, yes we have.

David Scott asked, are they going to be on there?

Brad Stockment stated, we have been told that we would not need them for the decimal level that these fans would admit. We would be prepared to install silencers if needed.

Attorney Altman stated, I think we set a precedent.

President David Stimmel stated, let’s go back and read this letter.

Attorney Altman proceeded to read the letter that was received in Area Plan from the Hendress’s (see letter in file).

President David Stimmel asked, Brad to want to respond to that or talk about it at all?

Brad Stockment stated, all of the equipment we plan to install like I said before enclosed equipment there are dust covers attached to all of the reclaim and fill conveyors that we are going to install. We are putting the quietest fans on the storage units that we can buy. We will address the silencers if the decimal levels are intrusive I guess. The two bin sites are at the North edge of the farthest North bin basically sets where the ditch crosses at an angle now. That is somewhat South of the Hendress property. As far as bins exploding or whatever you know I don’t know what kind of picture I guess you can paint. I mean these are commercial bins that have outside stiflers that have been built in locations that are far closer to what I would call residential area then what this area is.

President David Stimmel asked, these will hold dry grain?

Brad Stockment stated, yes sir.

President David Stimmel stated, so the angle to dry grain opposed to.

Brad Stockment stated, 23 degrees.

President David Stimmel stated, 23 degrees. So I mean it is just a quick math..

Brad Stockment stated, 23 degrees on an angle on repose to the top of the bin would not approach Meridian Road.

President David Stimmel stated, right, okay.

Jerry Thompson asked, how many fans?

Brad Stockment stated, there will be 4 centrifical fans per bin and 6 roof exhaust fans.

President David Stimmel asked, how many horsepower on the centrifical?

Brad Stockment stated, 25, 6 2 horsepower.

President David Stimmel asked, are they centrifical also?

Brad Stockment stated, they are hooded recess regular main axle blades.

David Scott asked, there are 4 per bin?

Brad Stockment stated, yes.

President David Stimmel asked, full aeration of the floor?

Brad Stockment stated, no it is what they call a 4F. Actually there is, if you can picture it, there are 4F’s lay at the bottom of the floor. Each fan then ducks into each one of these F’s which is just a configuration of tunnels in the floor until you reach the grain. When we look over the history of our facility here basically we originate grain for the Southeast market. That is what we do, so over the years from the mid 90’s until now our average load size has increased significantly with semi traffic. Actually what that has done is lowered the amount of truck traffic that we receive. When you think about it 80% of what we receive leaves by rail car. So when you go back 10 years and you think about he average size that we had then with straight trucks and wagons and the average impound bushels we had then, we had more truck traffic 10 years ago. Then we turned around and trucked it all back out again. So I mean truck traffic wise I don’t see a problem.

David Scott stated, my problem isn’t with the traffic compared to anything. I mean the facility is existing there. I see Eric is back there and he has had to deal with the Butter wings I don’t know what they are. That is not going to change, I don’t think by adding two bins that it is going to change anything. My concern, I mean you are still not going to notice an increase in truck traffic, but I do see a potential for more noise. We did require the people in Idaville to put silencers on and I think I would want to make that a contingent on how I vote.

Jerry Thompson asked, these bins are full right? How many rigs would this take?

Brad Stockment stated, 4.

Jerry Thompson stated, 4 trains to empty two bins.

Brad Stockment stated, yes. It is not about taking in anymore grain than what we are taking right now. It is about storing this grain for another 3 months to give us the flexibility to market it in a time frame that we want to market it. It is about offering a service to our customer patrons so they can store it to a more flexible marketing time for them also.

Jerry Thompson asked, who is your contractor?

Brad Stockment stated, we have not let bids on the project yet, we have two engineering firms that right now are working on the ditch project.

Jerry Thompson stated, but as far as the person sending the bids around I guess.

Brad Stockment stated, it will a Broxman or PSI.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak to this variance?

Eric Hendress stated, I’m Eric Hendress. I’m not going to go over what my wife wrote, but I was told that Excel Co-op purchased some property up Northwest of Town where they have flats and stuff. I just figure why can’t they build them down there, they’ve got the area and the railroad track. The noise it is going to be a big problem and if they can cut the noise down a lot less than what it is now, I mean that would be great. I just can’t see that happening.

David Scott stated, I don’t think the noise is going to be less than it is now, but maybe we can require the silences it won’t be any worse. That is the best we can do I think.

President David Stimmel asked, Brad can I ask you a question about the future a little bit? That is something that Eric’s wife had to say and that was down the road more grain bins going in? I know I’m asking for speculation, but.

Brad Stockment stated, the last time this location was expanded was in 1989. This project is a sizeable project and I guess I would only be speculating if I give you some kind of time frame on when we thought we might expand again. We have a facility there where we want to make it efficient as we can, and be able to server our customers the best way that we can. Still be a good contributing neighbor in the community also.

President David Stimmel asked, what about Eric’s point about the land that you might have bought or other possible locations? How will that affect you?

Brad Stockment stated, the other possible location is other elevator sites the Northwest quad of the Town of Reynolds. It is inside the town of Reynolds, so it is not really, we don’t feel like in our best interest to try to expand our facility inside the city limits.

President David Stimmel asked, any other comments?

Attorney Altman stated, I have a question. Could you elaborate a little bit further on what it take to get that existing ditch to the north of this proposed North bin.

Brad Stockment stated, I’m sure we have to observe the setbacks there from the black top. We intend to keep 30” tile on our property. That tile will move approximately 150’ to the North and then head straight back West. It will encompass 30” tile and the preliminary plans show a side swell that will carry more water on the side of it. A shallow swell on a 3 to 1 slope that will carry a 100-year storm.

Attorney Altman asked, what you are proposing is to enclose the water in a 30” tile going from the East to the West with a shallow swale to take up to a 100-year?

Brad Stockment stated, yes, they have to design it according to the new State regulations. Which designs the first part of the 10-year storm and the second part need to carry a 100-year storm.

Attorney Altman asked, has this been approved by the drainage board?

Brad Stockment stated, no, the drainage board has me working with C & S Engineering in Lafayette and Drainage Engineer Todd Frauhiger has been working with C & S Engineering also. We don’t foresee any problems on approving the C & S plan.

Attorney Altman stated, you understand we would require that and in fact even if we didn’t require it would be a part you would have to comply with.

Brad Stockment stated, yes, I do.

President David Stimmel asked, any other comments. Carol?

Carol Stradling stated, no other comments, I just want to note that in the letter Mrs. Hendress, she has lived there for the last 8 years. That would be after your, that would put it in 1997 or 1998 and you indicated that you expanded in 1989 so nothing has considerably changed in your operation since they have lived there.

Brad Stockment stated, not the size standpoint of our facility. As far as a change in our operation.

Carol Stradling stated, I guess when you say not in the size. I see your property, I’m not following in the size of your operation.

Brad Stockment stated, okay you wanted to know if anything has changed.

Carol Stradling stated, you indicated that your last expansion was in 1989. That was an expansion of?

Brad Stockment stated, a steel grain bin.

Carol Stradling stated, so since then your operation has changed, but not increase storage capacity.

Brad Stockment stated right.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave anything else?

David Scott asked, are we going to make it contingent on the silencers or are the other board members…

President David Stimmel stated, I agree.

Jerry Thompson stated, we made Hanenkratt’s comply.

President David Stimmel stated, silencers on the aeration fans.

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 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 95’ height variance to build 2 new grain bins for the existing elevator on a tract of land located in the Northeast Quarter (1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of Section Thirty-Three (33), Township Twenty Seven (27) North, Range Four (4) West, Honey Creek Township, White County, Indiana, and more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point located Twenty (20) feet South Eighty-Nine degrees and Fifty-Eight minutes West from the Northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of above said section Thirty-Three (33) and running thence South Zero degrees and Eighteen Minutes East along the West right-of-way line of a Forty (40) foot county road One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-One and Fifty-Six hundredths (1331.56) feet to the Quarter (1/4) section line between the Northeast Quarter (1/4) and the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of above said Section Thirty-Three (33), thence North Eighty-Nine Degrees and Fifty-Nine Minutes West along the Quarter (1/4) section line Two Hundred Twenty and Thirty-Eight hundredths (220.38) feet to the East right-of-way line of the C.I. & L. Railroad, thence North One degree and Forty-Nine minutes West along the East right-of-way line of the C.I. & L. Railroad One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Two (1332) feet to the half (1/2) section line running East and West along the North side of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of the aforesaid Section Thirty-Three (33), thence North Eighty-Nine degrees and Fifty-Eight minutes East along the half (1/4) section line Two Hundred Fifty-Five and Sixty-Two hundredths (255.62) feet to the place of beginning, containing Seven and Three tenths (7.3) acres, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located South of Reynolds at 646 S. Meridian 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 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.


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


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

****

Appeal #5 Rangeline Properties, Inc. and Jeffrey T. VanWeelden, Appellants; Appellants are appealing the White County Area Plan Commission decision to deny the applicant’s access across the two lots as set out in your letter of January 27, 2006.

President David Stimmel asked, Dow are you representing Rangeline?

Dow Dellinger stated, good evening ladies and gentlemen, I’m representing Rangeline. I’ll try to be brief. I’ll try to hit on what we want to touch on and let you get out of here. I’m here before this evening on an appeal on the reading of the current White County Zoning Ordinance, um it is just a little history about 2003. Um Rangeline Properties had made motion to change to an I-2 zoning got that on lot 2 on Korpita’s Corner Subdivision. Subsequently got a uh approval to utilize that area for a uh trash facility. Uh got an IDEM permit to open up a transfer facility on that lot 2. Uh subsequent to that permit being issued a letter was sent to IDEM from our County Environmental officer that said that they would be in violation of the zoning ordinance by utilizing lot 1 for access to lot 2 in the operation of that trash facility. Um I believe that Diann has prepared or given you copies of the appeal that we prepared um Diann I wanted to make sure that we got that memorandum and also the exhibits on as a part of uh the hearing this evening. Uh we can have those recorded and I think you’ve got the original copies. I believe or Jerry has the original copies, we need to make sure those get on the record this evening. Okay. What we tried to do was give you a short synopsis and I don’t know if you have had time to review that but kind of a synopsis of the zoning law. Um I’ve taken it from a couple of sources uh basically the constitution of the United States gives the property owner the right to utilize his property in any way he deems fit without doing damage to another property owner. Um the zoning ordinance, any ordinance, just not ours, but all zoning ordinances are in derogation of common law, that says a property owner can use their property in anyway that they want to. Uh because those are in derogation of the common law we must read the zoning ordinance and do what is called a strict, uh a strict construed or a strict construction of the zoning ordinance. Um this is not um a new idea, uh this is and I’ve given you cases from across the country and also in Indiana. Um but what we can’t do, we can’t read a zoning ordinance in general, we have to be very specific when we are restricting use of property. Um I gave you a couple of examples that I think uh that are kind of compelling. If you look at page two of our appeal, uh you will see the strict construction makes you have a very narrow construction of a word or a phrase, uh as a matter of fact I thought these two were interesting as an example. Uh, the zoning ordinance which prescribes the use of land for a cement mixing plant, uh, did not restrict from using that as a concrete plant. Um other examples were basically, the zoning ordinance may be restricted storage of vehicles, but that didn’t necessary restrict parking of vehicles. Um, what we can’t do is extend by implication the limitations that are set out in a zoning ordinance. Um you will see there are several quirks and I thought a good quote was from the uh the Beckman’s case down in Nebraska. Quotes; interpreting the language of the ordinance to determine the extent of the restriction upon the use of the property, the language must be interpreted where doubt exists as to the intention of the legislative body in favor of the property owner and gets implied extension of the restriction. Um, again there is a case uh Parker Construction vs. Planning where subjects of the ordinance listed accessory uses and also listed permitted uses. Where prescribed access routes did not appear on either list. The Court found that you can not prohibit access routes if it is not listed either place. This is really the kind of case that we have before you tonight. There is a very limited discussion in our zoning ordinance, basically 2.1058 describes a driveway as a private access road, serving only one residential dwelling, or commercial building. Section 3.2002 the ordinance reads the accessory uses such as the following are authorized in all districts. That was driveway. No statement is found anywhere in the zoning ordinance that restricts access or use for only access for ingress/egress easement on any level of zoned property.


There are a few things that we need to bring to your attention as well, not just the law um but there are a few issues that we wanted to address just so you are aware of it. We are not in any way by defining or by interpreting the ordinance to say that we can have free access across lot 1. In no way are we saying we can utilize lot 1 for any kind of processing for any kind of building or any kind of industrial use at all. The only thing we are asking for in the interpretation is only access across that ground. That doesn’t mean they can run any kind of operation on that. It just means they can utilize the property to verse across lot 1 to get to lot 2. That no way extends their ability to set containers on there to do any transferring on that other lot, that is what we’ve got before the uh Zoning Board, that we have tabled to the next month. We will take that back up then, but this is only talking about access easement and utilize lot 1 to traverse over to lot 2. There are very few cases in Indiana and I’ve talked to Jerry a little bit and I think it is such a very basic principle um unless the zoning ordinance restricts access, you wouldn’t have any way to restrict access across the property. It is very apparent that the an owner can utilize his property to transverse back and forth. A zoning ordinance is normally used to control the actual function of that property. We are not asking because we have an access easement across lot 1 that we would doing any of that any industrial zoned purpose on that lot what so ever. Um, Diann has told me that she basically could not come up with uh anyone that they have issued a cease and decease order or they have ever filed a suit to enforce the stopping of access and that is because you just can’t stop it in any way. I think there have been a lot of hard feelings in this case and I think there has been a lot of political issues in this case. This is simply an issue of law and interpretation of the statue. Um we shouldn’t use interpretation of the statue in a proper way to try to move some political or popular thought of the transfer station here. This is only the interpretation of the statue itself that we are looking at tonight. Um, there are several places um the um Area Plan staff was very helpful in letting us review some maps and look through. Um we found uh spending about an hour one morning playing with the maps and going back and forth with the computer um we found several places that had a different zoned property that transverse across a lesser zoned or a different zoned property to get access to the highway road. Um Isom Construction in Reynolds was one, Segal in Reynolds is another. REMC cell phone Tower, the Medical Arts building at the hospital. Woodlawn’s cell phone tower, every cell phone tower that is in an agriculture zone property transverse across to get to that tower. Across a different zoned property. This is just simply something that is done all of the time. Um, we may not run into this issue very often just because there is no reason we should have an issue with this. We’ve given you an exhibit with a letter that we ask Diann to sign that she has refused to do that. We would like you to interpret the statute, or interpret the zoning ordinance and let us know that this can be done, so we can get a letter from the Area Plan or the Board of Zoning Appeals either one, so we can give this to IDEM so we can proceed with our construction project.


The thing that I have to ask tonight um is if we don’t get a positive result from this we need a written finding of facts and I need for you to specifically point out in the zoning ordinance why you think there is any way we could be prohibited from traversing across that property for access for ingress/egress. We need some specific written findings so we can proceed to go on to the Circuit court with this matter. So with that if you have any questions I’d be happy to answer what ever I can.


President David Stimmel asked, Jerry anything right now?


Jerry Thompson stated, not right now


President David Stimmel asked, Dave?


David Scott stated, not right now.


President David Stimmel asked, Carol?


Carol Stradling stated, I’m looking at the letter, I’m assuming it was drafted, no I’m sorry. I’m looking at Diann’s letter to you, I’m sorry.


President David Stimmel stated if you want to wait a minute that is all right.


Carol Stradling stated, I think his case is presented pretty clearly and what you provided to the board. I don’t know that I have any questions right now.


President David Stimmel asked, Diann do you want to…


Attorney Altman stated, quite frankly it is my reason, not Diann’s. We had discussed this as a review of the ordinance and such uh I believe that Mr. Dellinger is correct. It does allow driveways in all districts. I will tell you that our definition of accessory building or use. That is what this is, says very specifically and I’m looking at page 3 of our ordinance that it says it is a subordinate use of the land that is incidental to the main building or principle use of the land. Okay and it principle admitted use of this land is an A-1 use. It seems to me that the use that they are going to put this driveway to as I understand is to be part and function of their use that is not agriculture at all. And it is not a permitted use in an agriculture-zoned property. That is principally why this letter was generated. And it isn’t I just not received the examples that Mr. Dellinger has talked about that he indicates might not be consistent with what I believe and has stated other than one I do know and that was the property at what was his name Gary uh….


Director Weaver stated, Dedaker.


Attorney Altman stated, Dedaker property that he did only rezone a very limited small area of his for his insurance business there. He very specifically indicated he would be doing his business not there, but it would be done out at the farmers and what have you and his clients so they did not require that the zoned property meet a public easement, mainly the highway. What I guess I’m saying is, the accessory use that they are proposing to go across an A-1 zoned lot is not an A-1 accessory zoned use. Because of that it violates our ordinance. It violates our ordinance as it has been almost uniformly applied during the time that it has been our ordinance. Mr. Dellinger did talk about the law and the cases and if I remember his comment to me was the cases are basically evenly split. That some are on the side of how I have interpreted this and Diann submitted a letter that gives us and some are on the other side as Mr. Dellinger has side you. Most of them as I remember where not in Indiana and this is basically an open area.


President David Stimmel asked, Dow if I could ask you, is there another way to approach this? I mean is it just the matter of changing the zoning on the one property so you can access it?


Dow Dellinger stated, well we tried, we’ve tried to get around this every way we possibly could…


Attorney Altman stated, they have a request in to do.


Dow Dellinger stated, we have a request in now, um there was no issue about this what so ever until our Environmental officer decided to become our zoning officer and make contact with IDEM. Uh IDEM doesn’t know that there is any reason or our engineers don’t think there is no reason why we should have to do, um but IDEM is now requiring us to get some kind of permission from the County to do this. So you know we have tried this every way we can to not have to come before you guys and make a definition. We put a petition in to rezone, which we had to table the other night because we only had 6 guys at the meeting and we want to make sure we have a fuller board to make that decision. We were hoping when we came to you guys tonight and just need to get a special use and not even care about addressing this. But we’re at the point now where we’ve got to go forward as quickly has we can. The drainage board has pushed us off a couple months with some engineering. This has been going on for a long time and we’ve got to get this project going forward so I need a decision tonight to go forward because I know I can go to court and get this enforced. I’m hoping within 60 or 90 days I can get the Judge to give me a decision on it, so we can just keep plugging forward with our project. It has been a very, very, very expensive product procedure for my client at this point and time. We’ve jump through hoop that we can finally jump through. We are down to tonight and I hope we don’t have to file a case, but we may have to. With all do respect to Mr. Altman the accessory use argument I don’t grasp really. The accessory use, and the only reason I would mention the accessory use because that is the only place that a driveway is mentioned in the zoning ordinance. The is no place that restricts access easement, ingress/egress nothing in the zoning ordinance that says that we have to have access to a property across the same zoned lot, there is nothing that can be read in this ordinance that says that. I think not only is the uh interpretation that we are asking for some kind access use across lot 1 for the access to the lot uh lot 2 that is Industrial. Um that is not just extended by implication that is one leap to find some restriction in our zoning ordinance it is just not in there, so…


Attorney Altman stated, on that I just humbly disagree because section 2.1001 says….


Dow Dellinger stated, if you would read that zoning ordinance, and I don’ think anyone can read that zoning ordinance and think that we can’t have access across there. There is something in there that tells us about access to our lot, something that restricts access to our lot.


Attorney Altman stated, it is the use, not access.


Dow Dellinger stated, it is the access it is not the primarily use…


Attorney Altman stated, it is.


Dow Dellinger stated, it is the access across the property.


Attorney Altman stated, it is the use you are doing. You can have access across there, you just can’t us it as part of the uh, I use.


Carol Stradling stated, didn’t you indicate that you would not use it as…


Dow Dellinger stated, for any Industrial purpose, our only use for lot 1 is to access lot 2.


??? which is Industrial….


President David Stimmel stated, hold on, please.


Attorney Altman stated, no one is going to interrupt you.


Director Weaver stated, Dow the drainage pond is also on lot 1 for lot 2.


Dow Dellinger stated, right, we have a drainage easement over there as well.


Attorney Altman asked, is that not Industrial use?


Dow Dellinger stated, no, the drainage easement is drainage, it is not an Industrial purpose to drain, it is drainage. We’ve got a letter from the County is approved us to sign a letter that we can have drainage on any zoning level.


President David Stimmel stated, Dow do you mind we have one gentleman that wants to speak, if you don’t mind. Give you a chance to rest your voice box.


Don Pauken stated, I’m Don Pauken. This appeal has to do with access to lot 2, the site of the proposed transfer station as approved by IDEM. Before giving my take on this appeal I’d like to make you aware of one of my concerns. My concern involves the noticing of this appeal. The appeal letter of January 30, 2006 from Mr. Dellinger requesting the appeal matches the published notice of the appeal in the Herald Journal. The notice is misleading and or flawed. Allow me to read the published appeal. Appellants are appealing the White county Area Plan Commission decision to deny the applicant access across the two lots that is set forth in your letter of January 27, 2006. Firstly this states that the White County Area Plan Commission made the decision. The Commissioners did not make that decision as the approved minutes indicate. The Area Plan Director made the decision. And if you and I will read to you a few piece out of the minutes. Mr. Anderson stated, who on the board right now would want to deny this so he can pursue his next. Mr. Altman says this isn’t before us. Mr. Anderson said we can’t do it any way. Bill Pyle said was it on the meeting minutes tonight or was it ever suppose to be on the agenda. Dave Rosenbarger says we can’t do anything on this tonight. Doc Anderson said it was on the agenda, we weren’t suppose to discuss it. We will actually have it advertised and bring it to the next meeting. Secondly the notice indicates that the denial was across two lots. This is incorrect. The opinion as express by the Area Plan Director of her letter of January 27, 2006 is across lot one only. Rangeline Properties already has two business access points to lot 2 by virtue of the I-2 zoning with special exception. I do hope that you realize that the notice is wrong and misleading. I’m not sure the validity of any board of this proceeding could I get a reading on this.


President David Stimmel asked, what are you asking Don?


Don Pauken stated, I’m asking the board can I get a reading on the validity of an of continuing with this particular appeal when the notice is incorrect.


President David Stimmel stated, Jerry I’ll ask you.


Attorney Altman stated, the notice was provided to us by the applicant.


Don Pauken stated, yes it was.


Attorney Altman stated, we advertised it the way, it is their appeal, uh we did it they way they wanted it noticed. I was going to fiddle with it and I decided no, it was inappropriate for me to change it to so I did what they asked us to do or Diann actually did and we advertised it that way.


President David Stimmel asked, so are you saying we are okay to proceed or not?


Attorney Altman stated, I think there is real question about whether it is properly noticed. Because there's mentioned and those uh, uh, the factual uh inaccuracies to the record.


President David Stimmel asked, Dow do you have any response to that?


Dow Dellinger stated, well I don’t think there, I think Diann’s notice is just fine. I don’t think there is anyway that any can say it is reasonable that they couldn’t understand what we are talking about the access across the lots, which the interpretation, I mean Diann works for the board.


President David Stimmel stated, the strict interpretation and I’m imagining my self I’m wondering if it prevent or in someway discourage someone from showing up to discuss this issue. That is what I would want to know. By the mis-wording of it or the misuse of one or two words or miss-correct statement I mean did it cause someone a problem not to show up or.


Don Pauken stated, I have no idea.


Dow Dellinger stated, I mean if somebody wants to object they can file a complaint that is what if you guys or if somebody is hurt by not getting notice, they can file a compliant with the White Circuit court and say they didn’t get sufficient notice of the action.


President David Stimmel stated, okay.


Attorney Altman stated, however that is exactly since this is treating this like a court that is exactly what this board is making that determination too. Granted if this is taken to the next level the judge would make a determination on that too, I’m sure if it was raised. So it isn’t pass the buck to the circuit court judge.


President David Stimmel stated, right.


Attorney Altman stated the board does need to make a determination.


Carol Stradling stated, I’m looking at a letter dated January 12 from the office of Dellinger, Dellinger, & Smith directed to Diann Weaver Director. It says Dear Diann. I hope you and the zoning board have had the opportunity to review the materials submitted to you on Monday evening 1-9-06. Enclosed is a copy of the letter my client wishes you to execute on your letterhead. I would like for you to issue or reject the letter as soon as possible in order we may address the board of Zoning Appeals if necessary. Should you deny our request issue the letter on your letter. Please advise me in writing of your bases of rejection including the specific sections our current zoning ordinance upon which you base your rejection. Additionally should you reject our request please accept this letter as our written request to be placed on the BZA agenda and let me know when the hearing will take place. Your time to date and assistants in this matter is truly appreciated. I thank you and your staff for your time and patience with Jeff and I on Monday. Very Truly yours Dellinger, Dellinger, & Smith. Dow Dellinger. I guess I’m looking at that I don’t know how we noticed it in the paper, this is his request. He is before us and it appears as though several interested parties where aware of what the implications of that were and are present.


Don Pauken stated, may I respond to that.


President David Stimmel stated, sure. Diann answered that by saying in her January 27, 2006 letter if you are wanting to file an appeal of this decision no later than 4:00 on Monday. Basically what she is saying is you send me a letter asking for the appeal. Which Mr. Dellinger did on January 30 and he says with accordance of your letter of this date in regards to lots 1 and 2 in Korpita’s Corner Subdivision please consider this correspondence of our notice of intent to appeal the White County Area Plan Commission decision to deny the applicant’s access across two lots that is set forth in your letter of January 27, 2006. Also from the news paper which I have right here, I’ll just read the Appellants are appealing the White County Area plan Commission decision to deny the applicants access across the two lots as set forth in your letter of January 27, 2006. They are identical.


President David Stimmel asked, Dave?


Attorney Altman stated, I guess the questions is make a decision whether that is reasonable notice or not and proceed one way or the other. This is what this board needs to do. Okay.


President David Stimmel stated, Jerry?


Jerry Thompson stated, what Carol?


Carol Stradling stated, I move that we proceed.


David Scott stated, I will second it.


President David Stimmel stated, all in favor? Motion carried 4 to 0.


Don Pauken stated, alright.


President David Stimmel stated, we are going to proceed Don, even though the noticed may have been flawed somewhat we are going to proceed.


Don Pauken stated, I understand that and so noted in the minutes.


President David Stimmel stated, yes.


Don Pauken stated, I would like to reinforce what Mr. Altman and Diann has said relative to the um ordinance, the zoning ordinance for accessory use and I think Mr. Altman stated it proper. You almost has to go under special provisions 3.20 there is 3.2001 which is primary uses and it talks about the primary use in, it says our authorized in districts established as shown in table one. Permitted uses are shown in the or defined by the squares in the boxes and for waste facility I-2 special exception, I don’t think there is any problem with that. Then 3.2002 says accessory uses and like Mr. Altman said such as the following are authorized in all districts. It does say driveways and parking spaces. I have no problem there, but as previously said the definition to 2.1001 subordinate use of the land either is which incidental to the main building or to the principle use of the land. The principle use of the land that we are talking about is for the uh waste facility. No let. I think you are pretty much aware. These drawings this one is out of the permit and as you see lot 1 and lot 2.


Attorney Altman stated, we are putting that as exhibit?


Don Pauken stated, yes. Lot 1 and Lot 2 have a common barrier between them and it is staggered and a surveyed plot, this is what has been presented to IDEM and lot 2 already have the special exception and that is what the plan looks like right there. Now because of the problem of drainage, storm water draining from the I-2 area where the transfer station is going to be which is shown here, they required because the drainage wasn’t good enough had to go to a detention pond. I’ve done that in blue. It is located, the are proposing it to be lot 1. Now we have a little bit of a problem. What is being proposed, lets go to this one first. Uh and talk about the, this is what has been approved by IDEM. This is a traffic flow diagram. Remember and it shows, here is your lot 2, which is already accepted and zoned properly. He has access here and he has access here. He does not have access here as shown in this particular area because this is being used for his business. Not only being used for his business in that manner, but it is also being used to load the roll on compacted material and also because how does he do it. He drives on to lot 1 up in this area here backs down into the loading bay that connects the containers to the compactor. He tilts drops the compactor the container off, it is connected to the compactor and the squeeze away with all of the trash that is dumped into the station here. Alright say that it is full you’ve got to pull out again. How does he do it, he pulls in here backs on out and goes. Now what happens when he is full here? In comes the truck with an empty container, he pulls in here or pulls in here and drops off a container the empty ones pulls up into this area here, backs down into here and tilts the bed up again. Up goes the loaded container, remember pull it up on the truck on to the bed of the truck, which is setting at an angle. Guess what is coming out of that hole? Can you imagine what squeezed garbage looks like? Pulls, drops the, drops it on down pulls in to here backs into here dumps it off. How is he dumping it off, tilting the bed up again and out comes the squeezing. The drippings and all of the other stuff, acid, whatever might be in there. Dumps it off and picks up the empty one and goes through the process again. What is he using to do that operate his business, this right in here. Okay….


Attorney Altman asked, what is that right in there?


Don Pauken stated, that is a little piece of grave, that is all gravel in there.


Attorney Altman asked, what lot is that?


Don Pauken stated, that is lot one.


Attorney Altman stated, okay…


Don Pauken stated, this is all lot one on this side.


Attorney Altman stated, your testimony is based upon the top diagram on the third map of your exhibit right?


Don Pauken stated, yes.


Attorney Altman stated, thank you.


Don Pauken stated, now this doesn’t show what he is asking for in this uh easement. He doesn’t show the retention pond. I’m going to put the detention pond in there now and this line is what he is asking for. This area here, now we went through 5 times in the last 18 no almost over a year. 4 or 5 times we have been mislead, Area Plan Commission has been mislead, Commissioners been mislead by saying we want access off of 300. In fact the last Area Plan Commission meeting that was a big thing coming off of 300, coming off of 300. Well 300 here, coming off 300 guess what that wouldn’t give him this little spot here. So they have made the found out they made mistakes so this is what we really want, okay this is what they really want. Want access through your pond? This is crazy, is you want access why didn’t just come down here and come across. They can’t operate the station without it. How much area is involved in this plus this, which is used for the transfer station. By draining water off of storm water off of lot 2. 50% plus okay we are going to be using this for this facility.


Attorney Altman stated, is that an A-1 use?


Don Pauken stated, no.


Attorney Altman asked, what kind of use is it?


Don Pauken stated, I-2 with special exception.


Attorney Altman stated, you just added something in the form of a flap that shows what on your top map page 3 of your exhibit A. it shows the holding pond.


Don Pauken stated, yes the detention pond as well as what they are requesting to have access to is half of that lot, now when do we say can we use 5% of it, can we use 10% of it, when does, when do we have to rezone. According to the ordinance you have to rezone if you use one inch of it. Point being he already has access Rangeline Properties already has 2 access the lot 2 so why are they really requesting this particular thing. Now I want to go one step further and that has to do with your perpetual uh drainage easement agreement. Oops. The perpetual access.


President David Stimmel asked, Don do you mind? Maybe it is just me, I really don’t know about the other board members, I would like to hear Dow’s response to some of what you have already said. Would you mind that?


Don Pauken stated, at this point needs to be said first.


President David Stimmel stated, all right.


Don Pauken stated, this is the perpetual access agreement to allow this to happen and the green line and everything from the green line they are asking for here.


Attorney Altman asked, green line is where?


Don Pauken stated, the green line…


Attorney Altman stated, page 3 on the map.


Don Pauken stated, now what they say on this particular thing this, the perpetual access easement agreement. Where as the above described lot 2 requires access through and across lot 1 in order to fully utilize the buildings now situated on lot 2. And the proposed building situated on lot 2 and where as the parties desire to make arrangements for ingress/egress through and across lot 1 for the operation of the refuse business located on lot 2. So they are saying we are going to use it for the business. Okay, I still have another point to make but uh go ahead.


Jerry Thompson asked, where are you in relationship to this property?


Don Pauken stated, I’m about a mile and half on the same road….


Jerry Thompson asked, East?


Don Pauken stated, it is on Hanawalt East, this is Division.


Jerry Thompson asked, who adjoins to the East? Is there anyone here?


Don Pauken stated, who adjoins it to the East, uh, uh, I don’t know if there is anyone here.


Charles Mellon stated, Mel Robertson, Mel’s Wrecker Service.


Don Pauken stated, and Georgia Day is very close, she sets back next to….


Jerry Thompson stated, okay.


Dow Dellinger stated, I guess I’m some what confused, Mr. Pauken you are a titleholder to real estate on Hanawalt Road.


Don Pauken stated, I’m a titleholder.


Dow Dellinger stated, you are a record titleholder?


Don Pauken stated, no, I’m not a titleholder.


Dow Dellinger stated, so you own no real estate on Hanawalt Road?


Don Pauken stated, no.


Dow Dellinger stated, okay, I just want to make sure we are clear on this. I was confused, I thought you insinuated you were a real estate owner on Hanawalt Road.


Don Pauken stated, I’m here representing other people.


Dow Dellinger asked, in what capacity are you representing other people?


Don Pauken stated, is that as a concerned citizen.


Dow Dellinger asked, who are the people you are here representing?


Don Pauken stated, Mr. Raines, Mrs. Raines, Georgia Day, uh Myron. Show your hands, lets see a show of hands of the people who are.


Dow Dellinger stated, I’m asking specifically what capacities are here representing them.


Don Pauken stated, a concern citizen, I live on the road I reside there.


Dow Dellinger stated, you can be a concerned citizen, but you are representing these people in some manner. How are you representing these people as council?


Don Pauken stated, no I’m not council to them.


Dow Dellinger stated, I just wanted to know what your interpretation of what your capacity is here tonight.


Don Pauken stated, it isn’t important.


Dow Dellinger stated, it is going to be important to me for the record.


Some one in the audience stated, I would say a spokesperson.


Dow Dellinger stated, we can address several things, and I’m not sure I’m going to get all of them. First of all the drainage easement is in pursuant to the request of the drainage board. The Drainage board demanded and easement and put in permanent record so that is what we did. As far as the access easement goes, that is an access easement. The easement is for access not for use, for access for ingress/egress. That is the term we use and that is what the access easement is for. It is for ingress/egress there will be no processing of garbage what so ever on lot 1. It is lot 2 with the processing of garbage will be done on.


President David Stimmel asked, can I ask you a question? Are the maps and the process as described accurate?


Dow Dellinger stated, no, I don’t know where those maps came from. So I can’t say if those are accurate or not. I know I’ve never seen the line drawn of the drainage for I have no idea if those are to scale or who prepared those. I can’t state whether or not those are accurate or not.


President David Stimmel asked, let me ask you?


Dow Dellinger stated, does it look similar, that looks similar.


President David Stimmel asked, is the concept there? Is it in fact the trucks pull ahead?


Dow Dellinger stated, that is right, yes the trucks will be utilizing the area to pull in and out of the building, that is the definition of access. As far as, we can use that lot A-1 anything that is acceptable in A-1. You know their insinuation that we can’t use lot 1 for anything that is related to the business. We could use it for anything that is acceptable in uh in an agriculture-zoned property, which would be drainage for instance, access for instance. There will be no building of an industrial unit, there will be no operation of industrial unit, other than for access for ingress/egress.


President David Stimmel stated, thank you Dow.


Jerry Thompson asked, does everyone live on Hanawalt?


Several spoke at once.


Walt Hough stated, I live in the County.


Georgia Day stated, I live at E. Division almost next to it.


Jerry Thompson stated, almost next to it.


??? stated, Hanawalt runs right into E. Division.


Jerry Thompson stated, I understand.


??? stated, it changes it I believe.


Director Weaver stated, County Road 400.


Attorney Altman stated, we are getting off of the being on the tape is what I’m worried about folks.


Jerry Thompson stated, I’m trying to get, I mean we’ve got a lot show of hands here and I’m trying to get a feel from where everyone is coming from here.


Walt Hough stated, I live in White County and I’m really concerned, I apologize I’ll come forwards.


Don Pauken stated, in answer to Mr. Dellinger as far as the drawings go. This is their drawing that went to IDEM for the drainage permit.


Attorney Altman stated, that is page #2.


Don Pauken stated, that is page #2, page 1 and 3 are from the permit itself that has been accepted. This is the site plan, this is the traffic flow diagram.


Attorney Altman stated, is your addition showing the flap that shows the…


Don Pauken stated, this is taken from the second drawing and super imposed over.


Attorney Altman stated, thank you, just trying to get the record straight.


Don Pauken stated, the third. Just show you the pond because, the pond isn’t being shown on their particular access agreement.


President David Stimmel asked, do we want to give access to somebody else here who might want to speak?


Don Pauken stated, I’m still not finished.


President David Stimmel stated, okay, I’m not trying to cut you short.


Don Pauken stated, there is another particular problem here that I do not know if anyone else is aware of. Wait until I get my…we have been discussing on site access uh and traffic patterns let me add this. The State Health Department controls on site water supply and wastewater disposal for public and commercial establishments. Rangeline Properties is a commercial establishment. They control this through these regulations right here. In accordance…


Attorney Altman asked, those regulations are what?


Don Pauken stated, it is bulletin SE 13, 1988.


Attorney Altman asked, what is the name?


Don Pauken stated, the name is on site water supply and wastewater disposal for public and commercial establishments.


Attorney Altman asked, are you putting that in as Exhibit B?


Don Pauken stated, yes. Alright in accordance with Section 404 and 509 of this. Septic tanks and absorption fields can not be covered by driveways or buildings. I’m going to go back to this particular drawing here or if you want to go back to the plot plan. Where is the septic tank? The septic tank manhole is shown right here, this is in the permit and has been accepted by IDEM. This is their particular drawing. Now lets go back to #3 that all covered with either gravel or building, their tank. The field, their absorption field we don’t know where it is. White County doesn’t know where it is. They say that is a commercial building and they’ve got a commercial permit from someone else to get the tank and put the field in. No body knows where it is. it’s gotta be in this area because if you look at this first one this is all grass right now back here, its got to be back here somewhere. They can’t go here across the line, its gotta be in here. So therefore it is all covered, this is against the regulation set forth by the State. So I’m not to sure why we are even going here, uh….


President David Stimmel stated, Don you’ve got to come to a point here to state what you are saying…


Don Pauken stated, all right, what I’m….


President David Stimmel stated, what relates to the actual appeal.


Don Pauken stated, it does relate to the appeal because they are talking about accessing the traffic patterns and it is use, its well I, it is part of the use.


President David Stimmel stated, okay.


Don Pauken stated, they’ve lied to you about facts if you grant this appeal you’ll be sanctioning violations of the White County Zoning Ordinance as we have indicated as well as the proposed illegal and unacceptable construction of the transfer facility which endangers the environment, health, general welfare of White County. In like of the above facts we request that this appeal be denied. Thank you.


President David Stimmel stated, there was another gentleman who wanted to speak in the audience, I believe.


Don Alvarez stated, I’m Dan Alvarez and I own approximately 15.5 acres on Hanawalt. It is agriculture it is farmland. My concern is one what has changed since the last time you met on this and you came to an agreement as to deny this appeal.


Carol Stradling stated, this is a different appeal.


Dan Alvarez stated, and 2 it talks about the law and damages. What I want to know is what is out damage. I have a farm that is done there and I already now have access amounts. I have a farm in Carroll County and a farm down from the proposed Transfer station. I pick up, there is probably ten times the amount of trash currently being deposited on my White County farm then there is at my Carroll County farm from their current existing operations. From trash being blown from the air, if this goes through and they go ahead and do this, there is going to be even more trash being blown around. It makes the area unsightly, it is not safe, extra work for the surrounding landowners. I don’t see I’m having difficulty understand what this appeal if you’ve guys turned them down why you know he is appealing on a point of laws essentially. I don’t see it, he says there are damages and we are the ones suffering possible damages from, if this appeal is given to them and they go ahead and finish and put this transfer station in my property value is going to go down and I’m going to see an increase in traffic. There is already traffic going up and down that road, the garbage trucks are going 50 to 60 miles an hours up and down the road currently already. They are flying up and down Hanawalt there is trash coming out of the back of them. All of this is going to increase traffic, increase the trash, increase everything and decrease the property value in the area. I know, you as a board, I think you need to take into consideration all the people in the area and what affects your decision is going to make on it. If we need to go to Circuit Court as their counsel has said his intentions are, then I feel then we need to go to the courts. Let the judge decide it. Everyone has been beating their heads up against the wall and everyone has been setting here for close to 3 hours waiting to get this done. If what we need to do is go to Court to resolve this and finish it, then lets do it and quite beating all of these I want to appeal this, I want to file this and go different ways, lets just get this thing done one way or another. If you need to deny it tonight as your council Mr. Altman has suggested there is a valid reason in your code to do so because their council says you have no valid legal reason to say no. Your council says that you do have a legal valid reason to say no. At this point I think we should just say no and let's go to court.


Carol Stradling stated, before you go set down, can you explain to me if that were not a transfer station on lot 2, I know that is a far stretch for everyone right now, if that were not a transfer station on lot 2 would a driveway on lot 1 affect you in any way.


Dan Alvarez stated, well, let's say it depends on if it was a residence being back there and that driveway was used to convey people back and forth across their property. I would say being that general area is residential or agriculture, the general mass of that area, I would say if it was a house, private residence, you can put a driveway in and go where ever you would like. If they are going to use that driveway to haul garbage trucks and dumpsters back and forth there is a difference, there is going to be garbage, there is going to be leakage from those vehicles, traveling back and forth. There is going to be waste products going into the ground and to the water shed. So I think there is a valid distinction between whether there is garbage trucks, hazard waste trucks or if there is a tri-axle full of grain okay. A tri-axle full of corn or soy beans if it tips over, or there is an issue of falling over, the birds pick it up. Okay, it doesn’t cause a environmental hazard for the other people. What they are asking to go across this property it would be well do you want a toxic waste dump next to you, hazard waste materials going over it. That I think is a valid reason for what it is being used for.


Carol Stradling stated, I don’t believe they are permitted for hazardous waste.


Dan Alvarez stated, well how do you know what is in the back of a garbage truck. People do illegally through away lead base paints, solids cleaners and all sort of matter. They are dumped in the back of those trucks just like this and that liquid is just flushed out. So when they tip it out, how many gallons of toxic waste is being dumped on to the land. The water shed in that area being as low as it is all the surrounding area will be affected. So I do believe there is a valid point in the fact that they are asking to use it for refuge because there is toxicity involved. If they were asking to drive a farm implement across it, or to haul grain across it, or for people to put a house and use it for residential use, everybody else is doing in that area, I feel that there is absolutely no problem with it. But the use they are asking for, Mr. Altman has pointed out the use is very important because you are talking about hazardous chemicals, hazardous waste that you don’t know what is in the back of that vehicle. You have no idea with any certainty what is in there and what is leaking out. They are asking to take a vehicle that you don’t know what kind of chemicals or contaminates are traveling back and forth an agriculture use designated land. I think that it is a valid point, I think there is.


President David Stimmel stated, okay, thank you. The gentleman in the back.


Walt Hough stated, first I want to apologize to the board for speaking out like that. My name is Walter Hough and I live in Buffalo and I live in White County. I’m concern because when I watched the presentation and I listen to the presentation of the hog farm. The people, who are concerned about the hog farm, they are concerned about he waste coming out of the hog farm. I’d be more concerned about the waste and stuff coming out of those trucks or excuse me those compactors than I would about a hog farm and I live by 3 hog farms. They don’t bother me, but some people it does. Everybody has the right to voice their opinion. That concerns me more than anything else. The biggest thing is if it gets into a transfer station why do we need to landfills in White County. You have permanent landfill in Buffalo. That is going to be a temporary landfill. That is exactly what it is going to be 15 miles from there to the Liberty landfill you have a permanent landfills. Why do we need to landfill in White County. We don’t.


President David Stimmel stated, unfortunately that is not the question. I know you know that and I’m giving you some leeway and I appreciate your comments, but both of you gentlemen that is not the question before us. If I can read the ballot that has been presented in front of us for just a minute. If that will help clarify. 1. Was the objection filed in 30 days, these are the questions we have to answer as a board. 2. Did the objector carry its burden of proof that the proposed White County zoning ordinance is correct, yes or no. Does an accessory use that a lot is proposed to be used for have to an accessory consistent with the zoning of the lot in question. That is another questions. 4. Was the Director Weaver interpretation of the ordinance correct as set out in her letter dated January 27, 2006? 5. Should the appeal of Rangeline Properties of January 30, 2006 be granted? That is the ballot, it doesn’t address the use. I understand your concerns, I think everybody else in the room does, I honestly do. Don one more time, we need to get rapped up.


Don Pauken stated, I just want to make one thing clear. On the drainage aspect of this all of the flow of the storm water is from that line it is difficult to see everything flows this way. The retention pond is set so the gray is that everything goes to the detention pond. So now as these containers are oozing this material when a storm comes along guess where it goes. It goes with the storm water into this detention pond. The detention pond has a metered flow problem. Where does the meter flow go? I’m not talking over flow right now, I’m talking about the metered flow. It does right through this pipe here and guess what that is, it is Diener drainage, the tile, where does Diener tile go to the ditch, it goes to the Honey Creek, Lake Shafer, people swim in Lake Shafer they boat in Lake Shafer.


President David Stimmel stated, no, Don.


Dow Dellinger stated, it may the help the board or help everyone here, the IDEM approved plan, part of that plan is the water run off near the facility it is caught in the detainment tank. It has a sump pump that pumps all the excess water around the facility and inside the facility into a storage facility where that gray water, the run off is moved to a pumping truck and hauled away from the site, so no run off from the trash, compactor, or anywhere near the facility are going to go anywhere except to a containment location.


President David Stimmel stated, okay, thank you very much.


Carol Stradling asked, is the drainage issue before us tonight?


President David Stimmel stated, not that I can see on the ballot.


Dow Dellinger stated, the drainage board has approved it.


Attorney Altman stated, the only real reason it would be is whether it is a permitted use on an A-1, just exactly the access indicated whether it is a permitted use. In other words it is the use of the land.


President David Stimmel asked, Jerry?


Jerry Thompson stated, no.


President David Stimmel asked, Dave?


David Scott stated, no.


President David Stimmel asked, are we ready to vote?


Without further discussion the board voted.


The results based on the findings of fact by a vote of 2 for and 2 against.


President David Stimmel asked, what is our next step?


Attorney Altman stated, take your next step.


Dow Dellinger asked, does the President break the tie?


Attorney Altman stated, no, it is a one vote for person. If he broke the tie it would be 3 no’s and 2 yes. It would be a denial then that is for the record.


****


President David Stimmel asked, is there any other business?


Jerry Thompson stated, we still have a meeting here.


Carol Stradling stated, I’m concerned about our surveys, is there anything we can do about that.


Director Weaver stated, I don’t know what.


Attorney Altman stated, the only thing I can tell you is if we have a discrepancy it is call it right then and there.


Carol Stradling stated, but how often do we get two copies of the survey to know if there is a discrepancy or not. How many do we just get one survey and that is what we have to go on.


Attorney Altman stated, I really can’t tell you except for when you do, it is like violations, if someone has a violation and say wow.


Terry Beasy stated, I think I can help Carol with the direction you are going, you can require the State seal stamp to be placed on that.


Attorney Altman stated, they are.


Director Weaver stated, they are.


Terry Beasy stated, then if you make that decision on the survey and if it is wrong it goes back to the surveyor that surveyed it he put his mark on the paper attesting what was on the paper as well as there.


David Scott stated, we got two surveys with two stamps. The same surveyor.


Several are talking at once.


****

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Gary Barbour, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission