Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, September 21, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: Daniel Whiteman, Emmanuel (Ted) Keller, John Fulkerson, Garry Cox, Amelia Kushnell, Timothy J. Plantenga, Charles A. Schafer Jr., Barb Heimlich, Don Apple, Katie Apple, Donna Bennett, Charles R. Mellon, Carroll Robertson, Rick Robertson, and Don Pauken.

The meeting was called to order by Vice President Carol Stradling and roll call was taken. David Scott made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the August 17, 2006 meeting. Motion was seconded by Gary Barbour and carried unanimously. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.

****


#2518 Ronald M. King and Marion B. Ballard; The property is located on Lot 8 in Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, located North of Monticello at 4997 N. Canyon Loop. This request is being brought back to the BZA for a decision regarding whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions put on the variance at the June 15, 2006 meeting. The applicants have been given notice to appear and requested to respond and demonstrate their actions to comply. (See enclosed minutes.)

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anyone here representing Ronald King and Marion Ballard?

Director Weaver stated, the board has with their pictures this evening, I received a letter by fax today regarding this matter.

Attorney Altman stated, it isn’t exactly clear from reading that, but I gather that they are asking the board to go ahead with oh they can’t go ahead they will appear next month as I read it, is that a fair summary of what that letter says.

Director Weaver stated, I believe so, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, that I guess I can just briefly say that Diann and I looked at the surveys


and they are the same surveys that we looked at when they were here before us and I don’t see


any new evidence to guide the board on making a decision and that is what we have asked, Diann has asked them to do in a letter. I would recommend that we don’t hear this, this meeting.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, when they can represent themselves.

Attorney Altman stated, when they can represent themselves.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I was not at that June meeting so it would be very helpful for me to be able to hear from them on that situation. I was very confused with the surveys. Dave any thing, do you want to table it or proceed tonight.

David Scott stated, the 4th survey is, the problem we had before was we had 3 surveys and they were all different and I see we have a 4th one and it seems to be the same as.

Director Weaver stated, it is basically the same.

Gary Barbour stated, it is the same because he used the last survey, they didn’t re-survey it physically.

Director Weaver stated, correct.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they just put a different date on it.

Gary Barbour stated, right.

Director Weaver stated, I verified with the survey and they did not go back out to the property.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, are there any problems with us tabling it?

David Scott stated, I will make a motion that we table it so they are here to represent themselves.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it doesn’t put them in any harm or delay, it doesn’t delay them or cause anybody else.

Director Weaver stated, it does delay them getting their building permit yes, but the way I understand the letter they are willing to do so and it may be a consequence of them not being here tonight.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay, okay, but it doesn’t put anybody else in hardship to table it.

Director Weaver stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so we have a motion to table it.

Gary Barbour stated, I will second.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, all in favor signify by saying “aye” and all opposed. Motion carried 3 to 0 to table it.

****

#2539 Forest Richard II & Carroll B. Robertson; The property is located on Part NW NE 4-27-3 on .436 of an acre, in the City of Monticello at 801 S. Main Street.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 10’ front setback variance to put up a free standing on premise sign.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and representing this request is?

Rick Robertson stated, hi, my name is Rick Robertson.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you have anything else to add to this request?

Rick Robertson stated, well we have recently rezoned the property as you know from Residential to Business. That allows us to be zero front setback in that zoning that we did, that is one thing I would like to point out. The other thing is we have gone and checked out all of the neighboring businesses along South Main Street and measured their distances from and we are requesting to put a sign at the same place that everybody else has their sign. This is basically at the setback where the East setback of St. Rd. 39 instead of…

Someone said, you mean the right-of-way.

Rick Robertson stated, yes that is it. So instead of going 10’ back I’m hoping to bring it up to the right of way line which seems to be where everyone else’s sign is too.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I noticed on your survey that the sign is 10’ x 10’.

Rick Robertson stated, well that is just, the sign is actually not that big, they someone Diann or some one just told us just put the area where the sign is going to be within that 10’ x 10’ area.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so it won’t be a square. How big?

Rick Robertson stated, no, we are anticipating probably a…

Someone said, you mean the right of way.

Rick Robertson stated, yes that is it. So instead of going 10’ back I’m hoping to bring it up to the right of way line which seems to be where everyone else’s sign is too.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I noticed on your survey that the sign is 10’ x 10’.

Rick Robertson stated, well that is just, the sign is actually not that big, they someone Diann or some one just told us just put the area where the sign is going to be within that 10’ x 10’ area.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so it won’t be a square. How big?

Rick Robertson stated, no, we are anticipating probably a 5’ x 8’.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay.

Attorney Altman asked, will be comparably a flat sign?

Rick Robertson stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, it will be within the 10’ x 10’ area.

Rick Robertson stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any comments from the audience any questions? Any questions from the board?

David Scott stated, I don’t have any.

Gary Barbour stated, I don’t have any.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is currently zoned B-1, Retail Business.

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. Testimony notes that the sign will be consistent with the placement of other signs in the neighborhood. This sign will be 5’ x 8’ within the 10’ x 10’ area on the survey.


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 10’ front setback variance to put up a free standing on premise sign on that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 26 North, Range 3 West, 2nd Principal Meridian, Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at the intersection of the centerline of State Road (SR) #39 and the centerline of the abandoned railroad said point being the Point of Beginning;

Thence Southeasterly along a curve 280.92 feet said curve concave to the northeast, having a radius of 2913.00 feet a central angle of 5 Degrees 31 Minutes 31 Seconds, and a chord of 280.81 feet bearing South 47 Degrees 07 Minutes 59 Seconds East; thence North 89 Degrees 11 Minutes 19 Seconds West 208.50 feet to the centerline of SR #39; thence North 0 Degrees 48 Minutes 41 Seconds East along said centerline 188.10 feet to the Point of Beginning; said described tract containing 0.436 Acres, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 801 S. Main Street.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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


****

#2550 John E. & Tara A. Lynch; The property is located on the Part N ½ SW ¼ 31-28-3 on 0.758 acres, on the East side of Lowe’s Bridge at 4472 E. Penrod Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a Special Exception to do an auto and boat detailing business.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, we have a request to delay this to the end of the meeting.

Tara Lynch stated, yes, my husband is traveling and he will be here shortly he got hung up in traffic on the 80/94.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay we will move that until the end of the meeting.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, now we are back to this request. Who is representing this request?

Tara Lynch stated, Tara Lynch and my husband Ed Lynch.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, do you have anything else you would like to this request?

Tara Lynch stated, we would like to be able to detail autos and boats which means cleaning interior and exterior of vehicles. This would just be a small part-time family business and all work will be done by us, by hand. We would not do any repairs or painting. There would be no storage. Since we are on the corner of Penrod, we would like the first driveway in. There really should be no need for anyone to drive further on Penrod. I don’t see any increase in traffic.

Director Weaver stated, on the staff report I just want to make a clarification. They are just wanting it on the small portion of the lot. It is not on the whole lot, it is on the North end and also we have received several letters regarding this request. Those are in the file.

Attorney Altman proceed to read all of the letters. (See file for the letters.)

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I would guess he has his letterhead with automatic insert of the date and when it called the letter back up it automatically inserted the date he called it back up. These do seem to apply to earlier business. Is there anything else?

Director Weaver stated, no, but I have the rezoning file here to discuss with the board and I can determine if these were from that meeting.

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

Don Apple stated, I’m Don Apple and I own the trailer court right across the street from the Lynchs and the property on the lake right across from them at the 4479. I would gather from the letter that you have received that there is a very passionate response from most of the neighbor in the neighborhood there and of course living right across the street from them and most of them gather around my door and wanted to know what my thoughts were on this thing. It has been a very difficult thing for me. I had told the Lynchs that I would support this back a few days ago, but in talking with some of the neighbors and I apologize for this in talking to some of the neighbors I’ve changed my mind. I would have a hard time at this point and time seeing where the neighborhood stands on this situation that is existing there to support at this point and time. There are some things that they have brought to my attention, and I guess I never really thought about. The property has been absolutely beautified by Mrs. Lynch and Mr. Lynch. It is a beautiful piece of property at this point and time. They are remodeling the buildings they are doing so much in trying to bring that piece of property up to high standards and it is a difficult thing to say that you can’t do something in a building that you have made plans for and you did turn down the zoning. Now they are asking for a special exemption. I guess I would have to ask a question, was there violations in fact on this piece of property that they did pay a fine for.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Don Apple stated, and that has been resolved.

Director Weaver stated, to the best of my knowledge.

Don Apple asked, are they in compliance at this point and time?

Director Weaver stated, there is still a sign on the door and all it’s says is Lynch’s, it does not identify a business it does not say what kind of business.

Don Apple stated, so the sign to the South side of that with a cover over it is considered…

Director Weaver stated, that is actually not on this property that they are requesting the special exception on.

Don Apple stated, okay, thank you. It would be a very difficult thing for me and it is very difficult, it is a very emotional situation to go against my neighbors who have been my neighbors to me for 57 years. And it is a hard thing for me to say I reject what you neighbors have come to me and asked of me in difference to the Lynchs who are not neighbors. They are neighbors in respect because they have the business there, but they do not live there and there has been some problems pointed out to me in respect to the traffic situation that Mrs. Lynch just made reference to the fact that it is on the corner and she is correct on that, but in order to get to their drive you must come around the corner on E. Shafer Drive on to Penrod Drive. The neighbors to the East of me, the Raderstorfs, have 5 cars that are parked on a 50’ lot. They are parked in the County road right of way and if you look at that survey Mr. Milligan has made a mistake on there on that survey and I’ve got the abstracts to show it that is not a 40’ roadway, it is only a 33’ roadway on Penrod Drive. So it makes a difficult situation getting around the corner there. There are cars I know that they are friends of the Raderstorf’s, the girls and the boys have a lot of friends and they park in front of the Lynch’s property still on the county highway right-of-way, but never the less it makes a very congested corner right there. That was pointed out and it is a difficult situation and right across from my garage and so there are some difficulties involved in this. The other thing pointed out to me is the quietness of detailing boats and detailing cars is the use of grinders and the use of polishing machines and Mr. Lynch has bought a very expensive soda blaster that uses an air compressor similar to the one you would use to blast the side of a building. I’m sure that is anticipated in being used to cleaning the bottom of pontoon boats and things like that and it is very, very noisy. That was brought to my attention too. I knew this all along and I was willing to over look it because I think they are wanting to do something that has been a dream. The other side of the coin too is, I can’t in good conscience go against what my neighbors are saying and I will not. So at this point and time respectfully request that you deny the application for the special variance on cleaning thvce cars and boats.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anyone else who cares to address?

David Scott staed, we probably should swear Mr. Lynch in Jerry.

John Lynch stated, I guess I’m a little surprised by this whole thing. We are some hard working people, taxpayers that have cleaned up a piece of property that was an eye soar to the neighborhood. Now we asking to make a honest living, I guess I’ve talked to people who are not straight forward because I was under the impression that there was no issue with a special variance so I guess all I can tell you is drive by the place and see what it looks like to day compared to a year ago. How we can hurt that neighborhood I do not understand, automobiles and boats inside a pole barn being cleaned. So I just leave it up to you folks.

David Scott stated, the blasting that the gentlemen mentioned the compressor and all of that will be used inside the building.

John Lynch stated, I have a portable soda blaster that I’m not sure if you are familiar with soda blasting it is like sand blasting, but it is soda bicarbonate environmentally friend, can remove paints, grease and lots of things. That would not be used on this property, this is portable. If I were to do pontoons I have property else where with a barn that has nothing in it that is in the country.

David Scott asked, would all of the boats and cars or whatever you are cleaning will they be inside?

John Lynch stated, yes they would.

David Scott asked, what is the blue building I see in the bottom right hand picture?

Director Weaver stated, that is a house across the street.

David Scott stated, it looks like it has garage doors on it.

Director Weaver stated, yes, there is an attached garage. When I was out there investigating the violation it appeared to me when I was out there one time that it was detailing being done out side of the building. There was a boat sitting beside the big red barn and there was someone inside of the boat.

John Lynch stated, I have several boats of my own. I paid that fine with no questions.

Director Weaver stated, I just saying what appeared to me. We could put stipulations.

John Lynch stated, I didn’t put up a fight over that and I could have but I wanted to be straight forward with you folks and pay it and get straight with you. I do have several vehicles of my own.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I guess Mr. Apple I believe I understood him to say that there were neighbors who park their cars on your property.

John Lynch stated, the lady next door the daughter has a boyfriend and they really don’t have a place to park, he pulls up in the grass I don’t know what that has to do with this. I mean…

David Scott stated, if we make this does it stay with the property or stay with the individual?

Attorney Altman stated, it depends on how it is granted, depends on how it is granted if it is granted. How it is phrased.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, how many boats and vehicles do you anticipate being able to have on the property at any one time?

John Lynch stated, you know I can see us being lucky doing 5 vehicles a week and I can see anything we have to do setting in the building. We are not looking to make a lot of money here. I’ve got a full time job and Tara takes care of a lot of different things properties, and we are trying to make money and looking forward to semi retirement. There isn’t going to be a lot of boats and this and that sitting out there. I could bring my cars and boats and park out there and be legal. I could do a lot of things to make the place look bad without breaking any laws. All we want to do is keep it looking, in fact we have plans to make it look better than that there. I believe if we had other intentions you, the building would reflect it today. We are not people who junk a place, we built a new house on the Big Monon in 2002. We are responsible people.

David Scott stated, I’m going to make a motion to table this until the next meeting because I would like to view the property myself.

John Lynch stated, I would be happy to show you the improvements and the improvements that we are working on.

David Scott stated, if I voted for it, it would have to come with some commitments that everything would have to be inside and the commitment would have to go with the owners. The Lynchs and not the property and I would like to think about it for 30 days or when our next meeting comes around.

Attorney Altman stated, we have a motion to we have a second.

Gary Barbour stated, I would like to ask more questions. What were these barns originally built for?

John Lynch stated, when I bought the property the older barns had stalls, animal stalls in them. If you look today the stalls have been removed, what was on the floor has been taken out and leveled. Now they are gravel. They have been painted. We plan put metal roofs on those two buildings. The pole barn I don’t know what he had in mind, but it is built very heavy. The trusses are oversized. What we are doing in fact this weekend, we are finishing the ceiling and it will be insulated next week. New lights, heat, fans and new wiring. We are just setting it up in anticipation of this being approved to work in there year around, cool it or heat it.

Gary Barbour asked, are you looking to work out of both barns or just one?

John Lynch stated, the other barns I will keep my vehicles in, my boats and cars.

Gary Barbour asked, which one of them are we working with here, you’ve got one to the…(going over the survey at this time)

John Lynch stated, we would take this one step further, we would place a drive on East Shafer on the East end of this building for to pull in that way rather that the sharp turn that was described earlier.

Director Weaver asked, would that cause any traffic problems there? I know it isn’t that good of an area of road there.

John Lynch stated, I wouldn’t put it on the corner. I would put it down between the building and house we rent out. It would be flared such so people could pull in and drive right along the north side of the red barn.

David Scott asked, do you folks think even with these commitments that the neighbors would not...

Mrs. Apple stated, it is a business and they want to keep it residential.

Don Apple stated, as you can gather, I don’t think any question in any bodies mind about the quality of the building or the surroundings. I think everyone is just as happy as can be. It is definitely going to fit in with the surrounding buildings. The question I hear that has been proposed everyone that I know of in the neighborhood is in fact, it is a commercial operation. They don’t want it in a residential district, #1. #2 Excuse me Lynchs, but they don’t trust the Lynchs in keeping it to the terms of the commitments they are making to you as far as the variance that you would allow in respect to the fact that they violated the orders that was given to them by the APC Zoning Board, twice. Sure they paid the fine, but that doesn’t address the think pattern behind it. If we can pay the fine and still keep the signs and what is going to be the next step. How is this going to be policed if they do bring a boat in and decided to soda wash the bottom of it. It is going to be a loud noise, they will have in the summer time the doors wont’ be closed and there will be operation of the buffers and machinery that it takes to do the detailing and the question that most of the neighbor’s have is where do we go from here. If you do grant the variance to them and allow them to do what they are saying, how do we know and how do we police these situations that will occur. The thought pattern of the neighborhood is why allow it up front and open the door. That it is a residential area and you know the problems that we’ve had with the previous owners that Mr. Lynch eluded too and it is has soured everybody on what has happened in that area down there. They just don’t want to open up the door again to allow something to happen even though the Lynchs have the very best of intentions. It is not something that is going to be their livelihood, it is something they are going to do on a part-time basis and why open that door. That has been expressed to me from the neighborhood.

Gary Barbour stated, I guess I’d like to say something before I second this because I’m getting ready to second this. All I want to point out to you is that these buildings are already there and have been for a lot of years. If they can’t utilize these buildings and do something with them they are going to set there and they can become way worse then what you had in that neighborhood before and it could have real quick and real easy. I understand the concern of not having the trust in the neighborhood, but I guess I would like to see to try and work something out here where these buildings get utilize and don’t’ just set there for the next 30 years and become and eye soar and they not be able gain anything from it.

Don Apple stated, but sir let me ask you a question. When this zoning was asked to be approved, they knew when they bought that building that it was a residential 2.

Gary Barbour stated, right and they were going to do a lot more that what they are trying to get accomplished here with a special exception and I understand that.

Don Apple stated, that is true and the other board turned it down and the comment was made and you can go back to the minutes of that meeting that under no circumstances would we allow any special exceptions on that zoning situation out there. And if my mind serves me correctly I think you need to look at your board minutes.

Director Weaver stated, the board has been provided a copy of those minutes.

Gary Barbour stated, there is nothing in there because that board can not make that decision.

Don Apple stated, no he can’t, and I understand that, but the comment was made at the time can we get an exemption and he said we have never allowed that. So I may be off base on that and you need to look at the minutes of that meeting. Again I have nothing personal against the Lynchs, they are fantastic people and I understand what you are saying, but I think as long as the Lynchs own those buildings as compared to what they were in the past it is going to be a beautiful corner. But the feeling of the neighborhood is and as you read these letters they don’t want to open up the doors for a commercial. Where does it go from there, even if you limit it to the personal use of the Lynchs themselves and only to them as long as they own that building? What is the avenue of violation on that, how is it enforced and what might happen down the road?

Gary Barbour stated, if someone sees them doing stuff they are not suppose to be doing it is just like anything else and it has to be reported and it has to be investigated.

Don Apple stated, it was reported and they were fined and they were written to letters and fined twice, not once, but twice.

Gary Barbour stated, I understand as time goes on here the fines get steeper and steeper and all I’m saying is be careful what you ask for there because if you don’t allow the Lynchs to have something they can do on this property, they could sell it and someone could do something way worse than what they are looking at doing.

Don Apple stated, well then it has to come before you people again.

Gary Barbour stated, I understand that. You can’t always keep it from being an eye soar.

Don Apple stated, I understand that thoroughly. It is in your people’s hand you have to look at both sides of the issue and what is the best use in that neighborhood and also having to deal with the neighborhood people.

Gary Barbour stated, when you go to look at that Dave I would like to go with you to see that and I would like to have access to the whole facility to see what is going on. We can get that set up after the meeting.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, only two of you can go together.

David Scott stated, another thing I don’t understand is they are talking about boats and cars here and as I look around here with one residence right after the other and everyone of them have boats, cars, garages chemicals everything. There is nothing they are going to have that you can’t find along that road somewhere. I don’t understand why the whole neighborhood is against it.

Don Apple stated, there is a very expense piece of property across the street. The values of the property is, there was just a $350,000 house built right beside my house. The value of my house has doubled in the last 2 years and as well as the houses down the lake. I guess it is getting pass the mental block that there is a business there irrespective of what the business is. What restrictions are placed upon it, my gathering from talking to the, there has been a lot of conversation in the neighborhood over this. I agree it is absolutely right, he has a right to be surprised because I did agree to come in and say I would back it. After listening to the neighbors how can I say I am against the neighborhood and get all the neighbors that have been my neighbors for years and years mad at me, which would very definitely occur in order to please the Lynchs. They don’t live there it is a business, if they lived there and had a house there it would be a different situation. They can get in their car and they can do what they do and they can go back over on Stahl Road and buildings there and we still have to live with it every day and every day. There is a man across the street rebuilding a truck in his garage, he makes probably as much noise as the Lynchs have made, that is not the issue at hand. They don’t want to open up the door for this to happen, I guess I said before and as bad as I hate to say it and I don’t share this same attitude most of the neighbors don’t trust the Lynchs in doing what they said they were going to do because of the 2 violations. Just saying I don’t care about those violations I will pay the fine and I’m still going to have my way if I can.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, there is a motion before us to table this until the next meeting. Is there a second?

Gary Barbour stated, I will second.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, all in favor. (The vote was 3 to 0.) This has been tabled until the next meeting and hopefully we will have some more board members and you two can take sometime to visit the property.

****

#2551 William E. & Candice A. Roth; The property is located on Part NW NE & NE NW 16-27-3 on 1.969 acres, located West of East Shafer Drive at 2809 N. Baers Court.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 2’ height variance to build a detached garage 19’ tall and a 4’ front setback variance for a 4’ vinyl fence.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?

Greg Roth stated, I’m Greg Roth.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else you would like to add to this request?

Greg Roth stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no we haven’t received anything. Do we have anything in the file stating that he is representing this? Are you their son?

Greg Roth stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience? There are no structures on this currently.

Greg Roth stated, no just the foundation of the house.

Director Weaver stated they have their permit for the home.

Greg Roth stated, the house is started. The garage is like 8’ away.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so the question is the height variance.

Greg Roth stated, I believe it is only going to go 1’, but they put 2’ just in case.

Director Weaver stated, there is a request for the setback for the fence also.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, which has not been started yet.

Director Weaver stated, right. They do have a permit also.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the board? Dave?

David Scott stated, no.

Gary Barbour stated, no.

Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system?

Greg Roth stated, it will be.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

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


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


3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. The height increase will be where it doesn’t affect others and the fence is likewise.


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 2’ height variance to build a detached garage 19’ tall and a 4’ front setback variance for a 4’ vinyl fence on that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter all in Section 16, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:

Commencing at a railroad spike found at the Northwest corner of the Northeast quarter of said Section 16; thence south 01 degree 56 minutes 57 seconds East (assumed bearing) along the quarter section line 644.05 feet to a capped with JLM I..D. ½ inch iron pipe (I.P.) set and the point of beginning; thence South 86 degrees 24 minutes 20 seconds East 306.91 feet to a I.P. set; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 55 seconds East 202.09 feet, passing through an I.P. set at 163.78 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 408.85 feet to an existing corner post; thence North 39 degrees 18 minutes 45 seconds West 15.48 feet to an existing corner post; thence North 10 degrees 16 minutes 17 seconds East 217.42 feet to an I.P. set in an existing fence line; thence South 86 degrees 24 minutes 20 seconds East 73.09 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.491 of an acre in said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and 1.478 acres in said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; being a total of 1.969 acres, more or less.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of East Shafer Dr. at 2809 N. Baers Court.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


David Scott stated, I have a question. Is there someway we can address the garage or building, accessory building heights for the agriculture areas without… It seems like we have people coming in here with pole barns and things in the agriculture areas that they should be able to have higher buildings and things. Is there a way?


Director Weaver stated, well it depends on if you consider this an agriculture area, too.


David Scott stated, it is zoned ag.


Director Weaver stated, it is zoned ag, but there are residences right beside it. We would have to have some thoughts on that and decide that. That is something for the new ordinance.


David Scott asked, have we addressed that in the new ordinance?


Director Weaver stated, I think we have had discussion on it, but I don’t remember what the end result was.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that would help with the need to show up and the fees.


Director Weaver stated, right now the farm buildings do not have a height requirement, they have to have 3 acres to be considered a farm. If it is a farm building for a farm use they do not have a height restriction, but they have to have 3 acres to be considered a farm.


****


#2552 Bobby D. & Donna J. Bennett; The property is located on Lot 12 in Wayside Lodge, located West of East Shafer Drive at 5243 E. 350 N.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 12’ rear setback variance a 4’ side setback variance, and a 5’ side setback variance to build additions and to add a second story to the existing home.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?

Donna Bennett stated, I’m Donna Bennett.

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

Donna Bennett stated, no we have a lot of children come and visit us, so it would be nice to have the extra space to keep the adults sane. It is just the one garage and the second floor over the main part of the house.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no. Did receive a phone call from the neighbor to the south just inquiring what the request was for and she stated on the phone that they had no problem with that.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, you have a lot of different rooflines.

Donna Bennett stated, yes, and that is one thing that we intend to fix to where they all look the same all the way across. The original house was built in 1956 and then he added on in 1978 and then in 1980 and has this interested looking contemporary thing. So the roofline will pretty much look the same all the way across with just small level at one end and higher in the middle where the addition goes. It will look the same.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience? How about the board? Dave or Gary?

Gary Barbour stated, clarify for me here looking at the survey and looking at the pictures, this is the side right here.

Donna Bennett stated, yes, with a little porch.

Gary Barbour asked, is this where the porch is going in?

Donna Bennett stated, what they are going to do is add a garage right here so this is going to be the same as this and a little 4’ area where it is not, it is going to be in, do you know what I’m saying, where there isn’t going to be any, that is where the porch is going to go connect to the garage and the front part.

Gary Barbour stated, so the 4’ porch is going to be the same line as this porch or.

Donna Bennett stated, no this porch will be gone, it will match up with this house right here.

Gary Barbour stated, I guess I’m looking for a foot-print, is it going...

Donna Bennett stated, I gave the plans when I applied for the building permit all of our plans and she said it was in the same office and you guys could have access to them also. It would show that clearly how it looks.

Director Weaver stated, it is probably with the building permit in the building department.

Donna Bennett is drawing what the garage and porch will look like for Gary Barbour and they are going over the pictures and survey.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, the wood deck is currently there?

Donna Bennett stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, will it be an open porch?

Donna Bennett stated, when we say porch it is something to step up on to go into the door so yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, with a roof?

Donna Bennett stated, yes because the 2ne floor will have a little bit of an over hang. Hanging out that way so some of it will be covered.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, thank you. Are there any other questions?

Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system?

Donna Bennett stated, yes, we had it hooked up.

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. The expansion is within the footprint of the existing and will all be one level.


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 requesting a 12’ rear setback variance a 4’ side setback variance, and a 5’ side setback variance to build additions and to add a second story to the existing home on Lot Number Twelve (12) in Wayside Lodge, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana now described as follows: That part of Wayside Lodge Addition and the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, described by: Commencing at a railroad spike at the Southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 9; thence North 15.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 31 minutes 09 seconds East (assumed bearing) along the North right of way line of SR 350 N 467.82 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe and the point of beginning; thence North 23 degrees 36 minutes 47 seconds West 123.81 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe on the Northern Indiana Public Service Company line; thence North 64 degrees 42 minutes 53 seconds East along said line 43.25 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe, thence South 26 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds East 146.71 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe; thence South 89 degrees 31 minutes 08 seconds West 54.64 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.144 of an acre.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of East Shafer Dr. at 5243 E. 350 N.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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

****

#2553 Timothy J. & Roxanne L. Plantenga; The property is located on Part NW SE 29-27-2 on 11.52 acres, located West of Idaville at 10598 E. US Highway 24.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 65’ rear setback variance to build a room addition and a roofed porch.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, you are sir?

Tim Plantenga stated, Tim Plantenga.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else you would like to add?

Tim Plantenga stated, I had a variance a couple 3 months ago on the same deal. I was going to build a room 22’ x 18’ and we decided to make it bigger and go to the back of the house that would make it 18’ x 30’. The property I have 3 parcels and the way the property is surveyed is make we to close to the back property line even though I own 25 acres it goes clear to the back. I can show you. (They are going over the survey showing all the land he owns.)

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, but they are not joined together are they, so you could sell one off.

Tim Plantenga stated, well I guess I could but I’m not going to.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, but because you can it is, we need to look at these as separate parcels.

Tim Plantenga stated, I see. I’m not selling it. I don’t want any neighbors; I have had neighbors before.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

(They are going over the survey again.)

Director Weaver stated, we did send a copy to the board from his last variance so they can see what you requested previously.

Tim Plantenga stated, I decided to make the room bigger we thought 22’ wouldn’t be enough and if we built clear to the back of the house and make it a nicer room.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I’m a little bit confused, when I look at your former survey the one dated March 23 it shows a 18’ x 20’ proposed addition. When I look at the current survey dated August 24 it shows the, have you actually built this already.

Tim Plantenga stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it shows that you are requesting a 19’ x 40’.

Tim Plantenga stated, no 18’ x 30’. What I’m doing this is the farm house here I’m going to come over 18’ and originally I was going to go just to here and now I’m going to go all the way to the back porch which is another 8’ which is 18’ x 30’. I own clear back to here to the railroad.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, lets forget about that and just deal with the property you are building on. Then you are proposing a porch also.

Tim Plantenga stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the porch is 10’ x 18’, but the survey says it is 19’. Is that to the overhang?

Director Weaver stated, I can’t answer that, I noticed the change too.

Tim Plantenga stated, I thought it was 10’ x 18’.

Director Weaver stated, the original one showed 18’. This one shows 19’.

Tim Plantenga stated it should show 18’.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, this won’t request a setback will it?

Director Weaver stated, no it is included in this request.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, it is. Okay.

Tim Plantenga stated, there used to be a garage here and I had the Amish people build me a barn and it can be moved.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, weren’t you supposed to move one already?

Tim Plantenga stated, yes I have.

Director Weaver stated, he has.

Tim Plantenga stated, that was here when they surveyed it I found out my fence line was not right and I was to close to the fence, so I moved it 2’.

Director Weaver stated, I did not include those pictures but you can tell from the gravel that he has moved it.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, the survey says it used to be 4’ and not it is now 6’. Any questions from the audience? How about the board?

David Scott stated, I don’t have anything.

Gary Barbour stated, I don’t have anything.

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. The improvement will be away from the roads, no obstructions.


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 65’ rear setback variance to build a room addition and a roofed porch on that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 27 North, Range 2 West in Lincoln Township, White County, Indiana Described by:

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

thence North 0 Degrees 25 Minutes 34 Seconds West (N 0 25’ 34” W) 621.70 feet to a wood corner post; thence South 84 Degrees 36 Minutes 49 Seconds East (S 84 36’ 49” E) 64.39 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe w/I.D. (IP) set; thence North 2 Degrees 05 Minutes 09 Seconds East (N 2 05’ 09” E) 261.07 feet to an IP set on South right-of-way of U.S. 24 thence South 87 Degrees 36 minutes 44 seconds East (S 87 36’ 44” E) along said right-of-way 284.17 feet; thence South 3 Degrees 29 Minutes 07 Seconds West (S 3 29’ 09” W) 88.00 feet to an IP set (passing through an IP set at 1.70 feet); thence South 29 Degrees 23 minutes 18 Seconds West (S 29 32’ 18” W) 68.00 feet to an IP set; thence North 88 Degrees 59 Minutes 16 Seconds West (S 88 59’ 16” W) 152.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 2 Degrees 17 Minutes 28 Seconds West (S 2 17’ 28”W) 114.00 feet to an IP set; thence South 84 Degrees 36 Minutes 49 Seconds East (S 84 36’ 49” E) 690.00 feet to a large iron pipe found; thence South 1 Degrees 44 Minutes 57 Seconds West (S 1 44' 57” W) 219.43 feet to an IP set thence South 1 Degrees 17 Minutes 19 Seconds West (S 1 17’ 19” W) 227.70 feet to an IP set on the North right-of-way of TP) and W Railroad; thence South 83 Degrees 31 Minutes 00 Seconds West (S 83 31’ 00” W) along said right-of-way 838.16 feet to the point of beginning; said described tract containing 11.520 Acres, more or less.


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


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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

****

#2554 Daniel J. & Bobi R. Whiteman; The property is located on Lots 34, 35, and 36 in O’Connor’s Riverside Addition Block A, located in East Monticello at 432 E. Lakeside Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 31’ front setback variance to build a detached garage.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and you are?

Dan Whiteman stated, I’m Dan Whiteman.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else you would like to add to the request?

Dan Whiteman stated, it is just an existing building and it was destroyed by a tree. I just want to replace the garage and being I’m close to the road I have to go through this.

Director Weaver stated, this is a unique piece of property because it has a street on the front and the back. It has two fronts.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience?

Tim Plantenga stated, I just happened to be a neighbor of his and he has always been a great neighbor. He keeps everything in place. I didn’t know he was going to be here tonight, I was just putting in a word for him.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the board?

David Scott asked, are you going to tear this completely down and rebuild?

Dan Whiteman stated, I’m not quite sure. One side is completely loss and I think structure wise it would be better to tear it down and start from the ground up.

David Scott stated, the existing building is only 2’ off of the road.

Dan Whiteman stated, there are two of them side by side.

David Scott stated, you are going to access it from the road.

Dan Whiteman stated, no, there is a driveway right here that goes up to it. I’m not accessing it from the backside. It would be sunny side.

David Scott stated, are you going to have a garage door

Dan Whiteman stated, yes I’m going have the garage door on…

David Scott asked, you can come in this way?

Dan Whiteman stated, yes come up the drive. The other one has, the way it is now you’ve got to sliding door on the back and front and there is not going to be a on the back side.

Director Weaver stated, the door is going to be on the West Side.

Dan Whiteman stated, it will be on the South side, yes. Where it is now, but it has one on the backside, but I’m not going to have that, it will be one overhead garage door. Same size, on the same cement slab and everything.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any other questions? Gary?

Gary Barbour stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, Dave?

Attorney Altman stated, you have 3 lots so basically what you are doing is putting them all together to make one lot. Is that what you are doing with the use.

Dan Whiteman stated, I don’t understand that, I’ve got 3 different lots, that is on the center lot on the main lot which the house is setting on the main and lot on this side and a lot on that side.

Attorney Altman stated, so the variance is on the side lot.

Director Weaver stated, no the request is for 3 lots.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, so that is what I’m trying to say that they are all 3 together as one unit rather than even though you have 3 lots you are building on one unit and you are marrying them all together and you have to do that if the variance is granted.

Dan Whiteman stated, okay, yes, they are all ready joined together.

Director Weaver stated, what he is trying to say is you can’t sell one of the lots they have to stay together.

Dan Whiteman stated, okay I understand that.

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. All three lots are one unit and access will be from the west to the garage so no traffic problems.


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 31’ front setback variance to build a detached garage on

Lot numbered Thirty-four (34) in Plat “A” in O’Connor’s Riverside Addition in Section 34, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Union Township, White County, Indiana.

Also:

Lot numbered Thirty-six (36) in Plat “A” in O’Connor’s Riverside Addition in Section 34, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Union Township White County Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in East Monticello at 432 E. Lakeside Drive.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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

****


#2555 Charles A. Schafer Jr. & Sheila F. Cochran; The property is located Lot 12 in Kozy Kove Addition & 0.028 of an acre Out NW NW 31-28-3, North of Monticello at 3211 E. Stahl Road.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 4’ height variance and a 10’ rear setback variance and a 4’ east side setback variance to build a new home.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?

Charles Schafer stated, Charles Schafer. What we are building is an "A" frame. With a height, instead of having 10” of insulation you can put 2’ to 3’ of insulation in it. The house is basically going where the old house is. I’m tearing out and going back within 3’ of my neighbor’s garage. From the, actually from the roadside you are going to have, there is an extra 20’ from the property line out to the edge of the road on the survey.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, because it is a vacated roadway.

Charles Schafer showed them on the survey where the property lines are. He then stated, the pins I was going by already had the 20’ vacated roadway there. Then there is another 20’ from that pin to the edge of the road.

Director Weaver stated, to the actual surface.

Charles Schafer stated, yes to the actual surface.

Director Weaver asked, do you understand what he is saying?

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so he is saying there is 20’ here.

Attorney Altman stated, so glad you didn’t build you would have had a violation.

Director Weaver stated, we did receive a copy of the letter that we sent out back in our office and it has a couple of signatures that say it is alright. I can’t really read the signatures. It could be Jerry Skinner.

Charles Schafer stated, Jerry lives across the way and Lewis is the neighbor east of us.

Director Weaver stated, it could be Jerry Skinner then.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there a reason you need to extend it beyond that vacated roadway? Why you couldn’t shorten it 10’?

Charles Schafer stated, well I’m keeping the house in line with the old house. Actually it looks crooked on there but the bay comes in. There is 25’ from here down from here to this edge 17’ from this edge 22’ to keep the houses in the archs that they are in.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay.

Charles Schafer stated, if you move it too far forwards you can’t put in a patio or even a paver or grass or anything, you would come out and be headed down hill.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay and you couldn’t shorten the house up 10’.

Charles Schafer stated, well that would make a 20’ garage. What I’m making is a 30’ deep garage to pull a garage in and walk around.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so this is porch and garage.

Charles Schafer stated, yes it is going to be garage and have 3 garage doors in it. The house is 36’ x 50’ and the garage is 30’.

Attorney Altman stated, so it is 36’ x 80’.

Charles Schafer stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, we talked about mail any questions from the audience. Any questions from the board?

Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system?

Charles Schafer stated, yes grinder already there.

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. This will be constructed on the original footprint and on the sewer.


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 4’ height variance and a 10’ rear setback variance and a 4’ East side setback variance to build a new home. Lot Numbered Twelve (12) in Kozy Kove, a subdivision on the North half (1/2) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of section thirty-one (31) Township Twenty-eight (28) North, Range Three (3) West, as shown by the plat of said subdivision on file and of record in the Office of the Recorder of White County, Indiana. Also that portion of a previously vacated roadway lying adjacent to said lot and containing. 028 acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 3211 E. Stahl Road.

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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


****

#2556 Hamstra Builders Inc; The property is located on that part of the North ½ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 28-27-3 on 17.7855 and 2.450 acres more or less, located in the City of Monticello at 916 N. Main Street.

Violation: None

Request: A proposal development requires a change in the parking ratio variance currently in effect. They are requesting a parking variance for restaurants and retail businesses on the property. This variance will allow them to have 786 off-street parking spaces.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?

John Fulkerson stated, I’m John Fulkerson the Director of Hamstra Builders, or Group. What we are proposing to do is in the Monticello Market shopping center in front of the Kroger store, we are proposing to add a Gas pump. Kroger is wanting to add a gas pump in front of the store there. In order to do that we are proposing to take a couple of I think there is a total of 26 parking spaces where the Fuel Island is. We are actually going to be replacing those parking spaces with employee parking in the rear of the shopping center adding 34 places. So we will end up with a net gain of 8 parking spaces total in the complex. Basically because of the way that the zoning requirements for retail and restaurants are in this area, every time we make a change in the center we have to come back and get the parking variance renewed to affect the changes we make. This site plan was previously approved when we did the Pizza Hut one of the other changes.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that is what I’m seeing the proposed Pizza Hut and I’m assuming it is already there.

John Fulkerson stated, it is already there.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, on cue video is no longer there though.

John Fulkerson stated, no it is the Buck stop.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?

Director Weaver stated, no, we haven’t received anything.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience?

Director Weaver stated, I just want to make a clarification to the board. On your staff report there are a couple of areas that are not darkened and should be and one would be is where Pizza Hut is located those two places are in the request.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I don’t think I have any questions about the parking issue, but traffic flow at Kroger or in that area at this point is to me a challenge.

John Fulkerson stated, we actually worked with the city within the State when they were developing the plan for the widening of the street there and we’ve developed a plan so it will flow with the entrances are going to be when completed.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, okay, recently stripped it and the entrances don’t necessary line up when you come in the entrance you can’t go straight ahead you have to make a turn to be able to be in the proper to be able to flow with the right direction and to me there is a lot of ways to cross traffic and be at the wrong place at wrong time.

John Fulkerson stated, in order to do that we would have to reduce the number of parking spaces to get it clear and that would be counter productive to what we are trying to do in the center all together.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, take a drive out there and see if these parking places line up with the entrances, it is kind of different. I don’t know if anyone else has that same problem, but when it was re-paved and re-striped this last time it was reconfigured differently. Any questions from the board?

Attorney Altman stated, tell us about he gas island how many and how it will how the traffic will go around there.

John Fulkerson stated, basically the way it is set up it is showing 3 pump islands on there and it is set up to flow around in a circle, so you can come in, in any direction for the pumps and flow around.

Attorney Altman stated, will this be marked on the ground or the black top the direction of traffic so we eliminate some of, I have the same issues.

John Fulkerson stated, if you look at the drives around there are 38’ so that allows for two way traffic both ways so basically it, there is enough space there to go around the island.

Attorney Altman stated, you haven’t met some of the people around here and they might say the same thing about my driving so I don’t mean that I’m covered with a halo here, but that traffic area is not very good. I guess intuitively you don’t know if you are in the right spot or they’re in the right spot and who has the right of way.

John Fulkerson stated, that is the problem with the parking lots there is no real right of ways because you can strip it either way and you go and try to enforce it and you can’t enforce it because it is private property. The City won’t enforce it and we can’t enforce it. We’ve put directional arrows and no one follows them any way. It looks now half of them are driving across the parking spaces in there.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, how does, over here behind the behind fuel island, you’ve got the hash marks for the parking spaces and….

John Fulkerson stated, those hash marks are parking spaces being taken out and be turned into isle for the island. It is egress/ingress for the islands.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, so the area right above the proposed fuel island, I guess people will be able to come in that entrance and go to the left and still go park up by where the pharmacy is.

John Fulkerson stated correct.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, once again I don’t think I have a problem with the proposed island or where it is situated, but I’m struggling with the..

John Fulkerson stated, if you look where the drives are now they do change a little bit with the new configuration when that goes in. These were actually done by the State highway department.

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, that explains it.

John Fulkerson stated, they did that the State highway department.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, anymore questions from the audience or the board?

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

1. That the building site is currently zoned B-2, General Business.


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. This would improve a traffic and parking that need it.


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 parking variance for restaurants and retail businesses on the property. This variance will allow them to have 786 off-street parking spaces on that part of the North half of the South half of Section 28 Township 27 North, Range 3 West, in the City of Monticello, White County Indiana, described by: Commencing at the intersection of the South line of the North half of the South half of the above said section 28 and the centerline of Main Street; thence South 89 degrees 42 minutes West 195.43. feet; thence North 40.00 feet to the point of beginning thence South 89 degrees 42 minutes West along the North line of Fisher Street 348.23 feet to the East right of way line of the L and N railroad; thence North 38 degrees 48 minutes West along said line 496.70 feet; thence North 51 degrees 12 minutes East 293.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East 160.4 feet; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes West 126.0 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East 247.7 feet to the centerline of Main Street; thence South 24 degrees 32 minutes East along said centerline 334.05 feet; thence South 89 degrees 42 minutes West 177.43 feet; thence South 24 degrees 32 minutes East 150.0 feet to the point of beginning. The above-described parcel of land contains 6.21 acres, more or less.

Also a part of the North half (1/2) of the South half (1/2) of Section 28, Township 27 North, Range 3 West, Union Township, White County, Indiana, more completely described as follows: Beginning at a point in the center line of the Monticello and Michigan City State Road, said point beginning 790.3 feet South 25 degrees east of the intersection of the North line of the Southwest quarter of section 28, heretofore described, and the center line of the Monticello and Michigan City Road, thence South 25 degrees East on the center line of the Monticello and Michigan City State Road for a distance of 138.7 feet; thence South 89 degrees and 46 minutes West for a distance of 247.7 feet, thence North 0 degrees and 14 minutes West for a distance of 126 feet thence North 89 degrees and 46 minutes East for a distance of 189.6 feet to the place of beginning. Said tract of land contains 0.6 acre more or less.


The above described tract is a part of the following described tract, to wit; Part of the North half (1/2) of the South Half (1/2) of Section 28, Township 26 North Range 3 West, described as follows; Beginning at a point on the North line of the Southwest quarter (1/4) of said section in the center of said Monticello and Michigan City State Road, thence West on said line 81 rods and 16 links thence South 86 rods and 8 links to a point eighty-one (81) rods and 16 links West of the center of said highway; thence East to the center of said highway; thence with the center of said highway 86 rods and a links to the place of beginning.

That part of the North half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana, described by:


Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Southwest quarter of the above said section 28, thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East along the quarter section line 1375.67 feet to the East right of way line of the L.& N. railroad; thence South 38 degrees 48 minutes East along said line 1062.40 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 61 degrees 00 minutes East 332.49 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East 182.47 feet; thence South 68 degrees 19 minutes East 150.42 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes West 322.47 feet; thence South 51 degrees 12 minutes West 290.00 feet to the East right of way line of the L. & N. Railroad’ thence North 38 degrees 48 minutes West along said line 99.31 feet to the point of beginning. The above said parcel of land contains 0.836 of an acre, more or less.


Except: That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in the City of Monticello, Indiana described by. Commencing at a railroad spike at the Northwest corner of the Southwest quarter of the above said Section 28 thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East (deed Bearing) along the quarter section line 1374.67 feet to the East right of way line for the CSX railroad; thence South 38 degrees 48 minutes East along said line 1062.40 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 61 degrees 00 minutes East 332.49 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East 94.32 feet; thence South 60 degrees 36 minutes 32 seconds West 406.37 feet to the East right of way line of the CSX railroad; thence North 38 degrees 48 minutes West 49.56 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.404 of an acre.


A parcel of land described as follows; Part of the North half (1/2) of the Southwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Twenty-Eight (28), Township Twenty-seven (27) North, Range Three (3) West of the 2nd P.M. in the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana, and described more fully as follows: Beginning at a point which is South 24 degrees 32 minutes East 27.53 feet from the intersection of the half section line funning east and west through the above said Section Twenty-Eight (28) and centerline of North Main Street and running thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes West 344.6 feet thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes West 300 feet; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes East 483 feet to the centerline of North Main Street; thence North 24 degrees 32 minutes West along said centerline 330.40 feet to the point of beginning,

Excepting therefrom,


That part of the North half (1/2) of the Southwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Twenty-eight (28), Township Twenty-seven (27) North, Range three (3) west in the City of Monticello White County, Indiana described by: Commencing at the intersection of the east-west quarter section line in said section Twenty-eight (28) and the centerline of North Main Street thence South 24 degrees 32 minutes east (deed bearing) along said centerline 27.53 feet; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes west 344.60 feet to a half (1/2) inch iron pipe; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes west 220.00 feet to a half (1/2) inch iron pipe and the point of beginning; thence South 58 degrees 45 minutes 24 seconds East 72.64 feet to a half (1/2) inch iron pipe thence South 24 degrees 09 minutes 36 seconds east 46.75 feet to a half (1/2) inch iron pipe; thence North 89 degrees 46 minutes West 81.57 feet to a half (1/2) inch iron pipe thence North 00 degrees 14 minutes east 80.00 feet to the point of beginning containing 0.097 of an acre more or less.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 916 N. Main Street.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


Attorney Altman stated, you need a building permit for the island.

****

#2557 St. James Lutheran Church; The property is located on Lot 6 in OP Block 4, located in the Town of Reynolds, on the East side of Boone Street and between First and Second Streets.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 2’ side setback variance to build a roof over the playground area.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?


James Wagner stated, James Wagner trustee of the Church.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is there anything else you want to add to the request?


James Wagner stated, no.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any fan mail?


Director Weaver stated, no we have not received anything. With the packets we did put a copy of the drawings that was submitted with the building permit.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience? Any questions from the board?


Gary Barbour stated, I don’t have anything.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I understand the end elevation, the side elevation has skylights.


James Wagner stated, yes some skylights on the inside there.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any other questions?


James Wagner stated, just like a picnic shelter so they can still go out and play gives them protection.


Without further discussion the board voted.


The Board finds the following:


1. That the building site is currently zoned B-2, General Business.


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. This would protect the child care business with actual building per 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 2’ side setback variance to build a roof over the

playground area on Lot number six (6) in Block Four (4) in the Original Plat of the Town of Reynolds.


COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Reynolds at Boone Street.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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

****

#2558 Garry A. Cox; The property is located on Lot 16 in Shady Point Park, located East of Girtz Industries on 5065 E. Shady Point Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 30’ front setback variance, a 5’ side setback variance, and a 2’ rear setback variance to build a second story addition with a deck and to bring the existing home into compliance.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, representing this request is?

Garry Cox stated, I’m Garry Cox.

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

Garry Cox stated, no.

Director Weaver stated, we haven’t received anything from any of the neighbors, but we do have a letter from SFLECC.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, was it sent with our packets?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Vice President Carol Stradling read the letter to the board. (See file for the letter.)

Vice President Carol Stradling stated, no other fan mail. Any other comments from the audience? Questions from the board?

Attorney Altman stated, their application is dated the 30th of August 2006, so that jives with what Mr. Moody’s requirements were on his letter.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, Gary any questions?

Gary Barbour asked, basically you are going straight up and the roofline will be the same?

Garry Cox stated, basically going straight up and it does not go the entire length of the house.

Gary Barbour stated, stops at the garage.

Garry Cox stated, well actually it stops before that, it stops which is… (He is showing Gary on the survey.)

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, Dave?

David Scott stated, no.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any other questions?

Attorney Altman asked, sewer line?

Garry Cox stated, yes.

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. This improvement will straighten up the present improvement.


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, a 5’ side setback variance, and a 2’ rear setback variance to build a second story addition with a deck and to bring the existing home into compliance on Lot number Sixteen (16) in “Shady Point Park” as shown by the deed of dedication recorded in Deed Record 119, page 82 in the office of the Recorder of White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located East of Girtz Industries at 5065 E. Shady Point 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 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


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

****

#2559 Emmanuel E. & Donna J. Keller; The property is located our N NW 8-27-3 on .20 of an acre, located West of East Shafer Drive at 4250 E. 400 N.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting an 8’ West Side setback variance to build an addition and to bring the existing dwelling into compliance.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, and you sir are?

Emmanuel Keller stated, I’m Emmanuel Keller.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, anything you care to add to the request?

Emmanuel Keller stated, no.

Director Weaver stated, we haven’t received anything from the neighbors, but I have been asked to mention to Mr. Keller, Dave Anderson the Building inspector reviewed this and wanted me to let you know there may be an elevation variance that may be required also. Just so you are aware of it.

Attorney Altman stated, if this variance is passed it is not for the elevation.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t think Mr. Anderson had enough information to make that determination. You definitely need to get with him.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is that potentially in the flood plane?

Director Weaver stated, yes I believe so.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, any questions from the audience? Any questions from the Board?

Gary Barbour stated, not now.

Vice President Carol Stradling asked, Dave?

David Scott stated, the addition is right in the middle of the lot and we can’t change the lot.

Attorney Altman asked, single story?

Emmanuel Keller stated, yes.

Attorney Altman asked, on the sewer system?

Emmanuel Keller stated, yes.

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 an 8’ West side setback variance to build an addition and to bring the existing dwelling into compliance on a strip or parcel of land abutting the Tippecanoe River on the North end in the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8 in Township 27 North, Range 3 West in White County, Indiana. Said parcel of land begins at a point 1050 feet West of the Northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8 and running thence West 85 feet, thence South about 330 feet to the water line; thence following the water line in a southeasterly direction to a point which is immediately South of point of beginning; thence North about 350 feet to the point of beginning.

Excepting from the above-described real estate a strip 38 feet wide taken by parallel lines off of the East Side of the above described parcel of land.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of E. Shafer Drive at 4250 E. 400 N.


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


The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.


Attorney Altman stated, you need to get your building permit and check with Mr. Anderson the height issue.


****


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, we still have some business before us the Fortune Lawsuit.


Attorney Altman stated, yes, I have been approached and I thought I had talked to the board about this and Diann says she does not find it in the records. Therefore I will stand correct. I thought I spoke to the board about a recommendation about settlement of that dollar wise. The attorney is asking for this is the one we fined $500 and then they were told to come before us and they didn’t and we accessed a fine of $5,000 and then nothing ever happened and I filed suit in Kokomo against them to collect the $5,000. I set that for a hearing and trial and that is, oh dear, I can’t remember.


Director Weaver stated, the same week in October as the other ones.


Attorney Altman stated, it isn’t today but it is not to far away. He is basically saying will you take less money than that in a way of a settlement. That is the way it always is, about money we require to pay. It is the board to tell me what this is proposed settlement here. Honestly we made out point and I suspect that they paid the $500 maybe $1500 is what I think it should be. You hired me to go over there, I think we would be making money and costing taxpayers extra money if we settled at the level. I wanted to get the feeling from the board members what you want to do.


David Scott stated, anything over what we have expense wise and the cost of the girls and your expense. If we’ve got $1500 or $1000 in it, anything over that.


Gary Barbour asked, what is this in relationship to again? I don’t remember.


Director Weaver stated, well I was just going to say originally the reason for the fine was to get them in here because the board was not looking for a monetary thing, the board was looking for an explanation why they told us they were doing one thing and they built something totally different. They came in and got a permit to build a home and told us they were on their property come to find out they were on a part of SFLECC property and the property was then sold and the new owner then came to us for the variance and to bring it into compliance.


Attorney Altman stated, we granted the variance and we fined the original owner and they paid the $500 and then by that time we required when they didn’t come in and make any explanation at all we required that they come back in.


Gary Barbour stated, they didn’t address it in a timely manner.


Attorney Altman stated, no, well they never did.


Director Weaver stated, they never came to the meeting as requested. That was the original thing the board wanted them to come in and account for themselves.


Attorney Altman stated, so that is why the board decided to put it at $5,000 and we thought they would do something about it and they never did. They ignored the letters and everything. Now they have had to hire a lawyer and we filed suit over there against them and we are going to go to trial.


Gary Barbour stated, they want to settle for $500.


Attorney Altman stated, yea and the only thing is on the other side balancing act I don’t want to spend more lawyer money going over there and Diann going over there and taking more expense and doing that either, so I’m balancing it. Being in litigation and getting their attention we have done that and I think everybody under the sun knows we have done that and therefore I tend to agree here, the thing we intended to do we did, now it is just get to break even point and not have to take Diann to trial and more expense. I want your thoughts on this.


Gary Barbour stated, I don’t want to come off that we pussed out either.


Attorney Altman stated, oh I don’t thing we did.


Director Weaver stated, they still haven’t given you an explanation.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, is this the one that built the corner on SFLECC property and they came in to come into…


Attorney Altman stated, no these people have never been in.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, they worked with SFLECC and I thought they came to an agreement and then they didn’t build to the agreement.


Attorney Altman stated, no that is a different one, the new owners came in.


Director Weaver stated, Kevin Claton and Rick Long.


Attorney Altman stated, yes. That is who came in and facilitated it.


David Scott stated, get what you can.


Gary Barbour stated, I don’t want us to puss out on this.


Attorney Altman stated, no we won’t.


Gary Barbour asked, I have a question about the industrial park there in Brookston, that model home we approved was that put in according to what the plans were?


Director Weaver stated, no she had to relocate it to the other end because of the septic system. I think.


Gary Barbour stated, because now they’ve got to drive off the county road and the only reason I approved it the way I did was because they were coming off of the lane within the industrial park.


Director Weaver stated, I went ahead and approved it because I thought that we did not discuss where we accessed.


Gary Barbour stated, they’ve got a drive up next to the State Highway now on the County road and that in my opinion is not good.


Director Weaver stated, well it was my understanding and maybe I’m wrong that there was more concern and that the board had stated, I thought….


Gary Barbour stated see that is already a bad road and you’ve got trucks and trailers moving in and out of there. By them putting a small business right there on the county road next to the state highway you are going to have accidents and that is my opinion.


David Scott asked, where is this?


Gary Barbour stated, the industrial park south of Brookston.


David Scott stated, oh the model home.


Gary Barbour stated, the model how because it was originally set up where the property on the corner the drive was coming to the place right here. They’ve moved the building now to the other end of the property and coming right off of the county line road right next to the highway. That was the first thing that came to my mind and that is not good.


Director Weaver stated, the reason I thought it was okay because the discussion that took place with the septic system that I thought the board understood the location of the home my differ because of where the septic system was going to go. Maybe I was incorrect in doing so.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I remember asking why it was there instead of somewhere else because of the soil borings this is where it had to go because of the septic systems. Because the soil borings indicated that is where it had to go. They really wanted somewhere else and the soil borings indicated they could have it where the originally wanted it they had to move it somewhere else. I thought the location was pretty well set.


Attorney Altman stated, and they wouldn’t have to put in one of those mound systems. That is what she said, I remember that to Carol.


Director Weaver stated, right.


Vice President Carol Stradling stated, I thought the location was pretty well set.


Attorney Altman stated, I did to.


Gary Barbour stated, I thought they were going to come off the internal drive from Industrial Park not the county highway.


Director Weaver stated, I will have to go back to the minutes. What does the board want me to do with this?


David Scott stated, can we put in on the next meeting?


Gary Barbour stated, I want to see them get the drive off of the County Highway. They need the access drive off of Industrial Drive.


Attorney Altman stated, now would be the easiest time to do it.


David Scott stated, see if that was actually in the minutes that they were going to come off...


Gary Barbour stated, that is what the plans were.


David Scott stated, if that is what the plans said I would think that is what they have to do.


Director Weaver stated, I will check on this and I will get in touch with her.


Gary Barbour stated, if they would have had that in her plans I wouldn’t have approved that.


Vice President Carol Stradling asked, anything else?


Director Weaver stated, I have some copies I’m going to pass these out.


The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Gary Barbour, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission