Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, October 19, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were: Candy Eller, Billie Eller, Becky Livesay, David Livesay, Judy Bronowski, Ted Bronowski, Charles R. Mellon, Tara Lynch, Ed Lynch, Joyce Boller, C. Tews, Don Apple, Katie Apple, Lawrence Hicks, Don Pauken, Lee D. Miller, Dave Alm, Joe Sukits, Michelle Howe, and Greg Vogel

The meeting was called to order by President David Stimmel and roll call was taken. David Scott made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the September 21, 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.)

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone here representing the King’s?

Director Weaver stated, no there isn’t.

President David Stimmel stated, there won’t be.

Director Weaver stated, they contacted me today and they are trying to get this situation taken care of so they are not here this evening.

President David Stimmel asked, have they been working with Jerry on this?

Attorney Altman stated, actually Diann has been more, we have been talking about this a lot but they really haven’t been working with me. I’ve just basically said we’ve got to get some valid


reason to discriminate between the surveys to let us know which one is the correct one. They are all close, but not that close.

President David Stimmel asked, do you know what their intentions are?

Director Weaver stated, they have hired another surveyor and he was there today, but the survey is not complete at this time and they are to contact me when it is complete.

President David Stimmel stated, so essentially is this tabled then or what or how do you want to characterize this.

Director Weaver stated, I do believe so at this time just to make sure we get the situation taken care of.

President David Stimmel asked, so it will come up at the next meeting?

Director Weaver stated, we will put it on the agenda unless it is resolved.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary or Dave any comments?

David Scott stated, with the proposed addition this boundary there is discrepancy in the survey and it doesn’t come into play with that. I mean what is out of compliance is the existing so I guess they are trying to define boundaries, is that what they are doing now.

Director Weaver stated, that was apart of their approval for their variance that they had to get that south property line established.

David Scott stated, what if they fine they are out of compliance.

Director Weaver stated, we are hoping that this new survey will clarify instead of making things worse.

Attorney Altman stated, we feel that surely they came to us to get straightened up and we trust that is what they have done. We certainly tried to help them and facilitate that and we just want to make sure since we have about 4 surveys that are similar but not and there are not way to pick out among them which was is valid and correct.

President David Stimmel asked, is the only part of the survey that is not correct is the south boundary?

Director Weaver stated, I think that is where the discrepancy is yes.

Attorney Altman stated, I would be happy quite frankly with an affidavit of a surveyor that says that such and such is correct the others were not exactly correct and take care of that. I’m not asking them to spend more money, I’m just saying however, we get 4 surveys and we don’t know which one is the right one.

Gary Barbour stated, then on the last one too they give them a different survey and they didn’t bother going up to the property to measure anything. That was told to Area Plan.

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Gary Barbour stated, that is all we were asking is for someone to verify exactly what those boundaries are.

President David Stimmel stated, I guess what I hear Diann saying is she has conveyed to the parties just what Jerry said that he would take an affidavit so they don’t have to go to a huge amount of expense.

Gary Barbour stated, right.

David Scott stated, I just think it is bad that they paid for 3 surveys and there is a registered stamp on there and they are all different and now they are getting a new survey. When it doesn’t have anything to do with what they are building.

****

#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.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone here representing the Lynch’s?

John Lynch stated, I’m John Lynch.

President David Stimmel asked, okay John is there anything else you would like to add to what has been said?

John Lynch stated, yes. First we have letters from adjacent property owners we would like to submit.

Attorney Altman stated, I have received an applicant’s exhibit A, a group exhibit. There are 12 pages total, with a summary on the first page. You didn’t get a copy of this.

Director Weaver stated, yes they did.

Attorney Altman stated, I was trying to figure out how to get this into evidence. (Jerry proceeded to read the letters to the board that states their approval.)

President David Stimmel stated, okay I’ve also I have received photos from your wife and you I believe.

Attorney Altman stated, no. Gary did that

President David Stimmel stated, oh Gary did this.

Attorney Altman stated, I will mark those, group exhibit from Gary.

Gary Barbour stated, if anyone wants to come up and look at these pictures are more then welcome too. I did go to the site and look at the area, taking pictures not only of the Lynch property, but everyone surrounding that property, areas coming in and areas going out so it shows all the different neighbors in the whole area. We can have an intelligent smooth discussion this evening about this property.

Director Weaver stated, I believe there are 43 pictures.

Attorney Altman stated, 43 pictures if anyone wants to look at them. I will not mark them now but later as 1 of 43 etc.

President David Stimmel asked, John is there anything else you want to add to what has been said?

John Lynch stated, well I thing those letters pretty much say it all the majority of the people who are adjacent to us are in favor of this shop that we want to put together. One thing I want to make clear is my creditability as attached by Don Apple the last time was here saying that I ran that business without the rezoning which was true. My rezoning was turned down and I went back and the next day Don Apple came to me and told me the neighbors were not opposed to me running that business, they just did not want the rezoning changed. I then began to run the business and I got the fine, which I paid and I stopped. Then when I came up with the idea to ask for this special exception again I was told there was no one against it. I came to the meeting to be very much surprised then I was even more surprised to find out that Don Apple himself has run a business on this corner. So just want to clear up the fact that yes I did run a business without the rezoning, but I was encouraged to do it by the very person who is here tonight.

President David Stimmel stated, okay, thank you. Is there anyone else who wants to speak either for or against this variance?

Kathryn Apple stated, I’m Kathryn Apple and I’m the neighbor right across the street from the Lynch’s and I’m the one that gets the noise believe me. My opposition to the Lynch’s efforts to change our zoning from an R-2 to a special variance for a business has remained stead fast from the very beginning. I have good reasons for my objections and the largest is that they were not truthful with us in the past. They defied the zoning board more than once and they were fined for the sign and they left it there and they got fined again. To me that is defiance. They insisted that they would never know that they had a business there. We would hear no noise see nothing and all they do is detail boats and cars which isn’t bad, and all of you now that isn’t bad. They uh, since that time we can assure you there is a lot of noise and they do more than detailing boats and cars. They do a great deal of it outside of the detailing and they are there afternoons, evenings, and all weekend when they are there. They had soda blasted on two separate occasions one was at nighttime and that was it he new pole barn. It just had this big white stuff you know coming out of it from around the building. Okay, then they did it another time and that was the weekend of the homecoming game Purdue I believe they beat Minnesota. Our son and his wife were there, our neighbor that he says is on his side but wouldn’t give a letter. There is a reason for that, when he saw the soda blasting that Sunday we all thought first of all they had it in the middle barn and it was a great big white cloud it was very windy that day and it was blowing it over the park and over us. It was shifting around that day, it was very windy day. When we thought it was on fire at first then we found out it was that soda and we were concerned you know. We considered that body work we knew they had a vehicle in there that needed painted, that they were blasting and that is not in with boat detailing is it folks or cleaning. I don’t believe it is. I wonder if you would like that across from you, I don’t think anyone really would. We were told we were lucking cause we could get worse and my question is why would a couple purchase a piece of property and then try to get it rezoned, they knew when they bought it from the Plantenga’s that we had fought against it being zoned Agriculture and I will tell you right now all of us thought it was agriculture no one knew it was zoned Residential until we came to the meeting to get it rezoned agriculture then we realized what we had to put up with for years folks that we had try to just have it cleaned up. They are truthful in that it is clean. It is very nice and clean and I have no objection to that. You know put your self in our spot, would you enjoy having to fight like this all of the time we don’t enjoy it. The soda blasting machine like I said that is kind of a scary thing because of the cloud of smoke so I ask and I was told by someone, I have problems with sinus infections and lung infections and I asked someone in the health department not here and she suggested that I ask my doctor about this, so Don was in the Doctor’s office at that time and I called him on the cell phone and it was Dr. Tribbett and his word were exactly I can’t believe they would consider this, I would not want to breath that. He said I would not believe that would be a good thing at all. He couldn’t believe it would even be considered. Okay so the next thing I asked was about the home values. I called Bev Tatlock who has been our realtor and Bev said it would very definitely. Having something like that, that is an industrial machine. It is a saw air, it probably is a nice machine. It is about this long and he pulls it away and we see him take it away sometimes, we see him bring it back.. He does do work there and I feel he will say, and this is my feelings folks. He will say he won’t do it but from my past experiences with the Lynch’s they will do what they want to do, and I don’t like being put as a policeman in my own neighborhood, they said to call if you see them doing this, call the authorities and have them come out there then. I don’t think in a residential neighborhood I should have to do that. It doesn’t bother people who are further down, you understand. You two Gentlemen, I don’t know there were two gentlemen suppose to go out there , so you know where my house is so it is directly across the road. And believe you me between that house and garage I like to leave the back door open and the patio door open to get a breeze and save on air conditioning and when they have that noise a going it is loud and I don’t appreciate the noise either and I’m like I said concerned about that cloud of smoke. It is not smoke it is a cloud of sodium bicarbonate is what it is. So I ask respectfully that you would considered we are the ones that are right there and the neighbor Mr. Queen an has changed his mind and he told us that he had been reminded by Mr. Lynch that he would not fight him so he is an honorable man and he won’t go back on his word, but he said he would not come and stand up for you either, so I know Mr. Mazelin intended to be here tonight because his property butts right up against and it effects him and I and Kevin. Kevin does a lot of body work at his place and so I’m sure he wouldn’t mind this going on. That is just what I had to say and I hope you consider our feelings and where we are coming from, it is just right across from me, please, thank you.

Director Weaver stated, I would like to clarify one thing, there was only one fine imposed on the Lynch’s.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anyone else who wants to speak?

Don Apple stated, Don Apple Katie’s husband live right across the street. Have you read Mr. Stimmel the last meetings letters and the comments and notes? Did you have an opportunity?

President David Stimmel stated, I sure did.

Don Apple stated, okay you so you know the opposition and the letters of opposition.

President David Stimmel stated, yes.

Don Apple stated, it is interested to see to the extent the Lynch’s went to here to provide you with the letters and the pictures and so on like that. I appreciate you coming out and taking the pictures. I’m sure you did a fantastic job. No body is contesting the Lynch’s ability to make that piece of property across the street look like a land mark. It is a gorgeous piece of property and they have done a fantastic and they are doing the inside of the building, is going to be gorgeous when they get done with it. The thing that the neighborhood is concerned about is the valuation of the property as Ms. Tatlock has said, if there was a business allowed to be put in there in place of or in a residential area, my understanding for years is been the reason for the zoning and the reason for the residential, the application they make for residential is to keep units like this business out of the neighborhood. Certainly one has to say that the letters, it is interested to see who he got the letters from. 3 of those people have been doing business with him all along, most of the rest of them do not have the slightest idea what is going on over there. I’m sure the Lynch’s have went and knocked on their doors and said would you be so kind to sign this and just like taking a petition around and we all have been involved in those. You can get any one to sign a petition by just basically taking by the house and saying will you sign on this and have no idea what the circumstances are. Mr. Lynch is absolutely right when we first looked at this piece of property and when we first went over there and had a lot of good conversations with Mr. Lynch and thought we were being good friends good neighbors and my problem that I have on this thing is that I’ve got some neighbors that are very much in opposition of this. Probably they come at under the classification of they really don’t know what the Lynch’s are going to do either for sure. #2 it is a residential neighborhood and they are just using the fact that it is a residential neighborhood to keep it a residential neighborhood. If the Lynch’s did no more than what they say they are going to do probably no one would have a problem with it. I think what the Lynch’s really need to do is to go to the folks who are objecting to this; it is across the lake who has the expensive property on the lake and all the loss of the value of the property if there is a business in the neighborhood. The need to go and say look this is what we want to do and we are the Lynch’s and make peace with this people there probably wouldn’t be any objections. I was put in the middle of this because I live right across the street from them. Mr. Lynch is correct I did say at one time I really didn’t have a problem with what he was doing and then it got carried away with this soda blaster business and there was some unfair comments by Mrs. Plantenga and I will dismiss her because we all know where she is coming from and where we’ve been on that before. Yes I did rent that back in 1985 or 1986 and paid them $600 for that corner to be used there for 4 months to put in new boats. They raised the price on me and doubled the price on me and I said I had no interest in it all for $1200 so I said I don’t want it that is what Roxanne said and of course we know where she is coming from we’ve been into it with here for years. Nevertheless I either have to agree as I went to Mr. Lynch and said I was sorry that I had to agree to not fight this, but after talking to some of the neighbors I had a choice to make. I can either have a nice neighbor across the street who thinks I’m a nice guy or I can have 4 or 5 of my neighbors that I’ve lived there with for 40 years made at me know. Where do you go from here? I guess I’m going to have to leave the decision up to you gentlemen. That you are going to have to make a decision, do you really want a business in a very high dollar neighborhood and take a chance on it ruining real estate values. The other people who have letters in here have no concern that I can see whatsoever. The Tebo’s he wouldn’t care one way or the other, the Tam’s, the Kampenga’s they are not involved, they are clear behind on farm ground really in what could be farming areas. They are not the ones that are going to be affected by what Mr. & Mrs. Lynch decide to do with that piece of property across the street. Now again you can put some severe restrictions on them and I understand that was brought up in the last meeting as to the terms that they could get this variance under, strictly for boat and car detailing. Who is going to police them, who is going to police it, as my wife has said it is not our point to stand out there and be policeman in everything that happens and everything occurs over there. I understand where they are coming from they want to use the building for their retirement and it is an admirable position to be in and I think they are admirable people. The fact remains it is still a residential area high dollar residential area and do you really want to as a board to allow them to do this and set the precedent in the respect if they happen to leave down the road in 4 or 5 years when he says he is going to retire and decide that he is not interested in the boat detailing anymore and he sells that piece of property to someone and they come in and they want something else in there. An attorney walks up in front of you people and says a precedent has already been set Gentlemen you are discriminating against my client because he has had a business in there in the past and what might we face down the road. So basically I’m leaving it in your gentlemen’s hands. Thank you.

President David Stimmel stated, yes sir.

Carl Tews stated, I’m Carl Tews. Mr. Apple did you not run a boat business out of your house right there across from him for a number of years.

Don Apple stated, no.

Carl Tews stated, you didn’t.

Don Apple stated, no not a boat business.

Carl Tews stated, well you sold pontoons boat you had them in front of your house.

Don Apple stated, no I did not.

Carl Tews asked, what is that then? Where the trailer park is?

Don Apple stated, that trailer park has been in the family for 57 years.

Carl Tews stated which you sell boat lifts and repair boat lifts there.

Don Apple stated, I did at one time not since 1989

Carl Tews stated, it is still zoned residential or business correct.

Don Apple stated at that time it was not zoned.

Carl Tews stated, then why are you telling this man he can’t do something when you did it for so many years and you have a repair business going there now.

Don Apple stated, I do not.

Carl Tews stated, you have a man living there right now and he is repairing cars there.

Don Apple asked, who is it?

Carl Tews stated, his last name is Tarrit, he also runs a scrap business out of there. He scraps metal.

Don Apple stated, absolutely not.

Carl Tews stated, yes sir.

Don Apple stated, absolutely not.

Attorney Altman stated, we have a problem here one side being heard and the other not.

Don Apple stated, absolutely under no circumstances anyone running business out of my trailer court.

Carl Tews stated, he has a pickup truck where he cuts his cooper up in the back and he is a heavy set man, weighs about 400 lbs.

Don Apple stated, you are right.

Carl Tews stated, that is right.

Don Apple stated, he is not running a business out of there. He is doing that to keep alive, he has no other income. He goes around

Carl Tews stated, well hold it..

Don Apple stated, he goes around and picks up scrap metal from people.

Carl Tews stated, he is processing it right there on our property.

Don Apple stated, he is not Mr. Tews have you been in there and seen him.

Carl Tews stated, yes I have. I go by there everyday.

Don Apple stated, I’m sorry but you are mistaken sir.

Carl Tews stated, we need to take some pictures then.

President David Stimmel stated, let’s not treat this like a political forum.

Don Apple stated, I’m sorry that if you want to go back years and years and you can always find business that was being done in the Apple family park. There is no one running their business out of my trailer park if there was it wouldn’t be there 10 minutes. The gentlemen he is speaking of has no other income and what he is doing he started picking up my scrap and hauling it away as far as what he is doing he is not doing it in my trailer park I guarantee that. Mr. Tews can make what he wants out of it. Yes I did have a boat place and docking place there and I did repair hoist at the property right next door for years and I haven’t done that for quite a few years. I don’t think there wasn’t even any zoning at that time we thought it was agriculture. Which still wouldn’t have allowed me to do that business? No one ever complained about it and no one ever complained no one said a word including any of the neighbors here now. Again I said I have no problems with the Lynch’s doing what they say they are going to do. It probably be something that none of would know it was there. Again whether or not you want to open up that door ladies and gentlemen to a business this type of business in a high dollar residence area is your choice to make.

President David Stimmel stated, okay thank you. Is there anyone else?

Lawrence Hicks stated, yes I’m Lawrence Hicks. That was one of my letters in there. To go back to the neighborhood and the neighborhood itself and the property values in the neighborhood what it would affect. Personally living in the neighborhood the trailer court across the street is a detrimental to the neighborhood and it always has been. I have lived in the Monticello area since 1972 it was more of a joke then anything else when you drive by it. Anyone who drives by it today, that is all they see, is the, to put it mildly, very used very old trailers up against a road. In fact, when I say against the road I mean against the road. If a car runs off or even pulls off to fix a flat tire they couldn’t because a trailer is in the way. They talk about the smoke coming from Mr. Lynch’s which isn’t smoke it is bicarbonate to use for spray things as a favor to a few people in the neighborhood. Apparently fires over at the trailer court don’t affect them the smell doesn’t blow over to their property it blows down over the hill to my property where I can smell the smoke from the fire in the trailer park. And no business they have several businesses going on at there at the same time. They have the boat ramp, which causes in the summer time there is not enough room for a vehicle to turn around and get back in without blocking traffic coming across the bridge and around East Shafer Drive. As were the Lynch’s took and cleaned up the corner and now it is a least safe to pull out of Penrod Drive on to East Shafer Drive. At one time you couldn’t even see down the highway and they torn down some trees opened up the view and now when you come to the intersection you can actually see.

Gary Barbour stated, excuse me, where exactly do you live in relationship to this property

Lawrence Hicks stated, down here. (Showing Gary on the map.)

President David Stimmel asked, is there anymore comments? Mr. Lynch?

John Lynch stated, I would like to address the soda blast issue. We didn’t buy that property with the plans to change the zoning or even put a business in there. That all happened after my wife lost her job. The soda blaster I purchased that back I the spring and it has been used there twice, once was when I initially bought it and that was to figure out how to run it. The second time was to blast a neighbor’s old pickup truck directly across the road. The sodium bicarbonate being the 4th most abundant on earth is not harmful to you and there is no cloud of smoke. If you were blasting in the room today and open the door you would not see anything outside that door. It will blow up and the heaviness of it will fall back down. There may be dust on the grass outside the door, but it will not travel. I have no intentions of running that business out of there that equipment is at Indiana Beach, one of my blasters is at the Indiana Beach we are doing the Shafer Queen. It is just not part of the blasting business.

President David Stimmel stated, Mr. Lynch before you sit down, if I could ask you a question. There was some place either in last months minutes or somewhere that I understood that you had volunteered that you would commit to not doing the soda blasting at that location and that you had another location that you would do that at.

John Lynch stated, yes I do, if I had to do a car for an example and the person I was doing the car for had no garage of his own. I have a pole barn of my own that is completely empty in another county that I would take that automobile to and blast it.

President David Stimmel stated, the only concern that I have is and I don’t have any concern about the sodium bicarbonate but what I would be concerned about is the paint that would come off or the other residual the oxidized aluminum or whatever becomes a part of that issue.

John Lynch stated, what you do is in your barn you put down plastic layers or a large tarp then you just fold that up and you depose of it. Everything falls down.

Attorney Altman stated, as I understand you have made a commitment that you will not have or use the sodium blaster at this site.

John Lynch stated, correct.

Attorney Altman stated, you also indicate I believe and I just want to make sure I don’t over state you position that there will be no vehicles of your business outside of the building ever. Is that right, obviously they have to go in and out.

John Lynch stated, what we said is we would do the work inside two cars came in at the same time one would set outside while we did the other of course, we could not guarantee that there would never be automobile or boat setting outside.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, I just have to get down for the board and you did indicate in an oral commitment and I understood it to be nothing would be outside.

John Lynch stated, I can’t say that.

Attorney Altman stated, so what you are saying is the operation would be inside, but there maybe boats, trailers, and automobiles setting outside waiting to be processed. I miss understood the commitment. Anything else you want to state as a commitment or how your business would be run.

John Lynch stated, I think we’ve addressed all of the issues.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, okay.

David Scott stated, I would like the commitment to stay with individuals and not the property.

Attorney Altman stated, okay.

President David Stimmel stated, okay when we vote on it that the special exception would stay with the individual and not the property.

Attorney Altman stated, I want to get this down. We usually have you put this in writing and you bring it to the board before we vote on it. I would really recommend to the board that he do that because as I just said.

John Lynch stated, I can write it tonight.

Attorney Altman stated, if he can set down and write it right now I would suggest that he do that right now and that would be helpful and we have it in his word.

President David Stimmel stated, it is a part of the record because it is a part of the minutes, so it is just an added piece to go with it.

Attorney Altman stated, yes, another thing a commitment normally says words just so you know that you would be held to the fact that if you did this that your rezoning and special exception would be no longer and you would revert to where you are right now before you have a commitment and you would also be obliged to pay the attorney’s fee and cost of the board in enforcing this commitment.

John Lynch stated, I understand.

Attorney Altman stated, that would be a part of that and you need to understand that. You and your wife would be committing to do that if you violated or we took steps to enforce that.

John Lynch stated, I understand.

President David Stimmel stated, Mr. Apple sorry.

Don Apple stated, I would also like to ask the Lynch’s if they would abided by or consent to some kind of a signage arrangement there so there is not going to be signs stuck all over the place out there.

President David Stimmel stated, that is covered by the zoning laws currently and whatever is in the zoning laws is what they will do.

Don Apple asked, and would that also be a part of this special exemption?

President David Stimmel stated, absolutely not that is a separate issue all together.

Don Apple stated, so what you are telling me since it is residential to that they couldn’t erect any signage.

President David Stimmel stated, I can state the law for you but I can tell you that Diann can come closer to it.

Director Weaver stated, I will have to look at the ordinance.

President David Stimmel stated, what ever the existing zoning requirements are, whatever those may be.

Don Apple stated, even though the will be granted a special exception to do the business, is that what you are telling me.

Director Weaver stated, any signs that would be put up would have to be in compliance with the ordinance and would have to have permits.

Don Apple stated, the other thing that I would like to address and this is probably not the forum that there be a situation with Twin Lakes Regional Sewer district I know they are not hooked up to the district yet and…

President David Stimmel stated, I think you are off track there. I think that is a separate issue.

Don Apple stated, oh okay. Let me make a suggestion to the Lynch’s if I may. Ed and Tara, would you be willing to meet with the people that are objecting?

John Lynch stated, no we have met with enough people.

Don Apple stated, you haven’t met with the ones that are fighting the exception.

President David Stimmel stated, I think this is enough, okay. Thank you very much we appreciate it. Dave or Gary any questions?

Tara Lynch stated, I think this is really getting all blown out, I mean my husband works full time and we didn’t have the intentions of doing this when we bought the property. I lost my job and this is part time and this is something that I’m going to be doing and my husband is going to be helping me and it is not going to be a big business and it is not going to escalate into a big business. I’m just going to be cleaning a few cars inside and outside, no servicing, no repairs, not really going to be a big deal. The work will be done inside but you know if I finish a car I’m going to pull it out side for someone to pick up. You will probably not ever see more than one vehicle out side and in this area there are lots of vehicles outside and it is really not going to look bad. That is my promise.

President David Stimmel stated, thank you. Dave or Gary any comments?

Gary Barbour stated, I have a lot of comments?

David Scott stated, in all due respect to the Apple’s I don’t see what they are doing their property how that is going to devalue your property or create a hardship or… There are some properties in the neighborhood that would degrade the property value and theirs is not one of them. I’m going to vote with what they are trying to do here with the commitment, and I will make the promise that if they do something outside of the commitments and if you come to me I will bring it to the board myself. That is all I’m going to say.

Gary Barbour stated, well there are some more things talked about when I went out to look at the property about the possibility of doing and I don’t know how far you want to carry this but they discussed the possibility of redoing the driveway a little bit to the east side and bring cars in one way and try to help with traffic flow they were concerned about the road. I didn’t know if that was a concern or a problem. I wanted to make sure it was an option so it is not your way. As Tara said they are only going to do a few vehicles at a time here at the most.

Don Apple stated, you said you were thinking about bring it off of E. Shafer Drive instead of Penrod.

Gary Barbour stated, yes.

Don Apple stated, that would be a big mistake.

Gary Barbour stated, it may very well be, but I’m making sure everything is out on the table. When I went to leave the property it was hard to see to the right as you go to the stop sign and I would ask for to try and make, try to help with the visibility.

Tara Lynch stated, we have taken out several trees.

Gary Barbour stated, I understand that. My feelings are there are more that can be taken down there to make it safer not only for the people in the neighborhood, but your customers come pick up their vehicles, so that is all I’ve got.

President David Stimmel stated, Mrs. Apple I have a question and this is off the subject a bit, you mentioned that someone was doing body work out there.

Kathryn Apple stated, yes in their garage, Kevin Raderstorf he builds things for himself, he races cars and he has done this himself he has done this all along, so he isn’t against this. I’m not against Kevin’s work in the garage, but I’m against the oil that he burns openly.

President David Stimmel asked, are we ready to vote?

Director Weaver stated, I just want to remind the board that this special exception is being requested on the North side of the property only.

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

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

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

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

4. That objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request is for a Special Exception to do an auto and boat detailing business on property commencing at the Southeast corner of the North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 31, Township 28 North, Range 3 West in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana; thence North 00 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds West along the Quarter section line 733.75 feet to the point of beginning;

thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes 00 seconds West 137.35 feet; thence North 00 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds West 208.00 feet; thence North 64 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds West along the South right-of-way line of Penrod Drive 151.92 feet; thence South 00 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds East along the center line of East Shafer Drive 272.60 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.758 of an acre, more or less.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located on the East side of Lowe’s Bridge at 4472 E. Penrod Drive.

7. That the special exception herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said special exception is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.20 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said special exception under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.


The special exception was granted based on the findings of fact subject to the following commitment. 1. This is only for John E. & Tara A. Lynch. 2. All detailing and cleaning shall take place inside the building and a very, very limited number of vehicles awaiting service outside. 3. There will be no soda blasting or the like on the premises by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.

****

#2560 David C. Alm; The property is located on 50’ x 42’ E/S Lot 6 Block 13 in Original Plat, located in the Town of Brookston at 319 S. Railroad Street.

Violation: None

Request: He is requesting a 32’ front setback variance (Railroad St.), a 20’ front setback variance (Fourth St.) a 20’ rear setback variance, and an 8’ side setback variance and a 4’ side setback variance to build an unroofed deck and to remodel and bring the existing home into compliance.

President David Stimmel asked, anybody representing this variance?

David Alm stated, I’m David Alm.

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

David Alm stated, I don’t think, basically it is an old property that by today’s standards doesn’t fit the setbacks that we have now.

Attorney Altman asked, it is on city sewers?

David Alm stated, yes.

Director Weaver asked, how much of the work have you already done to this property?

David Alm stated, we have a fair amount probably about half. I guess we are doing siding and stuff that is half the value of the, it is a good thing and it should be set up how it is today. We had to do that to our house.

Attorney Altman stated, obviously this is an existing building at this location for, well before we had zoning and you are just trying to make it to its use.

David Alm stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, you’ve put siding on and have done nothing else.

David Alm stated, well there is one thing with, I took off a deck and it had awnings on the Railroad Street side, like a roof that came out 4’ and we took that off. There was also in the 50’a western town fake front buildings so the roof was like that and I learned from the people who had been born there that those had been put on in the 50’s so I didn’t feel they were sacred anymore so I took them off and I didn’t like them. Things we did structural is one part had flat roof and had a roof like that so from here we ran beams like that and they are bolted on and have some kind of hurricane strap thing.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave any questions?

David Scott stated, no.

President David Stimmel asked, anyone else have any comments about this variance?

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

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

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

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

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request is for a 32’ front setback variance (Railroad St.), a 20’ front setback variance (Fourth St.) a 20’ rear setback variance, and an 8’ side setback variance and a 4’ side setback variance to build an unroofed deck and to remodel and bring the existing home into compliance on Forty-Two Feet (42’) of even width off the entire East Side of Lot six (6) in Block Thirteen (13) in the Original Plat of the Town of Brookston, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the Town of Brookston on the Northwest corner of Railroad Street and Fourth Street.

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


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

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

****

#2561 Judith Bronowski; The property is located on Lot 13 in Camp Munsee Addition, located South of C.R. 400 N. at 3702 N. Camp Munsee Court.

Violation: None

Request: She is requesting a 29’ front setback variance to re-build the house and a 4’ front setback variance to build an unroofed deck.

President David Stimmel asked, anyone here representing this request?

Judy Bronowski stated, I’m Judy Bronowski.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anything you want to what we read any other comments?

Judy Bronowski stated, no the existing house I just want to rebuild completely, so I can move down here and I don’t want to move into that house.

Director Weaver stated, there are some items, a letter from SFLECC and a drawing of what she is proposing to build and several items from Larry Fry from the Camp Munsee’s homeowners association. He sent us the bi-laws and a couple of letters, and several items the board might want to look over. I did not have these in time to mail to you there is quite a bit of information here.

David Scott asked, is everything positive?

Director Weaver stated, yes, actually that is what the letter from Mr. Fry is saying that they are in favor of.

President David Stimmel stated, in the letter I read it mentions 0 lot lines. For some reason on the drawings I don’t see anything or is he just saying, I don’t understand.

Director Weaver stated, well other than the deck crossing the property line.

David Scott stated, on to the lake.

Director Weaver stated, onto the lake side, yes.

David Scott asked, that has been approved?

Director Weaver stated, well they’ve given her approval at this time to repair and I believe she is going back to discuss this further and I will let her elaborate on that.

Judy Bronowski stated, they told me and I spoke to Joe Roach over at the SFLECC he said we could keep the existing deck and keep it in repair and I’m going back personally to the meeting next month and talked to them further, because what I would like to do is expand 6’ to the side so it is as wide as the new house we are building.

David Scott stated, I think under our new ordinance she would need side setbacks.

Director Weaver stated, probably if it passes as is. She doesn’t need anything on the sides now.

David Scott stated, oh right.

Attorney Altman stated, your variance doesn’t state how big the deck is going to be. You can go smaller and you can’t go bigger until you get approval from SFLECC and then get approval from us.

Judy Bronowski stated, my intent is just to get approved what is there now.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave anything?

David Scott stated, this is consistent with the other houses in the neighborhood.

Director Weaver stated, it appears so to me yes.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary?

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 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 and the proposed changes to the home are essentially within the existing footprint and the deck is approved or will be approved by SFLECC to stay at the same size.

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

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request is for a 29’ front setback variance to re-build the house and a 4’ front setback variance to build an unroofed deck on Lot #13, Camp Munsee Addition Liberty TL Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located South of C.R. 400 N. at 3702 N. Camp Munsee 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 subject to SFLECC approval by a vote of 3 affirmative and 0 negative.

****

#2562 Daniel & Penelope A. Scharer; The property is located on Lot 18 in Gingrich Addition, located South of Monticello at 5902 E. Taylor Trail.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting an 8’ height variance to build a new home with an attached garage.

President David Stimmel asked, is there someone here representing this variance?

Lee Miller stated, Lee Miller.

President David Stimmel asked, Lee Miller is there anything you want to comment on?

Lee Miller stated, it is shorter than the trees.

Director Weaver stated, you do have pictures and you have a revised survey with your pictures because the original survey did not show the garage attached and they are going to attach the garage to the home. We had them revise the survey.

Attorney Altman asked, the 20’ shed or is that part of it?

Lee Miller stated, that is part of the garage, it is more likely going to be smaller, if you seen the lot that is probably larger than what we can build.

President David Stimmel stated, Mr. Miller this is probably a silly question, but how are you representing the Scharer’s?

Lee Miller stated, for Penny, she is just uncomfortable coming up here with her age, she just felt intimidated. I told her I didn’t so I would come up and represent her and she signed a petition to where I could come up.

Director Weaver stated, they have already received a building permit on this property and as you can see in the pictures, those pictures were taken yesterday, they have not created a violation or anything. They haven’t gotten to the point to put rafters or anything on.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary or Dave any questions?

Gary Barbour stated, I don’t’ have any.

Attorney Altman asked, on the sewer?

Lee Miller stated, yes.

David Scott asked, the existing house over here to the Northeast?

Lee Miller stated, that is owned by Penny also.

David Scott stated, oh that is hers also.

Lee Miller stated, then the next property is also owned by Penny.

(He is showing them on the map where her road is.)

President David Stimmel asked, any more questions?

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 and the garage will be attached.

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request is for an 8’ height variance to build a new home with an attached garage on the property now known as Gingrich Addition, Lot 18 formerly described as:

A small track of land in the northeast quarter (1/4) of the southeast quarter (1/4) of Section 28, in Township 26 North, Range 3 West, two sides of which abut on the lands owned by the Indiana Hydro-Electric Power Company, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a point which is 181 feet due south of a point which is 647 feet east of the northwest corner of the northeast quarter (1/4) of the southeast quarter (1/4) of Section 28, Township 26 North, Range 3 West in White County, Indiana, and running thence 115 feet South 48° 30’ east, thence 265 feet south 36° 47’ west, thence 90.95 feet north 27° 22’ west; thence 151.48 feet north 1° 55’ east; thence 105.54 feet north 19° 40’ east; thence 25 feet north 28° 59’ west; thence 100 feet south 48° 30’ east to the place of beginning.

Also the right to use a right of way to the real estate and to lay a pipe line to a spring as more particularly described in a Warranty deed from Charles W. Gingrich to Harry E. Roach and Minnie Roach, (husband and wife) and D. Bryce Adams, and Beryl Adams(husband and wife) dated February 21, 1930 and recorded February 21, 1930 in Deed Record 120 page 170 in the office of the Recorder of White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located south of Monticello at 5902 E. Taylor Trail.

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.

****

#2564 David L. & Rebecca A. Livesay, Owners; and Jose L & Juanita Barrera, Applicant; The property is located on Lot No Part 63 & 64 in Citizens Addition, located in the City of Monticello at 519 Turpie Street.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 19’ front (Turpie St.) setback variance, a 4’ front (3rd St.) setback variance, a 12’ rear setback variance, and a 1’ east side setback variance to convert the existing garage into a dwelling.

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

Dave Livesay stated, I’m Dave Livesay.

President David Stimmel stated, I apologize for butchering your name.

Dave Livesay stated, that is all right.

President David Stimmel asked, is there anything you want to add Mr. Livesay?

Dave Livesay stated, the garage is 24’ x 40’ and I’m selling the home to Juanita and Jose Barrera and they wanted the variance done before we turned the property over to them or turn the garage into the house.

Director Weaver stated, I wanted to mention that there was a variance done for this garage to be built on this property. It is odd shaped because there is NIPSCO property behind it where there are towers located on the property. Not this property but the NIPSCO property.

Attorney Altman stated, so that is why the angle.

Dave Livesay stated, the back of the property. You have to 150’ from the towers and 100’ from the wires. I found that out through NIPSCO. That is why it is angled like it is.

President David Stimmel asked, what about sewer and water?

Dave Livesay stated, the fire hydrant and the water main are on that side of the road.

President David Stimmel stated, so they are going to have to have the city hook them up.

Dave Livesay stated, yes and the sewage runs down 3rd Street. They are getting ready to tear the fire hydrant out because it doesn’t work so if they were smart they would go ahead and have it hooked up them while they have it dug up.

President David Stimmel asked, what is the chance of that?

Dave Livesay stated, believe it or not if you talk to Rod Pool they would probably get it done.

Attorney Altman stated, they are going to have to put it in.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave and Gary?

Gary Barbour stated, I don’t have anything.

President David Stimmel asked, ready to vote?

Without further discussion the board voted.

The Board finds the following:

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

2. That the lot is a proper subdivision of land as provided by the White County Subdivision Ordinance on City sewer and water. The odd shape is because of the NIPSCO right-of-way.

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 requesting a 19’ front (Turpie St.) setback variance, a 4’ front (3rd St.) setback variance, a 12’ rear setback variance, and a 1’ East side setback variance to convert the existing garage into a dwelling on that part of Lots 63 and 64 in Citizens Addition to the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana, described by: Beginning at an iron pipe set at the Northwest Corner of Said lot 64; thence South 89 degrees 18 minutes 55 seconds East along the North line of lots 64 and 63, a distance of 75.00 feet to an iron pipe set; thence South a distance of 49.05 feet to an iron pipe set; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes 22 seconds West along the Northwesterly Line of the Nor. Ind. Public Service Co. property as described in Deed Record 123, page 320, White County Recorder’s office, a distance of 104.24 feet to an iron pipe set thence North along the West line of Lot 64 a distance of 122.35 feet to the point of beginning.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 519 Turpie Street.

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


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

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

****

#2565 Destination Homes, LLC; The property is located on Lot 32 in Recreation Park, located North of Monticello at 3145 N. Lakeshore Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 4’ North side setback variance and a 6’ south side setback variance to build a new home.

President David Stimmel asked, is someone representing this request?

Michelle Howe stated, I’m Michelle Howe and I’m the President of Destination Homes LLC. Nothing new to add other than the information you have. The variance is basically for the porch that has an overhang on the front portion of the house that is closes to the road. The house itself is 22’ in width and that would require a variance for 2’ for the house in total. So the porch itself that is at the front of the road is the requirement I think it is an 8’ for a variance.

Director Weaver stated, when the board looks at the pictures there is a lot of work being done on these lots. There are 3 lots here and it was really hard for me to get pictures of that specific lot. So keep in mind that there are 3 lots in these pictures. The garage that is staying is behind the sign.

Michelle Howe stated, that is on lot 31.

Director Weaver stated, right. You are looking at a larger piece of property here then actually being requested.

Attorney Altman asked, is that the lot that needs the variance?

Michelle Howe stated, no lot 32 that we are requesting the variance, the middle one.

Attorney Altman asked, does the building there go across the line on 32?

Michelle Howe stated, everything on lot 31 except the garage is being demolished.

Attorney Altman stated, everything will be on the right lot.

Michelle Howe stated, yes.

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

Carl Tews asked, are these manufactured homes that are going in?

Michelle Howe stated, no they will be stick built homes.

Carl Tews asked, one level?

Michelle Howe stated, no 2 levels.

Carl Tews stated, so you are demolishing one home and putting 3 in place of it.

Michelle Howe stated, they will each be about 2,000 sq. ft. on each.

Carl Tews asked, are they all going to have their own water and sewer?

Michelle Howe stated, yes, one will have a shared grinder and the other will have a grinder I the bottom floor of lot 33. On lot 32 and 31 will have a shared grinder.

Carl Tews asked, what about water?

Michelle Howe stated, water will have that taken care of with wells.

Carl Tews asked, each one will have a well?

Michelle Howe stated, yes absolutely.

Carl Tews asked, what about the street improvements?

Michelle Howe stated, street improvements will be based on what the requirements are.

Carl Tews stated, it is a private road now.

Michelle Howe stated, yes and we have already been approached and we are going to participate with the street improvement.

Carl Tews stated, so you agreed to go along with the street improvement 100%.

Michelle Howe stated, okay.

President David Stimmel asked, are these single occupancy homes?

Michelle Howe stated, yes.

David Scott stated, what I mean 4’ north, a 6’ south side on the one lot.

Director Weaver stated, because of the deck the home actually meets the setbacks, it is because of the deck.

Michelle Howe stated, I think there were rumors going around on what kind of, we were going to put up chintzy cabins and I’ve got some pictures of the houses we are going to put in. I hope they meet people’s approval. We are trying to put some houses that will add value to the area.

David Scott stated, we are making the variance for the porch.

Michelle Howe stated, yes, I put that on there for lot 32 on the top so I know it isn’t for the other side.

President David Stimmel asked, you are asking for a south side setback of 6’ variance is that indicating that you are only going to be 2’ from the property line?

Director Weaver stated, it is the same as the house 8’ minimum of 18’ total.

David Scott stated, so if she has to have….

Michelle Howe stated, we will make the porch fit with the set backs we have on here so I think the drawing, we will make it fit with the variance, so we have on the variance a request of 4’ and 6’ I believe and we will fit the porch to fit the variance.

President David Stimmel asked, what is the purpose of wrapping the porch around the house?

Michelle Howe stated, for the aesthetics of the house.

President David Stimmel stated, so it isn’t an ingress/egress issue with the house.

Michelle Howe stated, no, it is strictly aesthetics.

David Scott asked, how close will the porch be to the property line?

President David Stimmel stated, my understanding is it will be 2’ if they follow the setback variance that they have requested. They are requesting a 6’ south side setback and there are currently 8’ between the house and property line.

Director Weaver stated, it is my understanding that it is going to be a 6’ deck which would put it 4’ from the south property line.

President David Stimmel stated, I’m seeing 6 and 4 and that is 10 and I’m only seeing 8’.

Director Weaver stated, they are asking for a 6’ setback variance on the south side. What is missing is the dimension of this deck. The dimension of the deck is 6’ on the south side.

President David Stimmel stated, right and that leaves 2’.

David Scott stated, that leaves 2’.

Director Weaver stated, not if this is the 10’ side.

President David Stimmel stated, there is only 8’

David Scott stated, there is only 8’.

Michelle Howe stated, there are two 8’ side setbacks.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what it says on the survey.

Michelle Howe stated, so the house is 22’ and the lot line is 40’ and so the and I want to make sure so.

David Scott stated, the house is 22’..

Michelle Howe stated, the house is 22’

David Scott stated, the lot is 40’.

Michelle Howe stated, 40’ through this area and so the porch would be 4’ so this would be a 4’ and then for some reason they requested a 6’ on the other side, so this would be a 3’ porch on this side. So we would have a 4’ and a 6’.

Michelle Howe asked, are we including eaves?

Attorney Altman stated, I have no ideas.

President David Stimmel stated, on the notes it says all inside dist to foundation and outside to overhang.

Michelle Howe stated, okay so we include a 1’ eave and then it would be 24’ so you actually have 16’, so I think that must be what they are including here. That is why you have 8’.

President David Stimmel stated, so the 8’ and 8’ are to the over hang not the foundation.

Michelle Howe stated, correct.

David Scott stated, so the foundation of the porch will be 4’ off the property line and the over hang 3’.

Michelle Howe stated, on the variance they have a 4’ and a 6’ variance so that would only be a 4’ porch here and a 3’ porch along this side. I will make this porch fit the variance because I’m not going to request another variance and delay building. So we will do a 3’ porch around here and fit it in the variance. That would give some one enough walking room to get to the back of the house and around the porch.

David Scott stated, that is what I’m after, I don’t like a 2’ setback.

Greg Vogel stated, if your overhang is 8’ right there and even if you had a 4’ deck right here that still gives you 4’ from the property line, so how are you coming up with 2’.

David Scott stated, well I’m going by, okay so you are saying that is 4’ right there.

Greg Vogel stated, if that was…

David Scott stated, from the building.

Greg Vogel stated, from the building.

David Scott stated, this one is 4’..

Greg Vogel stated, from that lot line also.

President David Stimmel stated, that is what is not making sense Dave. If they do what they say, I’m still ending up with the 2’ setback. If they follow the variance that they are requesting, the only way to make that a 4’ distance between the deck and the property line is to make that south side variance a 4’ setback for a 4’ setback instead of a 6’.

David Scott stated, to be perfectly honest with you I’m not crazy about that either.

President David Stimmel stated, yep I’m not either.

Michelle Howe stated, so the request for a 4’ setback variance and a…

David Scott stated, see what we are dealing with here 4’ setback on each side, you could get a lawn mower down there. No way to get emergency equipment and depending on where you grinder is setting.

President David Stimmel asked, can I see that picture please?

Michelle Howe stated, so a setback when you described your setbacks the higher the number is the further back you want it to be back or the lower the number is the further you back.

David Scott stated, on the request it is the lower the number, is that right.

Director Weaver stated, say that again I was writing.

Michelle Howe stated, so a 1’ setback variance and I’m requesting 1’ additional.

Director Weaver stated, to go 1’ closer than what is allowed.

Michelle Howe stated, okay we may have.

David Scott stated, I see you have a couple different style of houses there and I was wondering if there was a different style, I’m not trying to tell you what to do, but a different style house to put on there so you didn’t have a wrap around porch. 4’ is not, you can not get down here with anything without getting on the neighbors property and that is what we are trying to avoid.

Michelle Howe stated, we aren’t going to stop for a variance stand point for a wrap around porch, if push comes to shove the porch is one of the things that makes the house aesthetically nice, but for a wrap around porch. If the variance is going to stop up dead in our tracks for a wrap around porch, so what we will do is do this differently. Go from there. The house is still 22’ and we have a 40’ lot and the roof overhang will then put us into a variance because it is a 1’ overhang.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what it says.

Michelle Howe stated, yes, so then we have a 1’ variance on each side for just the general roof overhang.

Attorney Altman asked, is that what you want to modify it back to then?

Michelle Howe stated, yes.

David Scott stated, I don’t mind having a variance on one side of the property, but when you have both of the sides of the properties you have no access. I don’t know what do you guys?

Attorney Altman stated, she has modified it for both sides, just the 1’ on the house, the overhang for the house and that is basically where we are right now.

David Scott stated, so basically at ground level you will have 8’ on both sides of the house.

Michelle Howe stated correct so I just need a 1’ variance on both sides of the property north and south for the roof overhang.

Attorney Altman stated, that is what we have before us.

Greg Vogel stated, Destination Homes owns the two lots on both sides, so.

President David Stimmel stated, the question that I have for you folks as members of the LLC what would be your intentions with the other houses. It says proposed houses are they going to be the same.

Michelle Howe stated, yes, same thing, but not same appearance of the homes, but same things, 2 story homes with a total square footage of approximately 2,000 sq. ft., single family homes.

President David Stimmel stated, I noticed that you do have 10’ sides on both of those properties.

Michelle Howe stated, correct.

President David Stimmel stated, which you have the opportunity to move that just a little bit to come with in compliance and not have to get a variance.

Michelle Howe stated, right there is no request for variance on either one of those.

Greg Vogel stated, hopefully the new zoning setbacks will be in affect.

Director Weaver stated, they have already requested a building permit for one of those.

Michelle Howe stated, we are starting on lot 33.

President David Stimmel stated, okay no problems.

David Scott asked, are you building these to sell?

Michelle Howe stated, yes.

David Scott stated, so you own all 3 of them is because the guy that buys this property not going to have access, but you have changed that.

Michelle Howe stated, correct.

President David Stimmel stated, that is what we are voting on. Gary anything?

Gary Barbour stated, no.

President David Stimmel stated, yes sir.

Carl Tews stated, do I understand that they are not going to build 3 homes, they are just going to build one home.

President David Stimmel stated, that is what we are hearing right now.

David Scott stated, no they are building three.

President David Stimmel stated, right, but what we are hearing is the one home.

Attorney Altman stated, they can build the other two because they do not need a variance.

Carl Tews asked, when are you planning on building the other two homes?

Michelle Howe stated, we are ready to do it.

Carl Tews stated, a year from now.

Michelle Howe stated, when ever they are ready to build it.

Director Weaver stated, I believe the information has already been submitted for lots 33, so the permit for lot 33 is ready to be issued.

Carl Tews stated, what about going along with the road program. When they do the road program with in the next two weeks are you going on board with the road program then.

Michelle Howe stated, I don’t know what that has to do with this meeting.

Greg Vogel stated, it has nothing to do with this meeting.

Carl Tews stated, I’m against allowing any variances unless you go with the road program with the other people who own properties adjacent to you.

Attorney Altman asked, what road project are you talking about?

Carl Tews stated, everyone who lives on that road it is a private road, we have all agreed to pave the road. Everyone is going to pay their own fair share, now she said she agreed to it, but she sees it has nothing to do with it. We are going to pave the road and they are going to be tearing it up doing this construction.

Greg Vogel stated, no, no they are building houses not a road.

Carl Tews stated, so you are not going to go with the road program.

Michelle Howe stated, I’ve already said I was going to go with it, but this has nothing to do with this meeting.

Greg Vogel stated, no it doesn’t.

Carl Tews stated, it certainly does.

Greg Vogel stated are you trying to threaten them to sign an agreement.

Carl Tews stated, I’m not threatening anyone, I’m asking you, I own property on that road also. Okay and when I went by there yesterday and seen everything being torn down with no silt fence being put up in front of the lake and the sand and stuff washing into there, I didn’t think that was right and I didn’t complain to anybody, but all I want to know on the variance on this and this plot survey shows 50’ frontage on the top and the lake frontage distance is what 50’ also.

Michelle Howe stated, it will be within the guidelines.

Carl Tews stated, it is not on this survey.

Michelle Howe stated, as long as we keep it within the variance with the guidelines.

Carl Tews stated, this is not right, there are no dimensions from here to here, these do not run parallel it slopes are an angle.

Michelle Howe stated, when it is time to build we will make sure when the building permits are done and the surveys are done , we will make sure that those, the survey stakes are right, then if the people need to come out and look at it to make sure.

Carl Tews stated, if I read right here you are proposing for your setbacks on this lot. This here is a platted survey where the house will be put on correct.

Michelle Howe stated, no that is just a plotted survey just to have for this variance meeting to make sure that what we need to have for a variance. Not absolutely where the house is going to set, no.

Carl Tews asked, then how can you ask for a variance if you don’t know where it is going to set on the lot?

Michelle Howe stated, for this meeting just for the variance not for absolutely to where the house is going to set. We can’t do that yet, we have to have an engineer come out there and look at these lots because like you said they go sloping far down, I can move it with in that line as long as I keep it within those guidelines, so many feet from the lake frontage and so many feet back from the road and as long as I keep it within there I’m with in the guidelines.

Carl Tews stated, on your survey it says proposed house lot.

Michelle Howe stated, proposed.

Carl Tews stated, right, so that is what you are planning on building in that area.

Michelle Howe stated, proposed it is not set in stone it, I’m not sure where this is all going to.

Carl Tews stated, I’d like to know what is going to be built on that lot.

Michelle Howe stated, you don’t need to know today.

Carl Tews stated, I do.

Michelle Howe stated, if you would like to go against this variance then please feel free to do so at this time, but I’m not sure where this is going to other than you don’t like that fact that I’m going to be building three houses there and you don’t have control over exactly where I’m going to put those houses and fact that I’m not signing on the dotted line for the road, I’ve already told you that I will do that road. I’ve already told you that, I don’t know what else you want me to do.

Carl Tews stated, can anyone tell me where this is going affect this house.

President David Stimmel stated, as long as, sir if I can just explain the fact that they can put it where ever they want as long as they follow the variance if they receive the variance, and also they follow the zoning ordinance they can put the house any place on the lot as long as they do those two things. Just as you could or anyone else could.

Carl Tews stated, so you are saying they can get a variance and put anything they want up there then.

President David Stimmel stated, that is not what I said, you are misquoting what I’m saying okay, what I said to you as long as they follow the variance that they have received if they receive it as long as they follow that variance and they follow the zoning ordinance as it currently exist they can build that house anywhere on that property that they seems fit.

Carl Tews stated, and the variance is only for the porch.

President David Stimmel stated, no the variance has been amended for 1’ setback on the house itself on the north and south sides, 1’ setbacks, that is what it has been amended to.

Attorney Altman stated, yes that is correct.

President David Stimmel stated, okay.

Carl Tews asked, can we have that written on there so we can have a copy of that?

President David Stimmel stated, it will be written the minutes of the meeting and it will be a part of the vote.

Carl Tews stated, that is fine, I have no problem.

President David Stimmel asked, any other questions?

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. The home will be single family, stick built on the sewer, and lot will participate in the road improvements.

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

4. That objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request was amended for a 1’ North side setback variance and a 1’ south side setback variance to build a new home on Lots Numbered Thirty-one (31), Thirty-two (32) and Thirty-three (33), in Recreation Park Subdivision, in Union Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located north of Indiana Beach at 3145 N. Lakeshore 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, they can only build with 1’ overhangs on this lot and as it is amended. You need to get a building permit before proceed.

****

#2566 Steve J. Riordan Trust, Owner; Joe Sukits, John F. Wood & Company, Applicant; The property is located on Lot 18 in Recreation Park Subdivision, located North of Monticello at 3289 N. Lakeshore Drive.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 5 ½’ north side setback variance and a 15 ½’ rear setback variance to remodel, build an addition and to bring the home into compliance.

President David Stimmel asked, and sir you are?

Joe Sukits stated, I’m Joe Sukits. This house has been in the Riordan family for 35 years and he wants to put an addition on it. As it stands right now he can’t do anything if the total thing doesn’t comply. Just trying to get it into compliance so he can do this.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary?

Gary Barbour stated, I don’t have anything.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave?

David Scott stated, no.

President David Stimmel stated, they are actually making it better on the north side.

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 and this is to put it in compliance and grant a variance to allow an addition for it.

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

4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.

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

6. That the request is for a 5 ½’ north side setback variance and a 15 ½’ rear setback variance to remodel, build an addition and to bring the home into compliance on Lot Number Eighteen (18) in Recreation Park Addition in Union Township, White County, Indiana, as appears in Deed Record Number 115, Page 48 and 49, of the deed records of White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located north of the Indiana Beach at 3289 N. Lakeshore 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 your building permit before you proceed.

****

#2567 Penelope Scharer; The property is located on Lot 20A in Gingrich Addition, located South of Monticello at 5908 E. Taylor Trail.

Violation: None

Request: She is requesting a 3 ½’ North side setback variance and a 28’ front setback variance to build a 12’ x 20’ shed.

President David Stimmel stated, Lee I wondered why you stuck around.

Attorney Altman asked, does this have anything to do with the other?

Lee Miller stated, absolutely not.

Attorney Altman stated, same person.

Lee Miller stated, same person different property.

Director Weaver stated, different property, just down the road.

Attorney Altman stated, is this one of the three she owns.

Lee Miller stated, yes.

David Scott asked, is this a portable building?

Lee Miller stated, yes, there was a portably building there and the floor was rotted out and we removed it and she wants a better structure there.

David Scott asked, but the new building is going to be portable?

Lee Miller stated, the new one wont’ have a foundation but it will be a poured floor. She puts her lawnmowers in there and she wants it more level t drive in there or rather going up a portable building.

President David Stimmel asked, Lee does she own the property to the North of this?

Lee Miller stated, no.

President David Stimmel stated, there is a 2’ setback that you are asking for on the North side of the property and that would be this property on my survey that is blank and it has no ones name in it and that is what I’m looking for.

Lee Miller stated, yes, I think that lane and I think Penny owns that and it was a proposed road and I believe that Penny owns that adjoining property and rather than research it we just asked for the setback and it is unusable property from that point on.

David Scott asked, from the North, north on she doesn’t own?

Lee Miller stated no she doesn’t. I’m not sure.

David Scott stated, well I guess it doesn’t make a difference.

You can’t move that building to meet the setbacks.

Lee Miller stated, I could, but it involves cutting down a 50’ tree and we don’t want to do that. That is the only reason. We could move it really easy.

President David Stimmel stated, the reason we get so sensitive is because of those 2’ setbacks and you don’t know who is going to build on those 50 years down the road and who is going to be the property owner.

Lee Miller stated, it is a cliff on the other side.

Director Weaver stated, that is why I said it needed contour lines on here because there isn’t much of a level surface.

Lee Miller stated it is absolutely a cliff and that is why we don’t want to remove the tree. We don’t want to create an erosion problem and that is as wide of a building that we could put in between those two trees and if we removed the tree we would put a larger building in there and we could meet the setbacks then.

David Scott stated, so it is an un-buildable lot then.

Lee Miller stated, yes, we would be going over the ravine. That is as big as we can put there.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary anything?

Gary Barbour stated, no.

President David Stimmel asked, Dave?

David Scott stated, no.

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. The ground is very un-level thus preventing other placement of the building.

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 on a 3 ½’ North side setback variance and a 28’ front setback variance to build a 12’ x 20’ shed on Lots Twenty (20) and Twenty A (20A) in the Gingrich Addition, Union Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located south of Monticello at 5908 E. Taylor Trail.

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.

****

#2568 Billie R & Candy A. Eller; The property is located on Lot 49 and 12’ of lot 50 in Mount Walleston now Norway, located North of Monticello at 1920 Buckeye Street.

Violation: None

Request: They are requesting a 23’ front setback variance (Norway Rd) and a 17’ front setback variance (Buckeye St.) to build a room addition and to bring the home into compliance

President David Stimmel asked, anyone representing the Eller’s?

Candy Eller stated, I’m Candy Eller

President David Stimmel asked, is there anything you want to add to what we have read?

Candy Eller stated, not really, the main reason for the room addition is because we do not have a full bath on the first floor and with my husband getting older and my health problems it would be nice to have a bedroom and bathroom on the first floor.

David Scott stated, it is just going to line up with the existing house there.

Candy Eller stated, correct.

President David Stimmel asked, Gary?

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 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. This will line up to the rest of the road.

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 23’ front setback variance (Norway Rd) and a 17’ front setback variance (Buckeye St.) to build a room addition and to bring the home into compliance situated in White County in the State of Indiana, to wit:

12 feet of even width off the entire northerly side of Lot 50 and all of Lot 49 in the original plat of the Town of Norway, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located west of Francis Street. at 1920 Buckeye Street.

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


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

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

****

President David Stimmel stated, okay legal updates.

Attorney Altman stated, we have another check for $1000, as I told you earlier today they have had sufficient penalties and no better and to go further it would cost more attorney’s fees. I think we could collect more, it came down to the money thing. That is what I settled for. On Rangeline, I’m preparing a brief on that and that is where we are on that. We had a hearing and the judge gave us a briefing schedule to respond and to do that. He has set a hearing and he feels that there probably won’t be a hearing at that time, in fact I would be very surprise knowing how he usually handles it.

President David Stimmel stated, really.

Attorney Altman stated, yes. Diann is there anything else?

Gary Barbour asked, why is that?

Director Weaver stated, well we sat there for 2 ½ hours to begin with and discussed the situation with him and answered questions for him.

Attorney Altman stated, that is just the way he operates, so that is what I would guess.

Gary Barbour asked, who is the Judge?

Attorney Altman stated, Judge Thacker. That is exactly what will happen and I’m trying to tell you that. He does set things like that so that in the case that he wished to have some kind of other evidence or something to presented he has a hearing set time, so he gets things moving quicker rather than later. I think it is really down to our briefing, once I get mind in and they get their in he will read them and resolve and rule on it. That is all. I might be wrong.

President David Stimmel asked, anything else out there?

Director Weaver stated, one that Gary brought up at the last meeting with Andrea homes down on 43 and C.R. 1250 S. I have contacted her and actually I have talked to her more than once. I had an appointment for Monday so she will be meeting with her Monday and hopefully no more at that time. She has question how, or where we are coming from.

Gary Barbour stated she put a drawing or there is a drawing showing the drive off the county road. Where did, I’ve never seen that before, where did that come from?

Director Weaver stated, that was presented with her building permit for her building permit.

Gary Barbour stated, do you guys understand what we are talking about here, why we are talking about it because they are coming off the county road and everything that was approved was to come off of the road inside of the Industrial, I didn’t think we needed to have another drive or road anything off the county road especially that close to the highway.

President David Stimmel stated, I agree with you Gary, I’ve read the minutes.

Attorney Altman stated, she certain put in her application that it showed the parking off of that road Industrial internal road.

Gary Barbour stated, what it showed was something completely different then what she did. Had I seen it the other way I would never have voted in favor of that.

David Scott stated, maybe something that she understood or maybe Diann didn’t understand how.

Gary Barbour stated, she moved it because of her septic or something.

Director Weaver stated, right, she stated in the meeting that she could possibly have to relocate the building because of the septic system.

Attorney Altman stated, she didn’t say she was going to relocate the driveway.

Director Weaver stated, she didn’t but the drive and the parking was never really brought up in the meeting so therefore I didn’t see a problem with it when she presented her information for her building permit, because I do believe there are other business in that same Industrial Park that do access off of the county road as well.

David Scott stated, they all don’t use the same access.

Director Weaver stated, no. I don’t believe so.

Gary Barbour stated, I thought there were only 2 access roads into the Industrial Park and that everyone was on those access roads.

Director Weaver stated, well maybe I’m wrong but I thought there was a business on to the West that access off the County Road.

David Scott stated, I know Area Plan is real stickers about that, not having a single access with every property on the roads.

Director Weaver stated, I am the one that approved her parking not realized it wasn’t issued.

David Scott stated, that is what I’m saying we really don’t want to put Diann in the middle of this either.

Gary Barbour stated, that intersection is a terrible intersection anyway.

David Scott stated, maybe it is something that we can work out with her.

Director Weaver stated, that is what we are trying to do, yes, and that is why she..

Attorney Altman stated, she can still come off of the other road, she can have the parking there.

Director Weaver stated, my thought was and I suggested I told her she might look at the possibility of leaving the parking where it is located and accessing it from the interior of the road, so what she has come up with she has been consulting with Bobby Wrede and what she has come up with I don’t know, I think that is what the appointment is for on Monday.

David Scott asked, does the County have to approve ingress/egress off of the County?

Director Weaver stated, we do on the handout that is given out on the building permit that tells them what to do and it is stated on there that they need to.

David Scott stated, that means the county highway.

Director Weaver stated, it is stated on the hand out that they need to contact the county highway for access.

David Scott stated, maybe also if it is the Area plan pleasure to keep these access to a minimum maybe we should bring them up to speed on it. If he is giving them a permit saying yea its okay to put the driveway in and we are telling her she can’t we all need to be on the same page I guess is what I’m saying.

Director Weaver stated, we don’t require that approval in order to issue the permit. That is something we don’t even follow through to make sure they even do, so maybe you are right.

Gary Barbour stated, my only importants is that is the purpose of having Industrial park that you’ve got certain drives into that Industrial park and then their drives come off of that so you are not congesting the.

David Scott stated I’d let Diann work on it and she what she comes up with.

Director Weaver stated, we are trying to resolve it, I did ask Jerry and Jerry did say that she could possible re-file since the request has changed enough that she could re-file and come in front of the board.

David Scott stated, I think I hear Gary say and if I know Area Plan would not want that to come out of there and I’m I talking out of turn here, they would want the access on that road if all possible.

Attorney Altman stated, just like she applied for in her request.

David Scott stated, it was on the request.

Attorney Altman stated, her parking was on the request.

Director Weaver stated, but her building was at the other end of the property.

David Scott asked, but the ingress/egress was on the original?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, all it had was parking right along the road. She has moved her parking in front of the building and moved the building and moved the ingress/egress of the county road. So she has done a lot of changing.

President David Stimmel stated, so Diann you know what the intentions are now.

Director Weaver stated, I do now, I wish I would have known earlier.

Charles Mellon stated, I questioned the house being to close to the State Highway. It is suppose to be 80 or 100’ off the state highway.

Director Weaver stated, I can’t tell you that off the top of my head.

Charles Mellon stated, well we had that deal up at Buffalo before when that women wanted to start a pizza hut or pizza parlor and had to be 80’ off the road and she was to close house was right there. You defeated it two or three years ago. The idea that she didn’t want to go out on the State Highway that cost them about $80,000 to $100,000. The undertaker told me that it was going to cost him $80,000 to $100,000. That drive they’ve got off the county road back there I don’t know where her parking is it is just a stone drive.

President David Stimmel stated, I don’t want to be a cop but I want to pursue that thing that I asked Mrs. Apple about that body shot. That guy working out there. I have a real problem with that.

Gary Barbour stated, I came back later that day and had that thing all fired up and was welding away out there.

President David Stimmel stated, I don’t know what to do there about Raderstorf.

Gary Barbour stated, I’m talking about over at Apple’s place at the trailer park. He does a lot of stuff for himself, but I don’t know if he does it for other people.

President David Stimmel asked, to what extent are you allowed to do that? I have three questions, one was that and the others are…

Gary Barbour stated, if you have a hobby that you do body work on your own vehicles I don’t see a problem with that.

President David Stimmel stated, I don’t either.

Gary Barbour stated, if you are doing it for hire or business.

Director Weaver stated, body work has to be done in a business zoning.

President David Stimmel stated, I agree and that is why I’m asking questions.

Gary Barbour stated, if he is doing it for a buddy as a favor or something like that that is a fine line.

President David Stimmel stated, he would have to be a full blown business.

Gary Barbour stated, majority of the business are started out of the home.

President David Stimmel asked, do we know anything about the Osco drug store going in out here?

Director Weaver stated, Walgreen’s.

President David Stimmel stated, Walgreen’s or whatever it was.

Director Weaver stated, it is still in the process. They haven’t even applied for the building permit yet.

David Scott stated, I see the car lot guy has applied for his permit.

Director Weaver stated, he actually has his permit for the car lot. Molter, the Building Department I believe has the plans for Walgreen’s, but I think that is all at this time.

President David Stimmel asked, I hate to even ask this, but has anything ever happened on the Commissioners secretary’s fine.

Director Weaver stated, no we were basically, no, I don’t have anywhere to go with that. Just to let it die.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Gary Barbour, Secretary

Diann Weaver, Director

White County Area Plan Commission