Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.
Members attending were: David Scott, Gerald Cartmell, Charles Mellon, and Jerry Thompson. Also attending were Attorney Jerry Altman and Director Diann Weaver.
Visitors attending were: Wayne Martyka, Robert Teel, Bob Reed, Keith Fuller, Angie Teel, Jeff Teel, Dennetta D. Hacker, John S. Hacker, Nancy Clark, Leonard Clark, Becky Hunt, Wayne Hunt, Don Pauken, Theresa Recchia, ???, and Ben Woodhouse (Deputy).
The meeting was called to order by Vice President Thompson and roll call was taken. Charlie Mellon made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the June 21, 2007 meeting. Motion was seconded by and carried unanimously. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.
****
#2615 Barry R. & Donya R. Tirpak; The property is located on Lot 14 in Southlawn Addition Part III, in the City of Monticello at 513 South Park Drive. This is continued from the May 17th and June 21st meetings.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 21’ front (Allen St.) setback variance to build a room addition on the existing home.
Vice President Thompson stated, this variance has been tabled so I assume to the 9th, August 9th.
Director Weaver stated, no to the 16th.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay I wondered that, okay. So this will be tabled, I guess you have, I’m sorry. Okay, I’m reading here and thinking, okay. So this will be heard the 16th of August?
Director Weaver stated, right.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, what’s confusing is we got a meeting the 9th but that does not make that meeting.

Director Weaver stated, no, it doesn’t.
Vice President Thompson asked, all right does everybody understand that? Okay probably everybody but me.
****
#2631 Harold Myers; The property is located on 7.149 acres, Out NE Frax 21-27-3 and 7.384 acres, NW NW 22-27-3 Northeast of Monticello at 1995 N. East Shafer Drive. Tabled from June 28, 2007.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 42' front setback variance to place cabins on the property.
Director Weaver stated, I’m not sure he’s here.
Vice President Thompson stated, and my director tells me you don’t think there’s anyone here representing the variance.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t believe he’s here I don’t see him.
Vice President Thompson asked, anyone here representing the variance? You had no notification?
Director Weaver stated, no, I have not talked to him.
Vice President Thompson asked, okay well what do we table this ourselves?
Attorney Altman stated, I thin that’s the, table it and then the next time it will be dismissed.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay therefore this will also be heard on the August 16th meeting. That’s strange you didn’t get any response either way.
Director Weaver stated, I wonder if he forgot.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, that’s a possibility. Moving right along.
****
#2639 Jeffrey D. & Angela J. Teel; The property is located on 1.554, 0.454, & 0.236 acres, Part S ½ S ½ 36-26-4 located Southeast of Chalmers at 2515 E. 700 S.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting an 8’ rear setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance.
Vice President Thompson asked, anyone here representing the Teel’s?
Director Weaver stated, while Mr. Teel is coming up to the mic I’d like to just inform the board of this situation. Mr. Teel had come in last fall requesting a variance for a pole building for the height and at that time it was discovered that his home was not in compliance with the setbacks and in reviewing information it was, the building permit was issued incorrectly and it was not, the site plan did not show that it was meeting setbacks at the time the permit was issued so therefore as the procedure that the board took for the action on the violation was for Mr. Teel to file a variance for the home to bring it into compliance and that’s why this is coming to you tonight.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver asked, correct?
Jeff Teel stated, that’s correct?
Vice President Thompson asked, Jeff do you have anything you want to add to that or…
Jeff Teel stated, no, I don’t believe so.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, all right. Jerry do you have anything for Mr. Teel?
Attorney Altman stated, no, the existing home was built when Diann?
Director Weaver stated, it was built in 1998.
Jeff Teel stated, 1997.
Director Weaver stated, 1997.
Attorney Altman stated, okay. And the permit you say was incorrectly issued was that, that was just because it didn’t get the attention it needed and it should have been changed and…
Director Weaver stated, I assume so I can’t really state because it was before my term as director so…
Attorney Altman stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, I’m assuming that what it appears, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s what the records appear too.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Attorney Altman asked, so it’s not this gentleman’s fault as far as you can tell?
Director Weaver stated, I don’t, no.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, very good. That’s why there’s no violation indicated here that’s what I’m trying to establish. Okay.
Director Weaver stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, okay very good.
Vice President Thompson asked, anyone here care to address the variance either for or against? Gerald Cartmell do you have any questions for the Teel’s?
Gerald Cartmell stated, no.
Vice President Thompson asked, Dave Scott? Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
Vice President Thompson asked, the board ready to vote?
Attorney Altman stated, the only thing I can mention is we always talk about hardship and it would seem that if this would be a case of where it is in fact a, I guess in a way a hardship because of how it was handled I guess apparently by the department and not by this person by the applicant so I would submit that if finding the fact that that would probably would be an appropriate because of that.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned A-1, Agricultural.
2. That the lot is a lot of record and properly divided.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. The rural setting of the site, the permit incorrectness, and the small variance is deemed appropriated.
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’ rear setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance on Tract 1
Part of the South Half of the South Half of Section 36, Township 26 North, Range 4 West of the Second Principal Meridian in the Big Creek Township, White County, Indiana more particularly described by:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of Section 36 marked by a railroad spike; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East, (based for bearings Grid bearings based on Indiana State Plane Coordinate System-West zone) along the south line of said Section 36 and along the centerline of County road 700 South, a distance of 2633.93 feet to a railroad spike at a point of beginning.
Thence North 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 282.50 feet to a wood post; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East a distance of 238.00 feet to an iron pipe, thence South 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds East a distance of 282.50 feet to a railroad spike; thence South 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds West, along the south line of said Section 36 along the centerline of County road 700 South, a distance of 238.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.544 acres.
Tract 2
That part of the South Half of the South Half of Section 36, Township 26 North, Range 4 West in Big Creek Township, White County, Indiana, further described by:
Commencing at a railroad spike (RR) found at the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East, (Indiana State Plane Coordinate System) CR 700 S and the section line 2,563.93 feet to a survey nail w/I.D. (SN) set at the point of beginning:
Thence North 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 282.50 feet; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East 70.00 feet to a corner post found; thence South 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds East 282.50 feet to a RR found on the section line; thence South 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds West, along said line 70.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.454 acres, more or less.
Tract 3
That part of the South Half of the South Half of Section 36, Township 26 North, Range 4 West in Big Creek Township, White County, Indiana, further described by:
Commencing at a railroad spike (RR) found at the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East, (Indiana State Plane Coordinate System) CR 700 and the section line 2.871.93 feet to a RR found at the point of beginning: Thence North 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 139.37 feet to a capped w/I.D. ½ inch iron pipe (I.P.) set, passing through an I. P. set at 15.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds East 73.66 feet to an I. P. set; thence South 00 degrees 41 minutes 36 seconds East 139.537 feet to a SN set on the section line, passing through an I. P. set at 124.37 feet; thence South 39 degrees 06 minutes 55 seconds West, along said line 73.66 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.236 of an acre, more or less.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located Southeast of Chalmers at 2515 E. 700 S.
7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, the vote on petition on #2639, 4 votes cast 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted. You ought to get your building permit consistent with this variance, okay so you ought to go back to Diann and get that done even though you probably don’t need a new building permit. You need to be consistent with the variance.
Jeff Teel stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, thank you Mr. Teel.
Jeff Teel asked, so the paper work will be updated then?
Attorney Altman stated, yes, and you need to go talk to Diann to get that done, okay.
Jeff Teel stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, all right I’d recommend that.
****
#2640 Keith A. & Wanda K. Fuller; The property is located on Lot 4 and part of Lot 3 in Western Heights Subdivision, located West of Monticello at 537 S. 425 E.
Violation: They built a shed too close to the property line and on a utility easement.
Request: They are requesting a 6’ rear setback variance for a fence and a 4’ rear setback variance and a 4’ side setback variance for a detached garage.
Vice President Thompson asked, Diann do you have anything you want to say?
Director Weaver asked, on the variance or on the violation?
Vice President Thompson asked, oh let’s do the variance and then, want to? Is that all right?
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine. Nothing other than the proposed location of the garage is on a utility easement.
Vice President Thompson asked, Jerry do you have any, I’m reading here.
Attorney Altman stated, obviously that makes it such that we can’t vary a utility easement or allow them to. We can’t condone by a variance them doing that if they had consent by the utility to allow that, that would certainly go along ways to looking at whether this would be possibly appropriate.
Vice President Thompson stated, just a second Jerry better interrupt. Anyone here representing the Fullers? I didn’t ask. Could you come forward please so we’ll know who we’re addressing here.
Attorney Altman stated, okay thank you. I didn’t think of that either.
Keith Fuller stated, yes, I’m Keith Fuller.
Attorney Altman stated, okay thank you Keith. With that being part of a utility easement dedicated by the… It just looks to me like they would need to have that appropriately consented to and I don’t think that’s done is it Diann? None of the utility easements?
Director Weaver stated, no, I don’t have anything in the file, no.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, that’s what I thought.
Vice President Thompson asked, you’re the original owner? You built the home?
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Charlie do you have any questions for Mr. Fuller?
Charlie Mellon asked, is that shed on a permanent foundation?
Keith Fuller stated, no.
Charlie Mellon asked, could be moved?
Keith Fuller asked, could it be moved?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson asked, anything else Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, well it looks like we got a lot of information here tonight from other people.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes um Jerry, yes, this would be a good time to…
Attorney Altman stated, okay, we have received into evidence looks to me like I’ll do them chronologically. We received a letter dated July 12, 2007. To: Fellow Western Heights residents, From: Norbert & Mary Pilotte 505 South 425 East Re: The property variance being requested by Keith Fuller 537 South 425 East. Mr. Fuller has requested a Municipal Property Variance in order to construct a 28’ x 32’ garage on his property. He already has a two=car garage attached to his home and a 12’ x 12’ storage building on the property. The 12 x 12 building presently is sitting on the property easement. The new building is also proposed to be constructed on the easement and just two feet from the South property line. The limited distance to the south property line would not allow for walking around the building without trespassing onto the neighbor’s property. Also, the water runoff from the proposed building would go onto the neighbor’s property. Per Mr. Fuller’s statement to me, the intended use of the proposed building is for the storage of “construction tools and supplies and a truck”. However, our area is not zoned as Commercial Property. Also, it has been noted that he has in the past, and is presently, using our community trash dumpster for the disposal of his construction trash. I don’t believe that is the intended purpose of that dumpster. I, Norbert Pilotte, and the other below signed residents, object to the granting of this variance. It is signed, and I’m not sure who that is the address is 499 S. Mesa Dr. Monticello, and Cleon Bush, Mesa Dr. a resident, Norbert Pilotte, Allen Williams, Jay Haywood, is that who that is, okay signed that. Okay then we also have addressed, it says Belinda Lafferty/Shannon McKay, 550 S. Mesa Drive, Monticello, Indiana, 47960. This was received 7-20-07. To Whom It May Concern: We Belinda Lafferty and Shannon McKay maybe they are just signing their name beside that,
Vice President Thompson stated, I think they are.
Attorney Altman stated, strongly oppose Keith and Wanda Fuller’s plan at 537 S. 425 E. to build a detached garage (Front-30’), (Rear-5’), (Sides-5’, (Height-30’) or any other structure which will detract from our view, property value, and diminish our view. We purchased our home at 550 S. Mesa Drive in October 2006 and enjoy our back deck and the views from there. The proposed building would completely eliminate our view from our backyard. Much of the reason why we purchased the property was for its secluded views. The entire horizon would be obliterated by such a structure. We spend most of our time in the evening out on our deck and do not wish to look at a garage of such proportions. The construction of such a building and its height violate code which was put forth for a reason. Neighbors have the right to have their views remain undisturbed and unobstructed and we hereby go on record that we strictly oppose such a building. Thank you for your time and listening to our concerns. You may call me at 765-409-2836 or 765-202-0685. Sincerely, Belinda Lafferty/Shannon McKay. And attached to that is a copy of the proposed site improvement survey for the setback variance request and also shows on there the property of the, Brenda Lafferty and noting that she lives there. Anything else that I need to read into the evidence Mr. President? I don’t see anything.
Vice President Thompson stated, no, I don’t think so.
Attorney Altman stated, okay very good.
Vice President Thompson asked, okay anyone care to address the variance either for or against? Yes sir?
Robert Reed stated, I don’t know if I understood what you said there, my name is Robert Reed. I live next to Keith on the south side.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Robert Reed stated, I’m not for the variance being passed due to reason that I show here on my diagram that his property, his building would be within 2’ of the property line and I get the runoff from his building and stuff. I think it should be set over according to the rules.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Robert Reed stated, that’s all I got to say about it.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, appreciate that. Anyone else care to address either for or against? Yes, Mr. Fuller.
Keith Fuller stated, I don’t, this is my first time at being up here so I really don’t understand how this all works but I did talk to Mr. Norbert Pilotte and done several business transactions with him. I bought the Heights, Western Heights from him and bought the 40’ of land where my septic system is on, okay and so talking with him on his back porch there was not a problem. He says you want a fence over and you want a garage over there that’s fine we’d just like for you to leave this open here. I said fine. So I was totally unaware of that. One of the names you have on there signed is an ongoing feud between me and Allen Williams and his wife. I do have a dump truck which I take my stuff to the dump. There are other stuff I put in the community dumpster. Belinda and Shannon is the lady’s name McKay and Lafferty, there the one’s that live in that house that they just bought and they just bought it from me I sold it for my family because my father’s in a nursing home now and I didn’t know there was any problem there either when I went to talked to them and they talk about how they sit and they look on their deck out their view and there is 20’ trees out there, shrubs, bushes, I don’t know how to pronounce the names of what they are so I don’t know what they mean by I’m going to obstruct their view maybe they’ll see the roofline, that’s possible. At one time talking with Bob and explaining with him he told he didn’t care if it was on the property line just as long as it wasn’t on his line. Since then he’s had some questions I believe Norbert’s raised some questions for him and he has done in the past and so he understandably changed his mind about some things too so basically what I’m trying to do is I need a building to put a couple of trucks in and some tools and stuff. I wanted to build it over on the other side by Norbert but my septic system is over there and therefore the only other land that I have is over there by my driveway where I’m trying to ask for the variances so when I go over there I need a smaller garage is all I can build so I’m here asking you to give me as much as I can get to build me the biggest one I can and if I don’t get a variance okay, then I’m still going to build a garage whether it be a 20 x 20. I have to have something there and I’ve been told if it’s an attached garage you got to be 6’ away, if it’s detached you got to be 5’ away and Bob was telling my wife something this morning that it has to be 8’ away so now I don’t even know what it is and that’s not trying to do there with the garage okay and with the fence over there, I don’t even want a permanent fence I, there’s 30’ blue spruce trees there that are beautiful and it blocked everything off for privacy between me and the other neighbors and stuff and he cut them up 6 to 8’ all along there and he could of cut them half way and seen 60 to 80 acres as a field if he wanted to and left half of them there but he went all the way up all the way along so for 2 years I put pompous grass there trying to grow up for blockage for the summer when your out and I put some more of those green trees that grow up that I can’t pronounce, and there growing so slow and the sheriff’s been called twice they don’t need that, I don’t need that and neither does the neighbor. So I thought that I would put up a privacy fence there. If not all the way at least half of the way then we don’t see eye to eye from deck to deck. And if I half to come out 6’ I’ll do that. It makes me feel like I’m giving 6’ but I’ll maybe childish but it just feels that you know what I’m saying so that’s why I want to put some kind of temporary fence right on that line until them trees grow up then and then the last thing on the shed, I’m definitely in violation of that but it was not in no malicious intent to do anything wrong. The lot right behind me that shed, when I bought the lot that house was on that shed was on that lot right on that line. There was a shed there it’s 8 x 16’ long and if you look directly behind I have a photo here that’s setting where McKay and Lafferty bought because my mom and dad lived there and when they lived there they had moved the shed over there. I have a picture it’s on lot 8. So me and dad just basically drug that across the property line. It was right on the line where my shed is now and because Scott Elizalde owned both lots is what he did and he had nothing on there, I bought it on contract and he left it on there anyways we do that and then mom says why don’t you just put it where it’s at I mean it doesn’t make any sense for you to move it somewhere else. I say I don’t know. He’s says can you move it if they want it moved, I said yes I can. And that’s where that came about I mean I’m wrong but it wasn’t any malicious thing to do deliberately and just a common sense thing where it was behind the house and blocked by the wind and yet there was an existing shed there at this time right on the line and then if you look right over on lot 7, there’s another shed there right on the line so 2 wrongs don’t make it right I guess but that’s what I’ve got and somewhere along the line I’m going back to Diann and I’m going to get a building permit to put a fence up there some how and I’m going to put a garage up because I can’t right.
Charlie Mellon stated, this lady saying that your height of your garage violates a code, it isn’t going to be over 17’, surely not.
Keith Fuller stated, no, no. I don’t think now if I don’t any variance at all I was thinking about an 8’ door was it, that’s it. And it wouldn’t look good for my house to go anything like that, that was never mentioned to me they just, it comes and maybe this happens all the time you know I can talk to them face to face and I get this reaction and then this just totally blew me away.
Charlie Mellon stated, Norris Pilotte I’ve known him all of his life probably and looks like he’s got the neighbors even though he agreed to do everything, he’s got the neighbors and the neighbors got him to be spokesman for the group.
Keith Fuller stated, yes, yes, and I get along with Cleon Bush, I used to live in that house.
Charlie Mellon stated, I was out there this morning, I see your situation.
Keith Fuller stated, as a matter of fact I think Cleon, her sheds in a right underneath the utility easement. But I don’t want to get into all of that cause more trouble over stuff. I mean I’ll move the shed you know what I mean, I’ll do that. But that’s what I’m trying to do is I’m just trying to get a little of privacy from my neighbor and I’m trying to build a garage and it’s not nothing commercial. I got a pick up truck that at one time dump truck and…
Charlie Mellon stated, well another thing in looking at that situation out there I know other people that live out there. I don’t know as we got a real rule about bothering peoples view. Now along the lake and everything like that that there to my notion is different than in an area like that where the people’s been there 6 months or so and their the ones that’s doing the gripping and I just can’t go along with that. That’s about all I got to say Jerry.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, Dave Scott.
Dave Scott asked, Diann what is the setbacks on the rear and a side supposed to be?
Director Weaver stated, its 5’ from the overhang from the each, the rear and the side.
Dave Scott stated, so…
Director Weaver stated, that’s for a detached.
Dave Scott asked, and does that have to be off the easement or just off the property line?
Director Weaver stated, it has to be off the property line but the easement does not allow for structures to be placed, permanent structures to be placed on an easement.
Dave Scott asked, okay so basically he can still build 28 x 32 or does that put him to close to the house or, with out a variance?
Director Weaver stated, I don’t regulate the distance between the house and the garage that’s building department.
Dave Scott stated, I guess what I’m after is…
Keith Fuller stated, no.
Dave Scott stated, I’m trying to figure out what the hardship is and why not just meet the setbacks. You’re just a couple of feet from it. First of all as far as building on an easement…
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, I won’t go for that, I mean I just won’t do that.
Keith Fuller stated, okay, then, yes. And I understand and okay that’s the way it is but I tried, okay and I understand so what is that easement, what is my, is it 6’ or 5’?
Dave Scott stated, it looks like its 10’ but…
Gerald Cartmell stated, it says 10’ easement.
Dave Scott stated, yes right there.
Keith Fuller asked, is it 5’ on each line?
Vice President Thompson stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Keith Fuller stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, it appears to be 5’ on each side.
Keith Fuller stated, okay so…
Attorney Altman stated, that’s something you ought to ask your surveyor though because he doesn’t exactly say that its 5’ on both sides, okay. But that’s something you can get that answer from your surveyor.
Keith Fuller stated, and then okay…
Dave Scott stated, if you just move in with 6’ and put your fence up and move your garage in there you can meet the setbacks. Why can’t he meet the setbacks Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes that’s all right.
Dave Scott stated, I mean…
Vice President Thompson stated, yes it’ll…
Dave Scott asked, why does he need a variance? Where’s the hardship? I mean I think there’s room for his garage to be there and the fence without a setback variance.
Keith Fuller stated, the fence was there because to put it on the line because there’s trees on each side. My trees would be on my side of the fence his trees would have been on his side of the fence is why we’re trying to go on the line with that.
Vice President Thompson asked, you have this survey don’t you?
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, what kind of an easement is it, for electric, gas, what is it?
Keith Fuller stated, there’s both, the electric and the gas line runs there also.
Charlie Mellon stated, you got to stay from that.
Dave Scott stated, see if…
Keith Fuller stated, but I don’t even want to plant anything in the ground.
Dave Scott stated, pardon me.
Keith Fuller stated, I’m not even going to put anything in the ground for this variance.
Dave Scott stated, well you got a fence post in there.
Keith Fuller stated, no, I’m not. I’m going to put whiskey barrels out there and put the posts in the barrels. I don’t want it to stay there forever. I want it 5,6 years for them trees to grow up and nothing will be in the ground unless it’s 6’ away where I have to anchor posts of some sorts.
Vice President Thompson asked, do you understand what Mr. Scott is saying?
Keith Fuller stated, no, I’m not sure.
Vice President Thompson stated, you can move that garage and not need us.
Keith Fuller stated, no, I don’t understand that.
Vice President Thompson stated, step up there, Dave show him what you, show him what he could do there.
Dave Scott stated, well according to the survey here you only have to move in 3’ both ways and you know that just moves you over to 3’ this way.
Keith Fuller asked, okay that’s what I don’t understand where do I have to be here?
Dave Scott stated, well actually I think 5’ puts you right on the easement, right on the easement line and I don’t know if there’s a setback for an easement is there, do you guys know? Can it be right on the line?
Director Weaver stated, I believe it can go right to the easement is my understanding.
Dave Scott stated, okay so you can go right up against the easement and…
Keith Fuller stated, its 5’ from each side then.
Dave Scott stated, right 5’ from each side.
Charlie Mellon stated, he’s got room to move it.
Vice President Thompson stated, see if you move it 3’ west and 3’ north your in business.
Keith Fuller stated, yes, but most likely what I’ll do for my home I’m going to request a building permit for a 26 x 28 then a smaller garage because it’s just to close to the house to me.
Vice President Thompson stated, that’ll work.
Keith Fuller stated, that’s what my option I have here 1 or 2. I don’t know what happens here so I said if I go, if it’s 5, 5 it needs to be somewhere around a 26 x 26 or a 26 x 28 and I would like to make another measurement and then come up with a building permit.
Vice President Thompson stated, if he does that he doesn’t need to come back.
Director Weaver stated, right.
Keith Fuller stated, right, and you’re not going to give me the rear setback anyway so and Bob doesn’t want me over there in his property so 2’ is 2’, I don’t want to ruin a neighbor over that.
Gerald Cartmell asked, what are you going to do about the shed setting on the easement, are you going to move that?
Keith Fuller stated, I can move it but I’m going to be right up on my deck.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I can’t help it, you’re on the easement.
Keith Fuller stated, I’ll move it, I’ll move it.
Vice President Thompson stated, well he isn’t going to have to move it that far.
Gerald Cartmell asked, he’s only got to move it how far?
Vice President Thompson stated, 3’.
Gerald Cartmell stated, 3’, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, you’re not going to move it that far. It’s not going to be on top of your deck.
Keith Fuller stated, I’ll move it, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, it’s hard to know exactly but 3’ looks like it’d be enough to get it off there.
Dave Scott asked, you and your neighbor was going to share the expense of this fence is that what your saying?
Keith Fuller stated, no Mr.? it doesn’t work that way.
Dave Scott stated, okay well…
Vice President Thompson asked, Gerald what do you, your turn we haven’t…
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’ve pretty well, he moves that shed and he’s going to put a garage in, he doesn’t even need us he just put it where he’s supposed to.
Vice President Thompson stated, no.
Attorney Altman stated, except for that request on the fence.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, the fence deal.
Attorney Altman stated, the fence seems still before us to vote or to look at and as I understand he’s talking about a temporary not permanent structure for a maximum of 6 years there, is what I hear him saying. Now is that about what you’re talking about?
Keith Fuller stated, that’s exactly the way it’s going to be. The only thing that would be permanent would be 6’ in with a post anchored to that fence if the wind wants to take it over.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, okay, yes.
Keith Fuller stated, but nothing will be drilled or put into that ground, nothing.
Attorney Altman stated, okay.
Keith Fuller stated, the whiskey barrels and the post in there and their filled up with dirt and flowers and rocks.
Vice President Thompson asked, with it not being any more permanent than that do we need to…
Attorney Altman stated, I think you ought to be that close there but he’s modifying it so that it’s, it isn’t permanent and it would be very temporary and move, and gone in 6 years, so that certainly makes a different request for us to look at.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Dave Scott stated, and the other thing I’d put in there is the utility company shouldn’t be responsible for damage to the fence if they have to get in there and work. Can’t we do that or?
Attorney Altman stated, yes we sure can.
Gerald Cartmell stated, you know they could run over your fence.
Dave Scott stated, yes, they may have to move it for…
Keith Fuller Stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson asked, any other discussion? Do you understand what we’re doing we’re voting on the fence.
Attorney Altman stated, as a temporary one.
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, but we have to go back to him. Does he, it’s his call.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I understand, that’s what your modifying your request to, right?
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, for the fence.
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, and we are not dealing with the garage now.
Keith Fuller stated, no.
Vice President Thompson stated, because you’re willing to make the changes to that to…
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay but I want to hear you say it before, we’re not trying to put words in your mouth.
Keith Fuller stated, yes, I, I, your not using you guys in the garage at all I’m going to move and I’m moving that shed 3’ forward.
Vice President Thompson stated, see and you’ll just go to her and that’ll square the garage up.
Keith Fuller stated, and I’ll just go to her with the garage.
Vice President Thompson stated, you don’t have to come back to see us again see.
Keith Fuller stated, no, I won’t bother you anymore.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Anything else?
Gerald Cartmell stated, just thinking back what happened along time ago.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Ready to vote?
Attorney Altman stated, and the hardship would be the fact the fence, he’s just replacing vegetation that was cut down, not by him but by a neighbor and the neighbor had the right to do it now however he’s just trying to show, bridge between the next 6 years.
Gerald Cartmell stated, the neighbor didn’t have a right, he goes to the middle of the property and to the right to your fence to your left is your neighbors, so the neighbor didn’t have a right to cut them down.
Attorney Altman stated, well maybe not then. Okay, I see what you’re saying.
Vice President Thompson stated, let’s vote.
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.
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 amended for a 6’ rear setback variance for a temporary fence not to exceed 6 years on Lot Number Four (4) of Western Heights Subdivision, being out of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Twenty-seven (27) North, Range Three (3) West in Union Township, White County, Indiana and part of Lot 3 in Western Heights Subdivision in Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:
Beginning at a half inch iron pipe at the Southwest corner of said Lot 8; thence North 40.00 feet along the west line of said Lot 3 to a ½ inch iron pipe; thence East 110.00 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe on the east line of said Lot 3; thence South 40.00 feet to a ½ inch iron pipe at the Southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence West 110.00 feet to the point of beginning
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of Monticello at 537 S. 425 E.
7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative on the fence only.
Attorney Altman stated, results on the vote of petition #2640 first thing just for the record the applicant had withdrawn the request for a variance as it applied to a proposed garage on the site improvement survey for a setback variance request. He’s also agreed to move though that wasn’t on that request the 12 x 12 shed that is setting out of compliance. He’s also indicated that the proposed fence as drawn on the site improvement survey mentioned before will be a temporary fence for no more than 6 years and it will not be permanently attached to the ground at the site along the property line. It will be guide in structured so it can’t be blown away but it will not be permanent. Am I saying that about the way you understand it Mr. Fuller?
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, okay very good.
Gerald Cartmell stated, and one other thing.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, and that NIPSCO or the utility company if they have any problems can remove that and you’d reimburse them if that caused any problems for them.
Keith Fuller stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, okay and one other thing.
Gerald Cartmell stated, we didn’t say when he had to move the shed.
Director Weaver stated, well we haven’t dealt with the violation yet.
Vice President Thompson stated, that’s coming.
Attorney Altman stated, haven’t dealt with that yet.
Gerald Cartmell stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, but he did mention that their so I wanted to talk about…
Gerald Cartmell stated, well that’s the only way I agreed to do this.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes, that’s right.
Attorney Altman stated, yes and the result on the vote as modified as I just set out is on 2640 is 4 votes cast 4 votes vote the variance is hereby granted and you may or may not need a building permit but you probably, that’s something we’re going to talk about in just a second.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay the violation, let me restate the violation. They built a shed to close to the property line and on a utility easement, now just for myself how long has it been setting there?
Keith Fuller stated, 97.
Director Weaver stated, the permit was issued in 97.
Vice President Thompson stated, in 97 okay for the shed itself.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, all right.
Attorney Altman asked, and this is the 12 x 12 shed that’s on the survey.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, okay good.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay and obviously the easement was there at that time.
Director Weaver stated, yes it was even shown on his site plan.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, okay, all right. Do you have anything before I...
Director Weaver stated, I do not other than there was a permit issued, when the permit was issued the site plan showed that it would not be sitting on the easement.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Dave Scott stated, I’ll make a motion that if he moves the shed within 30 days we’ll wave the fine and if he doesn’t move it in 30 days the $500 fine stays.
Charlie Mellon stated, I’ll second.
Vice President Thompson stated, been moved and seconded any other discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.
Board members stated, aye.
Vice President Thompson stated, all opposed. Motion carried. Clear enough?
Keith Fuller stated, clear enough.
Director Weaver stated, please contact me when the shed has been moved so I can come out and verify that it’s been moved.
Keith Fuller stated, I will.
Attorney Altman stated, and you ought to get your building permit consistent with this change, okay.
Keith Fuller stated, okay, is that it.
Vice President Thompson stated, that’s it.
Keith Fuller stated, thank you gentlemen.
Vice President Thompson stated, thank you.
****
#2641 Dennetta D. & John S. Hacker; The property is located on 1.00 Acre, out SW SW 29-27-3 located West of Monticello at 219 N. 400 E.
Violation: They built the home too close to the front property line.
Request: They are requesting a 15’ front setback variance to roof 2 existing decks.
Vice President Thompson stated, but lets deal with the request first. Diann?
Director Weaver stated, I don’t think I have anything to add.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Jerry?
Attorney Altman stated, not right now.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Charlie Mellon?
Charlie Mellon stated, not right now.
Vice President Thompson stated, excuse me.
Attorney Altman stated, the only thing I guess I should read is, there was a letter here from Dennetta., am I mispronouncing?
Dennetta Hacker stated, no it’s Dennetta.
Attorney Altman stated, Dennetta, I’m sorry, it says it’s dated 6/25/07. Have 2 existing decks that I would like to put a roof over the decks. I would need a variance for the roof. Thank you, Dennetta D. Hacker. And below that it says setbacks are different for the house and decks since it was built. Need a variance to roof over existing decks. That’s all it says.
Vice President Thompson stated, I’m sorry I’m out of whack again. Your name for the record please.
Dennetta Hacker stated, Dennetta.
Vice President Thompson stated, I thought you said that I was just wanted to hear you say that again, okay, all right. Gerald do you want to start?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I guess I’m lost. Is there, evidently there’s two different lots back there. What’s the deal? We had a hard time finding where it was marked back behind.
Director Weaver stated, this sits behind another property, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, behind, we thought we were on the wrong place.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, for the longest time.
Director Weaver stated, there’s one, I think there’s one driveway for 2 houses.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, you go clear back around.
Director Weaver asked, is that right?
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, that’s what I remembered.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, I guess it doesn’t make any difference how you designate what the front was.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, it’s the back I was out there this morning.
Director Weaver stated, the front is the south side.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, and there what, 2’ off from the house 58, shouldn’t it be 60.
Director Weaver stated, the original house is 2’ off.
Dave Scott asked, and it was built when?
Dennetta Hacker stated, 1985
Dave Scott stated, 85.
Vice President Thompson asked, you built the home ma'am?
Dennetta Hacker stated, we had it built yes.
Vice President Thompson asked, you had it built, you’re the original owner.
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon asked, which side is the house off, Diann, do you know?
Director Weaver stated, pardon me.
Charlie Mellon asked, which side of the house is off 2’?
Director Weaver stated, the south side, the south side is the front.
Charlie Mellon stated, ok, yes, that’s the front.
Vice President Thompson asked anything else Gerald or are you still thinking?
Gerald Cartmell stated, still thinking.
Vice President Thompson stated, all right. Dave Scott do you have anything more?
Dave Scott stated, no not really.
Vice President Thompson asked, Charlie do you have anything else?
Charlie Mellon stated, no I was out there this morning and I turned around in front of the house and there’s all kind of room in front of that house. I suppose the constructors might have missed 2’ when they were building it. That would be about all and evidently they had a permit then and the 2’ off is not very much as far as I’m concerned.
Attorney Altman asked, who was your contractor, ma’am?
Dennetta Hacker stated, well we had several different people do it. There was Noel Thompson actually laid the blocks for it.
Attorney Altman stated, okay he wouldn’t have sited the place. Who, who…
Dennetta Hacker asked, do what?
Attorney Altman asked, who put the home, or set where the home was going to be built?
Dennetta Hacker stated, I think it was done when Milligan surveyed it, they staked it.
Charlie Mellon stated, the guy that laid the block ought to have known.
Dennetta Hacker stated, and the, Jerry Sparks dug the foundation.
Charlie Mellon stated, okay.
Vice President Thompson stated, Gerald, back to you. Nothing else? Okay we are once again we’re dealing with setback to roof existing decks. Make sure we’re all together on this.
Dave Scott asked, what’s that?
Vice President Thompson stated, I’m dealing with the actual request again now.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Vice President Thompson asked, so is any other discussion on the request? None? Is the board ready to vote? All right let’s vote on that then.
Director Weaver asked, you brought your sign back right?
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes I did.
The Board finds the following?
1. That the property is properly zoned A-1, Agricultural.
2. That the lot is a lot of record and properly divided.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. The variance is small and will not cause problems in this neighborhood.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 15’ front setback variance to roof 2 existing decks on that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Union Township, White County, Indiana described by:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the above said Section 29; thence North 00 degrees 28 minutes 53 seconds West along the section line 1112.97 feet; thence South 89 degrees 18 minutes 50 seconds East 231.00 feet to the point of beginning;
Thence North 00 degrees 28 minutes 53 seconds West 198.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 18 minutes 50 seconds East 220.00 feet; thence South 00 degrees 28 minutes 53 seconds East 198.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 18 minutes 50 seconds West 220.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.00 Acre, more or less.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located West of Monticello at 219 N. 400 E.
7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, okay we have the vote on petition #2641 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted. You need to get your building permit into compliance with this variance then I’m proposing that the hardship is the fact that, as Charlie indicated it isn’t 2’ out of 60 isn’t considered to significant a miss given the circumstances and given the neighborhood. Would that be a fair statement? Okay very good.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, the violation. They built the home to close to the front property line. Diann do you have anything again on this?
Director Weaver stated, no, not really.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. What…
Gerald Cartmell stated, well the guy that dug the holes is dead.
Dave Scott stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, can’t do much about that.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, you’re right there.
Gerald Cartmell stated, somebody can’t read the transcript or the blue print, I don’t think that’s her fault.
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
Gerald Cartmell stated, out there in the country you can’t tell and maybe Milligan didn’t have the stakes right. I’d say we wave it.
Dave Scott stated, I’ll second it.
Vice President Thompson asked, this is in the mid 80’s, to late 80’s, correct?
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes, 22 years ago.
Vice President Thompson stated, 22.
Dennetta Hacker stated, 85, 1985.
Dave Scott stated, I would note that as part of our reason to because it’s fairly old.
Attorney Altman stated, so noted.
Vice President Thompson asked, so do we have that is form of a motion?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I made it.
Dave Scott stated, I seconded it.
Vice President Thompson asked, been moved and seconded? All in favor signify in saying aye.
Board members stated, aye.
Vice President Thompson asked, all opposed?
Dennetta Hacker asked, so does that now legalize any noncomforming buildings or any building that are out…
Director Weaver stated, just the home.
Dennetta Hacker stated, just, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, just the house and just the building of the roofing the decks okay.
Vice President Thompson asked, does she have any reason to come in and see you?
Attorney Altman stated, now she needs a permit for that.
Dennetta Hacker stated, I need to come it.
Director Weaver stated, she needs a permit to roof the decks.
Vice President Thompson stated, well I didn’t know if she understood that, that’s why I’m asking, okay.
Dennetta Hacker asked, but what I’m talking about is like there won’t be an issue with the home being off 2’ again right, that takes care of that?
Director Weaver stated, what we’ll do when you come in we’ll also amend the permit for the home and get that taken care of.
Dennetta Hacker stated, okay so then that will take care of that.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Dennetta Hacker stated, okay.
Dave Scott asked, Diann on that, I can’t find it now but it looked like the building was 3’ off the property line also is that, do you have that survey?
Director Weaver stated, yes, I haven’t quite figured that one out Dave.
Dave Scott stated, I’ve lost it here. I’m not trying to cause any problems for you.
Dennetta Hacker asked, no the utility building?
Charlie Mellon stated, it’s on the side.
Director Weaver asked, did you build that building?
Dennetta Hacker stated, FBI builders.
Director Weaver asked, but you own it, you were the owners at the time it was built?
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes, it was built in 86, the year after the house.
Dave Scott asked, in when, 8…
Dennetta Hacker stated, in 86.
Dave Scott stated, oh okay. Is that out of compliance?
Director Weaver stated, I believe so, yes.
Dave Scott asked, can you fix that too when you’re fixing the rest?
Director Weaver stated, not without, no because we didn’t request a variance on it.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, the reason I didn’t site it as a violation because I wasn’t sure of the details because there’s 2 barns right there and I wasn’t sure which permit the barn was for because I don’t think one of them is being assessed at this time. I don’t think the Hacker’s are being assessed for their barn at all.
Dennetta Hacker stated, that’s not mine. That belongs to Reynolds’s.
Director Weaver stated, the one that’s showing on your drawing.
Charlie Mellon stated, in front of the house.
Dennetta Hacker stated, yes, that barn is not mine. The one that says barn, the 40 x 26?
Director Weaver stated, there’s 2 of them that says barn. No I’m referring to 40 x 30.
Dave Scott stated, no the 30 x 40.
Dennetta Hacker stated, oh okay.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t believe it shows on your property record card so I’m not convinced you’re even being assessed on it.
Dennetta Hacker asked, oh really?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, so how does she go about getting that straightened out?
Director Weaver stated, she needs to see the assessor’s office. I’ve already contacted them. They we’re going to send someone out to review the 2 properties to see what the status was. That’s why I didn’t site it for a violation because I don’t, at that time I couldn’t tell whose building was who’s.
Gerald Cartmell stated, okay so what we’re trying to do is save her a trip here but we couldn’t do it. Make her bring that in. Can’t do it on this time can we?
Director Weaver stated, no.
Dave Scott stated, she may have to come back and bring the barn into compliance.
Gerald Cartmell asked, or would you like a fine?
Dennetta Hacker asked, well what do you do to come back to do this? Stake the thing again in the yard?
Gerald Cartmell stated, the same thing you did before. Come back to see Diann and she’ll tell you.
Dennetta Hacker stated, okay.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Dennetta Hacker stated, she told me too that it should have been set back 60’ but they gave me…
Director Weaver stated, that’s what they’re referring to is that it should have been set back 60’.
Dennetta Hacker stated, but you issued me the building permit or whoever was at the office at the time issued me a building permit didn’t say that.
Attorney Altman stated, bring it in.
Vice President Thompson stated, bring it in.
Dennetta Hacker stated, there’s a copy right there.
Director Weaver stated, if you come in and file for the variance that’s something that we can research and reveal at that time.
Dennetta Hacker stated, right here is for the, for the barn. It says 3’ on the side and 6’ from the back. That’s what the original building permit for it said.
Director Weaver stated, I have the file right here in front of me.
Dave Scott stated, oh, okay.
Director Weaver stated, Jerry’s looking at the site plan that was submitted at the time.
Dennetta Hacker stated, so I built it within this.
Attorney Altman stated, it says 3 and 8.
Gerald Cartmell stated, nice job.
Dave Scott asked, can I see that?
Director Weaver stated, this is a site plan.
Dave Scott asked, oh that’s a site plan?
Vice President Thompson stated, that’s 3 and 8.
Dave Scott stated, well her permit says…
Vice President Thompson stated, yes, okay.
Dennetta Hacker asked, so it that an issue?
Vice President Thompson stated, I don’t see how it is.
Director Weaver stated, no but if something happens to the barn, in order to build it back you’ll have to have a variance.
Dennetta Hacker stated, okay.
Dave Scott stated, yes, I wouldn’t loose that piece of paper.
Dennetta Hackers asked, but I don’t have to do anything now?
Vice President Thompson stated, no, you’re square.
Dennetta Hacker stated, okay.
Vice President Thompson stated, you’re square.
Dennetta Hacker stated, other than just come and get my building permit for the other variance.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, your all right to put your deck on. That’s what you’re here for.
Dennetta Hacker stated, the roofs, yes. That’s it?
Vice President Thompson stated, you’re done, thank you.
Dennetta Hacker stated, thank you.
****
#2642 Wayne & Lynn Martyka; The property is located on N 1/2 of Lot 13 in Ledford Camp located North of Lowes Bridge at 6739 N. Skaggs Court.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting an 8’ North side setback variance and an 8’ South side setback variance to add a room addition, and roofed area, and to change the roofline.
Wayne Martyka stated, Martyka.
Vice President Thompson asked, and sir you are?
Wayne Martyka stated, Wayne Martyka.
Vice President Thompson stated, finally I got that right. I recognize the proper people at the proper time. Do you have anything you want to present to the board sir other than what I read?
Wayne Martyka stated, no sir.
Vice President Thompson stated, nothing, okay. Diann do you have anything to throw in?
Director Weaver stated, no I do not other that, yes, I guess now would be the best time as any to mention that really doesn’t pertain to this property but there was a variance granted on the property to the north of this.
Vice President Thompson stated, um hum.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t know if that makes a difference to the board or not but when I went up there I recognized the property so I researched it and there was a variance granted to the north of the property.
Dave Scott asked, for what I didn’t hear you?
Director Weaver stated, there was a variance granted for…
Charlie Mellon stated, just right north of it. The big 2 story.
Director Weaver stated, the property directly north.
Charlie Mellon stated, she hadn’t got finished yet.
Director Weaver stated, I have it here but I didn’t look to see what it was exactly for.
Charlie Mellon asked, you’re not connected to that house are you?
Wayne Martyka stated, no I’m not that’s my neighbor.
Director Weaver stated, that was for a 1’ south side setback variance and a 1’ north side setback variance to build a new home.
Gerald Cartmell asked, I guess my question is what’s your hardship? We’re not supposed to approve these unless there’s a hardship so what’s your hardship?
Charlie Mellon stated, that’s not final. This here hardship deal, as far as I’m concerned just come on here recently.
Gerald Cartmell stated, it’s been in the rules since day one.
Charlie Mellon stated, the same thing, yes the rules from day one it hasn’t been forced and their just stressing it to much as far as I’m concerned here lately.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well I’m still asking a questing.
Wayne Martyka stated, I don’t understand as a hardship.
Gerald Cartmell asked, what hardship?
Wayne Martyka asked, I don’t think I have one do I?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’m asking you.
Wayne Martyka stated, I don’t believe I have one. I’m just requesting to move a wall out.
Vice President Thompson stated, just a second before we go any further. Jerry, do you have anything to add to this?
Attorney Altman stated, no I don’t think there’s anything in the file, no.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, all right. Let’s go back to you Gerald, I’m sorry I wanted to give Jerry a chance here before we got any further.
Director Weaver stated, we do have a letter that was submitted as part of the application.
Vice President Thompson stated, from them.
Director Weaver stated, yes, from them.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I was looking for and didn’t see it.
Vice President Thompson stated, its right here.
Director Weaver stated, yes, its, yes, that’s it.
Attorney Altman stated, okay the body to consider this our statement to comply with the zoning ordinance instructions. Item No. 7 Applicants must submit at the time of application a statement (as stated in 10.1001 of the White County Zoning Ordinance) of why the strict application of the terms of this ordinance would cause undue or unnecessary hardship or would involve practical difficulties as applied to the property for which the variance is sought and a request is made to vary such regulations or requirements so that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, public and safety secured, and substantial justice done. Owners’ Statement. The reason we are seeking a variance is because the value of the improvements we are planning for our summer home versus the property value is 50% more than the value of the home. This breaks the grandfather clause requiring a variance to be in compliance with the Zoning Commission. Please note we are not changing any setback distances. In addition, our surrounding neighbors are aware of the improvements and are not opposed to them. The improvements will not cause undue or unnecessary hardship, will not involve any practical difficulties, and the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, and public safety will be secured before, during and after the construction. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Wayne Martyka & Lynn Martyka.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay. Dave Scott you have any questions for…
Dave Scott stated, we went out and looked at this and the house was evidently there before the county had setback.
Vice President Thompson stated, um hum.
Dave Scott stated, things like that and because of the southeast corner of it I really don’t have a problem with because it’s actually going to be further from the property line than the existing house. The problem I have with is the southwest corner will put you it says 4’ from the property line but I, we looked at it and I question that.
Wayne Martyka stated, well the house is sticking out more because the owner before me placed rocks onto the existing foundation so my actual house is 4’ away but the rocks protrude out like 2’ more.
Dave Scott stated, right and it looks like the addition you’re wanting to put on that little corner because of the way the house is sitting on the lot is going to make it even closer there.
Wayne Martyka stated, on the angle.
Dave Scott stated, I don’t even think you can walk around the house without getting on your neighbors property.
Wayne Martyka stated, at one point comes there we got like 1’ where I’m walking almost on his property but there’s no structure next to it whatever.
Dave Scott stated, well, the problem is if your neighbor decides he wants to build something there 1’ off the property line, you know…
Wayne Martyka stated, I discussed what I was doing with them and they’re all for it because I’m improving…
Dave Scott stated, like I say I have no problem with probably granting the southeast corner of that project but the little section there that’s going to be right on the property line…
Wayne Martyka stated, it will not be on the property line sir.
Dave Scott stated, well it’s going to be close. Is the rock coming off of the house?
Wayne Martyka stated, yes, I took the rock off so it’s like extended out and I’m just putting it on the back side.
Dave Scott asked, then what are you going to use for siding when you get the new part built?
Wayne Martyka stated, the rock is going back on.
Dave Scott stated, your going to rock it.
Wayne Martyka stated, right it will still be off, 1’ off or I think how far off the property line where it’s at right now same corner but I understand how it’s coming out the angle there it is getting closer right in that southwest corner in the back it’s like a stake put there right now showing how far I could come to that corner but the way the house is on that angle it is from that corner on it just gets like a pie shape bigger and the corner where I want to put down there is where I want to put a shower in there because right now there is no shower in there, what he had was this an overhead thing right next to the hot water heater and the electrical box so I want to…
Charlie Mellon asked, well doesn’t that property, that edge of yours on the north go down? Your neighbor’s property is not very level there is it next to you? It goes down on down, down in that valley where that big house is being built.
Wayne Martyka stated, it’s a white double wide next door his property goes down.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh okay its back a little bit.
Wayne Martyka stated, right it’s a yellow house.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh okay, yes. I didn’t think anything was that close when I was out there. I didn’t go up there and look.
Vice President Thompson asked, anyone here care to address the variance for or against? Okay. Jerry do you have anything else?
Attorney Altman stated, no I think it’s been developed.
Vice President Thompson asked, Charlie do you have anything else?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
Vice President Thompson asked, Gerald Cartmell?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’m kind of with Dave on this, on this one property line. Any way you can shorten it up any?
Wayne Martyka asked, shorten what up though?
Gerald Cartmell stated, this southwest corner here. Come here and look.
Wayne Martyka stated, I’m just trying to square this part out right here.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, we understand.
Wayne Martyka stated, and it will be right there, that’s where it’s going, the point will be. We’re not going any further than that, that site is existing right now.
Dave Scott stated, but that leaves you, it says it’s 4’ right there but once you get the rock on there your down to, you know that rock sticks up another feet.
Wayne Martyka stated, well whatever I put up for siding I will not go over the property line. This here will be even closer than that.
Gerald Cartmell stated, but it’s already there.
Dave Scott stated, I know but we can’t do anything about that.
Wayne Martyka stated, right, right, so that’s going to be almost exactly just the same and my neighbors house is almost I think.
Dave Scott stated, we’ve got to draw a line in the sand somewhere because I mean the county sets rules and we’re just over riding them here.
Wayne Martyka stated, I’m trying to square it off I could put a rectangular based roof on it to make it all square now if I went in a little bit more I would deter from the square and it wouldn’t look right.
Vice President Thompson asked, have no fan mail from anyone?
Director Weaver stated, no, not that I’m aware of, no.
Vice President Thompson asked, what’s your thoughts gang?
Dave Scott asked, is there a house on this property here or a building or something on this property?
Wayne Martyka asked, on this property?
Dave Scott stated, yes.
Wayne Martyka stated, yes, its back on this corner here.
Dave Scott stated, it doesn’t show.
Wayne Martyka stated, right there at my sidewalk is right where it comes.
Dave Scott stated, um hum.
Wayne Martyka stated, I just wanted to square that square and change my hip to a gable roof.
Dave Scott stated, um hum.
Vice President Thompson asked, Gerald? Excuse me?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’m done.
Vice President Thompson asked, Dave Scott do you have anything else.
Dave Scott stated, oh I’m trying to think of an option here for him because I don’t feel good about granting this variance.
Wayne Martyka stated, I won’t go over the property line.
Dave Scott asked, pardon me?
Wayne Martyka stated, I’ll stay away from the property line.
Gerald Cartmell stated, obviously.
Attorney Altman stated, you’re required to do that.
Wayne Martyka stated, I want to comply with all the rules and regulations that what I want to do.
Attorney Altman stated, I’m just saying as I appreciate what your saying but you’re required to do that. That’s the law.
Wayne Martyka stated, I understand this.
Charlie Mellon asked, can you suck that corner in some?
Wayne Martyka stated, if I have to I could but then it’s not going, it’s going to effect the…
Charlie Mellon stated, the whole side would need to be sucked in really.
Wayne Martyka stated, right, and the part is sticking far enough and then I don’t know how I’d be able to put the footing in and have the roof square.
Attorney Altman stated, bring the whole wall in.
Wayne Martyka stated, but the existing are part, well I guess I could…
Attorney Altman stated, moved the existing part. I’m telling you, I’m not, I’m just saying just saying it’s possible, I’m not.
Wayne Martyka stated, I could cut the corner at an angle maybe.
Dave Scott stated, see on the other corner you’re a 1.6 off the property line.
Wayne Martyka asked, on the existing?
Dave Scott stated, and then on this other side you’re going to be I’ve got a feeling by the time you get the rock on there, you’re going to be 2’ from the property line which means you can’t get around the front of your house without getting on the neighbors. I mean, it’s a bad situation.
Wayne Martyka stated, we have a sidewalk right there as you can see where…
Gerald Cartmell stated, and if your neighbor wants to put up a fence it could get serious.
Director Weaver stated, um Dave keep in mind I think this site plan that your looking at is drawn to the foundation not to the overhang also because ask for an 8’ north side setback variance which means they can go right to the property line.
Dave Scott stated, so then you’ve got an eave also.
Wayne Martyka stated, that is the eaves.
Dave Scott stated, she just said it went to the, what did you say?
Vice President Thompson stated, foundation.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, she said it went to the foundation.
Director Weaver stated, right, this drawing is to the foundation. Because we asked for an 8’ north side setback variance and an 8’ south side setback variance which would include your overhang so that would allow you to go right to the north property line with your overhang and be 2’ off the south property line with the overhang.
Wayne Martyka stated, the actual addition is only going 4’ back inside wall, inside wall.
Dave Scott stated, yes. I can see that.
Wayne Martyka stated, because with the rocks, 12” dirt and the rocks adding on to it.
Vice President Thompson asked, we can vote on it but wouldn’t it be wise if we suggest he go home and rethink this, reapply?
Attorney Altman stated, that’s where I said they have to decide whether we vote or not tonight or they table it or not.
Director Weaver stated, if it’s tabled he doesn’t have to reapply.
Vice President Thompson stated, well yes, tabled but…
Director Weaver stated, submit additional information.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes exactly, I’m just throwing that out to try to save it.
Wayne Martyka stated, I’ll apply, whatever I need to do to so I can improve my house.
Vice President Thompson asked, what’s you’re thoughts Dave, should he go home and reconsider this thing and come back just…
Dave Scott stated, if you’re after my vote you need to go home and re-look at this and try to stay off that property line somehow, not get any closer than what the existing house is now. I mean I don’t know how to do it but…
Wayne Martyka stated, I don’t understand I can come up to my property line and I can’t come to my property line, I have to be a certain distance off right?
Dave Scott stated, no you’ve got to be off the property line. There’s setbacks and I don’t know what…
Director Weaver stated, this request requires the overhang to be 2’ off the south property line.
Wayne Martyka asked, so I would be in compliance? I’m not in compliance, I don’t understand.
Dave Scott stated, I think the only reason the house is in compliance is because it’s grandfathered. The whole thing's out of compliance.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, that’s what I was going to say.
Director Weaver stated, right.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes probably when it was built.
Dave Scott stated, both sides are out of compliance but because of when it was built it’s grandfathered but now you’re wanting to make improvements so you have to meet the setbacks.
Wayne Martyka stated, I want to meet every setback, whatever I have to do I’ll meet it. So if I have to shorten it I’ll shorten it, angle or…
Dave Scott stated, I guess…
Vice President Thompson stated, would it be, excuse me go ahead.
Dave Scott stated, I can’t speak for the other fellows but because of the whole situation here if you could come up with a solution that would not get you any closer to your property line than what you are now I would probably vote for it.
Wayne Martyka stated, well guess on the stakes there is, what I’m trying to accomplish that’s squared off around 2’ off the line right.
Dave Scott stated, right now you’re house is 4.58’ off the line and that’s to the…
Wayne Martyka stated, existing corner.
Dave Scott stated, to the footer and then when you add your overhang on there, whatever that is a foot or whatever so that brings you back up to 3 ½’ off the property line. That’s to close but I can live with that because of the situation.
Wayne Martyka stated, okay.
Dave Scott stated, so if you can figure out some way to do that.
Wayne Martyka stated, I’ll do that I’ll stay off that much.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that would make sense.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes that would be a lot better than being that close to him.
Wayne Martyka stated, okay I have no problem with that.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, so we table till he comes back and…
Vice President Thompson stated, yes, come back with a different altered plan, yes.
Wayne Martyka asked, altered plan of what, I mean I thought I squared off, I’m still in compliance being that far off.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well your going to, it’s diagonally built in there and you want to go this way, right, so tell me that’s not going to be closer than this. See you’re right here now, right?
Wayne Martyka stated, yes sir.
Gerald Cartmell stated, okay you want to go right here. Is that not going to be closer than this?
Wayne Martyka stated, yes, plus 3.3 and I’m offset on it. I had to put a stake there and everything and I put the overhang up and I had it all measured out and the surveyor came out there.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well I don’t know.
Dave Scott stated, it says 3 9 and a half and the old one is 4 6.
Wayne Martyka stated, he had to come out there twice and my neighbors house starts right here and I think it is 18’ away and I talked to him and he said he planning on putting an addition up not to come out the side or anywhere else.
Dave Scott stated, if you get a neighbor…
Gerald Cartmell stated, he wants to go this way.
Dave Scott stated, and, you can’t even walk around your house without getting on his property, either side, this side or this side. You need a …
Charlie Mellon asked, how much hang over is your old house got on it that you’re going to put on it.
Wayne Martyka stated, 2’.
Charlie Mellon asked, is it that much, okay. The new part will have…
Wayne Martyka stated, it will be shorter because it’s not going to come out.
Dave Scott stated, maybe you’re neighbor would sell you 6’. We’re creating a problem here.
Wayne Martyka stated, I understand. I don’t want to create problems but I can’t see ? by 3’, that’s my corner and if anybody cuts a corner back a little bit I’m going to be okay, I mean how much do you want me to cut it back? I’ll do whatever you want.
Dave Scott stated, I told you, in order for me to vote positively you have to stay 4.6 off of that property line and that’s…
Wayne Martyka asked, as of my overhang?
Dave Scott asked, pardon me?
Wayne Martyka stated, as of my overhang?
Dave Scott stated, well I would say the existing footer, foundation.
Wayne Martyka stated, see because that takes away everything I had. This is not an addition here this is just an overhang, sir. This overhang, this is not an addition.
Dave Scott asked, oh you’re not adding anything?
Wayne Martyka stated, no sir this is just an overhang. This will be all open here.
Dave Scott stated, um hum.
Wayne Martyka stated, and here this is my kitchen, two bedrooms, and here’s where you walk through. I have washer here, I have no shower or vanity or nothing.
Dave Scott asked, can’t you put it over here and not do that?
Wayne Martyka stated, no because my well and bellows tank and I have a tip right there that’s covering that.
Dave Scott stated, here’s the well.
Wayne Martyka stated, the existing well is here, there’s a big pit with my bellows tank and its where my ? are, it’s a hole in the ground there about 4’.
Dave Scott stated, you could build out here somewhere.
Wayne Martyka stated, extra cost at this time minimum just square this out. Originally I just wanted intend? I’ve been trying to do this for the last 4 months. I didn’t know I needed a variance. I had it all set with a contractor last June and he come in for the permits and he told me I need a variance.
Gerald Cartmell stated, good contractor, he saved you a lot of money.
Attorney Altman stated, you bet.
Vice President Thompson asked, what do you suggest for the applicant?
Dave Scott stated, I’m going to leave it up to him. He knows how I feel about this the way it is here so…
Wayne Martyka stated, I understand, I won’t have it. Go on the property line and ?
Charlie Mellon asked, Dave his original house is 4 and 6 tenths off the property line?
Gerald Cartmell stated, 4.58 or 4 6.
Charlie Mellon stated, okay 4.6
Dave Scott stated, yes, roughly.
Charlie Mellon asked, are you saying if he builds on, if he leaves it that much off of the property line it’ll be all right?
Dave Scott stated, it’s not all right but it’s the best we can do.
Charlie Mellon stated, well that’s what I mean.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’ll turn him down.
Charlie Mellon stated, I’ll agree with that.
Vice President Thompson stated, so…
Charlie Mellon asked, do you think you can do that?
Wayne Martyka stated, yes sir, no problem.
Charlie Mellon stated, well we’ll have it in writing when we make it.
Vice President Thompson asked, any other discussion?
Gerald Cartmell asked, so do we agree to let him go ahead and do this if it’s 4.6 off the property?
Vice President Thompson stated, it’s up to you.
Gerald Cartmell stated, Charlie seconded it.
Vice President Thompson stated, let’s vote.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
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. Construction must remain 4.6’ off the property line.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for an 8’ north side setback variance and an 8’ south side setback variance to add a room addition and roofed area and to change the roofline on Fifty (50) feet off the entire North side of Lot Number Thirteen (13) in Ledford’s Camp in Monon Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Lowes Bridge off of West Shafer Drive to Lake Road 64 West to Skaggs Court at 6739 N. Skaggs Court
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 1 negative.
Charlie Mellon stated, you may have to adjust some of that stone from the side, put smaller pieces on.
Wayne Martyka stated, I could do that, turn it long way instead of sticking out. That’s what I like about the house to me is the stone.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting on petition #2642. 4 votes cast 3 votes vote the variance is hereby granted, 1 vote is the variance is denied. The variance is granted.
Wayne Martyka asked, so I have to apply for the permit then tomorrow?
Attorney Altman stated, yes sir.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes you’re correct come in and see her in her office.
Director Weaver stated, you need to see Carmen in the building department.
Wayne Martyka stated, okay, thank you very much.
****
#2643 Leonard D. & Nancy A. Clark; The property is located on Lot 34 in Parse Forest Lodge 2nd, South of Lowes Bridge at 5049 Canyon Loop.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 6’ Southwest side setback variance to build a new home.
Vice President Thompson asked, and sir you are?
Leonard Clark stated, my name is Leonard Clark.
Vice President Thompson stated, you are Leonard Clark, okay, all right. Do you have anything you’d like to add other than what I read for a description?
Leonard Clark stated, I want to build a new home out there. I believe the back side of the house and the left hand side of the house as you face, from the street as you look at the house would be almost on the existing, where the existing structure would be. I want to go farther out to the, I’d call it the north and put a, like a garage and stuff to that. The old house is like, was built, I’m assuming maybe in the 40’s or 50’s and it’s just a fishing cabin. There’s no way to insulate it. There’s, it’s just, it can’t be wintered in. We’re looking for a place that we can possibly make a retirement home at and be able to come in the winter too.
Charlie Mellon asked, you’re going to take it completely down, the old one?
Leonard Clark stated, yes, yes, it definitely just needs to come down. It’s not had much maintenance over the years and it’s just not in good shape at all, the house isn’t.
Charlie Mellon asked, that garage is on the north side of that house there isn’t it?
Leonard Clark stated, lets see the garage, I think I’d call that the south.
Charlie Mellon stated, south, maybe it is. I was out there this morning.
Leonard Clark stated, I get kind of confused…
Charlie Mellon stated, by the time I got around all them curves I didn’t know which way it went.
Leonard Clark stated, on the directions myself but I believe that garage is on the south.
Charlie Mellon stated, the sun wasn’t shining.
Leonard Clark stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, Jerry we’ve got something to submit to the record.
Attorney Altman stated, okay we’ve received a letter and I’ll look at the body of it and read that. We are writing this letter in response to the notice sent to us and as an interested party due to the location of the subject property. My wife and I own Lot #33 (5047 Canyon Loop) in Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, which is adjacent to Mr. & Mrs. Clark’s proposed new construction. During the short time the Clark’s have owned this property they have cleared away the overgrowth, hauled away mountains of trash and installed new fencing. These changes have made a great improvement to our area. We have had the opportunity to review the proposed plans and want to inform the Area Plan Commission of our 100% support for this property variance and improvement. The proposed new construction will replace an old sub-standard structure with new construction which will meet today’s building codes and be vast improvement to the area. We offer 100% support of the Clarks proposed property improvements and strongly recommend the approval of the variance request. Sincerely, Mr. & Mrs. David Abair.
Leonard Clark stated, I have an unsolicited letter from a neighbor across the channel that I can submit to you too that saw my sign out and they brought this letter over to me.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay we can do that. It really, if their not adjoining does it matter?
Attorney Altman stated, it’s up to him.
Leonard Clark stated, it’s not adjoining but…
Vice President Thompson stated, okay if you want to present it your welcome to okay I wanted to make sure we understood that. That’s fine.
Attorney Altman stated, okay receiving a letter dated 7-20-2007, Area Plan Commission White County Indiana 47960. We understand that Leonard and Nancy Clark are requesting a variance concerned their property on Canyon Loop Road. As neighbors across the channel on Crab Apple Loop we’ve seen significant in the Clarks property in a short time they’ve moved in where it was previously an eyesore of the neighborhood. The Clarks have done considerable yard work clearing years of weeds and debris making the entire property much more attractive and presentable. Their request to build a new home is on one of their 2 lots is a natural next step and would significantly improve the appearance as well as the economic value of the entire neighborhood in fact a couple of years ago we were contemplating making an offer on the property and sketch out similar plans to build on one lot and maintain a garage on the adjacent lot from a neighbors perspective directly across the cannel. We whole heartedly support the Clarks request and believe their plans to build would really improve the entire neighborhood and request their variance be approved. Signed Pat and Donna Carroll, 5171 Crab Apple Loop, Monticello, Indiana.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, I’d like to clarify something. You own both lots 34 and 35, you are only requesting the variance on lot 34, correct?
Leonard Clark stated, yes.
Director Weaver asked, and you are going to keep the garage on lot 35, there won’t be a home or anything there?
Leonard Clark stated, no, I’m not planning building one. I bought the, the property had 2 lots with 2 60’ lots and I bought the property. I intended to, when we saw the property I intended to build a new house on the lot where the existing house was and I also bought the property as an investment for someday down the road, I’ll either give that lot or sell it to my son. He may someday want to put a home or something on that other lot so that’s why I don’t want to encroach over into that other lot so that remains either a sellable or a place that my son can move to.
Vice President Thompson stated, you have an option, yes.
Director Weaver stated, when you look at these pictures, when I looked at the property I thought it was for both the house and the garage so when you look at these pictures the garage that you see, the blue garage is on lot 35.
Vice President Thompson stated, um hum.
Director Weaver stated, so that is not part of this request just so the board understands that.
Gerald Cartmell asked, what was that again?
Director Weaver stated, the garage that you see in the pictures is not, this is his second lot, the garage is on the second lot and is not part of this request. The only lot that you’re looking at for the variance is lot 34 which is the north lot that has the existing home on it.
Attorney Altman stated, and it’s 60.24’ wide.
Director Weaver stated, yes. See I was confused when I went out there and looked, I was looking at it as a whole piece.
Attorney Altman stated, what’s your hardship?
Leonard Clark stated, well my hardship is if I encroach on the other lot then I don’t have something that I can let my son build a house on or sell the other lot off.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s not a hardship by the ordinance.
Gerald Cartmell asked, don’t you own across the road too?
Leonard Clark stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, your going to tear it completely down and start over?
Leonard Clark stated, yes, um hum.
Gerald Cartmell stated, if you just shorten it up 6’ less you wouldn’t even have to have that, right. Isn’t that what this is?
Dave Scott asked, the part on the right side I’m looking at is that the garage?
Leonard Clark asked, on the right?
Dave Scott asked, is that a garage or proposed house? You can look at this if you want.
Leonard Clark stated, this will be a garage over here. Actually I just want more or less use the existing footprint of the back and the side over there to go off of with my new house.
Vice President Thompson stated, we need to take a short break here a second, we need to change tapes, right Diann?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, let’s do that right now, a good time to do it, so.
Director Weaver stated, ready to go.
Vice President Thompson stated, ready to go, okay go ahead. Anyone here care to address either for or against the variance? I don’t think there’s anyone. Just need to ask anyhow. Charlie do you have any questions for the Clarks?
Charlie Mellon stated, no, I don’t.
Vice President Thompson asked, Dave Scott?
Dave Scott stated, well I don’t want to tell you your business but if you could change the house design some you could probably meet your setbacks if you put your garage back there in front of your house.
Leonard Clark stated, I actually a, my original house plan, which I have here was, I had the garage actually 14’ I’ve already shortened that garage up by 2’ to try to compact the whole thing more to try to make if fit more onto that lot and shorten the overhangs by a foot all around the house too.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, since your starting over building new…
Charlie Mellon asked, your not using any of the old foundations or anything are you?
Leonard Clark stated, no I don’t know what kind of condition the old foundation, there is just a slab poured on top of the ground or…
Charlie Mellon stated, or rock or cement.
Leonard Clark stated, yes I don’t know what kind of existing foundation is actually there and actually I want to have a basement when I end up with a new house too.
Vice President Thompson asked, Gerald do you have anything for the Clarks?
Gerald Cartmell stated, well I kind of just like to see them just build it right so he doesn’t have to mess with us, 6’ I think it is, isn’t that right?
Leonard Clark stated, um hum.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I mean their building all new and that takes care of everybody’s problem.
Attorney Altman stated, or do like the neighbor said they were going to do put it on both lots and then they wouldn’t have any problems.
Gerald Cartmell stated, they own both lots you could do that, that wouldn’t be a problem either. I understand what he’s saying, he wants something for his son.
Nancy Clark stated, the neighbors were only going to use one lot in that letter. They were only going to use one lot.
Attorney Altman stated, now they said both lots.
Nancy Clark stated, they were only 1 lot they were going to possibly build 2 different houses.
Attorney Altman stated, using 1 lot and maintain a garage on the adjacent, so they’d be together.
Leonard Clark stated, well the existing garage, that existing garage is on the whole separate lot all by itself.
Nancy Clark stated, a separate lot.
Attorney Altman stated, but they’d have it together is what they were proposing to do.
Leonard Clark stated, well that wasn’t their intent.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s what they said in their letter.
Leonard Clark stated, well I know but that’s…
Dave Scott stated, but you could build on both those lots but you could build on them since your building new and meet the setbacks if you’d do a little, just change the house design somehow. And especially if you want to someday build another house on there and then we’re going to give your son a 6’ setback and the house are going to be right next to each other, you can’t get fire equipment or anything down through them.
Vice President Thompson asked, anything else Dave?
Dave Scott stated, no.
Vice President Thompson asked, any other discussion? Is the board ready to vote?
Attorney Altman stated, okay, announcing the results of the balloting on petition #2643. 4 votes cast 2 votes vote the variance is hereby granted, 2 votes vote the variance is hereby denied. Not being 3 votes this matter is continued until next month for another vote on it.
Leonard Clark asked, I need to come back next month then?
Attorney Altman stated, you, it is going to be heard next month and re-voted. It needs 3 votes either way is what I’m saying and you have no decision is what it amounts to by our law okay.
Leonard Clark stated, uh huh.
Attorney Altman stated, so either you amend, change, or revoke next month okay is what…
Leonard Clark stated, like you know I really wasn’t asking for a whole lot on this you know. My feeling is to try to use the existing footprint more or less so, you know.
Attorney Altman stated, we have a vote so that will be next month.
Leonard Clark stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, thank you.
****
Vice President Thompson stated, business.
Attorney Altman asked, that’ll be the 16th, right?
Director Weaver stated, the 16th. The 16th of August.
Leonard Clark stated, the 16th.
Attorney Altman stated, yes sir.
Vice President Thompson asked, Diann do we have any other business tonight needs to be discussed?
Director Weaver stated, the only thing I can think of for business is just to update you that Mr. Keesling was in and paid the rest of his fine and so was Conroy’s, so both of those fines have been paid now. I can’t think of anything else I need to discuss.
Attorney Altman stated, the only thing you probably want to bug them again about their input on the new ordinance.
Director Weaver stated, yes those are due tomorrow.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
Director Weaver asked, have you guys had a chance to read that book, to go through that book?
Attorney Altman stated, really grab a section, especially Gerald you ought to hit the farming heavy.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’ve got a list a mile long.
Attorney Altman stated, well get it in right away so that…
Director Weaver stated, well my question is I’ve had other people indicate they haven’t had enough time…
Gerald Cartmell stated, we need more time, we need more time.
Director Weaver stated, that’s why I’m asking. I personally need more time.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, I hear you.
Director Weaver stated, so I wanted to see if others needed more time as well.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I just went over that part.
Attorney Altman stated, I just…
Director Weaver stated, and you’re not the first person that’s told me that. I’ve had several now so I think what I need to do is notify her that we need more time.
Attorney Altman stated, okay I just want to…
Gerald Cartmell stated, there’s several, there’s one big issue about the windmill or windmill or whatever you want to call them. That has to be industrial. That’s a power plant. That has to be zoned industrial we’ve been doing that all wrong. I had an attorney tell me that he says that has to be industrial, you guys can not do that as agriculture.
Charlie Mellon stated, that’s the new part of it…
Director Weaver asked, but then how can they, how can they farm around them?
Attorney Altman stated, that is the big question, however Gerald there are of course their talking about making an ordinance that in a way address that by almost making it an industrial, a small industrial area that, and letting them farm around it is what it really amounts to but it does put an awful lot of technical specifications in the requirements so that it almost, I don’t know that they come down and say it’s industrial but by all these technicalities that’s in that wind ordinance it really comes down to just that.
Vice President Thompson asked, so the wind for the test for test stations that are out there right now should have been changed?
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes. Well that’s not…
Director Weaver stated, well there not producing anything there just testing.
Gerald Cartmell stated, there not producing anything.
Attorney Altman stated, yes the producing, just the testing.
Gerald Cartmell stated, a big power plant. Like a substation, same deal with that.
Vice President Thompson stated, well I know what you’re saying.
Gerald Cartmell stated, it really opened up a can of worms.
Vice President Thompson stated, producing information for the project but…
Gerald Cartmell stated, I guess that’s right.
Attorney Altman stated, however its something you want to figure that ABC and you better ready to do AB and C if you’re going to let A happen.
Director Weaver stated, another thing to keep in mind is if we do that what’s that going to do to any residence, see that’s…
Gerald Cartmell stated, see that was my question to him and he says I don’t know but I’m telling you what the law says and what he says put a power plant out here electric, whatever and he says you got to be zoned industrial. He says you can’t do it as farm, okay, I don’t know nothing about the law.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t know that the dam is zoned industrial.
Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know that you…
Dave Scott stated, I was going to say what about NIPSCO’s got a plant right in the middle of town.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that was my next question, that is probably recreational.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t know that the dam is zoned industrial.
Attorney Altman stated, I don’t know that there’s any thing in the quote zoning law in the state of Indiana that says that must happen. I think that the…
Vice President Thompson stated, the dam is grandfathered.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, I think the County’s, the jurisdiction’s…
Director Weaver stated, but the land around it.
Vice President Thompson stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, can decide this is okay and if they do and if it’s a reasonable decision it would be allowed, Gerald but again what they’re adding is so much more control to those, that kind of use that in a way is industrial, it is industrial including quote it’s not called industrial but it is.
Gerald Cartmell stated, what he kind of said to me was that happened in Illinois, remember when you go north.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that turned into a mess. All kind of law suites on it, I didn’t understand and he started explaining it to me.
Vice President Thompson stated, no kidding, huh.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I said so the state of Illinois…
Attorney Altman asked, who’s the lawyer you’re talking about?
Gerald Cartmell stated, well he wanted to be silent.
Attorney Altman stated, well tell him I’d like to talk to him, so give me a buzz I’d like to know about it, okay because I don’t want to rediscover the wheel when we’re, when the barn door’s shut if you know what I mean. That’s why I’d like to talk to him.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that’s fine, I’ll talk to him.
Attorney Altman stated, and I’m sure that George Loy, the county lawyer would love to know more about it ahead of time rather than later on.
Vice President Thompson stated, the next meeting is in 2 weeks.
Director Weaver stated, the next meeting is the 9th of August and that is our 2nd part of the July meetings and you’re only going to have 1 meeting for August, one actual August meeting.
Gerald Cartmell asked, how’d you do that?
Charlie Mellon asked, was that the 16th.
Vice President Thompson stated, it is.
Director Weaver stated, that will be the 16th, there just a week apart.
Gerald Cartmell asked, how many do we have?
Director Weaver stated, well before you tabled the two tonight you had 8, no, yes you had 8 so you’ll have 10 so 1 meeting.
Charlie Mellon asked, what ever happened to Tirpak?
Director Weaver stated, they tabled for tonight.
Charlie Mellon stated, they didn’t go through.
Director Weaver stated, they tabled for tonight.
Charlie Mellon asked, they did it themselves?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh.
Attorney Altman asked, anything else?
Director Weavers stated, I don’t have anything.
Attorney Altman stated, the only thing I’d really hit again is read that dog gone new ordinance.
Director Weaver stated, um hum.
Attorney Altman stated, because you can save county money and everybody else money, a lot agony later on by your input now.
Vice President Thompson stated, I do have a question and I don’t know, I don’t know all the facts but I did have a couple of phone calls. Did the office fine the Town of Chalmers on the water tower?
Director Weaver stated, we didn’t fine anyone because there’s no, they were building without a permit, yes.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, but they were not in violation of any zoning ordinance rules and regulations so we did not, no.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, whether the building department did…
Vice President Thompson stated, well a town employee made a comment to me about it to me.
Director Weaver stated, the building department may have.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, and I’ll tell you one thing that probably worked against you is that you have the contractor on the Town Council.
Vice President Thompson stated, yes. Right but there again…
Director Weaver stated, but I don’t know, if they did I don’t know about it.
Vice President Thompson stated, but there again I don’t know what you know about it. I was told, I won’t have all the titles right, I won’t say project manager but whoever’s in charge of that project they fired him. They changed men midstream and the first guy supposedly had all the permits in place.
Director Weaver stated, no there were no permits…
Attorney Altman stated, well this whole story…
Vice President Thompson stated, but that was the conversation.
Director Weaver stated, well I know that the contractor that…
Vice President Thompson stated, once again in my opinion, and I know its not you were fining the wrong people, we’re fining the Town and we ought to be fining the contractor.
Director Weaver stated, it’s not Area Plan doing any of it.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay, all right.
Director Weaver stated, it’s not us.
Vice President Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, I do know thought that the contractor that came in tried to tell us that he had never dealt with White County before and we recognized him.
Dave Scott stated, well our engineering company had all of those permits in line before we started.
Attorney Altman stated, yes I’d think that’d only be copasetic.
Dave Scott stated, because I did some of the leg work for it.
Attorney Altman stated, I bet you did.
Vice President Thompson asked, did you really?
Dave Scott stated, the engineering actually done it before the contractors were ever on site.
Director Weaver stated, well nobody did it for Chalmers.
Gerald Cartmell stated, anyway going back to that book, the book, the agriculture part is a mess.
Vice President Thompson stated, huh.
Gerald Cartmell stated absolutely a mess as far as hog buildings and stuff like that, my god where do they come up with some of this stuff.
Director Weaver stated, yes, Mike Smolek has been and talked to me briefly.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes, he said wait a minute my god.
Charlie Mellon stated, that new book is practically the same as the old one, there’s only 2 words that’s changed.
Director Weaver asked, oh you mean the first draft that you had?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes the big white draft.
Director Weaver stated, oh no there’s a lot more changes than that.
Charlie Mellon stated, all I’ve read so far and I just quite on it on that account, deleted. I forget what the other word is but deleted is one of them. They deleted so much out of the other one.
Director Weaver stated, out of the first draft.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, but then…
Director Weaver stated, but what’s highlighted over in the, is what the added.
Attorney Altman stated, why don’t we adjourn.
Vice President Thompson stated, we’re going to here shortly.
Attorney Altman stated, I didn’t know.
Vice President Thompson stated, we haven’t but we can. Meeting adjourned?
Dave Scott made motion to adjourn.
Gerald Cartmell seconded the motion.
The meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
David Scott, Secretary
Diann Weaver, Director
White County Area Plan Commission
“I AFFIRM, UNDER THE PENALTIES FOR PERJURY, THAT I HAVE TAKEN REASONABLE CARE TO REDACT EACH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IN THIS DOCUMENT, UNLESS REQUIRED BY LAW.”
_________________________________________________