Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, October 18, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.
Members attending were: Charles Mellon, Gerald Cartmell, Jerry Thompson and David Stimmel. Also attending were Attorney Jerry Altman and Director Diann Weaver.
Visitors attending were: Bradley Gervais, Catherine Gross, Duffy Mullen, Phil Vogel, Nancy Jernagan, Claudia Shown, Sharon Garbison, Dean Stark, Randall Watson, Larry Holderly, Randy Blanchette, Mary Blanchette, Bill Tully, Helen Keesling, Larry Keesling, Charlene Buss, C. Goranowski, Jason Knoll, George Holmes, Sharon A. Malysa, Larry A. Norris, Kay Johns, Pat Mazgaj, Angie Mazgaj, Arturo Aragon, Gerardo ?, and Richard J. Norris.
The meeting was called to order by President David Stimmel and roll call was taken. Charlie Mellon made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the August 16, 2007 and the September 20, 2007 meeting. Motion was seconded by and carried unanimously. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.
President Stimmel stated, we have also a memorandum of the Executive Session for March the 2nd. Jerry what do we want to do with that?
Attorney Altman stated, basically you just need to have it included in the record, approved and included in the records.
President Stimmel stated, okay. And how do we approve it, just by a voice vote?
Attorney Altman stated, um hum.
President Stimmel stated, okay, so has everybody had a chance to read that memorandum?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel stated, okay we’ll take a minute here and we’ll review it.
Charlie Mellon asked, couldn’t wait till the end of the meeting?
President Stimmel stated, it just talks about what we discussed at the Executive Session.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, certifies it.
President Stimmel stated, certifies it all that was discussed and what was advertised.
Attorney Altman stated, um hum.
President Stimmel stated with the exception of the 5th board member issue.
Attorney Altman stated, um hum. That no action was taken and…
President Stimmel stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, other than the discussion.
President Stimmel asked, want to hear a motion or do you want to…
Jerry Thompson stated, I’ll move.
President Stimmel asked, that we accept it?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay, second?
Gerald Cartmell stated, second.
President Stimmel stated, second, all in favor?
Board members stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, okay we accepted the memorandum.
****
#2649 Randall E. Watson; The property is located on Lot 4 in R.J. Norris Subdivision, located North of Monticello and West of Royal Oaks on Brandywine Lane. Continued from August 9, 2007 and tabled from September 18, 2007.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 10’ front setback variance and a 10’ rear setback variance to build a new home.
President Stimmel asked, and who is representing this variance?
Randy Watson stated, Randy Watson.
President Stimmel stated, okay Randy thanks a lot. Do you have anything you want to add to what I just read?
Randy Watson stated, it’s pretty much cut and dry. We’re just asking for a 10’ from the front, 10’ from the back. It’s a beautiful home we’re just, we tried to get it set in there the best we could. I understand that the setbacks were set when this was developed down there and it was under the, like a R-4 I believe zoning, R-5 and now it’s an L-1 but since it was set at that time it stays whatever it was set at. We’re well within the L-1 setbacks and also as far as the rear of the house or the lake side a majority of the house is sticking out 2’ the other 8’ is just a covered patio. The portion near the road is just the garage portion that’s sticking out 10’. It still leaves 40’ to the road which is a private lane, minimal traffic and I lived at the house on lot 5 so I could picture what this house would be like and you have plenty of sight down the road if that was an issue so…
President Stimmel stated, okay. Give the board a little time to digest this, please. Any questions Jerry you think?
Jerry Thompson stated, well yes it’s been awhile. This was denied back in June. What, how does this differ what you’re presenting tonight versus back in June?
Randy Watson stated, back in June when the surveyor had plotted the house on the property it was off set. The setbacks were off and everything we have since had him redo it to where it’s, the side setbacks, there’s no question on it anymore, the only that we’re asking, and we’ve moved the house to even out the front and back setbacks. There’s not much more that we can do with this house that we’re trying to put on there.
Bill Tully stated, Bill Tully. At that time Jerry also there was the issue of the elevations which since been approved and so that’s…
Jerry Thompson stated, yes I see that here. That’s all I have.
President Stimmel stated, okay, Charlie.
Charlie Mellon stated, no not right now.
President Stimmel stated, okay, Gerald.
Gerald Cartmell asked, are you still going to be out though, what is it from everybody else? We went down there and looked at the line of sight and you’re going to stick out.
Bill Tully stated, 10’.
Randy Watson stated, 10’.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes.
Bill Tully stated, it’ll still be 30’ in front.
Randy Watson stated, the first house that you go to on the lane there has a 40’ setback so if you can picture that and he sits off the road pretty good. And another thing is with it having 20’ setbacks on the side you’re talking 40’ away from the house next to it which even makes it farther away from where she’s at you know on lot 5 which even gives you a better plane.
Gerald Cartmell stated, it shows it 12’.
Randy Watson stated, the setbacks in that area are 20’ from the sides.
Bill Tully stated, yes 20’ from each home.
Randy Watson stated, so it’s going to, a total from house to house is actually 40’.
Gerald Cartmell stated, the drawing here says 12’.
Randy Watson asked, you have the plot?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I assume that’s what that is. This right here?
Attorney Altman stated, on lot #5.
Randy Watson stated, yes I don’t know what that 12’ mark.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well Milligan prepared it.
Attorney Altman stated, it certainly appears to be, if it’s to scale it appears to us…
Bill Tully stated, I’m not sure, here’s the plat here.
Randy Watson stated, here you go.
Bill Tully stated, side setbacks.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I know but right here’s what the surveyors shows them 12’ lot 5.
Bill Tully stated, well but that’s.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well 20’ here but when you say there’s 40’ between there’s not.
Randy Watson stated, and that might be 12’ to the driveway.
Gerald Cartmell stated, it doesn’t look like it.
Several people are talking at once.
Director Weaver stated, well there are pictures. Jerry would you pass those around?
Charlie Mellon stated, his pictures are not in there.
Director Weaver stated, no I forgot to make copies of them Gerald. We’ll have to pass them around.
Jerry Thompson asked, so there’s only copy?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, sorry my fault.
Gerald Cartmell stated, no that’s all right.
President Stimmel asked, any response from anyone, Diann?
Director Weaver stated, we got a letter today that you’ve got a copy of this evening and the original is in the file.
President Stimmel stated, Mr. Watson could you help me with a little bit, I’ve got a question and that is really you need to show some kind of a hardship before we could approve something like this and I guess I’m really struggling, anything might be considered a hardship.
Randy Watson stated, yes sir and the thing of it is see I used to live in the house on lot 4, or no lot 5 I’m sorry excuse me. The house was too small over there for us to begin with that’s why we had to move. In order for us to get this house on here or any decent nice house and this house is only 1800 square foot, trying to fit this in this small block because the setbacks that they have set back then. It’s just hard to get, a house today unless you were planning on just putting a 2 bedroom cottage on it, you know as far as the, for a subdivision I’m just having trouble. Mr. Tully is the purchaser of this lot. I’m the, we’re trying to get this grant so he can build a house on it and buy the lot. If…
Bill Tully stated, the hardship is you can’t sell the lot.
Randy Watson stated, if, if I can’t sell the lot, I mean if this doesn’t get through it’s just going to be another hardship for somebody else, me again. I’m just you know.
Charlie Mellon stated, but there house is way farther back.
Randy Watson stated, I don’t know what to do.
Charlie Mellon stated, you get 10’ out here from the road, cut that off.
President Stimmel stated, I hear what your saying but what I struggle with is the fact that anybody else in the same situation anywhere else on the lake in the similar situation would be faced with the same hardship, you know that’s why you have zoning laws in the first place.
Randy Watson stated, well everybody else on the lake is in an L-1 zoning. This is an L-1 zoning but it still being considered R-4 where we can’t put a lake home on there.
Bill Tully stated, Dave if you can picture the back years ago actually in 1981 was it when it was plotted?
Randy Watson stated, yes.
Bill Tully stated, I believe, 81, yes. In 81 what they required them to do with the plotting was under total different zoning ordinances than what we have today.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Bill Tully stated, because that was actually now I believe almost a multi-family type situation back in those days for small duplexes and etcetera, since the zoning laws have changed that would not been the restrictions on their platting at that time had they been under today’s zoning laws they could expanded those, you know building pads substantially.
President Stimmel stated, okay. I hear you.
Bill Tully stated, so that’s kind of an awkward animal that’s platted that back part of it.
President Stimmel asked, so essentially you’re saying here you’re at the mercy of setbacks that were established 20 some years ago under previous zoning.
Randy Watson stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, designation hearing that Diann is that how your interpretation would be?
Director Weaver stated, it is somewhat um, and I don’t mean for this to jeopardize the request or anything but even this lot was not laid out with the standard R-5 setbacks because the rear setback in the, for a standard R-5 setback was 100’ not 80’ so most of them yes are as they were for the R-5’s but the rear was not even then. I can’t explain why because I wasn’t around at the time it was developed.
President Stimmel stated, yes. Okay. Anymore questions for the board? I’m sorry Bill.
Bill Tully stated, and apparently Diann when you and I tried to pull records on the adjacent ones there was just no records to be pulled I guess, if that there was no building permits or you didn’t have building permit records, remember when you and Dave Anderson and I was working on that while I think Randy was up there with us too. You couldn’t come up with a building? I was trying to figure out how they got those setbacks on some of those other houses there.
Director Weaver stated, yes, we didn’t find an explanation.
Bill Tully asked, didn’t have any records right?
President Stimmel stated, yes. Anymore questions from the board right now? Anybody in the audience who has any comments about this would like to step forward?
Charlie Mellon stated, a lady’s coming.
President Stimmel stated, the lady back in the back or somebody in front here either one.
Nancy Jernagen asked, do you want these now?
President Stimmel asked, do you want to explain what they are?
Nancy Jernagen stated, these are petitions from homeowners and lot owners on Brandywine.
President Stimmel asked, could we have your name?
Nancy Jernagen stated, I’m Nancy Jernagen I live on Brandywine Court.
President Stimmel stated, okay, thank you. I’ve got 2.
Nancy Jernagen stated, um, George Bogash and Ralph and Donna Ward just they have lots on Brandywine and their as soon as the new sewer system gets in they want to build but they don’t have a problem with the setbacks the way they are and don’t understand why we need to go and have that changed just for one person and we are, Terry and I have, we bought 2 lots to get the size of home that we wanted and our son has 4 children and he lives in a smaller house than you know he’s fine with the way things are and we really feel like that we bought our lots with the assumption that these you know it was going to be a uniform and you go up in Royal Oaks and Saddlebrook, and Hinterland Addition and there all uniform and they maybe bigger homes and built up but…
Jerry Thompson stated, okay. Are most of these people present?
Nancy Jernagen stated, yes, no not tonight, no. Ralph and Donna Ward they live in Lafayette, Yvonne and Jim Watkins are in the first house as you go on Brandywine and then our son and Claudia and Terry and I.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay. Thank you.
President Stimmel asked, any other questions?
Charlie Mellon asked, what’s you biggest, biggest idea against it is it the view down the street?
Nancy Jernagen stated, yes and I just think it makes it look, a better looking neighborhood when everything’s uniform.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, we got the pictures a big house too.
Nancy Jernagen asked, the blue one?
Charlie Mellon stated, no what he’s wanting to build.
Nancy Jernagen stated, oh okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, we had it the last time and it looks awful big compared to your house.
Nancy Jernagen stated, well our house is 2300 square feet with a 2100 square foot garage attached and that’s what we wanted so we bought 2 lots to be able to do that.
Charlie Mellon asked, have you got the lot on this side of your house, south? I was out there.
Nancy Jernagen stated, no most of the empty part of our lots is north of our house.
Charlie Mellon stated, north okay, okay.
Nancy Jernagen stated, we didn’t center the house right in the center of the 2 lots and then we had to deed over 10’, 13’ to our sons so he could add on a garage to his house so he would, we’d still be in the 20’.
Charlie Mellon asked, is it on north, is it on north of you?
Nancy Jernagen stated, no he’s south, he’s right next to us, south of us.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh.
President Stimmel stated, so what I think, I, if I hear what your saying is that other people that own property in that area are making accommodations to meet the setbacks, is that correct?
Nancy Jernagen stated, yes, George Bogus, Bogash, he’s not built a home yet and neither have the Wards but they’re just waiting for the sewer system to come in and they’re perfectly fine with the setbacks and that type of thing. Okay.
President Stimmel asked, Gerald any questions? Okay, thank you very much ma’am.
Nancy Jernagen stated, thank you.
President Stimmel asked, you folks have some comments? Okay.
Larry Norris stated, Larry Norris.
Kay Johnson stated, Kay Johnson.
President Stimmel stated, thank you.
Larry Norris stated, as a family we own 20 lots in this subdivision and we don’t have a problem with somebody wanting to build a house to better the subdivision and he showed me a picture of the house and I think it’s great. It, when you guys start turning down people for building houses it put people, you know it’s one less tax you can have for your tax base and also it puts people to work and I own the lot 12, I think the lady that was just up here, she owns 10 and 11 and the lots are supremely big from the front to the back and every lot has a different setback so it’s going to be hard for everybody to try to get a home like they want and water property is at a premium right now if you guys if your up on properties on the water so I think it’s a great thing.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Thank you very much.
Larry Norris stated, and we have 20 lots as a family so…
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Larry Norris sated, and we don’t have a problem with it.
President Stimmel stated, we’re you the signers or part of this piece.
Kay Johnson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay, great, thank you. Any questions from the board? I’m sorry ma’am you had a question in the back.
Claudia Shone stated, I’m Claudia Shone I live on lot 5. I’m not approving that variance because what the house sticking out I cannot see the road. The road is only 1 lane. 2 cars cannot pass on there, okay. I also want to tell Randy he doesn’t know this, I have a retarded child. My daughter also has a child that has MS that’s in a wheelchair and they come out and go down my driveway all right, with this sticking out I will not see the road. I want to see the road. I paid enough money for that house so I could see the road and I want to see it all the way up to the mailbox. That’s all I have to say.
President Stimmel stated, thank you. Mr. Watson do you want to respond to either one of these?
Randy Watson stated, well like I said I lived in that house on lot 5 and I looked down that road for 5 years and 50’, 40’ you’re still going to see a ways down that road. I’ve taken, you know, that’s a private lane. The only people that’s supposed to be down there are the people that live down there, okay so the only one she actually has to worry about is the few people that just live south you know, north of her that they have to get to the dead end. The people that know this will know that she has, you know a handicapped child or whatever, you know it even has on signs at the beginning of the road no trespassing, private lane so on and so forth. We’re trying to make the home in a spot, it’s a beautiful home it’ll only increase the value of this whole neighborhood and we’re trying to make it that best suits you know the neighbors. As far as the Jernagen’s she said she had to deed the 13’ to her son and all of this I don’t believe it’s ever been done. I think it’s still, I think they had 5 years to do, it was never done. You know, we’re just trying to do the right thing here and I don’t know what else to say.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right. Any questions from the board? Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, nothing.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Gerald? Any other comments from the audience? Yes sir.
R J Norris stated, my name is R J Norris. I’m the one that originally started this subdivision and I’ll enlighten you on some of this, why the setbacks are why they are. There are some of these people that they named that have 40’ setbacks, Bogash has 40’ setbacks and Watkins has a 40’ setback so just up the road 150’ are lots that’s got 40’ setbacks. The reason for this was they were trying to get the septic tanks in the front yard because of the 100 year flood plain and that was the health departments deal that these had to be put in the front yard. Well to get the measurement back there then their front yard, they had to move them back originally it was 40 we was trying for so they stopped us at 40 and made us move back 50’ and that’s the reason they’re 50’. Which we didn’t want because it crowded the back so and they’re complaining about people that has 40’ setbacks now that signed the thing lot 1 and lot 2 both has 40’ setbacks and there’s some on further down. The reason for that is the septic tank system. Now it’s not there.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Any questions from the board? Okay, thank you Mr. Norris. Any other comments? Are you guys ready to vote?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, ready to vote? We’re going to vote.
The Board finds the following:
1. That objectors were present at the meeting
2. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
3. That the request is for a 10’ front setback variance and a 10’ rear setback variance to build a new home on Lot Number Four (4) in R. J. Norris Subdivision, in Union Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello and West of Royal Oaks on Brandywine Lane.
4. (1) The variance request (is) (is not) a variance from a use district or classifications under are plan law. Vote: 2 is not, 2 is.
5. (2) The granting of this variance (will) (will not) be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and welfare of the community. Vote: 2 will not 2 will.
6. (3) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance request (will) (will not) be affected in a substantially adverse manner. Vote 3 will, 1 will not.
7. (4) The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance is being applied to a situation that (is) (is not) common to other properties in the same zoning district. Vote: 3 is, 1 is not.
8. (5) The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance (will) (will not) result in unusual and unnecessary hardship. Vote: 1 will, 3 will not. There was no hardship shown or found.
9. (6a) This situation (is) (is not) such that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question or to the intended use of the property that does not apply generally to other properties or class of uses in the same zoning district. Vote: 2 will, 2 will not.
10. (6b) this situation (is) (is not) such that such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zoning district and in the vicinity. Vote: 2 will, 2 will not.
11. (6c) This situation (is) (is not) such that the authorizing of such variance will be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will materially impair the purposes of the ordinance of the public interest. Vote: 3 will, 1 will not.
12. (6d) This situation (is) (is not) such that the Board specifically fins the condition or situation of the specific piece of property for which the variance is sought is of so typical or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation, under an amendment of the ordinance, for such conditions or situations. Vote: 2 will, 2 will not.
The variance was denied based on the findings of fact by a vote of 0 for and 4 against. A vote of 3 “for” is necessary to grant a variance.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting on petition #2649 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote no the variance is denied.
****
#2661 Sharon A. Malysa & Joseph Tadevich; The property is located on Lots 7 & 8 in Shore Acres 1st Addition, north of Norway Dam at 3508 N. Shore Acres Court. Tabled from September 18, 2007.
Violation: The deck was roofed without a permit and is too close to the property line.
Request: They are requesting a 5.5’ side setback variance for a covered porch.
President Stimmel asked, who’s representing this variance please?
Sharon Malysa stated, Sharon Malysa.
President Stimmel stated, hi Sharon.
Sharon Malysa stated, hi.
President Stimmel stated, you want to introduce your cohorts here.
Sharon Malysa stated, yes this is my carpenter Arturo Aragon and…
Gerardo ? stated, translator sir.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Gerardo ? stated, just in case.
President Stimmel stated, just in case, okay very good, good idea, okay. Mrs. Tadevich is there anything else you want to add to what we’ve talked about we originally we tabled this with the idea in mind that we wanted to get the contractor here Jerry you weren’t here, just to get a little bit of a up to speed, if you guys want to add in anything that I’ve missed please do but the concrete pad was built, correct and then the contractor came in and built this structure over on top, above it, right?
Sharon Malysa stated, right the concrete patio’s been there since, I’ve got a 93 survey which I believe you might have a copy of. It was there then, I don’t know, you know and therefore when we went and did this we had no clue, idea that because, we figured that because the concrete patio was there we could go and cover that patio to that end we didn’t realize anything about this 8’ variance off the side line.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Sharon Malysa stated, until we found, and then we found out and since then I’ve tried to do everything I can to comply with this that you’ve asked me and also our neighbors haven’t complained. There is 32’ between the closest point of my roof and the closest point of that neighbor’s roof. He has no problems with it, no one has a problem with it and prior to having this area roofed all we could use this for is we used to store our firewood there because we have huge oak trees over it and acorn fall there all the time so you couldn’t sit there, you couldn’t do anything we actually stored our firewood and had a little Rubbermaid shed for the toys there. So this went up and actually everybody thinks it looks beautiful and everything and like I say I’ve learned my lesson in this whole thing and all I ask is that you let me keep the roof.
President Stimmel stated, okay, and then we address the, we said we were going to table it until she got the contractors back which she has and I don’t think we discussed the fine. Did we or the violation at that point in time so we’re going to do both of those tonight. The reason for bringing the contractor in was the fact that we, that according to this young lady that the contractor said that he didn’t need a permit. That’s what he thought, that was my understanding and…
Sharon Malysa stated, he didn’t believe he needed one since the concrete was already there.
President Stimmel stated, right, right. Obviously, you know evidently he didn’t check the laws so, I think that’s where we stand.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, any other questions? Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no that was the main thing.
President Stimmel asked, was that the main thing?
Charlie Mellon stated, and then the size of it’s a little too big.
President Stimmel stated, right, I mean you’re really looking at 2 ½’ setback and the house next to it is set back from that quite a bit actually.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes I was out there and…
Sharon Malysa stated, like I say, yes and like I say as a survey shows I’ve had that even marked on there that it’s 32’ from the closest points of our roofs.
President Stimmel asked, so if, so if the guy in lot 6 wanted to build 2 ½’ from his property line you have the same thing, right.
Charlie Mellon stated, um hum, yes.
President Stimmel stated, I mean you’d end up being 5’ between the properties. Okay.
Sharon Malysa stated, but I’ve already spoken to him and he doesn’t intend to do anything like that but, so there is no problem.
President Stimmel stated, no but his heirs or his heirs or you know I mean where this is not a short term project it’s a long term issue and that’s why we’re trying to address it like this. Gerald any questions?
Charlie Mellon asked, didn’t you or your builder know that it had to have a permit before you could do that?
Sharon Malysa stated, no I assumed that the contractor got one because you know, takes care of that because I did have construction done to my home a few years ago, I had dormers put on and everything else and that contractor just did everything. I was not even present at the time. I just told him what I wanted, he came in and dealt with Dave and brought the plans and everything. This was just basically a verbal thing where Arturo came to my home, I explained what I’d like to have done, he gave me my options and that was it he wrote down a price and we agreed to it and that was all that was done.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, 2 things…
Director Weaver stated, I’m just not sure there was any permit issued for any dormers on this property.
Sharon Malysa stated, yes there was you checked when I came into Area Plan and she pulled, the one that pulled it out…
Director Weaver stated, well I’m looking for it.
Sharon Malysa stated, it showed that I had a permit for all kind of numerous things.
Director Weaver stated, a remodel with a balcony. Okay.
Sharon Malysa stated, right.
Director Weaver stated, that’s what I was looking for, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, 2 things, how long is this been up and how was this discovered?
Director Weaver stated, I cannot tell you how long it’s been up.
Jerry Thompson asked, relatively new?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Sharon Malysa stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, when was it built?
Jerry Thompson asked, less than a year?
Charlie Mellon asked, when was it built?
Sharon Malysa stated, probably um I can look in my checkbook and see my first check.
Jerry Thompson stated, ball park, ball park.
Sharon Malysa stated, let’s see if I came in Area Plan in September, in the beginning of August, maybe.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, less than a year.
Sharon Malysa stated, oh yes, oh yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, that’s all good, okay.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t know if I can tell you how this was brought to our attention either, I believe the Building Department.
Jerry Thompson stated, Dave Anderson spotted it possibly.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay that’s all I need to know.
Director Weaver stated, that’s what sticks in my mind, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, all right.
Jerry Thompson stated, that’s it.
President Stimmel stated, well the first thing we’re going to do is we’re going to vote on the variance itself on the 5.5’ setback, right. You guys ready to vote or are there anymore, is there comments from the audience? Anybody want to comment about this variance? Okay are you guys wanting to go ahead and vote or are you ready?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes, let’s vote.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Sharon Malysa stated, no, I did not. I left it where you told me to leave it.
Director Weaver stated, okay that’s fine.
Sharon Malysa stated, if this is finished tonight I will bring it in in the morning.
Director Weaver stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, all right we have the results of the balloting on BZA #2661 we have 4 votes cast, 2 votes vote yes, 2 votes vote no. This matter is not accordingly concluded. It will be continued till next meeting for another vote and that meeting will be when Diann.
Director Weaver stated, it will be November 15th.
Attorney Altman stated, November 15th.
President Stimmel asked, do you understand what’s happened? The fact that there…
Sharon Malysa stated, yes it’s a tied vote.
President Stimmel stated, the fact that we are only a 5 person board, there’s 4 members here, you have to have 3 votes to be able to have anything passed. You got a 2 to 2 so basically it’s a tie so there’s no winner, no loser you don’t get the variance yet it’s not denied either.
Sharon Malysa stated, so we come back next month. Next month do I need Arturo and interpreter also?
President Stimmel stated, I think we may or may not that’s going to depend on what we do on the fine, I think that’s still yet to be determined quite frankly but we can talk but we can talk about that at the very end of this, this entire discussion, if that’s all right whether they need to come back again, is that…
Jerry Thompson stated, yes, that sounds good.
President Stimmel asked, is that okay Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, it sounds like a good plan.
President Stimmel stated, all right, now do you want to address, lets address the fine.
Gerald Cartmell asked, should we wait and have all 5 members here?
President Stimmel asked, on the fine?
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, I don’t think so Gerald.
President Stimmel stated, I’m okay with going ahead with it personally but it’s up to you guys too.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that’s fine.
President Stimmel stated, okay the reason, as I recall I’m just going to try to state this again Charlie but what we talked about before and that was that we wanted the contractor here because of the fact that he had proceeded without getting the proper permits and we felt like that there was some responsibility on his part and that he might in fact end up either sharing in the fine, we have fined contractors before for not, you know for not following proper procedure in getting permits and weren’t sure, I think that was the whole issue was it not is the fact that we wanted to make sure both people were represented here before we ended up fining anybody anything.
Charlie Mellon stated, since she’s got the contractor and the interpreter here I think maybe we ought to do it tonight so we wouldn’t have to bring them back.
President Stimmel stated, right I tend to agree.
Jerry Thompson stated, yep.
President Stimmel asked, so how do you want to discuss the fine?
Charlie Mellon stated, she’d be the only one that’d have to come back, I imagine. I guess it was a misunderstanding.
Jerry Thompson asked, are these gentlemen local?
Sharon Malysa stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson asked, and have lived here for some time?
Sharon Malysa stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay. 5 years?
Arturo Aragon stated, 9 years.
Jerry Thompson stated, 9 years, okay, thank you. I move we fine the contractor $200.
Charlie Mellon stated, I’d second that.
Gerald Cartmell asked, well it’s an automatic $500 fine anyhow isn’t it?
Director Weaver stated, that’s the way the policy is written, yes.
President Stimmel stated, that’s what the policy is.
Jerry Thompson stated, it is my only explanation to that is it’s just a, it’s a small project that’s over the platform.
Jason Knoll asked, sorry I’m Jason Knoll. I was just wondering what the normal policy for that would be as far as the fine cost goes for not getting a permit.
President Stimmel stated, it starts at $500.
Jason Knoll asked, normally it would be $500?
Director Weaver stated, it’s for violating our ordinance is what’s it’s for and the starting point is $500.
Jason Knoll stated, right, right. Is $500?
Director Weaver stated, that’s where I set it at, this board or the APC has the right to raise or lower it.
Jason Knoll stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, okay.
Jason Knoll stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, so that’s just a notification.
Jason Knoll asked, that’s just kind of a starting point then?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Jason Knoll stated, and then the board has their, at their free will they can raise and lower that as they see fit.
President Stimmel stated, that’s correct.
Director Weaver stated, and we have everyone in our office when they come and get a building permit, they have to sign a copy of that fine policy that they receive a copy when they get their permit.
Jason Knoll stated, right, okay. I wasn’t sure on the, like the amount, you know I’m a contractor myself here in the county, we’ve seen each other a couple of times in the office and you know people come to me all the time and say well so and so said I don’t need a permit for that, well guess what it doesn’t matter what you do you gotta have a permit to do, you know to make, to attach something to a structure of the home your supposed to have a permit is the way that I understand it right?
Director Weaver stated, anything 25 square feet or larger.
Jason Knoll stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, whether it’s attached to the home or not.
Jason Knoll stated, it doesn’t matter who you are exactly.
President Stimmel stated, thank you.
Charlie Mellon stated, another thing Dave if you remember, Gerald said he knew the contractor, this contractor here had worked for and that would be another point, that contractor that he worked for, for a long time surly knew that and he should of let the guy know.
President Stimmel asked, how long have you been a contractor in the area, you say you’ve been here 9 years how long have you been a contractor sir?
The interpreter is talking to Arturo in Spanish.
President Stimmel asked, about 5 years?
Arturo Aragon stated, no 5 months.
President Stimmel stated, 5 months, and have you gotten a permit for anything in that particular period of time?
Arturo Aragon stated, um, no just do like roofs and small house like I work for a contractor you know and I have some job sites you know I do myself on weekends or…
President Stimmel stated, okay, okay. Well that would be my concern and I’m just voicing that and that’s the fact that he’s been contracting on his own doing it for 5 months has he ever gotten a permit to do anything he’s done where it might have been required, you know what other issues are there out there if he didn’t think he didn’t needed a permit for this one, what other issues might there be out there?
Sharon Malysa stated, well basically what he had told me see he used to work for, who is it that you used to work for, he worked for somebody else well basically the people that he worked for before he went on his own were building like new homes so they had the permits and everything for the entire home and then just like hired him to do certain portions of that so he was covered under you know the permit that was already issued by the owner that was building it.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Sharon Malysa stated, so I think that’s where he got confused with the whole…
President Stimmel asked, okay do you want to discuss the $200, we got a move and a second already do you want to discuss that anymore or do you want to vote?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I don’t think it’s enough.
President Stimmel stated, okay. I tend to agree but then let’s vote or do you want to…
Jerry Thompson stated, no it’s fine, yes.
President Stimmel stated, all right so all in favor of the motion that was $200 fine for the contractor signify by saying aye.
Jerry Thompson and Charlie Mellon stated, aye.
President Stimmel asked, all opposed?
Gerald Cartmell and President Stimmel stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, 2 and 2.
Attorney Altman stated, you make another motion.
President Stimmel stated, that’s fine, that’s fine.
Sharon Malysa stated, this is not a funny situation but you’re…
Charlie Mellon stated, he’s going to make a motion now.
President Stimmel stated, Gerald you said it’s not enough why don’t you continue that thought if you would.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well it’s an automatic 500 bucks, or at least I thought it was.
Attorney Altman stated, well make a motion.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I’ll make a motion its $500.
President Stimmel stated, I’ll second it. Are we heading for a, I don’t think. Is there anymore discussion? You want to discuss it?
Jerry Thompson stated, just a second before we vote.
President Stimmel stated, okay not a problem.
Jerry Thompson stated, we’re talking about basically he built a roof over this cement slab.
President Stimmel stated, that’s correct.
Jerry Thompson stated, not enclosed it’s just a roof over a cement slab.
Charlie Mellon stated, the slab was there.
Jerry Thompson stated, make sure I’m understanding, okay, I’m ready.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie are you okay or you want to discuss it some more? This is just on the $500 fine we just got a motion and a second for a $500 fine.
Jerry Thompson asked, who second it? Did you second it Dave?
President Stimmel stated, I seconded it.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, all right.
President Stimmel asked, can I second it?
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, I would rather see it that last flip make it 350. That’s a motion.
President Stimmel stated, we already got a motion.
Jerry Thompson stated, we got a motion.
Charlie Mellon stated, okay, go ahead.
President Stimmel stated, all right vote on the motion of $500. All in favor?
President Stimmel and Gerald Cartmell stated, aye.
President Stimmel asked, all opposed?
Charlie Mellon and Jerry Thompson stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, all right give us a number Charlie.
Charlie Mellon stated, 350.
Jerry Thompson stated, second.
President Stimmel stated, this is just on the contractor.
Jerry Thompson stated, that’s fine, that’s fine. Yes that’s right.
President Stimmel stated, all in favor of $350 fine say aye.
Jerry Thompson, President Stimmel, and Charlie Mellon stated, aye.
President Stimmel asked, all opposed.
Gerald Cartmell stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, okay 3 and 1. All right now that’s the fine for the contractors $350.
Sharon Malysa stated, now comes the big one.
President Stimmel asked, now for the homeowner do we want to extend this or how do you want to approach it?
Charlie Mellon asked, you mean as far as the fine?
President Stimmel stated, yes, I mean does she get fined in addition to the contractor?
Charlie Mellon stated, well I thought it was just for the contractor.
President Stimmel stated, well that was just for the contractor.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that was for the contractor.
President Stimmel stated, that’s exactly what that was.
Jerry Thompson stated, that’s just one project.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, I say not.
Attorney Altman stated, make a motion.
Charlie Mellon stated, I’ll have to agree.
Jerry Thompson stated, I move we do not fine the homeowner.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, I second it.
President Stimmel asked, all in favor?
President Stimmel, Charlie Mellon, and Jerry Thompson stated, aye.
President Stimmel asked, all opposed. All right, 3 to 1 Gerald no problem.
Jerry Thompson stated, we need another member.
President Stimmel stated, all right, that’s the way we feel on the fine so when she comes back next month the contractor doesn’t need to come. He’s been fined you’ll need to talk to Diann about how to pay that fine, how to make arrangements to do that.
Attorney Altman stated, and I’d suggest you start getting building permits.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, lots of them.
President Stimmel stated, when in doubt.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, when in doubt do it.
Director Weaver stated, come in to the office I’d be more than glad to give you handouts that explain the process. Any information that you would like?
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right. I think we’re done with this one, are we not, okay.
****
#2662 Larry D. & Helen R. Keesling; The property is located on Lot 35 in Isle of Homes Sub., located north of Monticello in the Isle of Homes at 5091 E. Bluebird Drive.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 19’ rear setback variance and a 29’ front setback variance to the North road and a 1’ South side setback variance to build a new home.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Larry Keesling stated, Larry Keesling.
President Stimmel stated, thank you. Do you have anything you want to add to what we just read Mr. Keesling?
Larry Keesling stated, no.
Jerry Thompson stated, but Larry we keep these, do you have copies?
Larry Keesling stated, I don’t care. Yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, seriously when you give them to us we keep them for the file.
Larry Keesling stated, well I wanted you to look at them.
Jerry Thomson stated, okay.
Larry Keesling stated, it’s easier to see the red is the existing home that’s there now.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, and the green is what we proposed to build a new home.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Larry Keesling stated, it’s easier to see than on the other black, the solid black one.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes. Are you going to build that while the other one’s still there?
Larry Keesling stated, I don’t think so.
Charlie Mellon stated, that’s what I was a wondering if it wasn’t going on the same foundation.
Larry Keesling stated, no, the foundation will be different.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, okay.
Larry Keesling stated, this home that was there was built in the mid 50’s, um, and it hasn’t had very much updates in that 50 year period, um the elevation of it is rather low. When it rains the water runs towards the house and with a new construction we’ll elevate the floor approximately 1’ above the road. The reason the setbacks are so extreme on this, there’s a 35’ easement on the north side, well it’s not, we found out it’s not an easement it’s a road so a road means that this house that’s there has, there’s 2 fronts to it.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, one from the lake and one from that road. But the road is not a road, it just goes, it’s an easement for the people in the center of the Isle of Homes out there, there’s 3 lots out there and they have their boatlifts down there and so they just walk down there to the and then it’s 35’ wide then it’s I don’t know who many feet from the 35’ width over to Charlie’s house, the house to the north but there’s quite a space, distance there and then on the south side of our house we’re 8’ but with the overhang that makes us a little, we have to get a 9, we have to have a 9’ variance instead of 8’ and then the one back at the road, from the road to where our property starts the blacktop to where our property starts is approximately 15’ and the other, I don’t know Charlie if you were out there you seen there’s other houses or…
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, sheds and garages that are quite a bit closer than that, you know around the circle there.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, so I think basically that front part would be a 3 car garage that would load from the south as you’d come you’d drive into that.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, and then there’s a, the reason I can’t move it that far forward on that new drawing there you’ve got a little tree that’s a magnolia tree that’s probably about 50 years old if you, did you look in the front yard?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes I saw that.
Larry Keesling stated, that’s a beautiful tree and I don’t want to destroy it and then in our front, in the other corner there’s a well.
Charlie Mellon stated, uh huh.
Larry Keesling stated, and so that’s why we kind of got to build around those things to end up with a new house.
Charlie Mellon stated, this house looks like it’s going to be a little bigger than the other.
Larry Keesling stated, yes, it’s probably about 2700 square feet.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, and the other one’s about 2000.
Larry Keesling stated, it’ll be a story and a half but we’ll be within the 30’ limit.
Charlie Mellon asked, you’re on the new sewer?
Larry Keesling stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, okay.
Larry Keesling stated, been there since, I think it was last spring.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Larry Keesling stated, a little over, well no last fall, about a year now.
Gerald Cartmell asked, Larry where’s your water going to run now when you build this? Is it going to run on the neighbors?
Larry Keesling stated, no, no, no we’ve got well you mean from the front yard or from…
Gerald Cartmell stated, well your saying you’re going to raise a foot and the waters not going to run to your house anymore so where’s it going to go.
Larry Keesling stated, it’ll go around the sides.
Charlie Mellon stated, putting a perimeter drain around it would take care of that.
Larry Keesling stated, and I’ll put a perimeter drain around it to catch it off the roofs.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, he’s wanting to know where the outlet is.
Larry Keesling stated, it’s the lake.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh yes.
Larry Keesling stated, but we’re probably, there’s probably I’d say close to 3’ fall from our house to the lake now, to the boathouse and the pier out there.
Charlie Mellon stated, um hum.
Larry Keesling stated, it slips off rather quickly.
Charlie Mellon stated, the original house is there, it looks like a good home yet, I mean it’s got brick and everything’s there.
Larry Keesling stated, well up part way, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, it looked nice. You can tell it’s been kept up.
Larry Keesling stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, around, you know.
President Stimmel asked, any other questions from the board? Go ahead Gerald.
Gerald Cartmell stated, so your 15’ off the blacktop, I was out there looking.
Larry Keesling stated, yes before the property line starts.
Gerald Cartmell stated, before the property line starts.
Larry Keesling stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell asked, and you’re what going to be 2’ off of that?
Larry Keesling stated, yes I think something, going to be 15.
Charlie Mellon stated, 13, it says 13 here.
Larry Keesling stated, 19.
President Stimmel asked, any response from anyone Diann?
Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of.
Gerald Cartmell stated, the guy across the street put in a good word for you.
Larry Keesling stated, yes, right.
President Stimmel asked, is there any comments from anybody else from the audience about this variance?
Jerry Thompson stated, let’s vote.
President Stimmel asked, ready to vote?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, for the record mark them as exhibit A.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Larry Keesling stated, no I forgot to, it was raining.
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine.
Attorney Altman asked, Larry for the record on this exhibit A there appears to be a tree is that the location?
Larry Keesling stated, that’s my magnolia tree.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I thought you were trying to put on that.
Larry Keesling stated, we were trying to jog it around.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. There is a tree in the way of placement. The road easement is not used for motor vehicle traffic, only walkers. The setbacks are much less necessary. The applicant will raise the home by at least one foot and install perimeter drains.
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 19’ rear setback variance and a 29’ front variance to the North road and a 1’ South side setback variance to build a new home on Lot Number 35 in “Isle of Homes” Subdivision situated in Sections 8, 9, and 16, Township 27 North, Range 3 West in Union and Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located north of Monticello in the Isle of Homes at 5091 E. Bluebird Drive.
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 3 affirmative and 1 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting on BZA #2662, 4 votes cast, 3 votes vote to grant the variance, 1 vote votes to deny the variance. The variance is granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed.
Larry Keesling asked, what a tearing up permit?
Attorney Altman stated, you need that to.
Larry Keesling asked, do you?
Attorney Altman stated, yes, go see Dave.
Director Weaver stated, no, they do not issue permits, you need your building permit to build but you don’t need a permit to remove.
Larry Keesling stated, ok, thank you guys.
****
#2664 Vogel Real Estate Co. Inc.; The property is located on Lots 1, 2, and 14’ lot 3, in Lake Drive Subdivision in Block 2, located in the City of Monticello at 1001 N. Main Street.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 10’ front setback variance from Main Street to relocate an on premise sign because of the road widening.
President Stimmel stated, Mr. Vogel.
Phil Vogel stated, hi I’m Phil Vogel.
President Stimmel stated, thank you.
Phil Vogel stated, you’ve kind of described it a little bit. They took our sign down when they widened Main Street. I want to put it back up and kind of the main reason, one of the reasons I’m asking for the variance, you see where they kind of made, it’s kind of a grassy area there and I’d like to set the sign in that grassy area, originally they was going to put asphalt which doesn’t help anybody so I’d like to put the sign there and landscape around it but in putting that sign up I kind of measured some signs that are already existing that when they widened Main Street, and I think your going to find that a couple of them don’t actually meet the setback which really is irreverent but yet I’m trying to set it up into that area and even when I still erect it the edge of my sign is going to be more than 10’ away from the curb. I talked to the City, in fact they gave me a consent to encroach and I gave Diann a copy of that today.
Attorney Altman stated, we have that in the record.
Phil Vogel stated, and…
Attorney Altman stated, together, excuse me, minutes of the meeting that adopted both from the City of Monticello,
Phil Vogel stated, so I’ve, yes I went to the city and kind of told them my train of thought also, one of the two or three things they were concerned with #1 was it back far enough 2, block the vision of any, you know car pulling up or somebody pulling up to the I think that, is that Center Street or Lake Street, I should know.
Attorney Altman stated, Center.
Phil Vogel stated, Center Street okay, they didn’t want to make sure that it was back far enough the it didn’t block the view of anybody. They also asked about the height of it, was it going to be high enough that it was not going to block the view of anybody and as you see on the drawing and I think you got that it’s going to be 11’ high, the post is 11’ 6” and probably just planning putting that about even with the asphalt there to do that. One of the things that in talking to the engineer of the project I put in there the 10’ it’s not going to be less than that could be a little more than that depending on how we dig the hole between the new storm sewer drain and the water meter but I put that it’s a minimum of 10’ and when I met George Loy out there the city attorney we did some measuring and roughly the, I guess I would call it the east right-of-way line is roughly 23’ from the curb so we went in there and you said okay roughly I’m going to be 4 or 5’ from the east right-of-way line and then my sign is roughly 11’ which would be another 5 ½’ so 5 and 5 would be a t 10 ½’ off the 23’ so gives me a 10’ plus back away from the new curb.
Gerald Cartmell asked, but your still in the city right-of-way, right?
Phil Vogel stated, yes and the city doesn’t have a problem with that, they, that’s why their giving me a grant to encroach and of course any time you get a consent to encroach you know if they come along and they said they had to widen Center Street or they redid it again it would be my expense to remove the sign and it says it in the consent to encroach. I asked, one of the board members asked me you know do they have a set guide line you know are they going to say okay everybody has to be back 10’ or 15’ um, I talked to the city attorney in regards to that and he said we don’t have a set guideline, our position is we’re going to take each case as it comes along and go from there so I think he’s going to take a look, I think the city’s going to take a look whether it’s you know, what they’re going to do and then he put the burden on you people and said you’re the one that…
Gerald Cartmell stated, oh no I don’t understand it took 30 years to get that now we’re giving it back.
Phil Vogel stated, well your not really giving the road back your just letting me put the sign.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well it’s a public right-of-way not a personal right-of-way.
Phil Vogel stated, I understand that.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I mean, I don’t care what the city does I mean that’s fine but I’m thinking we need something, need to talk to city council about this a little bit. Sit down with them and see what’s going on because we’re going to be on this thing 15 times. Everybody down through there’s going to want a sign the same way. Where ever we draw the line in the sand that’s where it’s going to have to be.
Phil Vogel stated, well and I’m sure and that’s what George was talking about, he said I’m not going to say it’s going to be 5’, I’m not going to say it’s going to be 10’ and he said it’s going to be a case by case scenario.
President Stimmel stated, so what I’m hearing that’s new to me tonight is that you’ve talked to George and they are going to look at it on a case by case basis.
Phil Vogel stated, that was George’s comment to me.
President Stimmel stated, so there’s no concern about being consistent about, in or inconsistent about these encroachments.
Phil Vogel stated, that’s the way he felt.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, till they get the next request up that’s when that’ll come in.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well Phil Schrader is already out there on the curb.
Charlie Mellon stated, well yes.
Phil Vogel stated, well there’s a little difference between him and I. I’m going to be, I’m a lot farther back.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I was going to say he’s already on the curb I don’t know how he can do that.
President Stimmel stated, I’m not trying to be devils advocate but why not go ahead and go out there why Phil’s at if he’s got a right to encroach already.
Phil Vogel asked, do what?
President Stimmel asked, does Phil, does he already have a right to encroach?
Phil Vogel stated, no.
President Stimmel stated, he does not.
Phil Vogel stated, he does not.
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
Phil Vogel stated, he put that in without even coming to see you guys.
President Stimmel stated, without the city’s approval is what you’re saying.
Phil Vogel stated, without, well I’ve heard…
President Stimmel stated, well okay, it’s…
Phil Vogel stated, I’ve heard some mixed signals on that because I’ve heard the previous mayor said it was okay but the city council didn’t say it was okay.
President Stimmel stated, that’s more of the concerns that we have I think is just exactly that issue, you know in other words if they give him a right to encroach and it’s 10 or 12’ and yours is back 5 or 6 why wouldn’t you want yours to have the same amount so your lining up, he’s not blocking your sign, etcetera, etcetera. I’m asking why wouldn’t the next business owner want to do that, have his sign out there as far as possible?
Phil Vogel stated, well and I guess that’s going to come back to you guys whether you’re going to allow, I mean the city said they’re not going to set a definite number.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Phil Vogel stated, okay so the city’s going to put I guess the burden on you.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Phil Vogel stated, of where you think it should be set.
Jerry Thompson stated, that’s happened before.
Gerald Cartmell stated, been there before.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes that’s not new territory.
Phil Vogel stated, going back, the two main things I think when I was at the city council meeting was you know am I going to obstruct a view of any vehicles, okay and of course they didn’t want me out over the road and like I said I’m going to be 10’ back the edge of my sign, my post is going to be back 15 ½’ from the curb but that’s where it is and going back to the project engineer you know I have to have him there to make sure that I don’t tap into any the storm sewers and stuff like that.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Phil Vogel stated, putting the base in.
Gerald Cartmell asked, what did you just say you’re going to be 15’ back? It shows 10’ right here, 10 from each curb.
Attorney Altman stated, no his pole.
Phil Vogel stated, my pole is going to be 15’ plus back, my sign is going to be a little, I’m just asking for 10’ I can be back farther than that.
Charlie Mellon stated, his sign is going to be out this away more than the pole.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well I’m going on what the building shows here. The building shows both of them 10’ from each corner from Main Street and whatever street that is on the south there, look at the drawing. That’s what we have to go by.
Jerry Thompson stated, but that’s to the edge of the circle isn’t it Gerald, it’s not to the center point is it?
Charlie Mellon stated, edge of the sign.
Phil Vogel stated, which I don’t have George here but I can tell I took a tape measure and I measured from the curb, from not the outside of the curb the inside of the curb to the what I’m going to call the east right-of-way and if you go out there your going to kind of see the east right-of-way because they’ve poured cement approaches all the way along and you can see it following Main Street then 23’ there because we measured. Like I say he’s got 10 I’m asking for 10 but I’m actually going to be a little farther than 10 and I went in there at 5’ like I said it could be 12 or 13 but it’s minimum 10 and a half you know the edge of my sign to the inside of the curb. The post is definitely going to be back farther because the sign’s 11’ a crossed.
Charlie Mellon stated, right, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Is there any, are you done for a minute?
Phil Vogel stated, yes I’m done.
President Stimmel asked, is there anybody in the audience who wants to comment on the variance? Okay, you guys want to talk about it anymore?
Charlie Mellon stated, time to vote.
President Stimmel stated, I’m not ready to vote. I’ve got to think about this a little bit.
Phil Vogel stated, I know, I mean that’s what you’re here for.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, whatever we do tonight is going to be, that’s the line in the sand.
President Stimmel stated, well yes, for us.
Gerald Cartmell stated, if we approve or…
President Stimmel stated, in other words if we’re saying and here again playing the devils advocate again if each applicant as they come up and they have a consent to encroach essentially all we’re doing is rubber stamping what the city wants to do which is allow that encroachment, is that correct?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, is that correct or am I misinterpreting that?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
Attorney Altman stated, and from a legal point you’re exactly correct, exactly correct.
Jerry Thompson stated, I’m surprised they’re that flexible about it, I figured they’d have a specific…
Gerald Cartmell stated, 30 years to get it why would you just say okay go ahead.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, you know, gees.
President Stimmel stated, some of what you’re saying Phil troubles me just a little bit in the sense of you’ve mentioned the fact that they’re throwing it back on us and essentially I guess I’m almost not interpreting it that way. I mean they’re telling us what they’re wishes are by issuing the consent to encroach. This is my interpretation, they’re telling us what they’re wishes are right there, that they’re willing to allow that.
Phil Vogel stated, well obviously they are. I don’t have it signed by the mayor yet but I mean they voted at the council meeting to do that and I had to give them the stuff and they agreed to do it at the council meeting.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Phil Vogel stated, I have a question for Diann. If I’m on the east right-of-way line, okay, which would be the end of the cement, normally, what’s normally the setback from there, is it 10’ from there?
Director Weaver stated, it is 10’ from the road right-of-way to the leading edge of the sign.
Phil Vogel stated, so really if I actually went by that my sign would probably be about I’m going to guess 8’ away from a building.
Director Weaver stated, probably.
Charlie Mellon asked, it wouldn’t be that close, would it?
Phil Vogel stated, it’d be pretty close because you take the sidewalk out and you take, you got to back to where the cement comes in Charlie. That cement comes back quite a ways.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes but you’ve got blacktop way back to the building.
Phil Vogel stated, no not where I’m on that corner.
Gerald Cartmell stated, 33’ to the building, supposedly.
Phil Vogel stated, well then you’ve got a 4’ sidewalk that’s going around it.
Charlie Mellon asked, have you got a sidewalk there in front of yours?
Phil Vogel stated, um hum.
Charlie Mellon stated, well somebody’s growling south of you that they don’t even have a sidewalk.
Phil Vogel stated, oh your talking about the new Main Street, no I’m talking about going around my building.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh okay.
Phil Vogel stated, it’s on the other side of Main Street is where it’s at.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, yes.
President Stimmel stated, so it we, I’m sorry I’m really concerned about…
Charlie Mellon asked, isn’t this sign business county run, instead of city? Isn’t the city on signs under the county ordinance?
Director Weaver stated, yes they are.
Attorney Altman stated, but they adopted the ordinance also.
Charlie Mellon asked, but why is the city attorney or anybody up there telling him what to do?
Director Weaver stated, they have they’re own ordinance that doesn’t allow signs in a right-of-way.
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes they’ve already had on that says you can’t put a sign there.
Director Weaver stated, they have they’re own even.
President Stimmel stated, they’ve violated their own ordinance. Go ahead Phil, I’m sorry.
Phil Vogel stated, I don’t know how much of you went up and down Main Street but you know there’s already a violation on the right-of-way because when they widened the street they didn’t make them move the signs.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Charlie Mellon stated, that’s grandfathered.
Phil Vogel stated, well I need go talk to my grandfather.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes I know it.
Phil Vogel stated, but there is some, there are some signs that are in violations that they didn’t have to move because, you know they weren’t in the…
Attorney Altman stated, construction area.
Phil Vogel stated, construction zone if I want to call it whatever to go from there.
President Stimmel asked, would it bring any undue hardship upon you to, if we tabled this for 30 days and were able to talk to the city some more and George, kind of try to map this out a little better?
Phil Vogel stated, no I’m going to go with what you guys say, you know and if…
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Phil Vogel stated, that’s what you feel comfortable with you know that’s what you need to do.
President Stimmel asked, do you guys feel like there’s a pressing need to vote on this right now or do you think…
Jerry Thompson stated, no, no.
President Stimmel stated, we, it seems like to me that there has the potential to be not as simple as just one guy with one sign.
Jerry Thompson stated, I just can’t believe they’re not more specific then they are about it.
President Stimmel stated, it would at least give us a chance to have some dialogue with the city council and mayor at some point in time either through Diann or through us or however.
Jerry Thompson stated, I move we table this to the November meeting.
President Stimmel stated, I’ll second. All in favor?
Board Members stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, it’s tabled. Phil thanks I appreciate you coming up and talking.
Jerry Thompson stated, somebody’s got to be first.
President Stimmel stated, sorry about that.
Phil Vogel stated, well.
Jerry Thompson stated, really.
Phil Vogel stated, you know, and I agree with that but I think you know even when you’re all of a sudden done everybody’s going to have a different scenario.
Jerry Thompson stated, exactly.
President Stimmel stated, I agree, I agree.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s the way it always is with variances.
Phil Vogel stated, yes it’s not going to be the same going up and down.
Jerry Thompson stated, nope.
President Stimmel stated, they’re will be but I think in fairness to everybody I think we need some kind of a plan.
Phil Vogel stated, okay, all right.
President Stimmel stated, that’s just me, thanks again Phil.
Phil Vogel stated, see you.
****
#2666 Clarence E. Jr. & Christine Ann Goranowski; The property is located on Lots 3, 4, 5 in Pleasant View Terrace, located North of Lowes Bridge off of West Shafer Drive at 6703 N. Skaggs Court.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 30’ front setback variance to build a 2 story addition.
President Stimmel asked, and you sir are?
Clarence Goranowski stated, I’m Clarence Goranowski.
President Stimmel stated, thank you. Do you want to add anything to what I just read?
Clarence Goranowski stated, no you pretty much basically, what we want to is what you said. We just want to use the existing foundation that’s there and build on top of that and then the building, the part that we’re building would be west, west of the lake towards the back of the house so, I talked to the Lake’s association they didn’t have any problem with it and…
President Stimmel asked, so the 14’ porch that sticks out into the SFLECC easement right-of-way, will that all be torn off and then be…
Clarence Goranowski stated, that’ll stay.
President Stimmel asked, that’ll stay?
Clarence Goranowski stated, we’re grandfathered with NIPSCO.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Clarence Goranowski stated, 20 years ago or better.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Clarence Goranowski stated, with that. We’re not building out anymore that way.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Clarence Goranowski stated, we’re building west.
President Stimmel asked, but is the existing house going to stay?
Clarence Goranowski stated, yes it is. Were you out there to see what I was doing?
President Stimmel stated, yes I actually was.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, I think there were probably a couple of us out there.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, I was out there.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, it looks like he’s got plenty of room.
President Stimmel stated, yes. Jerry anything?
Jerry Thompson asked, no other than I don’t know does that need to be mentioned for the record Jerry that he does have a letter from SFLECC?
Clarence Goranowski stated, I do.
Attorney Altman stated, sure does.
Jerry Thompson stated, I mean but it needs to be entered I believe.
Attorney Altman stated, a letter from them dated September 19, 2007, basically the SFLECC does not have objections to your proposed addition as indicated on the Site Improvement Survey by James L. Milligan, date September 12, 2007, for Lot 4 in Pleasant Terrace Addition, Monon Township, White County, Indiana, commonly known as 6703 North Skaggs Court, Monticello, Indiana 47960.
Charlie Mellon stated, Joe Roach.
President Stimmel stated, the way I’m looking at this Jerry and Gerald is just basically he’s just bringing the existing house into compliance, essentially.
Director Weaver stated, in order for them to do improvements on the home for the amount of improvements that he’s doing.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Director Weaver stated, he has to bring it into compliance before he can…
President Stimmel stated, which already exists.
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, it already exists.
President Stimmel asked, do you guys have any more questions? Any questions from the audience?
Jerry Thompson stated, let’s vote.
President Stimmel asked, you guys ready to vote.
Attorney Altman stated, this is lot #3, 4, and 5, married together if the variance is granted, okay.
Clarence Goranowski stated, make it all into one lot.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, can’t sell any off.
Clarence Goranowski stated, all right, didn’t plan to but…
Attorney Altman stated, all right. I had to say that on the record.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. SFLECC has granted a right to encroach – see file. Lots 3,4 & 5 must remain together as long as this variance is used.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 30’ front setback variance to build a 2 story addition on Lots Numbered Three (3), Four (4), and Five (5) in Pleasant View Terrace Addition, located in a part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section Twenty-Eight (28), Township Twenty-Eight (28) North, Range Three (3) West in White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Lowes Bridge off of West Shafer Drive at 6703 N. Skaggs Court.
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, announcing the results of the voting on petition #2666, 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote the variance is hereby granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed.
Clarence Goranowski stated, okay, tomorrow. I brought my sign back to.
****
#2667 Bradley J. & Christine A. Gervais; The property is located on Lot 2 in Franks 1st Addition, located North of Monticello, at 5040 N. Frank Lane.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 3’ north side setback variance and a 4’ south side setback variance to build an addition onto the existing house. This request will replace Variance #2611 that was approved May 17, 2007.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Bradley Gervais stated, I am Bradley Gervais.
President Stimmel stated, thank you and I apologize for butchering the name.
Bradley Gervais stated, no problem. Yes we’d like to add this addition to our house. My wife and I are planning to retire down here to Monticello and this is a, you know small house and it actually has no storage room so we want to add this addition to add an additional bedroom and some storage space for us so we can live down here comfortably.
President Stimmel stated, okay, thank you. Give the board just a minute to kind of digest what…
Jerry Thompson stated, yes. Gerald did you guys go out and look at that today?
Gerald Cartmell stated, yes I looked at it and I don’t have a problem with it.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
Attorney Altman asked, on the sewer system?
Bradley Gervais stated, on sewer, right.
Jerry Thompson stated, this is basically the same setup it’s just going to be a little larger.
Bradley Gervais asked, you mean from the previous drawing?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
Bradley Gervais stated, it’s the same, the dimensions are all the same. When the surveyor came out he misplaced the house on the survey.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, all right.
President Stimmel stated, really it’s just a redo of…
Jerry Thompson stated, positioning.
President Stimmel stated, yes, repositioning, the surveyor made a little mess.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, any questions from the audience on this variance please? You guys ready to vote?
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. It is on the sewer.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 3’ north side setback variance and a 4’ south side setback variance to build an addition onto the existing house. This request will replace Variance #2611 that was approved May 17, 2007 on Lot 2 in Frank’s First Addition in Monon Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello, at 5040 N. Frank Lane.
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results on balloting on petition #2667, we have 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote to grant the variance. You need to get your building permit amended to be consistent with this, okay.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir.
Bradley Gervais stated, thank you and I did bring back the sign back here.
Director Weaver asked, do you want me to give this deposit back to you or do you want me to give it to Buck?
Bradley Gervais stated, you can give it to Buck if you want.
Director Weaver stated, okay.
****
#2668 Randall V. & Mary Blanchette; The property is located on Lot 31 in Recreation Park, located North of Monticello at 3153 N. Lakeshore Drive.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 7 1/2’ south side setback variance and a 5 ½’ north side setback variance to replace an existing garage with a dwelling and a second story deck on the same foundation.
President Stimmel asked, and representing that variance?
Randy Blanchette stated, I’m Randy Blanchette.
President Stimmel stated, thank you. Do you want to add anything to what I just said?
Randy Blanchette stated, I’d like to clarify the request a little bit.
President Stimmel stated, sure.
Randy Blanchette stated, there’s an existing garage there now and we’d like to demolish that of course, put a garage back on that same foundation with living quarters above it. And then another side note, we’re the property owners to the north as well.
Gerald Cartmell stated, your trying to help your neighbors out you don’t want to be as tall as they are.
Randy Blanchette stated, no, I don’t want to be that tall, no.
Charlie Mellon asked, they’re working on a building right south of you there too aren’t they?
Randy Blanchette stated, yes sir, they’re putting a garage, attaching a garage.
Charlie Mellon stated, the height of that building is going to be about the same as yours when you get it done. It might be if you put housing on top of the garage.
Randy Blanchette asked, how high is that?
Charlie Mellon asked, well you know how high it is? I didn’t look, your building.
Randy Blanchette asked, oh the building with the print?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Randy Blanchette stated, well um, must be 8, 10, 16 and then the pitch of the roof, I don’t know, you know if you have 2 stories.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, I though they’d be pretty similar.
Randy Blanchette stated, I’m sure it would be…
Charlie Mellon stated, it wouldn’t be no.
President Stimmel asked, Gerald you got any questions, I’m sorry. Okay, Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
Randy Blanchette stated, mine won’t be as narrow as that building.
Jerry Thompson asked, any fan mail?
President Stimmel asked, any fan mail Diann, anything on this one? Anybody in the audience…
Director Weaver stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, anybody in the audience have any comments on it? You guys ready to vote?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system Mr. Blanchette?
Randy Blanchette stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson stated, there’s an application Jerry I don’t know if that needs to be mentioned.
Randy Blanchette stated, we’ve already had that done.
Jerry Thompson stated, I don’t know if that needs to be on the record or not.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, it should be.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Randy Blanchette stated, no sorry.
Director Weaver stated, that’s okay.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. It is and will be on the garages existing foot print with a second floor of living area.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 7 1/2’ south side setback variance and a 5 ½’ north side setback variance to replace an existing garage with a dwelling and a second story deck on the same foundation on Lot Numbered Thirty-one (31) in Recreation Park Subdivision, in Union Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located North of Monticello at 3153 N. Lakeshore Drive.
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, all right the results of the balloting on petition #2668, 4 votes were cast, 4 votes the variance is hereby granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed.
Randy Blanchette stated, okay thank you.
****
#2669 Sharon R. Garbison; The property is located on Lot 13 in Bennett’s Addition, located in the City of Monticello at 717 S. Main Street.
Violation: None
Request: She is requesting a 16’ rear setback variance to convert a detached garage into a primary structure.
President Stimmel asked, and you are ma’am?
Sharon Garbison stated, I am Sharon Garbison.
President Stimmel stated, thank you very much. Do you have anything you want to add to what I just read, Miss Garbison?
Sharon Garbison stated, I just, I’m sure you’ve got all the information with it that I showed where the building has been there for 1938 and I guess when I bought this property 2 years ago I guess I didn’t realize that I needed to do all of this stuff to get it to where, you know to this point so when I went up to talk to Diann about what we’re trying to do with it now. She told me we need to get something done with it because it’s not considered anything, just a detached garage to get it so I could use it for, use it for like a business type thing which I’ve done for a year because I did have an antique shop in there for a bit because we went in a redid the whole thing and cleaned it up, put a new roof on it, if you’d look at the pictures and stuff and used it for a year and so now I’m asking for that, I guess the whole block there is zoned B-2 I do believe even the 2 house that are in between us and R&M so what I needed was a variance for the property that is the residential property on the other side of the alley. That’s, I guess that’s where I’m at so other than that I don’t know what else to say.
President Stimmel stated, all right. Gerald any questions?
Director Weaver stated, something I do want to mention is if this is passed tonight you might check with the building department and make sure that you don’t need any permits. At the time that you converted it I think you probably did need some building permits.
Sharon Garbison stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, so you need to talk to Dave Anderson.
Sharon Garbison stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, to make sure what you need to do, if you need to do anything.
Sharon Garbison stated, okay, basically we cleaned it up, you know and put a new roof on it.
Director Weaver stated, you changed the use of the structure.
Sharon Garbison stated, yes, yes, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, the use is consistent with the zoning that’s why there’s no violation.
Director Weaver stated, well and I’m not sure there shouldn’t be a violation. After I did your agenda I got to thinking about this and I, it’s currently being used for what?
Sharon Garbison stated, I have it rented to a gentlemen all he’s got is his stuff stored in it right now until we can get this settled of what we can do here.
Director Weaver asked, so it is currently storage?
Sharon Garbison stated, yes, right.
President Stimmel asked, didn’t you say ma’am that you didn’t use it as a business for a year?
Sharon Garbison stated, I did because we, last summer we cleaned it all up and everything and moved our antiques in there and you know had it as a store like 2 days a week.
President Stimmel stated, I see.
Sharon Garbison stated, yes, that’s basically what we did you know not knowing that I was doing anything wrong.
President Stimmel stated, yes. I understand that.
Attorney Altman stated, but this is B-2 so that wouldn’t violate that.
Sharon Garbison stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, right, okay. Anything else, Gerald?
Gerald Cartmell stated, we talked to your renter.
Sharon Garbison stated, yes, Tracy. Yes he came over and said that you had been there today, so.
President Stimmel asked, any questions from the audience, anybody want to comment on it? Okay, you guys ready to vote?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, let’s vote.
Sharon Garbison stated, and Diann I did bring my sign back.
Director Weaver stated, I saw that.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is currently zoned B-2, General Business.
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. There is no change in size of structure and is surrounded mostly by businesses.
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 16’ rear setback variance to convert a detached garage into a primary structure on Lot Number Thirteen (13) in H.P. Bennett’s Addition to the town, now City of Monticello, Indiana
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located in the City of Monticello at 717 S. Main Street.
7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, announcing the results of the voting on BZA #2669, 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote the variance is hereby granted. You might check your building permit situation just to make sure that everything’s all right, even though apparently you didn’t build.
Sharon Garbison stated, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, but I’d sure check it out.
****
#2670 Ronald Wayer & Tracy Giglio; The property is located on .10 of an acre, Out SE 31-28-3, located south of Lowes Bridge on Crabapple Loop.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 21’ front setback variance and a 1’ north side variance to build a detached garage.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Jason Knoll stated, I am Jason Knoll, their contractor. I had brought a note on Diann’s idea for you guys that states from Roy Wayer giving me permission to talk on his behalf.
President Stimmel stated, okay good, that’s always good it would be the next question.
Jerry Thompson stated, good, good, yes exactly.
Jason Knoll stated, and it has been stamped and signed by…
President Stimmel stated, okay that’s very good.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, thank you. Anything you want to add?
Jason Knoll stated, basically what it is the building that we’re trying to build which is a garage, basically it’s a storage building so he can store his boats, he’s got a boat, a wave runner, and various other outdoor things that he would like to get inside because he’s a obviously he lives in another part of the country, he lives in Illinois. It’s his summer house and the reason we need the setbacks is because of the road frontage or the road actually, the piece of property that it’s on is on the corner of the road where it makes the loop and that’s why we need the variance.
Charlie Mellon asked, is that his property across the road?
Jason Knoll stated, yes the little white house across the road, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, I figured it was.
Jason Knoll stated, yes, yes.
President Stimmel asked, so essentially the letter that you meant is attached to my documents and I didn’t do the other folks is the fact that it would end up if you didn’t meet the setbacks you’d have a lot that’s buildable that’s only 7’ deep is what your saying.
Jason Knoll stated, right, right.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jason Knoll stated, because of the road frontage there.
President Stimmel stated, right, right.
Jason Knoll stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, is that correct?
Director Weaver stated, it appears to be yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Jerry anything?
Attorney Altman stated, no, I don’t.
President Stimmel asked, Jerry #2?
Jerry Thompson stated, no, I don’t either.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I went and looked that up. He’s in a pickle of a state.
President Stimmel stated, he’s in a pickle. One of the questions I had Jason wondering if he could orient the thing the other way, just out of curiosity.
Jason Knoll asked, turn it the other way?
President Stimmel stated, yes to get more frontage on that 12’ side I guess is what I was thinking about.
Jason Knoll stated, right the only problem with that is if you turn it the other way then as far as getting a driveway into it there are multiple white oaks right there and you’d have to cut down more trees than what we were hoping to cut down aesthetically basically that’s what we’re trying to do is get away from cutting down more trees on the lot.
President Stimmel asked, where’s the driveway going to come as it exits?
Jason Knoll stated, pretty much straight off of the driveway that’s existing there. It’ll come straight off the front of the building.
President Stimmel asked, the front here again you’ve got 2 fronts the long front or the short front?
Jason Knoll stated, the short front, I’m sorry.
President Stimmel stated, the short front.
Jason Knoll stated, the short front yes which would be facing the east, southeast kind of.
President Stimmel stated, right southeast.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, that’d give you 12’ to park. But I guess…
Jason Knoll stated, which really you’re not parking there and if somebody you know if they have multiple people over the lot that we’re putting the building on there’s 78’ to the north of the building, you know and there’s plenty of room around in there is there’s multiple people there that they can drive up into the yard and park onto the yard.
Gerald Cartmell stated, if they don’t have to meet anybody.
Jason Knoll stated, right exactly.
Gerald Cartmell stated, one lane.
President Stimmel stated, if you reoriented it, it would be instead of 12 it would be 16’.
Jason Knoll stated, right. Anyway you turn it on the property your still, you still have to get a variance and you’re still…
President Stimmel asked, anybody in the audience have any comments about this? No fan mail?
Director Weaver stated, no.
Gerald Cartmell stated, cut in half you still couldn’t get it there.
President Stimmel stated, 23’ long. Jerry what do you think, Jerry Thompson?
Jerry Thompson stated, I’m ready to vote.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Are you ready to vote Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Jason Knoll stated, actually I didn’t I was hoping to get my variance through that way I could just bring it back tomorrow and pick up my permit and…
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine.
Jason Knoll stated, thank you very much.
Gerald Cartmell stated, you guys see that the contractor that’s getting the permit not the owner but the contractor, everybody see that.
President Stimmel stated, exactly good to see.
Attorney Altman stated, I was about ready to comment on that.
Jason Knoll stated, actually that is why I came up earlier when you guys were discussing the problem with the contractor being from the area, you know you got to take a little bit of pride in the work that you do around here and you have to take care of the people that your doing the work for, you know that’s what it comes down to if you’re going to be a contractor here and have a good name at it you better take care of the people that your doing the work for.
President Stimmel asked, is there a licensing law in White County for contractors?
Director Weaver stated, not yet, no.
Jason Knoll stated, unfortunately not.
President Stimmel asked, will there be?
Director Weaver stated, I believe so I think its coming it just hasn’t happened yet.
Jason Knoll stated, I certainly hope so.
Attorney Altman stated, that would be a good move I think.
Director Weaver stated, I know he would like to be doing it now but he just doesn’t have things in order to do it at this time.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential.
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. The proposed siting of this improvement would save trees and because of two streets adjoining the lot almost any improvement must be varied.
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 21’ front setback variance and a 1’ north side variance to build a detached garage on a tract of land out of the Southeast Quarter of Section Thirty-one (31) Township Twenty-eight (28) North, Range Three (3) West, in Monon Township, White County, Indiana, and described more fully as follows: Beginning at a point which is South Zero Degrees East (S 0° E) Thirty-three and Sixty-four Hundredths (33.64) feet and South Forty-eight Degrees East (S 48° E) Five Hundred Seventy (570) feet from the Southwest corner of Lot Number Seventy-five (75) in Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, and running thence South Forty-eight Degrees East (S 48°) Thirty-one and Two Tenths (31.2) feet; thence South Twenty-four Degrees East (S 24° E) Twenty-two and One Tenth (22.1) feet; thence South Forty-six Degrees and Nine Minutes West (S 46° 9’ W) One Hundred Eleven and three Tenths (111.3) feet; thence North Forty-eight Degrees West (N 48° W) Forty-three and Three Tenths (43.3) feet; thence North Forty-two Degrees East (N 42° E) One Hundred Twenty (120) feet to the point of beginning. Being out of Tract “B” of Parse’s Forest Lodge Second Addition, containing One Tenth (.1) of an Acre, more or less.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located south of Lowes Bridge on Crab Apple Loop.
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, okay announcing the results on the vote of petition #2670, 4 votes cast, 4 votes said that the variance is hereby granted. You need to get your building permit and again I reiterate thank you for your question about the building permits.
Jason Knoll stated, thank you.
Attorney Altman stated, spread the word.
Jason stated, I tell everybody that you know that I do business with that they need to have a building permit if there’s anything changing astatically or anything like that I mean you can’t, you can’t go and do stuff like that gentleman did and think your going to get away with it. Thank you gentlemen.
****
#2671 Duffy D. Mullen; The property is located on Lot 3 in Lakeries Addition, located South of Monticello at 820 Terrace Bay Court.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 15’ front setback variance and a 7’ rear setback variance and a 2 ½’ North side setback variance.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Duffy Mullen stated, I’m Duffy Mullen.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir. Anything you want to add to what I just read?
Duffy Mullen stated, uh not much just this is a 600 square foot log cabin that was built in 1940. I bought it 4 years ago, I’ve got a, had a young family when I purchased it, I have 2 kids they’re 12 and 10, boy and a girl and as they’ve gotten older the space has become limited. If you’ve been out there the ceiling, the roof is caving in and has been for awhile but now it is leaking so I’ve definitely got to rebuild it no question about it, so I’ve been working with, trying to, keeping my neighbors as you will see also both my neighbors on both sides of me are very pleased that I’m doing this. I, in fact tried to design it with their input so I didn’t encroach on number 1 their, really their view of the lake and that was real important to me so as you see the side variance I tried to keep it as close as possible the way I have it now on the house so I just had to go a little bit farther long ways because the lots narrow and it’s also angled which makes it kind of tough so what we tried to do is square the house to get the square footage the way we wanted it. The majority of the house is in the current setbacks so just a little bit over but like I said the neighbors agree with it. I own the lot behind me, actually the 2 lots behind me so that’s all I got to say.
President Stimmel stated, okay, good. Anybody want to comment about the variance? Dave? Gerald anything?
Gerald Cartmell asked, is he all right on his elevation?
Catherine Gross stated, I’m Catherine Gross and we just today got the letter from the DNR, haven’t really had a chance to study it, that will be at the next, whatever we need to do. I think Mr. Milligan might have some numbers he needs to adjust on his survey and then whatever we need to do for that would be at the next meeting if anything.
Charlie Mellon stated, it’s going to be a little tight in there building, isn’t it? I mean you’re at the end of the street and…
Duffy Mullen stated, right.
Charlie Mellon stated, and tear the old house down and get rid of it and then build on.
Duffy Mullen stated, right, it’s…
Charlie Mellon stated, as long as you’re getting a long with the neighbors but it could get pretty tight in there.
Duffy Mullen stated, we need to get an easement to get the trucks back there and I have, in fact I did discuss this at our homeowners association meeting with everybody that was there so everyone in the neighborhood is aware of this and I haven’t gotten any objections from anyone.
Charlie Mellon stated, that’s good.
President Stimmel stated, let’s go back to the elevation issue, Gerald you were talking about?
Gerald Cartmell stated, well they’re going to have to get a variance for that too, they’re not tall enough, 617, a hundred years is 613. That’s not enough.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Catherine Gross stated, excuse me the new house definitely will be…
Gerald Cartmell stated, it says right here it’s 617.
President Stimmel stated, the new floor elevation.
Gerald Cartmell stated, the new floor is 617 and the 100 year flood plain is 613.
Catherine Gross stated, right, right.
President Stimmel stated, it’s above it.
Catherine Gross stated, definitely, the new home would definitely be…
Gerald Cartmell stated, it has to be 6’ above.
Charlie Mellon stated, it’s above, 3’ above.
Director Weaver stated, it has to be 2’ above the base flood elevation.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, and he’s 4.
Director Weaver stated, but these numbers were put on here prior to the DNR letter.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, he’s got 2 to spare.
Director Weaver stated, I think that’s where she’s saying that maybe there’s some numbers that need adjusted.
Catherine Gross stated, it looks like that, we just got that letter Diann this morning so we’ll be getting that…
Director Weaver asked, but we are possibly looking at an elevation variance for next month is?
Duffy Mullen stated, correct.
Catherine Gross stated, I just haven’t had a chance really since we just got the letter this morning to study that but definitely whatever needs to happen there.
Director Weaver stated, I think that’s what Gerald said.
Catherine Gross stated, yes whatever needs to happen we’ll definitely have to, will be taken care of.
President Stimmel asked, does this variance not address the elevation issue, if there is one?
Director Weaver stated, correct, correct.
President Stimmel asked, Jerry, you want to talk about anything?
Jerry Thompson stated, nothing.
President Stimmel asked, Gerald?
Gerald Cartmell stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Jerry?
Gerald Cartmell stated, I think it’s a big improvement.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I hate to say anything but he’s got the worst house there.
Duffy Mullen stated, thank you.
Attorney Altman asked, is this on the sewer system?
Duffy Mullen stated, yes, it is.
President Stimmel asked, are we ready to vote?
Director Weaver asked, is this going to have a garage?
Duffy Mullen stated, not right away but eventually.
Director Weaver asked, you are required to have 2 parking spaces on the property will you be able to accommodate that?
Duffy Mullen stated, okay, absolutely, yes. And I didn’t bring my sign.
Gerald Cartmell asked, are you going to put your garage across the street?
Duffy Mullen stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, okay you’ve got plenty of room over there.
Duffy Mullen stated, right.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. Applicant owns the two lots behind this lot.
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 and a 7’ rear setback variance and a 2 ½’ North side setback variance on Lot Number Three (3) in Lakeries Addition, in Union Township, White County, Indiana
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located South of Monticello at 820 Terrace Bay 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 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the vote on petition #2671, 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted. You need to get your building permit first.
Duffy Mullen stated, thank you, appreciate it.
****
#2672 George H. Holmes; The property is located on Lot 11 & pt of Lot 10 in Camp Reuben Addition, located south of Lowes Bridge at 4534 N. Reuben Court.
Violation: He rebuilt an accessory building by the water and a detached garage that are not meeting the setback and height requirements.
Request: He is requesting a 23’ front setback variance and 4’ south side setback variance and 2’ height variance to bring the accessory building by the water into compliance and a 5’ rear setback variance and a 4 ½’ south side setback variance and a 3’ height variance to bring the detached garage into compliance.
President Stimmel asked, and somebody representing this variance.
George Holmes stated, yes, George Holmes.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir. Do you want to add anything George to what I’ve read?
George Holmes stated not other than I bought the property earlier this year. The only reason I bought it was because of the buildings that were on it and then I started commence to rebuild them pretty quickly.
President Stimmel stated, yes, what we normally do is address the variance first and then we address the violation second so we’re going to talk about the variance first and then we’ll talk about the violation and or any fine. Yes sir you had a question? Step up and identify yourself.
Pat Mazgaj stated, my name is Pat Mazgaj. As I said before I’m not against progress however, I think if the progress is going to be made we all have to be playing by the same ground rules, okay. I built a pole barn / garage 92, got a permit, addition, 96, I got my permit. My neighbor 2 doors down builds a garage gets a permit, white house lodge spends a half a million dollars, okay building a 3 story structure, they get a permit. Regal Development is going to be spending a million and a half dollars project, they’re in the process of getting permits, okay. Um I don’t know if you realize or not but this gentlemen bought the property, number one he tore down the garage and built a 2 story garage, no variance, no permit. Number 2 he started working on the house, expanding the size of the house, no permit. Number 3, starts building a 2 story, I guess you’d call it an accessory building, I don’t know it could be 3, 4, or 5 stories at the lake front. No permit, no variance, okay. I just don’t think we can allow people to come into this county and do what they darn well please.
President Stimmel stated, sir I don’t want to interrupt you but would you mind spelling your last name please.
Pat Mazgaj stated, sure, M-A-Z-G-A-J, I also signed it and printed it at the sign sheet.
President Stimmel stated, thank you.
Pat Mazgaj stated, again I’m not against progress, okay. Sure I’m sure the man has good intentions but we just can’t allow people to come into this county and do what they darn well please, okay. No permits, no variances, okay. For all I know he may want to finish the property, turn around sell it and make a good profit on it and the county looses taxes.
President Stimmel asked, can you tell me where your located sir.
Pat Mazgaj stated, directly across the lake from him.
President Stimmel stated, across the lake.
Pat Mazgaj stated, for the last 19 years.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Pat Mazgaj stated, um you had a contractor there who, he’s right he said people should get permits and there is a contractor talking right. This is 2007, it’s not 1957, who in their right mind doesn’t know you need a permit when you’re going to be doing something.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Pat Mazgaj stated, number 2 that accessory building at the lake, please, you can’t let that happen because if people are going to build 2 or 3 stories accessory buildings at the lake do you realize what that’s going to look like in 10, 15 years, they’re going to be all over the frickin' place, excuse my expression, okay.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Pat Mazgaj stated, and fines, I don’t know. How do you fine something like this, what a thousand dollars, 2 thousand that’s an insult to me and every law abiding citizen in the county. I think your only choice is to tell him to tear down the building, the garage, tear down the story, the accessory building, apply for the proper variance and permits. That’s my opinion, thank you very kindly.
President Stimmel stated, okay, we appreciate it. Any questions from the board for the gentlemen?
Gerald Cartmell asked, what do you do for a living?
George Holmes stated, I remodel houses, rehabbing houses in Lake County, Indiana for 5 years.
Gerald Cartmell asked, so you are a contractor?
George Holmes stated, I’m a licensed contractor in my home town.
Gerald Cartmell asked, so do they ask for permits when you do something like that?
George Holmes stated, yes, they do. I get permits.
Gerald Cartmell asked, and do you think Monticello is stupid or something or what?
George Holmes stated, no I don’t I, if I may say right now, I did go at first the realtor said that I couldn’t build an accessory building on the water like the one that is on this property, but this one would be grandfathered in but it would be under the lake peoples rules and regulations right after I had bought it I went to see them, it was a half a block away and I showed them the survey that I had gotten at closing and pointed out the building that I wanted to rebuild and asked them what I needed to do. They said well you’d have to go to the building department that day for all three buildings but I didn’t match specifically which building but I didn’t say I’m not going to make the buildings any bigger I’m rebuilding the buildings that I have although I did raise it up higher and I was told by a young lady, I don’t know I haven’t seen her there since then but she was sitting behind the counter that if you’re just rebuilding an existing structure you don’t need a permit, I was like wow, okay. I didn’t come back in to get a permit, to look into the permitting process any further.
Gerald Cartmell asked, so when you bought the property did you look at the survey?
George Holmes stated, yes.
Gerald Cartmell stated, did you see that your garage is out 3’ in the county road?
George Holmes stated, yes. I was supplied with this survey.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well the survey you provided shows that your garage is out 3’ in the right-of-way.
George Holmes stated, right that was one that…
Gerald Cartmell stated, Milligan.
George Holmes stated, Milligan had to do for this hearing.
Gerald Cartmell stated, well we can’t, I don’t know how we could possibly give you a variance for that, give the county’s road away, I don’t know if we can do that.
George Holmes stated, those buildings were built in 1950 so I just figured…
Gerald Cartmell stated, but you tore it down and started over and when you start over then it’s a different story.
George Holmes stated, well yes that I was not aware of and in Lake County that’s and a Star County Indiana that’s what people do up there. I wasn’t aware of that rule.
Gerald Cartmell asked, how tall is your garage?
George Holmes stated, the garage is, it has, I put a gambrel roof on it which gave it a whole lot of storage space so it’s like 2 stories.
Gerald Cartmell asked, how tall is your garage?
Charlie Mellon stated, you up there I would say it looks about 20’.
George Holmes stated, it’s almost 20’, about 19 I believe, yes.
President Stimmel stated, yes, Jerry Thompson anything, questions?
Jerry Thompson stated, but on the garage Gerald, yes I don’t like it being outside the property line either but is it the same size as the original old?
Gerald Cartmell stated, to tall, he made it taller.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
Gerald Cartmell stated, you tear down…
Jerry Thompson stated, I’m thinking about, I’m thinking about the footprint not so much the height.
Gerald Cartmell stated, I understand but when you tear down then you got, you start over it’s a different world then.
Jerry Thompson stated, well yes, I realize that too.
Gerald Cartmell stated, if he remolded fine but he tore it all the way down.
Jerry Thompson stated, I was just, for some reason I was just curious of the footprint of it.
President Stimmel stated, according to the survey the neighbors actually over on your property by about a foot and a half isn’t he or something like that.
George Holmes stated, yes, I believe about a foot. They had just bought that house this year also.
President Stimmel stated, did they.
George Holmes stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, the gentlemen, sorry Diann go ahead.
Director Weaver stated, I kind of have an answer, well from the property record card, I have an answer for your question Jerry Thompson. The detached garage that was on there previously it says was built in 1950 and it was a 17’ x 22’. I can’t tell you if it was one story or 2 story but that’s what it says.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, I was just curious, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, and didn’t really know where it is.
Director Weaver stated, well it was 1 story because it was 8’ tall.
President Stimmel stated, okay, the gentlemen would like to speak again.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
Pat Mazgaj stated, okay I have nothing personally, I never knew who the man was until now. A little bit about, I know about the property, there was an older 2 car garage, okay, tore that down built a 2 story structure but he may have put it on the same pad, I don’t know if he had it in concrete. I don’t know how strong that pad is, okay, number 1, number 2 the accessory building at the lake, there was a one story accessory building. I have no objections if you want to make it a 1 story, replace what was there, okay but the fact that he’s going up 2 stories made me more, I don’t know. It has a concrete wall in back of it, now if that building had been there 40, 50 years, I don’t know if that water is going to drain down there, I don’t know if that concrete wall, that brick wall is strong enough to hold that building. I mean, and then also if you want to get technically, I believe it’s considered a lake property, L-1, so doesn’t he have to be 30’ away from the SFLECC line?
Director Weaver stated, that’s why he’s asking for a front variance.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Pat Mazgaj asked, okay so even if you grant him the variance he’s still got to get permission from SFLECC, right.
Director Weaver stated, he is not on their property, I’ve already talked to them. He is on his own property.
Pat Mazgaj stated, so you’re telling me then that his, the SFLECC property extends 30’ into that?
Director Weaver stated, his lot actually extends into the water is my understanding.
Pat Mazgaj stated, 5 feet.
Director Weaver stated, so the SFLECC has no concerns with this structure.
Pat Mazgaj stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, that’s amazing.
Gerald Cartmell asked, can we have a time out for a minute, I think the weather situation is getting out of hand because I just got a call from the fire department.
President Stimmel stated, really.
Jerry Thompson stated, oh you did.
Gerald Cartmell stated, let me go see.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, good idea.
President Stimmel stated, we’re going to take a short recess folks if you don’t mind just because we’ve got some weather concerns here. It’s been recommended to us, number 1 we took our short recess we’re going to reconvene and that we maybe take a weather advisory kind of a break here and table this variance until the next meeting and no fault of anybody’s and I apologize for that but I don’t think anybody wants to get into an issue here with safety so we’re going to recess the meeting until November.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, November 15th.
Attorney Altman stated, November 15th right here, you’ll be the first one on the agenda.
President Stimmel stated, yes the first one we won’t have to wait 2 ½ hours.
Director Weaver stated, he’ll be the second.
Attorney Altman stated, well the second.
President Stimmel stated, the second.
Director Weaver stated, yes because we had the one earlier.
****
The meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
David Scott, Secretary
Diann Weaver, Director
White County Area Plan Commission
Document Prepared By: __White County Area Plan, _______________________________________________
“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.”
_________________________________________________