Get Adobe Flash player

The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, April 17, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.
Members attending were: David Scott, Charles Mellon, Jerry Thompson and David Stimmel. Also attending were Attorney Jerry Altman and Director Diann Weaver.
Visitors attending were: Jim White, Robert Novak, Juanita Botts, Janet Oberlander, Pat Mazgaj, Drew Walker, Kerry & Holly Muller, Joan Leonard, Ted ?, Monica Williams, Virginia Conrad, Randy Williams, Carson A. Williams, Rita C. Mankus, George Holmes, Terrence Pickens, Ron Reed and Ben Woodhouse (Deputy).
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, March 25, 2008 meeting. Motion was seconded by and carried unanimously. Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members.
****
#2704 Robert T. Novak & Rita A. Mankus; The property is located on pt lots 194 & 183, pt vacated alley in Barrs Addition and a strip of ground off the South side of Jefferson Street, located at 203 E. Jefferson Street in the City of Monticello.
Violation: There is a shed that had no permit and is not meeting the setbacks.
Request: They are requesting a 26’ front setback variance and a 12.5’ rear setback variance to build a new home. The current home on the property will be removed.
President Stimmel asked, is there someone here representing that variance? Yes sir?
Robert Novak stated, hi I’m Robert Novak along with my wife Rita Mankus. We’re here requesting our variance.
President Stimmel stated, okay, thanks Mr. Novak. Is there anything that you can add to what I’ve read so far, anything that you want to add to that in any way?
Robert Novak stated, I’m sorry, as you said about being nervous, I’m not really sure this is my first time coming up here.
President Stimmel stated, that’s all right, really.
Robert Novak stated, um, basically as we stated in our hardship letter, the fact that our current residence that we have now we are experiencing uh, cracks in our foundation that are worsening and getting more severe. We had contacted an architect in hopes of finding ways to remedy this situation, actually going beneath the house after taking a look at that after having a soil test done by an engineering firm, speaking with our architect we felt that the way to approach the situation to correct it and to make a nice habitable property there and also you know, to add to our neighborhood was to go ahead and demolish the current house, rebuild, we would basically rebuilding in the exact same spot that our house is now, uh, we would take up even I think, a slightly less surface space than what the current house has with a poured basement. I think it would be a really nice addition to the neighborhood and it would make everything look a lot nicer.
President Stimmel stated, okay, great. The board will kind of digest this and we’ll probably have some questions, if you don’t mind staying right there that’d be great. Any thoughts Dave? Charlie? Go ahead.
Charlie Mellon asked, are you going to go with the first setback or the thing that the sheds on or do you want to go with the other first?
President Stimmel asked, okay, what’s your pleasure? Take care of the violation first?
Charlie Mellon stated, well, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, I was out there and I didn’t find anybody around but I talked to a neighbor that’s there and that’s a portable shed and I don’t it needs a permit.
Director Weaver stated, it does, it does need a permit.
Charlie Mellon asked, huh?
Director Weaver stated, any shed needs a permit if it’s over 25 square feet, portable or not.
Charlie Mellon stated, hog houses don’t.
Director Weaver stated, yes, any structure.
Charlie Mellon asked, when did that change?
Director Weaver stated, in 97, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, well the only thing wrong with it they said it was build on a line and he’s probably going to tear it down too.
Dave Scott asked, can you move the shed back so it meets the 5’ setback?
Robert Novak stated, there would be no problem with that. Part of where the shed is, is when the soil company came in they had to bring their truck in uh, and I guess were doing bore samples and they needed to get around the house to go ahead and do, because they did bore samples on the other side and that was part of the reason why the shed kind of ended up because they had to drive their truck around the house.
Dave Scott stated, okay, even put it, even put…
Robert Novak stated, I could move it, get rid of it.
Dave Scott stated, I’ll just move we a, dismiss the violation or whatever, whatever…
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, I’ll second that.
Attorney Altman stated, continue wanting him to move it to eliminate the violation.
Dave Scott stated, right.
President Stimmel stated, do you want to set a time limit on it Dave or do you want to wait till after the house is built or…
Dave Scott stated, let’s make it after, as soon after the house is built.
President Stimmel stated, give him some flexibility so you just, when you’re done with all of that just make sure it’s off. Is that how I’m understanding that?
Dave Scott stated, yes.
Jerry Thompson asked, could I ask a question before that’s seconded?
President Stimmel stated, absolutely.
Jerry Thompson asked, how long have you owned this property sir?
Robert Novak stated, since February 2004.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, all right.
President Stimmel stated, and we’re assuming, I guess in this discussion as Diann stated earlier that that shed was a preexisting shed.
Robert Novak stated, correct.
President Stimmel stated, set basically, essentially on the line is what it looks like or very close to it, so.
Jerry Thompson stated, all right.
President Stimmel stated, okay so we got a motion that we wave any fines on the violation and the shed be moved after the constructions done or sometime in that vicinity and I’ve got a second all in favor say aye.
Board Members stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, okay that violation is done, anything on the variance itself Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Dave?
Dave Scott stated, you said the alley’s been vacated but, the Jefferson Street um, is that an encroachment or did they vacate the, it looks like, I know that’s not, is that…
President Stimmel stated, the lines look, the lines, extend Jefferson Street down there and it looks like everything on there is almost encroaching onto Jefferson Street. Can some, can you explain that somehow, does Jefferson Street really go there or is that?
Jim White stated, my name is Jim White, I’m with Vester and Associates land surveyors and engineers. Yes Jefferson does go all the way down to the water.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jim White stated, um, it cannot be vacated because there is drainage that the city uses down through that are so you would not be able to vacate it, you also, well you can’t build in it but it has been a long time passing that’s, that is there.
President Stimmel stated, when I read that thing Jim the thing that concerned me is I wondered if the city has ever blessed that, you know what I mean to the allow that to occur or to continue.
Jim White stated, and that at some point could be an issue between them and the city but that’s really not a matter of the variance.
President Stimmel stated, but that’s…
Director Weaver asked, isn’t it my understanding that what’s there, what is encroaching your not changing that at this time.
Jim White stated, correct, that’s correct.
President Stimmel stated, that all stays.
Director Weaver stated, stays the same, yes that’s what I understand.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, I have a question on the survey it appears that it describes a strip of ground 20’ off of the south side of Jefferson Street.
Jim White stated, correct.
Attorney Altman asked, okay does he own that strip?
Jim White stated, yes, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, he owns actually part of Jefferson Street.
Jim White stated, yes, Jefferson Street was originally 66’ wide, the south side got 20’, the north side got 20’.
Attorney Altman asked, so the inside is now?
Jim White stated, 26’.
Attorney Altman stated, 26’, so that he actually is building on his property there.
Jim White stated, yes, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, it’s just that it’s, used to be Jefferson Street.
Jim White stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, okay so…
President Stimmel asked, but that’s shown, but that’s shown by the property line on the north side right Jim?
Jim White stated, correct the dark line on the north side is the property line.
President Stimmel stated, right, okay, all right.
Jim White stated, um also the distances I spoke with Diann earlier for the request, the 26’ we were actually asking, on that west side for 8’ um, for the setback.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jim White stated, the reason for the, is if they ever wanted to put a single car garage, a shed, or anything in that area then we wouldn’t have to come back and do this again.
President Stimmel stated, I guess I’m just realizing this but just in the way of what the hardship really truly is, is the sense that there’s the top of the bank is actually there and that limits the eastward movement of the house…
Jim White Stated, right.
President Stimmel stated, if you’re going to maintain the same footprint you really have to put it in…
Jim White stated, and the house is actually going to rotate around and be parallel with the lot lines now…
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jim White stated, if you look at the two different drawings. You’re looking puzzled at me.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, yes because this drawing doesn’t show the house parallel.
President Stimmel stated, it shows it about 6 or 7 degrees.
Jim White asked, are you looking at the site improvement? Did you get both drawings?
Director Weaver stated, evidently not.
Attorney Altman stated, site improvement survey.
Director Weaver stated, it’s says it’s a site improvement survey.
Dave Scott stated, yes.
Jim White stated, it should also, proposed plan and…
Attorney Altman stated, it shows a one story framed dwelling with a basement. Is that before?
Jim White stated, there should be a before and an after.
President Stimmel stated, oh okay.
Attorney Altman stated, maybe we’re looking at the before.
Director Weaver stated, here’s what we’re looking at.
Jim White stated, okay, that’s the before this is the after.
Director Weaver stated, no wonder we’re looking at you confused.
Jim White stated, yes. Um…
Attorney Altman stated, okay we don’t have the after apparently because it’s not in the file unless you…
Jim White stated, I have an after that is not signed, I can’t give you my signed one because it’s the original.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jim White stated, but I can give you the unsigned for you to look at, there’s the new dwelling.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh yes
Jim White stated, it’s going to rotate around parallel.
Jerry Thompson stated, I’d reckon.
Jim White stated, um, …
Attorney Altman stated, anybody else that wants to come up, please do so uh, it’s not a secret.
Jim White stated, the reason I’m here is what I’m saying it. We’re going to rotate around parallel. We’re asking for 8’ along this side that allows him to put a shed or a garage in here, one car at some point. We’d still be 10’ away from the adjoining garage which is code for buildings. Um, the other thing is that is on this side we would like to look at 7 and a half. The only reason for that is, is that’s what it is now. There is a retaining wall there. They want to put it 10’ off but if that retaining wall becomes an issue they’d build right up against it.
Dave Scott asked, is that advertised as the 8’?
Director Weaver stated, well you really don’t need a variance there because we allow, it would be a side…
Dave Scott stated, a garage.
Director Weaver stated, it would be a side yard if it’s attached it can go as close as 8’.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, so you really, there’s no need for a variance…
Jim White stated, so actually there no need to.
Director Weaver stated, right.
President Stimmel asked, so there’s no need for a rear variance is what your saying Diann, right?
Director Weaver stated, no this is a side,
President Stimmel stated, oh this is a side.
Director Weaver stated, because this is their front.
President Stimmel stated, this is the front oh okay, all right, all right, gotcha.
Director Weaver stated, so the request would still be okay as presented.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jim White stated, that can go in the record.
Attorney Altman stated, okay very good, I’ll put it down as applicant’s exhibit A.
Director Weaver asked, Jim can you get us a signed one?
Jim White stated, I will get you a copy of the signed one and send it up to you.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, thank you.
Attorney Altman stated, we would very much like that.
Jim White stated, not a problem.
Attorney Altman asked, and that would be you signing it right?
Jim White stated, no it would be Patrick Cunningham.
Attorney Altman stated, okay very good.
Jim White stated, who is the licensed surveyor.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Did we get any fan mail or anything?
Director Weaver stated, not that I am aware of, no.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Is there anybody in the audience who has any comments for or against the variance? Okay. Any more questions?
Attorney Altman stated, one thing I’d like to note is rather obviously in the area where this doesn’t show topographically but I think factually it shows a very severe grad down to Lake Freeman. It also shows that there’s a landing, steps landing and a water upper deck, he calls it and that sort of thing on there. I think that’s existing, right?
Jim White stated, correct.
Attorney Altman stated, and the only thing I could tell you is we can’t grant that, we can’t grandfather, we…
Jim White stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, do anything more than say it’s there but we can’t approve it, okay and if the city ever wants it gone, unless you’ve got some rights to say it that you have to remove it okay.
Robert Novak stated, no problem.
President Stimmel stated, yes so really all we’re addressing is the variance on the dwelling itself.
Attorney Altman stated, yes it’s just that other stuff is so blatant on the survey I’ve got to say about that.
President Stimmel stated, right, right, well I mean it covers into the next lot to the north too, so.
Attorney Altman stated, yes it does in fact.
Jim White stated, and by that time you’re into SFLECC’s property so it’s, different issue.
President Stimmel stated, lake property gets…
Attorney Altman stated, but your not changing anything on the from what is called, there’s a 7.5 right along that north boundary and it goes on down to the lake, you’re not changing a thing beyond that, right it’s only the proposed dwelling and the proposed patio and moving that metal shed.
Jim White stated, correct.
President Stimmel asked, any more questions from the board? Ready to vote? Let’s vote.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned R-2, One and Two Family Residential.
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit. This lot has a steep slope to the East.
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 24.5’ front setback variance and a 12.5’ rear setback variance to build a new home on Fifty (50) feet off the North side of Lots Number One Hundred Eighty-three (183) and One Hundred Ninety Four (194) in John Barr’s Addition to the town, now City of Monticello, EXCEPT One Hundred Nine (109) feet off the West end of Lot Number One Hundred Eighty-three (183); ALSO, A strip of ground twenty (20) feet wide off of the South side of Jefferson Street and being North of the North line of Lots Number One Hundred Eighty-three (183) and One Hundred Ninety-Four (194) in John Barr’s Addition and extending East to the river, EXCEPT One Hundred Nine (109) feet off the West end. ALSO, Twelve (12) feet by fifty (50) feet of vacated alley lying between Lots One Hundred Eighty-three (183) and One Hundred Ninety-four (194) in John Barr’s Addition, as vacated on May 3, 1885 and shown in Miscellaneous record A page 521. All located in the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Property is located in the City of Monticello at 203 E. Jefferson Street.
7. That the variances herein authorized and granted are not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make reasonable practicable the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variances are based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variances under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, I think because of the severe topographical limitations of this lot in question and the general layout even within 1840 quick print the board is determined by a 4-0 vote that the variance, variance #2704 be granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed and we need a copy of the signed survey. Thank you.
President Stimmel stated, thank you gentlemen.
Robert Novak stated, thank you very much.
Jim White stated, thank you.
****
#2705 Virginia S. Conrad; The property is located on .22 of an Acre, Frax Out SE 4-26-3, located at 207 Brittany Lane in the City of Monticello
Violation: None
Request: She is requesting a 10’ front (north) setback variance, a 3’ front (east) setback variance, a 22’ front (south) setback variance, and a 5’ side (west) setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance and to build an addition to attach the existing detached garage and enclose the existing covered deck.
President Stimmel asked, and you are ma’am?
Virginia Conrad stated, hello, I’m Virginia Conrad and how do you turn this on?
President Stimmel stated, it’s on.
Director Weaver stated, it’s on.
Virginia Conrad stated, okay I’m Virginia Conrad, I own the property on Brittany Lane that we’re talking about. I now live in a rental apartment. My husband is in a nursing home and I’m living near him so I can go to see him but I have a caregiver and she now, this is her right here, and she now comes to me in my apartment and we decided that it would be better if I just added on to my house so that she could just be right there all the time which would be lovely. So we talked to some people about what to do about putting an addition on the house so it would look nice because I don’t want it to look like something that’s just been thrown on there and so we’ve talked to people that have designed and I’ve requested certain things and they’ve said they can do that because I am handicapped and I do need some special dispensations I guess because of my handicap so they’ve got it all figured out how to do it and one of the things it says is not going to be done, what is it Monica about the…
Monica Williams asked, well do you need to read the, what’s on here first like you did for the last one?
Virginia Conrad stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, I’m sorry ma’am.
Monica Williams stated, I just wondered if you needed to read what was on here like you did the last one because there was a change on there that we need to make that I wanted you to, didn’t know if you wanted to read first.
President Stimmel asked, did I miss something?
Director Weaver stated, he did, he did read that.
Monica Williams stated oh he did, okay, the only thing that’s changing is the, we’re not going to enclose the existing covered deck, there was a problem with the roofline, who was it that, one of the building inspectors came and showed us why we couldn’t why we couldn’t do that and because there’s a window that’s coming off of that porch, that breezeway and if we enclose that there’s no fire exist so we cannot enclose that. We have to leave the breezeway open which is fine.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Virginia Conrad stated, so…
Monica Williams stated, we can work around that.
Virginia Conrad stated, yes so the only thing is just the actual addition to the house.
Monica Williams stated, and the setbacks.
President Stimmel stated, okay. No fan mail there?
Attorney Altman stated, yes we do.
President Stimmel asked, we do?
Attorney Altman stated, yes do they have a copy of this Diann?
Director Weaver stated, I can’t answer that.
Attorney Altman stated, I do have a letter dated April 11th.
President Stimmel asked, oh okay, you want me to read?
Attorney Altman stated, yes go ahead.
President Stimmel stated, oh that’s Mrs. Conrad, okay there’s Mrs. Conrad and then there’s the one from Jasper County Land Surveying.
Attorney Altman stated, no.
President Stimmel stated, no.
Attorney Altman stated, Daryl Carson.
President Stimmel stated, okay I have got it.
Monica Williams stated, I can explain this one.
Attorney Altman stated, I am writing in regard to a request for variance at 207 Brittany Lane. A request for variance to comply with setback restrictions which were enacted subsequent to construction of the property would seem to be a reasonable request, even if the real property encroached into the setbacks on all four sides of the property. A proposal to expand a property which is presently out of compliance with setback requirements on all four sides, would seem on its face to be an unreasonable request. Based upon the information I received from this Commission, it appears that the 24 foot garage presently extends into approximately 50% of the setback on the south side of the property. The proposed addition appears to extend this encroachment by an additional 32 feet and would enlarge the encroachment into more than two-thirds of the setback. A proposal to construct an addition which would more than double the improvements constructed onto a required setback, and extend into nearly 70% of the setback requirement, when the present encroachment already exceeds 50%, would certainly appear to me to be unreasonable. Respectfully submitted, Daryl A. Carson, 205 Indian Springs Road, Monticello, IN 47960.
President Stimmel asked, can I see that Jerry.
Attorney Altman stated, you bet.
Virginia Conrad asked, can you say that in English?
President Stimmel stated, yes, I ‘m not the only one.
Attorney Altman stated, basically saying is your encroaching now and you’re extending into the encroaching area so that you would be in 75% of it rather than 50%. Your house is not you personally.
President Stimmel stated, in essence I believe the letter is against your variance I think that’s what it amounts to.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, that’s what I was trying to understand also. Jerry you want to pass that around or read it, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, yes I can pass it around, I’m sorry.
President Stimmel stated, that’s all right.
Jerry Thompson stated, um, I want to double check something here, 207.
Attorney Altman stated, Indian Springs Road is right below that, uh where 207 is on Indian Springs. I’m not sure but it is the road to the south of this lot.
Virginia Conrad stated, Brittany Lane goes around my house and then it all of a sudden changes into Indian Springs Road.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, it appears as though…
Jerry Thompson asked, but Mr. Carson is adjoining to your property?
Virginia Conrad stated, I don’t know.
Monica Williams stated, no he’s across Indian Springs Road on the other side.
Jerry Thompson stated, he’s across the street.
Monica Williams stated, um hum.
Virginia Conrad stated, I don’t know him.
Monica Williams stated, and we’re not looking to go out any further than the existing garage. We’re not going out any further then that we just want to come off the garage and then to the corner of the house.
President Stimmel asked, how many square foot is the addition, can you tell me? My, I guess I should be able to figure that out. Is it 32 x 20? Is that really what it is, so 600 and some square feet, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, I think it looks like it.
President Stimmel stated, okay, I answered my own question. Yes ma’am?
Janet Oberlander stated, um, I would like to speak on it too…
President Stimmel stated, all right would you give us just a minute, but I’ve got you and we’ll let you speak.
Jerry Thompson stated, they’re across the street, okay. That’s the only thing I wanted to know.
Dave Scott stated, thank you.
President Stimmel stated, okay you guys ready to, you ready…
Monica Williams stated, I’m thinking it’s going to be a little over 500 if I’m thinking that’s what he told me.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Well the dimensions I see here are 32.1 and 20’ is what I’m looking at and that’s 640 square feet.
Charlie Mellon asked, anybody in the crowd Dave?
President Stimmel asked, pardon me?
Charlie Mellon stated, he didn’t ask if anybody in the crowd…
President Stimmel stated, she’s already raised her hand and I’m going to recognized her, and I’m going to bring her up here in just a minute Charlie if that’s all right.
Charlie Mellon stated, okay.
Jerry Thompson asked, is he present?
President Stimmel stated, that’s a good question. Is Mr. Carson present? Evidently not, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, all right, just curious.
President Stimmel stated, ma’am we’re going to let the lady speak in the back here if you don’t mind. Yes ma’am you had something you wanted, please.
Janet Oberlander stated, okay, I’m Janet Oberlander, I love at 110 Brittany Lane which is kind of diagonal across from the property. It’s on the other side of the road so I’m not adjacent, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, okay, all right. Thank you.
Janet Oberlander stated, my concern is that those lots are pretty much are smaller that are in that center stretch and that to me looking at it, it seems like the yards are about 50% and the house is about 50% so I’m looking at the um, the room that they’re wanting to build is about 50% of the square footage of living space that they have now. I figure that they’re wanting to increase by 642 square feet.
President Stimmel stated, um hum.
Janet Oberlander stated, and their home right now, if you took half of that would be about 658. So the ratio would of ground is not going to look right. My other concern is it’s on an angle with the road the farther, or the closest point to the road is right where the curve is. There’s kids in that area, it’s hard to make that curve, it’s sharp and it’s hard to see around and I’m concerned with the house extending out there you’re not going to be able to see. If you get a truck in there, they’re going to have trouble getting in and out too. Um, and let’s see, and that’s really just my concerns.
President Stimmel stated, okay, thank you Mrs. Oberlander.
Janet Oberlander stated, that, that maybe their trying to do something that really that property’s not suited for is my thing.
President Stimmel stated, okay, thank you very much ma’am.
Janet Oberlander stated, um hum.
Monica Williams stated, the back of that addition would not stick out any further than what the house does now already.
President Stimmel stated, it would be on a straight line ma’am, I see that but it would be closer to the property line because the house, well both of them sit at an angle, so I mean from the drawing it’s going to be closer to the road.
Monica Williams asked, may I see, may I see the drawing?
President Stimmel stated, sure.
Monica Williams stated, because we had 2 prepared and I want to make sure you have the correct one.
President Stimmel stated, that’s a good…
Jerry Thompson stated, seems to be the trend tonight.
Director Weaver stated, this one says proposed so…
President Stimmel asked, oh it does?
Monica Williams stated, yes, okay.
Director Weaver stated, it does.
Monica Williams stated, here’s the garage and we’re going to here. This part here we were going to, okay because this is a porch right here, okay this is a little bathroom area, we’re not going clear over here, we’re going up this way. I don’t think it’s going to be, it’s not 32., I don’t know what to do help me.
President Stimmel stated, I’m not going to try to cut you short ma’am but I’m beginning to wonder if we don’t have an accurate drawing in front of us that maybe we ought to table the thing until we have an accurate drawing.
Attorney Altman stated, I think that would be a good idea.
President Stimmel stated, just a thought.
Monica Williams asked, when do they table it till?
President Stimmel stated, it would be the next month.
Monica Williams asked, what do you want to do?
Virginia Conrad stated, well if you have to table it, you have to table it. If you don’t table it they’re going to turn it down.
President Stimmel stated, ma’am I’m just, I’m just one person and I’m only making a suggestion to the board and that’s, they can decide whatever they want to do, okay there’s 4 of us in it so…
Virginia Conrad stated, well if they don’t have an accurate drawing…
Monica Williams stated, I don’t know that this isn’t the accurate one mom because I don’t remember the other one went over this far or not. Waite a minute, this is the accurate one because this is where the thing comes off.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Monica Williams stated, this is it because this is the wooden deck and this is where the bathroom is up through there and they originally thought, the surveyor did that we wanted to come up to where the bathroom was and we don’t want to come that far. We just want it to come out so this one is the accurate one.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Thank you very much.
Attorney Altman stated, if we know what we’re dealing with we can deal with it.
President Stimmel stated, that cleared it up. I’m sorry any questions from the board? Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no, I was out there.
President Stimmel asked, what do you think?
Charlie Mellon stated, looks half way decent to me.
Monica Williams stated, it’s just that if she’s got to live there she has to have the handicapped accessibility to be able to live there and real estate right now is not selling and she’s going to have to pay taxes and insurance on her house plus her apartment rental until it sells which could be several years, I mean…
President Stimmel stated, ma’am could you explain to me how this, how this 640 square foot adds to the accessibility of it, I don’t see any details that say there’s any ramps or there’s anything that makes that…
Monica Williams stated, there’s ramps out the front and into our portion of the regular house so that she can get back and forth, um the bathroom needs to be bigger than the ones that are in the house. She can’t get in the ones that are in there now.
President Stimmel asked, so this would include a new bathroom?
Monica Williams stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Monica Williams stated, when she lived there last year um, she was on a walker and she could get in those bathrooms and she could pull herself up on the bars, she can’t do that in this chair.
President Stimmel stated, okay, okay so what..
Virginia Conrad stated, there’s going to need pull bars and different things to make it easier for me get around.
Monica Williams stated, and it’s going to be an open area, there’s not going to be a lot of walls um, it makes it easier for her to turn just the supporting walls that the contractor…
President Stimmel asked, so what will the actual 640 square feet be comprised of?
Monica Williams stated, it will be her living room, her bedroom, her bathroom, and she’s not going to have a kitchen but she’s going to have a kitchen table because I prepare her meals, she doesn’t cook.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Monica Williams stated, um, she’ll have a kitchen sink just for her to be able to do dishes that I bring over if she feels that she needs to do them before I come get them or whatever but there will be no stove, they’ll be a small refrigerator on the countertop just for her to have drinks and stuff, um there won’t be a big refrigerator.
President Stimmel asked, is there any consideration given to just remodeling the inside of the existing house?
Monica Williams stated, yes and we, the walls would have to go, several of them.
President Stimmel stated, um hum.
Monica Williams stated, and there would not be room for my family to live in that home with her to be able to take care of her.
President Stimmel asked, so it’s not just you it’s your family that’s going to live with her?
Monica Williams stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay, which is comprised of …
Monica Williams stated, my husband and myself and I have an 11 year old and a 16 ear old.
President Stimmel stated, okay so the 4 of you will actually be living in the old house and she’ll be in the new part of the house.
Monica Williams stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Virginia Conrad stated, right now when she comes to help me she has to come across town.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Virginia Conrad stated, I live in the Oakview Apartments near that nursing home.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Dave do you have anything else you want to add?
Dave Scott asked, those 4 trees that are across the back there, those will stay?
Monica Williams stated, they will stay unless they’re in the way and then they will come out or if they’re to close to where their going to cause problems they’ll come out.
President Stimmel stated, I’ve got a question for Mrs. Oberlander. Ma’am is, would you mind stepping up here please? Have you seen the entire drawing that we’re looking at?
Janet Oberlander stated, um hum and I’ve seen the house since it was remodeled.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Janet Oberlander stated, you know before she bought it.
President Stimmel asked, is there any way that that they could add 600 square feet to that house do you think that would satisfy yourself and the neighbors or not?
Janet Oberlander stated, I just, it’s out of proportion.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Janet Oberlander stated, and it’s more like a multi family, I mean I don’t, I see more adults there then you too. There are other adult families, there are like 3 and 4 vehicles there.
Monica Williams stated, I have 3 myself, my 16 year old has a car, my husband has a vehicle, I have one…
Janet Oberlander stated, then that could be.
Monica Williams stated, and she has a handicapped van…
Janet Oberlander stated, right.
Monica Williams stated, and other than my sister and her husband helping us move…
Janet Oberlander asked, so the 16 year old lives there too?
Monica Williams stated, yes.
Janet Oberlander stated, right?
President Stimmel stated, yes, yes.
Director Weaver stated, the property is zoned R-1 which only allows for a single family dwelling so it cannot be converted into a duplex or multi family.
Janet Oberlander stated, right, right, you know that was just one concern, I’ve seen quite a few.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Janet Oberlander stated, which they are living there now, it’s not like the house is sitting empty. I mean, I realize she’s paying taxes but there is people living there.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Janet Oberlander stated, but I just think by increasing by 50% is making something different than what that lot was proposed to be to start out with.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Janet Oberlander stated, and, like I have mine for sale and it’s been for sale for a year so, you know, it’s true, houses aren’t moveable I know that.
President Stimmel stated, um hum. Thank you very much Mrs. Oberlander. Help me peruse this zoning, the issue itself whether it’s multi family or not. Is this considered a multi family dwelling then? If, 2, is that considered 2 family groups?
Director Weaver stated, it cannot have a full kitchen, if there’s 2 full kitchens, it’s considered a duplex. As long as they do not put 2 full kitchens in there.
Monica Williams stated, there’s not going to be a stove.
President Stimmel stated, there’s not going to be 2 full kitchens.
Monica Williams stated, there’s not going to be a garbage disposal, a dishwasher, nothing other than a small refrigerator on the counter.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Monica Williams stated, and we won’t put in a kitchen sink if that makes a big difference, I mean, she just wanted it there so she could say she has kitchen sink.
President Stimmel stated, sure. Okay that helps me.
Attorney Altman stated, awful hard to police guys.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, I can just see…
President Stimmel asked any other comments?
Attorney Altman stated, that’s from a practical matter is what I mean.
President Stimmel stated, yes. Any other comments from the board? Want to vote? You got enough information? Not a slam dunk I can see, go ahead Dave.
Dave Scott asked, is there a requirement for green space in a residential or a maximum footage that you can put on? Just so it fits…
Director Weaver stated, not in this ordinance.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
President Stimmel asked, what’s the pleasure of the board, want to vote or do you want to do something else?
Monica Williams stated, it will raise the property value I do believe as well.
President Stimmel stated, okay thank you.
Jerry Thompson stated, I’m ready to vote, I think Dave’s got a concern.
President Stimmel asked, you ready Dave or not?
Dave Scott stated, yes, let’s vote.
President Stimmel stated, okay ready to vote.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Monica Williams stated, I’m just going to bring it in the morning.
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned R-1, One Family Residence
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.
4. That objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 10’ front (north) setback variance, a 3’ front (east) setback variance, a 22’ front (south) setback variance, and a 5’ side (west) setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance and to build an addition to attach the existing detached garage and enclose the existing covered deck on A tract of land out of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of Section Four (4), Township Twenty-six (26) North, Range Three (3) West in Union Township, White County, Indiana, and described more fully as follows:
Beginning at a point which is South Eight Hundred Twenty-nine and Eight Tenths (829.8) feet, East Twenty (20) feet, and South Seventy-three Degrees and Forty-five Minutes East (S 73° 45’E) Five Hundred Thirty-Three and Seven Tenths (533.7) feet from the intersection of the South line of the Northeast Quarter (1/4) of the above said Section Four (4) with the centerline of the Monticello to Chalmers blacktop road, and running thence South Seventy-three Degrees and forty-five Minutes East (S 73° 45’E) Ninety-nine and six tenths (99.6) feet; thence South Sixteen Degrees and Forty-four Minutes West (S 16° 44’ W) Ninety and Five Tenths (90.5) feet; thence North Eighty Degrees and Fifty-nine Minutes West (N 80° 59’ W) Ninety-six and Five Tenths (96.5) feet; thence North Fourteen Degrees and Thirty-two Minutes East (N 14° 32’E) One Hundred Two and Six Tenths (102.6) feet to the point of beginning, containing .22 of an Acre, more or less.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Property is located in the City of Monticello at 207 Brittany 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 3 affirmative and 1 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, announcing the results on the vote on petition #2705, 4 votes cast, the vote on that by those 4 is 3 in favor, 1 against. The variance is approved. You need to get your building permit before you proceed.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
****
#2706 George H. Holmes; The property is located on Lots 11, pt 10, & pt 12 in Camp Reuben, located southeast of Lowes Bridge at 4534 N. Reuben Court.
Violation: This is to remedy a previously cited violation.
Request: He is requesting a 27’ front setback variance to bring the existing boat house into compliance and to allow a second story. The total height will not exceed 17’.
President Stimmel stated, and Mr. Holmes.
George Holmes stated, yes George Holmes.
President Stimmel stated, we’re going to be on a first name basis one of these days.
George Holmes stated, okay George. Mr. Holmes, call me whatever you want.
President Stimmel stated, that’s fine. Do you have anything you want to add to Mr. Holmes?
George Holmes stated, no, when I first came here I was asking for 6 variances for a problem I had gotten myself into. I whittled it down to one. I can’t get around this one so this is what I’m asking for. I did remove the second floor which I have started which uh, I guess created the problems with this boat house, a/k/a building by the water. That’s been removed and that’s where I’m at.
President Stimmel asked, okay, any more fan mail on this one?
Director Weaver stated, no I haven’t received any either.
President Stimmel stated, all right. I see a gentleman I think is going to want to speak against it or speak, okay. Let’s give that gentleman an opportunity right now if you don’t mind George.
Pat Mazgaj, hi my name is Pat Mazgaj, okay I live directly across the lake from the gentleman. Can we clarify first of all, is that the boat house or is that an accessory building? Because I believe 2, 3 months ago we were talking about an accessory building.
Director Weaver stated, they are, setback wise there one and the same.
Pat Mazgaj asked, okay so now it’s considered an accessory building or a boathouse?
Director Weaver stated, a boathouse is an accessory building.
Pat Mazgaj stated, okay so it’s the same thing, okay. Um, why, my question is why do we need a 2 story building at the waters edge, that was my first complaint in the first place, uh, you remember I indicated that, I don’t know the gentleman and if he would of gotten his permits, okay, and did it legally I wouldn’t of never complained. But my question I’m still asking you is why do we need a 2 story building at the waters edge? The accessory building or boathouse, whatever you want to call it was a single story building for 20 some years, 30 years, okay he tore it down, he built a 2 story building. I have no objections to the one story building. My question is why do we need a 2 story building unless he plans on renting it out. Um, he built the 2 story garage, okay without a permit, again was he planning on renting it out I mean during the summer, using like a lodge. I, I have no intentions are, okay. But I am objecting to a 2 story building at the waters edge. I just think it looks terrible, okay.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Thank you very…
Pat Mazgaj stated, the boathouse or accessory building, if you want to call this such to me a boathouse means that the boat can drive into it, okay. There is no way a boat can drive into this building, this building physically sits on land, okay so for a boat to drive into the building you have to have an eyebeam pick it up an put it in.
Director Weaver stated, the terminology that we use came from the survey.
Pat Mazgaj stated, okay that’s all I say. Thank you.
President Stimmel stated, thank you very much sir. Anybody else in the audience want to speak for or against the variance? Okay. Board members what’s you pleasure?
Dave Scott asked, so if we grant the variance he could build this thing 27’ high is that correct?
Director Weaver stated, no.
Dave Scott stated, no, or no not 27, 17’.
Director Weaver stated, he cannot exceed 17’.
Dave Scott asked, 17’ and that’s from the waters edge, that’d be from where?
Charlie Mellon stated, foundation.
Dave Scott stated, from the bottom of the foundation.
Director Weaver asked, how that height is measured, is that what you’re asking?
Dave Scott stated, yes. Um hum.
Director Weaver stated, I can’t tell you that from my head. Uh the vertical distance from the finished ground level at the wall of the building nearest and most parallel to the front lot line measured as an average of the ground level at it’s 2 furthers corners to the top of the roof.
Dave Scott stated, okay and now does this, is this on SFLECC or is this actually on his lot?
Director Weaver stated, it’s actually on his property.
Dave Scott stated, yes, okay, so the thing could be 17’ from, I wish we had a, what do I want to call it…
President Stimmel asked, elevations?
Dave Scott stated, elevations so we could see um…
President Stimmel stated, the way the request is stated, Dave one of the things I’m wondering myself is that this is to bring the existing boathouse into compliance, that’d be the front setback variance.
Director Weaver stated, that’s right.
President Stimmel stated, but he’s not asking for a height variance.
Director Weaver stated, no he’s not.
President Stimmel stated, so he could build a 17’ structure there.
Dave Scott stated, that was my point if we grant the variance he can build 17’ without us, I mean we don’t have a choice on what tall, how tall as long as he stays under 17’. Is that correct?
President Stimmel stated, in other words the variance is not going to allow him to build a second story is it? The variance is actually for the setback. I’m just concerned about the wording.
Director Weaver stated, the variance is for the setback. If he can put 2 stories within 17’ than he can do so.
President Stimmel stated, than he can do so.
Director Weaver stated, that’s right.
President Stimmel stated, that’s, that’s he’s within the law from within the ordinance, from the standpoint of height.
Director Weaver stated, we don’t, we don’t regulate the stories, the number of stories just the total height.
President Stimmel stated, right, okay.
Pat Mazgaj stated, if you read this it says to bring the existing boathouse into compliance and to allow a second story.
President Stimmel stated, right that’s why I’m…
Pat Mazgaj stated, that’s so there’s 2 issues here both of them are being combined in one.
President Stimmel stated, well actually I’m wondering if there is a second issue in a sense that in a sense that if we allow an accessory building, he can build it as long as it’s under 17’ he can build it up to 17’ or that’s 2 stories or 3 stories depending on, I mean seriously he can have a floor in between I would think, you know.
Pat Mazgaj stated, technically okay if you allow up to 17’ he could build a 4’ level, a 4’ level of floor okay.
President Stimmel stated, right, I mean really I mean that technically and that’s why I’m saying I’m wondering if it is actually, essentially it’s almost, to me it’s misworded in a sense that it really doesn’t allow the second story doesn’t have anything to do with it. He can build a building 17’ high period.
Director Weaver stated, I think the reason we included that was to clarify so the board would realize that he had the intention of having 2 stories there.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.
Director Weaver asked, am I correct?
George Holmes stated, it sounds right, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right. I understand.
Pat Mazgaj stated, I think it’s the same height as the shed that he just applied for or he has a permit. He had the 2 story garage and he had a lower deck down to 17’.
Director Weaver stated, but it is still 2 stories.
Pat Mazgaj stated, 17’ right, and at the back of the road, that’s right but you just put this building twice as high as it is originally, okay and above anything else on either side of it at the waters edge, looks terrible.
President Stimmel stated, yes, unfortunately we may not have anything to say about it quite frankly.
Attorney Altman stated, well you can move him back.
President Stimmel stated, we can move him back but that’s all. Go ahead Mr. Holmes.
George Holmes stated, it really can’t be moved, it’s buried on the side of the hill but at 17’ it would still be about 7’ below the top of the hill which the houses sit on, elevation, cross section would show that.
Dave Scott stated, yes, I’ve been out there, I agree with that.
George Holmes stated, that’s the way it is.
President Stimmel stated, okay. All right, Jerry anything?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Dave?
Dave Scott stated, no the only thing I’d say is if anybody has that right to build up to 17’ so I’ve talked to the gentleman over there, I mean, um, anybody along the water there if they want to can build up to 17’ so I mean it’s, I don’t know that that’s an issue here. I guess I’m repeating you.
President Stimmel stated, yes, like Jerry said the only thing we’re really dealing with is essentially the 27’ setback variance.
Dave Scott stated, setback variance.
Attorney Altman stated, you can move, make him move back.
President Stimmel stated, you can make him move back and that’s the only thing we can really do.
Dave Scott stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay, turf the water. Ready to vote?
Board Members stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, ready to vote.
Attorney Altman asked, Diann has he complied with the other requirements?
Director Weaver stated, he has brought the other building into compliance.
Attorney Altman asked, so everything on that last application, other than this is in compliance?
Director Weaver stated, that’s right, he purchased additional ground from the neighbor to meet the side setback requirements.
Attorney Altman stated, okay, good, good. I knew he had other things to do and that’s why I wanted to, on the record.
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. This should be properly divided.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 27’ front setback variance to bring the existing boat house into compliance and to allow a second story on Lot Number Eleven (11) and Ten (10) feet off of the South side of Lot Number Ten (10) in Camp Reuben, as shown in the Deed of Dedication at Deed Record 120, page 146 of the Deed Records of White County, Indiana.
That part of Lot Number Twelve (12) in Camp Reuben Subdivision in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana described by:
Beginning at a ½ inch iron pipe found at the Northeast corner of said Lot 12; thence South 88 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds West along the North line of said Lot 12, 27.00 feet to a capped with JLM I.D. ½ inch iron pipe (I.P.) set; thence South 45 degrees 42 minutes 14 seconds East 6.98 feet to an I.P. set; thence North 88 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds East 22.00 feet to an I.P. set; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East (plat bearing) along the West right-of-way line of Reuben Court 5.00 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO, That part of Lot Number Twelve (12) in Camp Reuben Subdivision in Liberty Township, White County, Indiana described by:
Commencing at a ½ inch iron pipe found at the Northeast corner of said Lot 12; thence South 88 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds West along the North line of said Lot 12, 107.00 feet to a capped with JLM I.D. ½ inch iron pipe (I.P.) set at the point of beginning;
Thence continuing South 88 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds West along said line 31.95 feet; thence South 06 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East along the S.F.L.E.C.C. property line 4.01 feet; thence North 88 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds East 26.43 feet to an I.P. set; thence North 50 degrees 29 minutes 01 seconds East 6.48 feet to the point of beginning.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: The property is located southeast of Lowes Bridge at 4534 N. Reuben 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, okay announcing the result on the vote on petition #2706, 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted. You need to get your building permit.
George Holmes stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, thank you Mr. Holmes.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back sir?
George Holmes stated, no, I’ll bring it back.
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine.
****
#2707 Kerry D. & Holly A. Muller; The property is located on Lot 80 in Gingrich 2nd Addition, located South of Monticello at 5745 E. Sheridan Road.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 19’ front setback variance, a 7’ east side setback variance, a 6’ west side setback variance, and a 10’ rear setback variance to bring the existing home into compliance and to build a 2 story addition.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Kerry Muller stated, Kerry Muller.
President Stimmel stated, thank you Kerry. Is there anything you want to add Mr. Muller?
Kerry Muller stated, uh, Holly and I, this addition is actually a garage, first floor and then a bedroom, 2 bedrooms and a bath above that garage. This area right here is the only house in the, within oh probably 5 houses there without a garage and so what we’re wanting to do, there’s an existing driveway right there and so what we’re wanting to do is build over that driveway.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, that driveway’s already blacktopped.
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
President Stimmel asked, any fan mail Diann?
Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of.
Attorney Altman stated, not that I can see, I just was looking through it. I don’t think there is anything Dave.
President Stimmel asked, I have a note on my survey that says there is a deck that isn’t shown, where is that located?
Director Weaver stated, it is towards the water and I know that we talked with Mrs. Muller about it…
Kerry Muller stated, you spoke to me.
Director Weaver asked, oh did we speak with you?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, okay, and I thought that…
Kerry Muller asked, Mr. Milligan didn’t bring it?
Director Weaver stated, was requested but we did not receive it.
Kerry Muller stated, oh you never did, okay. I spoke to him the next day and he said he was going to bring over the platted survey, what…
President Stimmel asked, okay it just comes, does it just cross the front of the house Mr. Muller?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, yes, okay.
Kerry Muller stated, I can, if you want, I can show you the platted survey or if you have one I can show you where it goes.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Kerry Muller stated, the deck actually comes around here and it goes out about 3’ and it angles over to here and it goes down towards the lake.
President Stimmel stated, just like we are.
Kerry Muller stated, this is actually a two stage plan that Holly and I have, uh, we’re wanting to down the road, you know, we don’t have that much money so down the road, uh, we’d like to take the existing house and then rebuild it on the same footprint so what are intentions are down the road but right now we can’t afford to do that so.
President Stimmel asked, have you considered Mr. Muller putting it back the required 8’?
Kerry Muller asked, move it back?
President Stimmel asked, yes I mean to come, did you consider going at this and not going after a variance by just making the garage um, 3’ narrower, wouldn’t that bring it well into compliance from, on the east side or west side, I’m sorry?
Kerry Muller stated, oh on the west side.
President Stimmel stated, yes on the west side. You can’t do anything about the east side it’s already there, right?
Kerry Muller stated, right. That’s where the existing dwelling is.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Kerry Muller stated, uh, actually the, my neighbors house that’s adjacent to it they’re actually 5’ from the fence also there.
Charlie Mellon asked, that’s on the east side?
Kerry Muller stated, the west, west side.
Charlie Mellon stated, the west side, yes.
Kerry Muller stated, west side, on the east side uh, there’s 8’, about 8’ 8” between the 2 houses.
President Stimmel stated, here it shows 5.
Kerry Muller stated, the one thing that…
President Stimmel stated, I’m sorry.
Kerry Muller stated, this doesn’t show the, the house actually sits a little bit crooked on the, to the driveway and so one corner of the garage would be 4’5 with the, you know the 1’ overhang and then on the far corner of it would actually be further away and the way I staked it out in the yard it looks like it’s going to be, it moves over in the yard about 3’.
President Stimmel asked, so are you saying that the south side of the garage would be at 3 ½’ from the overhang to the property line?
Kerry Muller stated, no, no, no. The closest point would be 4 1/2’ or 5 ½’ with a foot overhang.
President Stimmel stated, okay so 4 ½.
Kerry Muller stated, and that’s the north side.
President Stimmel stated, oh okay.
Kerry Muller stated, and then so the south side would actually be another 3’ further away from the property line.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Kerry Muller stated, because the original house actually sits a little crooked to the property line.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver asked, so this survey isn’t correct, because it shows it 5’?
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Kerry Muller stated, at that one point, that’s true.
Attorney Altman stated, that’s the critical point.
President Stimmel stated, but it doesn’t show it at an angle and it shows it 2’ on the other side, the full length of the house it doesn’t, the drawing does not show it sitting at an angle.
Kerry Muller stated, no.
Charlie Mellon stated, it doesn’t show.
Director Weaver asked, the closest point would be 5 ½’ then a, or a 1’ overhang?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, it would be 4 1/2’.
Kerry Muller stated, right.
Director Weaver stated, he’s still…
President Stimmel stated, say it again.
Director Weaver stated, the side setback is still…
Kerry Muller stated, this here is actually a, a…
Director Weaver stated, that was my concern.
Kerry Muller stated, and it shows how the house actually sits. See it here?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
Kerry Muller stated, and so it’s closer on the north side than it is on the south side of the house.
Jerry Thompson asked, do we have a color photo?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, this might be a stupid question but without trying to redesign your house isn’t there any way that you can do your proposed addition across the rear of the property or something? What we’re doing here, uh we’re getting his houses too close together. We’re not, uh, we got 10’ on one side and 8’ on the other, uh, there’s no, uh, and then I see a fence down through there, there’s no way you can get any kind of equipment around the front of it.
Attorney Altman stated, and you couldn’t get an ambulance or…
Dave Scott stated, no or ambulance or anything like that.
Kerry Muller stated, there’s a…
Dave Scott stated, I don’t…
Kerry Muller stated, there’s a garage door on both ends of this.
Dave Scott asked, on both ends of your house?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, that’s all garage all the way through that or am I looking at…
Kerry Muller stated, on the bottom.
Dave Scott stated, on the bottom, that’s 2 car garages.
Attorney Altman stated, these fire trucks are not going to go through that garage.
Dave Scott stated, no that’s right.
Attorney Altman stated, and a lot of the ambulances won’t either, I hate to say it.
Kerry Muller stated, 8’ garage door.
Attorney Altman stated, yes, I understand, but, there’s with the fence in there Dave your right, if the fence weren’t in there then they can say they have 10’ and it would be…
Kerry Muller stated, your first question about redesigning and putting it towards the rear of the property.
Dave Scott stated, um hum.
Kerry Muller stated, we will be able to do that because there’s a grinder pump is sitting there on the property line it’s like 6, 7’ away from the corner of the house.
Dave Scott stated, yes, I see it there.
President Stimmel asked, anything else Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Dave?
Dave Scott stated, I don’t have any trouble with the front setback it’s just the side setback.
President Stimmel stated, um hum.
Dave Scott stated, in trying to, see 6’ west side.
Charlie Mellon stated, there’s one down east from that, a couple houses that looks awful tight, there building it there now and they’ve got dirt all around and it’s, looks like its awful close to everything. We approved it though, a month or 2 ago.
Kerry Muller stated, anyone, that’s going in yes, that’s going about 6’ house to house.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, or less.
Kerry Muller stated, yes, and then to both houses.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t think there’s fence between them though either.
Kerry Muller stated, there’s quite a few houses right through that upper Gingrich 2nd Addition that are that way. Original cottages were you know, 50’ lots, 90…
Charlie Mellon stated, yes that’s hard to get it in that 50’ lot.
Dave Scott stated, yes you’re supposed to have 18’ and your going to end up with 7.
Kerry Muller asked, what’s the problem?
Dave Scott stated, I don’t know I guess there isn’t.
President Stimmel asked, I’m not voting, I’m just making notes.
Dave Scott asked, what’s that?
President Stimmel stated, I said I’m just making notes.
Dave Scott stated, oh okay.
President Stimmel stated, Jerry thought I was voting and I’m not jumping the gun I’m just making notes.
Dave Scott asked, what’s the area down in front between the water and your home?
Kerry Muller stated, hill side.
Dave Scott asked, just a hill side?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, is it. Looks like there quite a bit of…
Kerry Muller stated, I actually went in there and put…
Dave Scott stated, distance there.
Kerry Muller stated, there’s actually, I put 4 terraces in.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Kerry Muller stated, on a high bank side there and the roads pretty…
Dave Scott stated, um hum. You asked about comments from the neighbors and nobody said anything.
Director Weaver stated, I haven’t received anything, no.
President Stimmel stated, no.
Director Weaver stated, not that I know of.
Dave Scott asked, the pitch of the house will go…
Kerry Muller stated, north and south.
Dave Scott asked, pardon me?
Kerry Muller stated, north and south.
Dave Scott stated, north and south. I got to get the thing out here again.
Charlie Mellon asked, you been out there Dave?
Dave Scott stated, no, I didn’t make it. Did you look at it Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, he’s got a lot of space on the west side and I know the east side is the closest but the back is, must be, well the hill goes down not to much room but it’s 30, 40’ before the hill goes down into the lake and that looks like that house originally there sits square, he said it’s off a little bit, it could be but looking at it from the road why, my notion is he’s got plenty of room.
Dave Scott stated, I guess I don’t have anymore questions.
President Stimmel asked, okay, you ready? Let’s vote.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Kerry Muller stated, yes we did.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results on petition #2707. 4 votes cast, the vote is 2 in favor and 2 against. The variance was not approved, heard again next month.
President Stimmel stated, you’ll have to reapply Mr. Muller and you may want to change your, check with Area Plan about suggestions they may have that might get it passed the next time. I don’t know, uh…
Director Weaver stated, he doesn’t have to reapply.
President Stimmel asked, he doesn’t have to reapply?
Director Weaver stated, no, he doesn’t have to reapply…
President Stimmel stated, why don’t you explain it.
Director Weaver stated, it’s continued.
President Stimmel stated, it’s continued…
Director Weaver stated, because it’s not…
President Stimmel stated, oh that’s right because it wasn’t, that’s right there weren’t 3 votes against, there was just a 2 to 2 so we’ll continue it till next month.
Dave Scott stated, there should be another guy here too.
President Stimmel stated, yes he’ll be the 5 members the next time and you’ll get an up or down.
Director Weaver asked, will you be here.
President Stimmel stated, no, sorry.
Kerry Muller asked, do I need to change the plans or, I’m not understanding.
Director Weaver stated, you could consider that and you could, you could change plans if you have another idea of what you’d want to do and you can do that, there is time to allow you to do that.
Attorney Altman asked, that will be when Diann?
President Stimmel stated, just speaking from my vote and I will be very up front with you. I voted against it and the reason is because I think there is space for you to move the garage over enough to give it more room in between and what Dave said earlier about what the face and I understand and we deal with these lake properties all the time and one foot variances okay, we’ve had people here wanting 1’ and no variance, no setbacks, close properties out there and those lake additions are tough to vote for, for some of us for that reason because there’s no room for emergency personnel, it endangers people if there trying to get down through there and they’ve got 2 or 3’ to get down through there with a gurney or a fire hose or emergency medical equipment or something like this, they cannot do it. You got 2’ on the other side. You know, had there been an equal distance on both sides that might have been, that might of swayed my vote I guess is what I’m trying to say to you but there’s no way to move the house so in my mind the only way to do it personally would be to you know, to move that garage over several feet and come a lot closer to meeting the setback on that side what that magic number is I don’t know. Now the existing house is, you know I’m not going to ask you to bring that into compliance. That’s not the idea, you know you can’t move that but that’s the reasoning that I used, okay just to be honest.
Kerry Muller stated, so I guess my next question would be what’s an acceptable, because I can’t meet the setback with any additions on the side of the, or a garage on the side of this house. It to meet the side setback I’d have a 3’ wide garage.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Kerry Muller stated, so you know and we both know I won’t do that.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Charlie Mellon asked, could you put it completely behind the house, north?
Kerry Muller asked, you mean to the south?
President Stimmel stated, south.
Kerry Muller stated, to the south.
Charlie Mellon asked, oh your intending on building on the south of the original house?
Dave Scott stated, no.
Kerry Muller stated, no on the west side right over the driveway.
Charlie Mellon asked, the total width of the garage is going to be on that driveway?
Kerry Muller stated, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes. Well how wide is that driveway to start with?
Kerry Muller stated, uh, it’s 18’.
Charlie Mellon stated, I would say 18 or 20.
Kerry Muller stated, and then it adds another 51/2’ from so it’s 231/2’ wide and there’s actually a 2’, 21/2’ flower bed that’s going to be removed.
President Stimmel stated, to answer your question directly, what’s the magic number, I can’t give you that okay. It’s, and that’s, you know, that’s one of the issues, one of the problems with this okay but I think that I would have a lot better comfort level if there was 8 or 10’ there, you know. I mean if you had what’s a standard width on a garage, 14’?
Charlie Mellon stated, oh no, bigger than that.
President Stimmel asked, what are the 18, 29?
Kerry Muller stated, 20, and I only want to go 18.
President Stimmel stated, yes, yes.
Charlie Mellon stated, you couldn’t cut it off much shorter.
Holly Muller stated, then your rooms are going to be so small upstairs, what’s the point.
Charlie Mellon stated, too small, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay I’m just giving you my reasoning that’s all I can give you.
Kerry Muller stated, all right.
Charlie Mellon asked, is that your fence on the west side or your neighbors?
Kerry Muller stated, no it’s the neighbor’s fence.
Charlie Mellon stated, oh maybe you could get him to take it down. Then them there big outfits they’re talking about could get in there.
President Stimmel stated, okay, moving on. Thanks a lot.
Director Weaver stated, this will be continued until May 15th.
Kerry Muller stated, all right.
****
#2708 Juanita L. Botts; The property is located on 0.16 & 0.316 of an acre on pt S/S SE SW, 21-27-3 and S/E SE Frax SW, 21-27-03, located in the City of Monticello at 1608 Lawson Lane.
Violation: None
Request: She is requesting an 18’ front setback variance to enclose an existing carport and add a new carport and to bring the existing house into compliance.
President Stimmel stated, and you are ma’am?
Juanita Botts stated, hi I am Juanita Botts.
President Stimmel stated, thank you ma’am.
Juanita Botts stated, um hum.
President Stimmel asked, is there anything you want to add to what I’ve read?
Juanita Botts stated, no, it’s just that the carports falling down now. I’m going to have to rebuild it and I just want to put a utility room off the kitchen and extend the living room out that far and then on the other side the same, I think it’s maybe a foot more than what the carport is now, put a new carport there.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Dave Scott asked, does the new carport go over onto another lot is that what this does or can you…
Juanita Botts stated, yes I have both of them, they're both mine. They put them together.
Dave Scott asked, Jerry does this marry these together?
Attorney Altman stated, yes, yes you’d have to keep them all together as long as you continue that use.
Juanita Botts stated, yes I told, I spent like 4 hours in the courthouse when I applied for this and I think they put them together, yes. I own clear to Francis Street, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Any fan mail on this one at all?
Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of.
President Stimmel asked, anybody in the audience have anything for or against? Okay.
Dave Scott asked, the only other question I have, it says there’s a 20’ road there, does that go all the way back here to Norway Road?
Juanita Botts stated, no it’s like um, no it’s a dead end. Do you know where Diamond Point is, it’s up across the water from there, and it’s the high point.
Dave Scott asked, can you give me an idea here, what this, this road right here.
Charlie Mellon stated, it’s a dead end.
Juanita Botts stated, it’s a, oh let me look at this, I’m looking at it upside down.
Director Weaver stated, that 20’ road is Lawson Lane.
Juanita Botts stated, okay yes. We’re looking at it, it’s hard for me even and I live there. There’s the house, there’s the carport, yes this is a road, it’s like a private owned road. The man that lives in this house back here owns that road.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Juanita Botts stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, all this is dead end this way?
Charlie Mellon stated, yes it’s a dead end.
Juanita Botts stated, yes you’ve got a high ravine and then the water, the lakes there.
Dave Scott stated, oh okay.
Juanita Botts stated, yes.
Dave Scott asked, and then you access this from this way or this way?
Juanita Botts stated, I come off of Francis Street because it’s a dead end.
Dave Scott stated, okay it’s a dead end street.
Juanita Botts stated, there’s like 5 or 6 houses back there.
Dave Scott stated, um hum.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Jerry any questions?
Jerry Thompson stated, nothing.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, I think she’s got a hardship case with the variance, for the variance if you read this article. No that’s about all I would say. I was out there and it looks like to me that she’s got plenty of room all around this house.
Attorney Altman stated, especially marrying that lot together.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, marrying the lots together.
President Stimmel asked, and she understands that those lots are married together now that you can’t separate them?
Juanita Botts stated, definitely.
President Stimmel asked, ready to vote?
Board Members stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, ready to vote.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Juanita Botts stated, yes I did its back there.
Director Weaver stated, okay.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the building site 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. These lots are united for this variance.
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 18’ front setback variance to enclose existing carport and to add a new carport and to bring the existing house into compliance on That part of the South side of the Southeast fractional Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 27, North, Range 3, West in the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana, described by:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28; thence East 1741.0 feet; thence North 26 degrees 00 minutes West 1386.0 feet; thence North 54 degrees 44 minutes East 379.0 feet; thence North 58 degrees 00 minutes East 240.0 feet; thence North 52 degrees 30 minutes East 222.0 feet; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes East 95.31 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes East 6.69 feet; thence South 02 degrees 00 minutes East 51.67 feet; thence North 87 degrees 25 minutes East 112.17 feet; thence North 02 degrees 35 minutes West 52.47 feet; thence North 28 degrees 34 minutes West 20.0 feet; thence South 80 degrees 02 minutes West 108.39 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.316 of an Acre, more or less.
and
That part of the South side of the Southeast fractional Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 27, North, Range 3, West in the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana, described by:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28; thence East 1741.0 feet; thence North 26 degrees 00 minutes West 1386.0 feet; thence North 54 degrees 44 minutes East 379.0 feet; thence North 58 degrees 00 minutes East 240.0 feet; thence North 52 degrees 30 minutes East 222.0 feet; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes East 95.31 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes East 6.69 feet; thence South 02 degrees 00 minutes East 51.67 feet; thence North 87 degrees 25 minutes East 112.17 feet; thence North 02 degrees 35 minutes West 52.47 feet; thence North 28 degrees 34 minutes West 20.0 feet; thence South 80 degrees 02 minutes West 108.39 feet to the point of beginning, containing .16 of an acre, more or less.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Property is located in the City of Monticello at 1608 Lawson Lane.
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, all right announcing the results on the vote on petition #2708. We have 4 votes cast again, 4 votes voting to grant the variance. You need, it was granted, you need a building permit before you proceed ma’am.
Juanita Botts stated, thank you very much.
President Stimmel stated, thank you.
****
#2709 Drew & Tami Walker; The property is located on Lot 1 in Kemps Camp Addition, located West of Monon Road and South of Bailey Road, at 3722 E. Polk Loop.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 6’ front setback variance to replace a covered patio.
President Stimmel asked, is there someone here representing that?
Drew Walker stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir.
Drew Walker stated, good evening, Drew Allen Walker.
President Stimmel stated, thank you Mr. Walker. Anything you want to add to that?
Drew Walker stated, yes we purchased the home in July of 2006, the structure is there existing, uh, we spent the last bit of time doing some work on the outside. I want to bring some of the wood decking up to standard of work to be done but this porch is kind of the last thing we had uh, to look at it’s um, it was put together with uh, just kind of a plastic room sheathing so it leaks rain, captures water so the wood has been kind of eroding over time. Um, we do like the porch because it has south exposure good kind of block from the sun and the afternoon and that kind of things so we’d like to keep the structure in tact but we need to change it and make it a little more ascetic to the home and um certainly a little more rain proof and that kind of thing so we have had a contractor look at a couple of options we feel we can stay within the existing structure. You can see on the survey, we’re roughly at 26’ at one point and then the slope of the lake quickly gets us and then kind of within 30’ but there is a 24’ setback on one, we’re within 26’ on one corner so we feel we can stay fairly structurally within that, within that current structure. That’s what we plan to do but we were advised maybe to ask for a little bit of extra room to make sure we can stay within incase some of the wooding and that kind of thing from the south so. There’s a bit of a gable on the other end of the home that we tend of kind of match and make the home look very, kind of ascetic from both sides of the home uh, we kind of spent time talking to our neighbors in the area and they’re aware of what we plan to do and thought it would be a nice addition to the home.
President Stimmel stated, okay. So the wood deck that I see is not going to be covered right, or it is going to be covered?
Drew Walker stated, the deck would not be covered no.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Drew Walker stated, it’s just the porch area that’s outlined the 20 x 10 area that’s kind of outlined on the side there.
President Stimmel stated, oh okay.
Drew Walker stated, so the 26’ is the corner of that patio.
President Stimmel stated, I gotcha, thank you.
Dave Scott stated, your going to have to help, I don’t understand.
Drew Walker stated, okay.
Dave Scott asked, can you come here a minute?
Drew Walker stated, sure, absolutely.
Dave Scott stated, if you don’t mind. What are you doing here?
Drew Walker stated, it’s this, this structure right here.
Dave Scott stated, uh huh.
Drew Walker stated, is what we’re looking to uh, bring down and then um, we’re actually going to put up a bit of a pitched roof inside, put a gable into the home and put a pitched roof with good drainage with guttering off the side of the home so it would be a bit of a pitched gable coming off. The structure will be roughly the same size.
Dave Scott asked, so basically it’s, this area right…
Drew Walker stated, to right here.
Dave Scott stated, oh to right here.
Drew Walker stated, right to the 26’ corner pipe.
Dave Scott stated, right.
Drew Walker stated, and all the rest would stay the same.
Dave Scott stated, all right thank you.
Drew Walker stated, you bet.
Attorney Altman asked, is it called the 20 x 10’ area?
President Stimmel stated, right.
Drew Walker stated, that is correct, yes.
Attorney Altman asked, on the survey?
Dave Scott stated, yes I didn’t see that.
Drew Walker stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, yes that was my point too.
Drew Walker stated, yes there’s a bay window in front of the deck it kind of ties in with the, it kind of fits the dwelling real well, that size that it is today.
Attorney Altman stated, and what your adding will be x 6, or 20 x 10, I’m sorry.
Drew Walker stated, we’re going to stay around 20 x 10 but you know with the way that the trusses may build and that kind of thing they said maybe we should ask for a little bit extra just incase that extends, you know maybe, you know just into the next foot or something. We don’t intend to really overlap if we don’t have to.
Dave Scott stated, yes, you…
Drew Walker stated, we really don’t want to extend any further because that’s where the existing decking underneath it cuts off so we want to stay as tight to that as we can.
President Stimmel asked, no fan mail?
Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of.
President Stimmel stated, okay, nobody in the audience. Anybody in the audience want to comment? Jerry anything?
Jerry Thompson stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel asked, Dave?
Dave Scott stated, no.
President Stimmel stated, we’re ready to vote.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your sign back?
Drew Walker stated, I have it in the car, I’ll bring it up. I wasn’t sure where to bring it so I thought I’d make sure.
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine, or tomorrow, whenever.
Drew Walker stated, I’ll bring it up.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 6’ front setback variance to replace a covered patio on Lot Numbered One (1) in KEMP’S CAMP ADDITION in Monon Township, White County, Indiana; and Part of Lot Number Two (2) in KEMP’S CAMP ADDITION described as follows:
Beginning at a point which is East Twenty-eight feet and eight inches (28’8”) of the Northwest Corner of Lot Number Two (2) in KEMPT’S CAMP ADDITION; thence in a Southeasterly direction One Hundred Forty-three (143) feet to a point which is South Forty-nine (49) degrees West Four feet and Six inches (4’6”) from the Southeast corner of Lot Number Two (2), thence North Forty-nine (49) degrees East Four feet and Six inches (4’6”) thence following the line between Lots Numbered 1 and 2 in Kemp’s Camp Addition in a Northwesterly direction One Hundred Thirty-seven (137) feet, thence West Nine feet and Eight inches (8’9”) to the point of beginning. ALSO, lot Number Forty-two in KEMP’S CAMP ADDITION EXCEPT the following: Beginning at the Northwest Corner of the above said Lot 42; thence East 100.00 feet to the Northeast Corner of said Lot 42; thence South 50.00 feet; thence West 100.00 feet; thence North 50.00 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO: Lot Number Forty-three (43) in KEMP’S CAMP ADDITION all in Monon Township, White County, Indiana. ALSO, a 2/67th interest and a 2/134th interest in Tracts A, B, and C in Kemp’s Camp Addition, all in Monon Township, White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Property is located West of Monon Road and South of Bailey Road, at 3722 E. Polk Loop.
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 on petition #, the vote on petition #2709, we have 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote the variance is hereby granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir.
Drew Walker stated, thank you.
****
#2710 Kelly A. & Gregory R. Loudon; The property is located on Lots 48 & 49 in Apple Knob Addition, located North of Monon Road and East of C.R. 300 E, at 6546 N. Apple Knob Drive.
Violation: None
Request: They are requesting a 4’ front setback variance to build an unroofed deck that will encroach on SFLECC’s property.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Ron Reed stated, I’m Ron Reed, Reed’s decks, sheds, and garages.
President Stimmel asked, I’m sorry sir?
Ron Reed stated, from Reed’s decks, shed, and garages.
President Stimmel stated, okay. We got a letter or a note?
Attorney Altman stated, Mr. Reed’s the one that made the application.
Ron Reed stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, made the application, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, and we do have a letter in here from Greg and Kelly Loudon.
Ron Reed stated, Loudon.
Attorney Altman stated, hereby give Ron Reed authority to represent our interests.
President Stimmel asked, and do we have anything from SFLECC?
Director Weaver stated, I believe so. Didn’t you provide something from them, from Shafer, Freeman Lakes?
Ron Reed stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, I thought so.
Ron Reed stated, because he said he didn’t have a problem.
Director Weaver stated, I thought we had a copy but I’m not sure where.
President Stimmel stated, I don’t, I’m not seeing it in my packet. That’s just…
Dave Scott stated, I don’t have one either.
Attorney Altman stated, I was just leafing and don’t see it, uh it may be here Diann, I’m going down. Go ahead and grab it, I, I…
Director Weaver stated, I don’t see it. Do you have a copy of that with you Ron?
Ron Reed stated, no, I don’t have one. He said he was going to send it over to you guys.
Attorney Altman stated, I am just at the bottom and there’s nothing there.
Director Weaver stated, I don’t have anything in the file.
Ron Reed stated, no, I don’t have anything on it, not from them.
Dave Scott asked, can we vote on this contingent on the, him producing a letter from SFLECC?
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, if it’s a favorable vote.
President Stimmel stated, right. I think we can add that.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, we did receive the revised survey.
Ron Reed stated, did you okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, we’ve done it before with a motion.
Attorney Altman stated, yes you do, yes you do.
President Stimmel stated, go ahead Jerry.
Jerry Thompson stated, no I say we need that in a form of a motion.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Jerry Thompson stated, it doesn’t matter, Dave or I, it doesn’t matter.
Dave Scott stated, I’ll make a motion we vote on this contingent on receiving a letter from SFLECC.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Any second?
Jerry Thompson seconded.
President Stimmel stated, second, all in favor say aye.
Board Members stated, aye.
President Stimmel stated, okay passed.
Dave Scott asked, how tall is this thing, deck is there a roof on it?
Ron Reed stated, no, no roof just a deck with piers going over the water with 2 stair cases going down to them.
Dave Scott stated, okay.
Charlie Mellon stated, I was out there and there’s nothing on the east side of his house that would prevent anything, building a deck going down there to the water but disapprove from the water we’ll be fine.
Ron Reed stated, the only problem we really have is the setback because of my staircases wouldn’t land down on his piers where we need to go out to the setback, the 4’.
Charlie Mellon stated, okay, yes.
Ron Reed stated, and while we were doing that then um, the Lakes Association said we could go ahead and cantilever over. What we’re going to do is we’re going to, our posts will be in at the, at the riffraff and we’re going to cantilever out just 2’ over it.
Charlie Mellon stated, I couldn’t see that from the road.
Ron Reed stated, yes, no not down there.
President Stimmel stated, help me understand the hardship again, I read the letter but it just says that the stairs won’t reach the piers.
Ron Reed stated, yes with their, their property line is 32’ out and where the property line is, is exactly at the top of the stairs at their piers where my deck has to sit back the 4’ setback. I won’t be able to go down that hill and catch that pier without going to the property line which is the setback. We’re staying back that 4’ I’m not gonna catch that pier with my staircases.
Dave Scott stated, the pier is already there, it’s a gift.
Ron Reed stated, yes, I’m going to rebuild the one, the other side gets a new pier put in.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Ron Reed stated, but I can’t get there with the deck sitting 4’ away from it you know, because of the riverbank on it.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, I think something that’s deceiving too, the survey makes it look like it’s all one deck.
Ron Reed stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, but it’s actually 2 decks.
President Stimmel stated, okay at different levels?
Director Weaver stated, right. Correct?
Ron Reed stated, it’s actually a one level deck.
Director Weaver stated, I thought it was going to cantilever over the other one.
Ron Reed stated, well yes but it’s just going to be a 12’ deck…
Director Weaver stated, oh okay.
Ron Reed stated, and it will be 2’ cantilever over the water.
Director Weaver stated, oh okay, I’m wrong then, I guess I misunderstood.
Ron Reed stated, yes it’s a 12’ x 28’ deck and there will actually be 8’ on their property counting their 4’ setback.
Director Weaver stated, and that’s…
Ron Reed stated, the other 2’ will go where the riffraff is and then the other 2’ is just going to cantilever over the top, over the lake 2’.
Director Weaver stated, okay, I misunderstood, I’m sorry.
President Stimmel asked, so what would you have to do if the variance was not granted?
Ron Reed stated, I’d have to take all this lumber back to the lumber yard that’s sitting on a trailer down there and…
President Stimmel asked, but I mean you couldn’t, you couldn’t move back and there’s not, there’s not, I can’t tell from, about elevations.
Ron Reed stated, yes I can’t get my stairway to drop down and catch the piers.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Ron Reed stated, there’s no way, there’s no way they can go down in there.
President Stimmel stated, so you do have an elevation issue, I guess is what I’m trying to say.
Ron Reed stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, and that’s what I’m trying, what I’m trying to grasp…
Dave Scott stated, establish the hardship.
President Stimmel stated, establish the hardship, that’s what I’m trying to do…
Ron Reed stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, in my mind.
Ron Reed stated, yes the elevation would be what would stop me from catching those, the stairway on that pier.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right. That’s what I was trying to understand. Any other questions from anybody, the board or otherwise? Charlie?
Charlie Mellon stated, no.
President Stimmel stated, no. Ready to vote?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, vote.
Director Weaver asked, you didn’t bring your sign back did you?
Ron Reed stated, no I just came back from Methodist Hospital and came straight here. I didn’t even have time to go over there.
Director Weaver stated, okay, that’s fine.
The Board finds the following:
1. That the property is properly zoned L-1, Lake District
2. That the lot was an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the ordinance, as defined in Section 2.114.
3. That the site plan survey provided shows the lot size, existing improvements and proposed improvements, see file for exhibit.
4. That no objectors were present at the meeting.
5. That proper notice was given by mail to adjoining property owners.
6. That the request is for a 4’ front setback to build an unroofed deck that will encroach on SFLECC on Lots Numbered Forty-eight (48) and Forty-nine (49) in Apple Knob Addition, Monon Township, White County, Indiana as recorded at Deed Record 135, page 21 of the records of White County, Indiana.
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Property is located North of Monon Road and East of C.R. 300 E, at 6546 N. Apple Knob Drive.
7. That the variance herein authorized and granted is not so typical or recurrent in nature as to make typical or recurrent the formulation of a general regulation under an amendment of the ordinance for the above said condition or situation of the above said specific piece of property, and the Board additionally finds that the above said variance is based on the findings of fact so made that are required to be made under the provisions of Section 10.10 of the White County Zoning Ordinance, said findings of fact support and create a fact situation that authorizes the above said variance under the above said sections of the zoning ordinance.
The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.
Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting and vote on petition #2710. 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted. You need to get a building permit before you proceed.
Ron Reed stated, okay I already have the permit. I need to get the thing from the Lakes Association.
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Ron Reed stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, that vote was contingent on the, producing that note from the SFLECC.
Director Weaver stated, that permit will have to be amended.
Attorney Altman stated, I was going to say you probably better get that permit corrected, or amended is probably a better word.
Director Weaver stated, yes it does need to be amended.
Ron Reed asked, so should I bring the old permit in. I’ll bring it and the sign when I go out there and the letter from the Lakes Association.
Director Weaver stated, that’s fine.
President Stimmel stated, okay great.
Ron Reed stated, okay thank you.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir.
****
#2711 Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 13 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, just North of C.R. 225 N at 2406 N. West Shafer Drive.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting an 8’ front setback variance, a 5’ rear setback variance and a side setback variance to bring the existing cottage and attached garage into compliance and allow it to encroach onto lot 14. Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 owned by the applicant. The purpose of this variance is to separate lot 13 from the other lots.
President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?
Terry Pickens stated, Terry Pickens.
President Stimmel stated, thank you sir. Anything you want to add Mr. Pickens?
Terry Pickens stated, yes, good evening. Um, please excuse me for not understanding that everything that I needed to acquire the permits that were necessary. You voted to approve the variance on January 17th for the garages and the carports but um, what I understand is there is some additional steps that I probably needed to take and Miss Weaver’s office was very helpful in pointing out exactly the steps regarding keeping the lots separate and proceeding with the carport that um, the variance was approved for but not marrying the lots together so I had to stop work and I hope my good neighbor understands that I’m going to continue repair the damage that the storm did to their property when some of the fill washed out into their land. I did bring a better drawing and I think you have it there. It’s an imperfect piece of property and I’m just trying to bring it in as close to compliance as possible and a…
President Stimmel stated, okay. Well I think the one misunderstanding or at least I have is that and I think it’s substantiated by the minutes of the meeting is that those lots were married together as a result of the last variance you were granted.
Terry Pickens stated, and I didn’t understand that.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Terry Pickens stated, right.
President Stimmel stated, all right.
Dave Scott stated, it appears that the building or carports or something are encroaching across the property lines so I don’t know how you could…
Attorney Altman stated, you can’t grant a variance to do that.
Director Weaver stated, they are encroaching, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, well it’s across, it’s…
Terry Pickens stated, yes I didn’t quite know how to do that you know it was like a lot of encroachments…
Attorney Altman stated, tear it off.
Terry Pickens stated, right that would be one way if you’re correct.
President Stimmel stated, yes, that’s one way.
Attorney Altman stated, tear it off.
President Stimmel asked, is there any, do you mind if I ask what the reason for separating the lots are Mr. Pickens?
Terry Pickens stated, oh well first of all uh, I bought that with the intention of perhaps selling it someday you know, it’s a lot easier to find a buyer for one cottage then it is for the whole piece especially in today’s market. The things so obsolete your not going to be able to make money as a small resort anymore.
President Stimmel stated, uh huh.
Terry Pickens stated, so the only choice I would have is to carve off of the next lot over which I own to give to the person that might buy um, one unit on the end. You know I, you know I just want to get the carport up and I want to get my neighbors happy so that I’m not uh, inconveniencing them anymore…
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Terry Pickens stated, then I already have and I apologize.
President Stimmel asked, did we get any fan mail? I’m sorry Jerry.
Attorney Altman asked, why don’t you resurvey it off, re-subdivide it off into lots or a planned unit development?
Terry Pickens stated, well I actually…
Attorney Altman stated, rather than do what you’re doing because you’ve got encroachments on everything.
Terry Pickens stated, I know. I’ll explain, okay.
Attorney Altman stated, sure.
Terry Pickens stated, there’s more than one survey, this is the local surveyor, the other one that I have in my possession shows me owning 29’ of my neighbor’s property and if you look at the county overlay it’ll show you the same. I don’t know which is right and I don’t really care, you know they’ve had the property for longer than I have, they’re good neighbors, um, I just want everybody to be happy and…
Dave Scott asked, are you talking about the neighbors to the west?
Terry Pickens stated, to the west, yes if you look at the county overlay map it’ll show you that and it’ll show me owning their cottage and their swimming pool and I have no interest in perusing any of that.
Dave Scott stated, but I don’t know if that’s really the issue, the issue’s more the…
Terry Pickens stated, I mean, so subdividing, there’s 6 lines of questionable ownership and the only thing that we probably would end up doing is import battling with my neighbor and getting a judge to give us an order which I don’t want to do that, you know a lot of this problem is not understanding because I had some lawyers advise. I’m trying to do this on my own and I’m not a lawyer and just given it my best shot and hopefully that’s good enough. Thank you.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Dave Scott asked, now what are they requesting again, please, sorry?
President Stimmel stated, that’s all right.
Dave Scott stated, well I can read, never mind.
President Stimmel asked, was there any fan mail Diann?
Director Weaver stated, not that I’m aware of, we, we did have a neighbor come into the office…
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver stated, and ask some questions but I don’t, we didn’t receive anything, no.
President Stimmel asked, did you folks want to speak for or against the variance? If you would.
Joan Leonard stated, hi my name is Joan Leonard and I have property next to them. I’d like to know where the variance would be coming from because from where it says the shed on here is only 6’ between this 13 house, on lot 13 and my shed that’s on there. There is not 6’ variance there or 5’ right now between the 2 of us there’s only 6’.
President Stimmel stated, I guess I’m not sure how, the variance is from his property line, okay.
Joan Leonard stated, I know.
President Stimmel stated, and versus the setback that is required and he’s already been granted a variance some, whatever the date was back in, several months ago.
Charlie Mellon stated, January.
President Stimmel stated, January.
Joan Leonard stated, well I never had a notice for that or I would have been here too.
President Stimmel stated, well the signs were up and I, and that passed it was a hardship based on the fact that the county widened the road and…
Joan Leonard stated, I know they did.
President Stimmel stated, they didn’t have a lot of space.
Joan Leonard stated, I know that.
President Stimmel stated, so that’s the way it ended up so he’s, what he’s trying to do now is separate the lots off individually so that he can sell them at some point.
Joan Leonard stated, I know but the back of it, he hasn’t got that much space on it.
President Stimmel stated, right and we agree, he doesn’t but right now he’s in compliance in the sense that the whole property is in compliance because it’s all married together, okay it’s viewed as one piece of property even though there are 4 separate lots.
Joan Leonard stated, I’m not talking about 1 I’m talking about the whole thing.
President Stimmel stated, I agree.
Joan Leonard stated, mine go all the way down to the water too.
President Stimmel stated, right, right and it appears as though there’s only about…
Joan Leonard stated, it’s a 200’ piece of property too.
President Stimmel stated, it appears as thought there’s only 5’ or so between his property line and the back of the cottages.
Terry Pickens stated, exactly.
Joan Leonard stated, but it’s not really.
Dave Scott stated, according to the survey it is though.
Joan Leonard stated, well I have the plats and everything from uh, when they first came to sale what do you call those things that you get when you buy a house and they give it to you.
President Stimmel stated, the abstract.
Charlie Mellon stated, the deed.
Terry Pickens stated, the abstract.
President Stimmel stated, abstract.
Joan Leonard stated, that’s it.
President Stimmel stated, okay. So I take it from your comments that you’re opposed of granting the variance then.
Joan Leonard stated, well I’m just worried about them encroaching on mine, I mean 5’ of property it would cut my, between his one cottage there and my house, my shed that I have, what it is it’s a little house and we made it into a shed because there’s no utilities or nothing in it and it’s old and it’s been there for years and years and years and of course there’s only like I said 6’ between the two houses.
President Stimmel stated, right, the only thing the variance does ma’am is if it were granted, okay…
Joan Leonard stated, right.
President Stimmel stated, it would separate the properties, number 1 and it would also allow for a setback variance on that west side, whatever the side that is southwest side. It would, he would not, he’s not moving the building okay so he…
Joan Leonard stated, I know he’s not moving the building.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.
Joan Leonard stated, but you couldn’t even put a car between there let’s put it that way.
President Stimmel stated, I understand but the buildings are already there, they exist. Right?
Joan Leonard stated, all of them that’s mine to suite.
President Stimmel stated, I mean everything is there that’s there. He’s not talking about building on anything and…
Joan Leonard stated, no I know but…
President Stimmel stated, reducing any kind of set, setback.
Joan Leonard asked, but how would the 5’ variance come into it when he hasn’t got it?
Attorney Altman stated, the 5’ variance is from the amount that the ordinance requires. He doesn’t get that from any place. It’s, we reduce it from, from what Diann to…
Director Weaver stated, 10’.
Attorney Altman stated, from 10’ to 5’ so that’s…
President Stimmel stated, because there’s only, I’m sorry Jerry.
Attorney Altman stated, so ahead that’s okay.
President Stimmel stated, there’s only 5’ there now, he’s required to have 10’. Okay, that’s the requirement if you…
Joan Leonard stated, yes but they were all grandfathered in like that so there’s no way you can get it.
President Stimmel stated, if you built a building, if you built a building you’d be required to have 10’ back.
Joan Leonard stated, now, yes but before there are all grandfathered in so he couldn’t do it.
President Stimmel stated, right, and that’s the essentially what his situation is. He’s already got 5’, he’s already received that variance for that entire property for that setback.
Joan Leonard asked, in other words I only got 1?
President Stimmel asked, only got 1 what ma’am?
Joan Leonard stated, 1’ on the east side of the building.
President Stimmel stated, no, no, no, I mean you have what is there.
Ted stated, so in other words our property line is the same no matter what…
President Stimmel stated, it’s the same, it doesn’t change your property line what ever, it doesn’t affect your property line.
Joan Leonard stated, in other words if he’s got 3’ he can still say it’s 5.
President Stimmel stated, no, I mean whatever the survey shows…
Joan Leonard stated, that’s the only way it would work.
President Stimmel stated, that’s the only thing we have to base it one is the survey.
Several people are talking at once.
Attorney Altman stated, one at a time please.
Charlie Mellon stated, one of them’s 4’.
President Stimmel asked, does it say 4 Charlie? Okay.
Director Weaver stated, well they’re different distances.
President Stimmel stated, yes there are, there’s 4, looks like 4 to 5’ along the back of the properties.
Charlie Mellon stated, yes, there’s only 1 pole.
Joan Leonard stated, that’s what it says but…
President Stimmel stated, right, right.
Charlie Mellon stated, back away from hers though.
President Stimmel asked, does your survey show something different Mr. Pickens?
Terry Pickens stated, no I’m just giving Ted a copy because if theirs is different that’s all.
President Stimmel asked, the same thing?
Terry Pickens stated, same thing.
President Stimmel stated, all right, thank you. Okay.
Joan Leonard stated, okay just so he ain’t taking my property that’s all I care about.
President Stimmel stated, no, no, no, not at all ma’am he really, that’s really it at all.
Joan Leonard stated, okay as long as it’s that way.
President Stimmel stated, okay thank you very much for the comments.
Joan Leonard stated, your welcome, thank you.
President Stimmel asked, board members…
Attorney Altman stated, the only comment I have is that this is lot 13, 14, 15, 16 are coming right back at us.
President Stimmel stated, right.
Attorney Altman stated, so that we need to basically and I don’t think the facts change a bit when we go down that line so that we got to look at this, I think as a unified decision or I needed a fight I think is what he’s proposing.
President Stimmel stated, well I think whatever happens on the first one Mr. Pickens can assume is going to be the results on the other 3 and may or may not want to table those or take some other kind of action depending on how the vote goes and I don’t know what that would be.
Terry Pickens stated, I understand.
President Stimmel stated, so just kind of a heads up. What do you think Jerry?
Jerry Thompson stated, I don’t know.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Charlie? Dave?
Dave Scott stated, I don’t think I need to say anything else.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Are we ready to vote then?
Jerry Thompson stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, okay.
Director Weaver asked, did you bring your signs back?
Terry Pickens stated, yes I did.
Director Weaver stated, you did.
Attorney Altman stated, all right announcing the results on the vote on petition #2711. 4 votes cast the vote was 2 in favor, 2 against. This will be continued until the next meeting.
President Stimmel stated, this will be continued. Okay.
Attorney Altman asked, do you want to continue with the vote on the rest of them or do you want to table them until the next meeting?
Terry Pickens stated, probably next meeting would be better, right?
President Stimmel stated, I’d think so.
Attorney Altman stated, I think it would save time and…
Terry Pickens stated, better, yes.
Attorney Altman asked, that’d be when Diann again I think…
Director Weaver stated, May 15th.
Attorney Altman stated, May 15th, you’ll be 2nd on the agenda.
Terry Pickens stated, oh thanks.
President Stimmel stated, all right.
Attorney Altman stated, one thing good about it.
President Stimmel stated, thank you very much Mr. Pickens.
Terry Pickens stated, thank you.
****
#2712 Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 14 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, just North of C.R. 225 N at 2408 N. West Shafer Drive.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 13’ front setback variance and a 6’ rear setback variance to bring the existing cottage and attached garage into compliance. Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 owned by the applicant. The purpose of this variance is to separate lot 14 from the other lots.
Tabled until the May 15, 2008.
****
#2713 Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 15 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, just North of C.R. 225 N at 2410 N. West Shafer Drive.
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 13’ front setback variance, a 5’ rear setback variance and a side setback variance to bring existing cottage into compliance and allow it to encroach onto lot 14 and the proposed detached carport that will encroach onto lot 16. Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 owned by applicant. The purpose of this variance is to separate lot 15 from the other lots.
Tabled until the May 15, 2008.
****
#2714 Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 16 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, just North of C.R. 225 N at 2412 N. West Shafer Drive
Violation: None
Request: He is requesting a 19’ front setback variance, a 4’ rear setback variance and a north side setback variance to bring existing cottage and decks into compliance and allow it to encroach onto SFLECC. Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 owned by the applicant. The purpose of this variance is to separate lot 16 from the other lots. Also requesting setback variance to build a well house.
Tabled until the May 15, 2008.
****
President Stimmel asked, any other business for the board?
Terry Pickens stated, good night.
Board Members stated, good night.
Director Weaver stated, I have a couple of things that I’d like to mention to the board. In working on this new ordinance, a couple little things that, I’ve learned a lot in working on this subdivision ordinance because of the fact that in working with 2 surveyors that work in the county and Dave I don’t know if you were there the night that we discussed this but we were discussing side setbacks and what Tippecanoe County had I was really shocked for them to inform me that on residential they have a standard 6’ side setback and they don’t grant variances for their side setbacks and the reason behind it is because state building codes require 6’ separation between buildings. So I thought you guys might be interested in knowing that.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, I thought it was very intriguing because I thought boy would that simplify you guy’s life.
President Stimmel asked, now where did this come from again Diann, I’m sorry.
Director Weaver stated, Jim White and Bob Gross, Jim White that was here tonight…
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, has been helping us with our subdivision ordinance and Bob Gross who has um, RW surveying, he has an office in Tippecanoe County plus an office here in White County.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, so…
Dave Scott stated, so if we grant a variance closer then 6’ we’re actually breaking the law then.
Director Weaver stated, they would probably, they can do it but they will probably have to install firewalls.
Attorney Altman stated, pretty intuitive, if you really want to look at.
Dave Scott stated, and what, and if you could get a definition of a fire wall so that if somebody come in for a variance for 5’ or they want to be closer then the 6’ you could tell them that the variance would not be granted or there’s not any sense filing for a variance if they can’t meet a certain spec as far as the fire walls goes.
President Stimmel asked, didn’t we used to add that to the, to the…
Dave Scott stated, we’ve talked about that before.
President Stimmel stated, we’ve talked about that at other, Jerry you…
Attorney Altman stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, I know you guys, but we have.
Director Weaver stated, we don’t really don’t have to deal with it to much anymore because we’ve got the building inspector now.
Dave Scott stated, but if we’re going to grant a variance we need to deal with it, we need to make sure,
Director Weaver stated, when they go to build that building, he’s the one that’s got to make sure that fire walls in there.
President Stimmel stated, yes but we could require it though I guess.
Director Weaver stated, you can require it, yes…
President Stimmel stated, that’s what I guess what I’m getting at.
Director Weaver stated, but I think maybe that’s why we’ve gotten a little lax on it because we had him to rely on to make sure because he knows those rules and regulations.
Attorney Altman stated, I think it’d be a good idea to add that just as a standard operating procedure. As part of our requirement if your going to do it.
President Stimmel stated, I don’t think, I think it would be in our best interest if Diann did, if she did at the very least if she put something in when there is a variance that’s less than 6’ put something in there about you know you may want to request a fire wall or something, just something to jog our memory or something…
Director Weaver stated, okay.
President Stimmel stated, I mean, I just, I’m just throwing that out, I don’t know whether that’s appropriate or not.
Charlie Mellon stated, that fire wall would have to be on the outside wall then.
President Stimmel stated, well it is a fire wall, it has to be rated…
Director Weaver stated, yes.
President Stimmel stated, in other words it has to be…
Charlie Mellon stated, one being there it’s usually inside.
Dave Scott stated, I think it’d just be nice to have, to have Dave have a, have the standard so that if somebody comes in here requesting a variance for 6’ or closer, you can hand them this thing and said it will not even be considered unless it meets this specification and that way you’d eliminate anybody coming here thinking they weren’t going to have to do that. I mean, if, if it’s a simple thing, now if it’s a book…
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Dave Scott stated, then I realize it can’t be done but if it’s a simple thing that you have to have ¾” drywall and brick or whatever it is, I don’t have a clue or double drywall, whatever it takes. Anytime somebody requests a variance of closer than 6’ I would give them that thing and say this won’t even be considered unless this is, these obligations are met.
President Stimmel stated, right, right. That’s a good idea.
Dave Scott stated, because and we’ll help Dave out in his job that way also because I suppose he goes out he makes sure that it is but…
Attorney Altman stated, sometimes it’s awful hard to see that when your on site.
Dave Scott stated, right. He may not know that we granted a variance.
Director Weaver stated, yes he does.
Dave Scott asked, does he?
Director Weaver stated, yes.
Attorney Altman stated, he probably does because that…
Director Weaver stated, he gets copies of the survey plus it’s on the permit itself when there’s a variance, yes.
President Stimmel stated, I mean I got to tell you that might of even swayed my vote when that guy was wanting that garage…
Dave Scott stated, exactly, me too.
President Stimmel stated, if he had said look I know I’m pretty close I’m going to put a 2 hour fire wall or something like that, it might have moved me in that direction.
Dave Scott stated, there were 3 things, the fire trucks, the fire wall, and if he’d of had a story to tell me how he was going to control the water running off the roof to keep it from running off and going into his neighbors house or going into his neighbors crawl space or if he’d of had some provision and I realize that’s construction but…
Attorney Altman stated, but it’s still relevant.
Dave Scott stated, it’s still relevant.
President Stimmel stated, okay, all right. Are we done with business then or…
Director Weaver stated, one other thing.
President Stimmel stated, okay go ahead.
Director Weaver stated, the other thing that I have learned from these surveyors when we have a subdivision plat come in front of the APC, what we have been doing currently is requiring it to show all 4 setback requirements on each, in each direction on each individual lot and they’ve now talked me into and I agree I understand now that those plats really should only show the front setback line and if, what they were pointing out to me is if there’s, if they show them all and even if they show just the front, if there’s a variance granted for those setbacks then technically they need to replat that plat and rerecord it because it alters that plat. Which I thought was interesting and the reason, they were agreeable to show that front setback line because really you shouldn’t, there shouldn’t be, in a new subdivision be variances on the front. You know so.
President Stimmel stated, yes.
Director Weaver stated, so I just thought those were a couple of things you guys might be interested in and I would pass on to you. And that’s all I have.
President Stimmel stated, okay. Anything else? Motion to adjourn?
Dave Scott made motion to adjourn.
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.”
_________________________________________________