Get Adobe Flash player



The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, October 16, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Members attending were: David Scott, Charles Mellon, David Stimmel and Gerald Cartmell.  Also attending were Attorney Jerry Altman and Director Diann Weaver.

Visitors attending were:  Herb Parrish, John Hanik, Pat & Calvin Belt, Diana Mead-Seabolt, Randall Seabolt, Robert Gross, Carolyn Coonse, Sandy Coonse, Ron Coonse, Roger L. Wilson, Ken Kersey, Perry McWilliams, R. H. Roth, Kindra Roth, Jason Knoll, Jim ?, Tabitha ?, John Senesac, Gary Ottinger, Electa Ottinger, Maxine Cory, Steve Meyer, Dean Cook, Bruce Luetschwager, Mary Luetschwager, Vicki D. Hettinger, Frank Hemersbach, Margaret Hanik, Rosemary Denier, Alan Welch, Steve Parrish, Janice L. Herman, Carlos J. Camillo and Ben Woodhouse (Deputy).

The meeting was called to order by President David Stimmel and roll call was taken.    Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members. 

****
Old Ordinance
#2738     W. Dean & Marcia Cook; The property is located on 1.164 acres, on Part NE NE 22-27-03, located East of State Road 39 on C.R. 175 North before C.R. 725 East.  Tabled from September 18, 2008.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 54’ front setback variance to build a new pole building.

President Stimmel stated, and Dean I just noticed we don’t have podium up there for you to lean on, sorry about that.

Dean Cook stated, that’s all right.

President Stimmel asked, um, Dean do you want to add anything to what we just said?

Dean Cook stated, no other than last month the document that Mr. Little presented, I got the same document and I don’t see anything that shows any kind of easement going back to Pike Creek including on his property so.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dean Cook stated, that’s all I got.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Is there anybody here for or against the variance who wants to speak?  Sounds like we’ve got some folks, I’m sorry go ahead Dave.

Dave Scott asked, Diann do we have a staff report on that?

Director Weaver stated, I don’t have one, I’ll go make you some.

Attorney Altman stated, have one in the file.

Director Weaver stated, yea, there is one in the file.

Dave Scott stated, you didn’t put any in here.

Director Weaver stated, well evidently not, I don’t have any.  If you don’t have one I’m assuming not, I will be glad to go make copies.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s the staff report on file.

President Stimmel stated, accidentally or other wise.

Dave Scott stated, okay, all right, yea that’s, I didn’t know if I was supposed to bring mine from last week or…

Director Weaver stated, not normally, no.

Dave Scott stated, oh okay, go ahead.

Attorney Altman stated, Charlie I don’t know, show you that.  If anybody else wants to see it of course you are welcome to but this is the staff report that, from the July 17th.

President Stimmel stated, I’ve seen it…

Attorney Altman stated, okay.

President Stimmel asked, Dean looks like, are there anymore questions from the Board right this second?  Okay Dean I guess we’ve got some people that want to speak and so thank you very much.  Gentlemen.

Steve Parrish stated, uh, we haven’t found any more paperwork to justify that, we’re still looking into the litigation of it.

President Stimmel stated, okay, and your name sir?

Steve Parrish stated, Steve Parrish.

President Stimmel stated, okay thanks Steve.

Herb Parrish stated, I’m Herb Parrish and my question is that right-of-way, that 40’ right-of-way if it goes through there, I want to know who owned it.

President Stimmel stated, okay, I don’t think this Board can answer that quite frankly.

Herb Parrish stated, well what I’m getting at the property line don’t go to the middle of the right-of-way it goes to the edge of it there’s a 40’ through there that my dad never signed over to the county.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Herb Parrish stated, and the reason why he didn’t was, he sold some property to Joe Schnepp, 150’ wide and 750’ long and that 750’ goes clear across Pike Creek and the reason why I think they were both a little lax on getting things in order the reason why it wasn’t taken care of my dad got sick and then he passed away but if they don’t permit that right-of-way through there Joe’s land locked.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Herb Parrish stated, because there’s not way he can get to that property across the creek.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Herb Parrish stated, or even with where the road ends.

President Stimmel asked, is he here tonight?

Herb Parrish stated, no he’s not here.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Is he aware of the situation?

Herb Parrish stated, I don’t know that was the agreement when my dad sold it to him.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Charlie go ahead.

Charlie Mellon asked, has he got property across the creek too?

Herb Parrish stated, right, yes.

Charlie Mellon asked, on the west?

Herb Parrish stated, on the west side.

Charlie Mellon asked, okay how much has he got there off hand do you know?

Herb Parrish stated, I, probably a couple of lots.

Charlie Mellon asked, is that still woods?

Herb Parrish stated, yes.

Charlie Mellon asked, it’s all woods on his…

Herb Parrish stated, it’s all woods.

Charlie Mellon stated, it’s all I need.

Director Weaver asked, would that be Schnepp Family Trust maybe?

Herb Parrish stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, well they got a notice for the original meeting.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  I think that’s all the questions I have for you sir, thank you very much.

Herb Parrish stated, yea.

President Stimmel asked, Dean you want to step back up I got one or two question if you don’t mind please?  Dean in your surveys is there anything that goes that, there’s nothing that shows that, that easement?

Dean Cook stated, no.

President Stimmel asked, and your property line, your stakes or whatever they, you know the corners of your lots?

Dean Cook stated, it doesn’t show any…

President Stimmel stated, it goes clear…

Dean Cook stated, any easement from the edge of my property back on my survey.

President Stimmel asked, nothing, okay?

Dean Cook stated, no, no.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  And the 54’ variance is based on, on what Diann?

Director Weaver stated, well it was from the front property which is the south property line.

President Stimmel stated, right, okay, okay.  That’s all I had, any, Gerald anything?  Dave?

Dave Scott stated, the only thing I would do is I would just repeat what I said last week was that the easement that was there is drawn on the survey that we got and I would think that if there  was a dedicated easement through there that it would have been on that survey.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Dave Scott stated, if there’s an easement and it didn’t get recorded I don’t know who’s fault that is but, but nobody can produce any documentation that that easement goes any further then right, then where that survey says it is.

President Stimmel stated, right, to the end of the gate there or whatever it is.

Dave Scott stated, so the fact that there could be an easement there is not going to play into my vote, uh, if I wouldn’t vote for it, it would be because there may not be justification for a hardship but as far as I’m concerned, I mean I feel bad for these folks back here they probably need an easement to get back through there but there’s nothing documented and nobody can produce anything so as far as I’m concerned there isn’t one.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.  Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, no, I don’t have any more.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Dean is, can you express if there is a hardship some way to make some compelling case other then the fact that that’s where you want to put it.

Dean Cook stated, well you know there’s several large trees that would, I mean large trees that would have to be taken down to change it and I’m not sure I could do that with the lay of the land.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dean Cook stated, putting the building in there I just don’t think it would work.

President Stimmel stated, okay, okay.  Any other questions or are we ready to vote, ready to vote Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right thanks Dean. 

Attorney Altman stated, okay before I announce our vote I thought I maybe should tell you that our 5th member tonight, Mr. Thompson is not here tonight because he’s sick, unwell it isn’t just because he couldn’t be here or something like that, so that you know that uh, the results of the vote on 2738, we have 4 votes cast, 2 votes vote that the variance is granted, 2 votes vote the variance is denied.  It is tabled till, when is the next meeting Diann?
President Stimmel stated, Dean I apologize but that’s just, if Jerry was here it would be, it would surly be a 3 to 2 one way or the other but right now it’s just the way it is, it’s unfortunate but that’s just the way it works.

Director Weaver stated, November 20th.

President Stimmel stated, November 20th.

Attorney Altman stated, November the 20th, right here.  I guess you’ll have the benefit of being first on the agenda again.

President Stimmel stated, thanks Dean sorry for your trouble.

****

New Ordinance
#2754     Vicki D. Hettinger; The property is located on Lot 36 in Citizens Addition, in the City of Monticello at 610 N. Second Street & 446 Turpie Street.  Tabled from September 25, 2008.

Violation:    This property had 2 grandfathered structures that were used as 3 dwelling units and one is being rebuilt without the proper zoning or meeting the setback requirements.
Request:    She is requesting a 17’ front (Second Street) setback variance, and an 18’ front (Turpie St) setback variance, a 28’ rear (east) setback variance and a 4’ (north) side setback variance, a 3,400 sq. ft. space variance and a 10’ width variance to rebuild one of the two houses on the property and connect it to the existing house to make a duplex.

President Stimmel asked, and you are ma’am?

Vicki Hettinger asked, pardon?

President Stimmel asked, and your name ma’am?

Vicki Hettinger stated, Vicki Hettinger.

President Stimmel stated, okay Vicki thank you.  Is there anything you want to add to what I’ve read there?

Vicki Hettinger stated, just any question that you guys might have.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Vicki Hettinger stated, you’ve been here a couple of times and I’m just doing what they at the city that they told me that I needed to do because originally I had applied for the R-3 and then we met with the city and they voted against that and to come back and re-file for R-2 under the new city codes, ordinances.
President Stimmel stated, okay.

Vicki Hettinger stated, basically it’s the same as I’ve been trying to accomplish for the last 3 months.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Is there anybody in the audience that wants to speak for or against?  There’s a gentleman behind you ma’am.  Yes sir?

Ken Kersey stated, I’m Ken Kersey and I live at Turpie Street, 423 Turpie Street.  Um, I’m here to speak on behalf of Vicki, in favor of this project.  That neighborhood down in there is very rundown and there a lot of housing down there that is being fixed up, um, she’s got one right across the street from us getting it fixed up.  She’s not changing the footprint of that neighborhood what so ever all she is wanting to do is build on that foundation, put her house back up and I’ve talked to other neighbors down there, I can’t speak for them but I can tell you we’ve all been in favor of this project um she’s trying to make it good down there and I think she’s going to get it done if she does it right and this Board is one of the processes.  We got properties down there that are burned out, not boarded up and just sitting there for years, people come and go in the things but she’s trying to do something really nice there so the rest of our neighbors down there, we think it’s a good idea.

President Stimmel stated, thank you very much sir.

Ken Kersey stated, thank you.

President Stimmel asked, any questions from the Board?  Gerald?  Dave?

Dave Scott stated, the only question, I’m looking at this overhang and the deck on the back of the property and it’s within 2’ of the property line.

Vicki Hettinger stated, um hum.

Dave Scott stated, uh.

Vicki Hettinger stated, actually the man who bought my sisters house who lives right next door, he stopped me the other day when I was at my moms and said that he got a paper from court and said that he could not come here that he had to be at work tonight and I told him what it was about and if he had any objections and he goes oh no you make it look nice around here so…

Dave Scott stated, the only part I, that I’m opposed to is the deck being within 2’ of the property line.  Is it a, it’s a roofed deck?

Charlie Mellon stated, hang over.

Vicki Hettinger stated, it’s a over hang from the roof and just a, there’s going to be 2 doors on the back and there’s going to be, it’s a, I don’t know if you’d really call it a deck just like a platform outside those doors and I didn’t know how to word that matter of fact I forget the other girl in the office.

Director Weaver stated, Melanie.

Charlie Mellon stated, Melanie.

Vicki Hettinger stated, she’s the one who told me how we needed to write that or put that on or whatever, oh yea on this.

Dave Scott stated, so your overhang is going to be within 2’ of the property line.

Vicki Hettinger stated, right and that’s all open through there, each yard in that neighborhood is open.

President Stimmel asked, should there be a rezone.

Director Weaver stated, she tried to rezone the property to keep these as two individual houses which in order to do that would require an R-3 zoning to have multiple structures, multiple dwellings on a property, she would have had to rezone to an R-3.  She did try to do that and she was turned down so her only option to stay as an R-2 zoning is to make this into a duplex.  She cannot have 2 individual structures.

Vicki Hettinger stated, and what they said was, and they gave me the paperwork in the office back there was to just adjoin them at rooflines, they said that would meet the requirement.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Charlie I apologize I interrupted you.

Charlie Mellon stated, that’s all right.

President Stimmel stated, you were next.

Charlie Mellon stated, well they went through the Area Plan and she was for 3 now she switched back to 2, R-2.

Director Weaver stated, she tried to go for an R-3 but the R-3 was denied.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea so…

Director Weaver stated, so she’s trying to stay with the zoning she had.

Charlie Mellon stated, whatever we do is final, she don’t have to go back to the city.

Director Weaver stated, no.

Charlie Mellon stated, no.

Vicki Hettinger stated, and I had applied for the R-3 because when I asked what I needed to do, that was what I was told to do or that was what I was told I needed to do to accomplish what I’m…

Charlie Mellon stated, and another thing Dave that looks like, they set the deck there is 6 more feet, the over hang is only 2’ from the property line but the wall of the house and everything is back 6 more feet so…

Dave Scott stated, right.

President Stimmel asked, what’s the purpose of the overhang Miss Hettinger?

Vicki Hettinger stated, just to be able to sit there in the evening and that stuff.

Charlie Mellon stated, on the deck.

Vicki Hettinger stated, keep the rain off of you.

Charlie Mellon stated, won’t get wet.

Gerald Cartmell asked, there’s no other choice right?  There’s nothing else she can do?

Director Weaver stated, there’s no other option, she’s, this is her last option.

Gerald Cartmell stated, that would be the hardship.

Attorney Altman stated, if she does what she wants to.

Gerald Cartmell asked, yea but what else could she do?  She’s toast.

President Stimmel stated, Vicki one of the things I know I struggle with is having a 2’ setback in town okay, where the structure is, may not affect you and your sister or relation who lives next to each other…

Vicki Hettinger stated, no it’s not, somebody bought my sisters home, I was talking the property beside.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right and that’s the point I guess the fact that there will be other people who buy  your residence at some point and time and other people who buy the adjoining property and that’s where the issues…

Vicki Hettinger stated, well then they can come up here and go through this stuff now but…

President Stimmel stated, well the point is to not create the issue in the first place I guess…

Vicki Hettinger stated, yes I understand that, I understand that.

President Stimmel stated, is the problem and that’s what I’m struggling with quite frankly.  Would you consider not putting the deck on there?

Vicki Hettinger stated, I don’t know.  It would have been easier if I was told that last month and I had all this time because now we’ll have to change it again and…

President Stimmel stated, well.

Director Weaver stated, no you can go, you can go less of a request you just can’t go more.

Vicki Hettinger stated, I don’t know.

Director Weaver stated, so if you decide to take the deck off they can still vote on that.

President Stimmel stated, that’s just me asking, that’s not the Board and there’s 3 other members here that’s just one person asking a question so you know.

Vicki Hettinger stated, yea.  I’m just thinking because all the materials are bought and sitting there and have been sitting there…

President Stimmel stated, right.

Vicki Hettinger stated, you know.

President Stimmel asked, who’s going to do the work Vicki?

Vicki Hettinger stated, my husband, my brother, my 5 brother-n-laws, and a person that’s an electrician.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Any more questions?  You guys want to think about it some more Vicki or you want to table it or anything like that or would that, do you think that would help or what?

Vicki Hettinger stated, I don’t know.

President Stimmel stated, I’m just throwing it out at you.

Vicki Hettinger stated, no I would much appreciate it to be passed tonight so we can…

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.

Vicki Hettinger stated, get busy and…

President Stimmel stated, sure.  Is the Board ready to vote?

Board Members stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

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.  They will be connecting it to the existing structure.

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 17’ front (Second St) setback variance, and 18’ front (Turpie St) setback variance, a 28’ rear (east) setback variance and a 4’ side (north) setback variance, a 3,400 sq. ft. space variance and a 10’ width variance to rebuild one of the two houses on the property and connect it to the existing house to make a duplex on Lot Number Thirty-Six (36) in Citizens Addition to the Town now the City of Monticello, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION:  Property is located in the City of Monticello at 446 Turpie Street.

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

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, announcing the result on the vote on petition #2754, we have 4 votes cast the vote is 4 votes in favor of the variance that is hereby approved.  You need to get a building permit for that.

Vicki Hettinger stated, yes, thank you very much.

Attorney Altman stated, the violation.

President Stimmel stated, Vicki hang on we got a violation here too, I apologize.  This is under the new ordinance and this property is proper zoning and meeting the setback requirements.  So you had begun rebuilding and I think everybody here has looked at that property.  Tell me a little bit about the violation Diann.

Director Weaver stated, well the violation I don’t know that it matters was actually sited under the old ordinance.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, um, and I really can’t tell you a whole lot because the violation was originally acted on by the Building Department, I know that they went out and put a stop work order up and at that point is when they notified me of the violation.

President Stimmel stated, all right.

Dave Scott asked, did they come in right away, do you know?

Director Weaver stated, I believe she did, yes.

Dave Scott stated, then I’ll make a motion we waive the violation fine.

Charlie Mellon stated, I’ll second it.

Dave Scott asked, of course we don’t even know what the fine is now, do we?

President Stimmel stated, no but anyways.  Moving that we waive the violation right.

Dave Scott stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, and I heard a second Charlie.

Charlie Mellon stated, yes.

President Stimmel asked, all in favor say aye.

Board Members stated, Aye.

Vicki Hettinger stated, thank you.

President Stimmel stated, it’s done.

****

#2771     Perry R. & Lisa L. McWilliams; The property is located on Lot 53 in Isle of Homes Subdivision 2, located north of Norway Dam on the east side of the lake off of Hummingbird Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 3’ west side setback variance to build a new home on the property.

President Stimmel stated, Perry.

Perry McWilliams stated, hi Dave, Perry McWilliams.

President Stimmel asked, would you like to add anything Perry?  I’m sorry.

Gerald Cartmell stated, my wife’s boss so I’m reclusing myself.

President Stimmel stated, yep that means you have to step outside.  Go pick a load of corn.

Gerald Cartmell stated, I could do that.

Perry McWilliams stated, yea Dave actually and what we are requesting is a 1’ setback instead of a 3’ on that west side 1’.

Dave Scott stated, explain to me why you need a variance at all.

Perry McWilliams stated, I know good point, yea um, well the house, you know what we currently have on stock plans, what we have for that lot there, the garage needs to be at least another foot wide in order to have the garage door get that put in there properly so you can get in and out on my current design for this house and so that’s what’s put that one foot in there and that’s on the west side only which actually in effect is going to make that setback over there will be like 9’ you know on the west side and then the east side that’ll be okay, that’s 8’ back over there.

Dave Scott asked, so the main part of the house needs a setback or just the deck?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Perry McWilliams stated, no it’s the screened in porch, is what it is.

Director Weaver stated, but Perry the survey shows that your 7’ on the east side, that the house will be 7’ from that property line and 6’ on the west side.  Under the new zoning ordinance you have to be a minimum of 7’ with a total of 16’ between the 2 so I think the 3’ is proper.

Perry McWilliams stated, okay so we have the 7, we’re still okay on the east but with the new, see I was thinking we were 18 but your saying we’ve done…

Director Weaver stated, old ordinance you would have to be 18.

Perry McWilliams stated, so we’ve got an aggregate of 16 right now.

Director Weaver stated, right, right.

Perry McWilliams stated, so it’s 7 and, I’m not so sure I need a variance at all if it’s 16.

Director Weaver stated, its 7 and 9, and you’ve only got 6 on the west side.

Perry McWilliams stated, yea.

Charlie Mellon stated, that’s 13.

Perry McWilliams stated, yea.

Director Weaver stated, that’s why we’ve got 3’, a 3’ variance.

Perry McWilliams stated, okay, all right, I thought maybe she had taken in account that overhang on that Diann.

Director Weaver stated, no, nope.

Perry McWilliams stated, which I know we’re not doing now.

Dave Scott asked, is there any way you can redesign the porch so that, 15 x 15, can you make it?

Perry McWilliams stated, yea, yea.

Dave Scott stated, so that you don’t have to have a variance?

Perry McWilliams stated, yea.

Dave Scott stated, I mean, I’m thrown, figuring out what’s a hardship, I mean is…

Perry McWilliams stated, yea, um, actually Dave I’m glad you asked me that because from the time I filed for this I did sell the lot to the owner Rusty Roth and actually I’d like Rusty to come up here and address you know the committee and I’ll answer any other questions that you might have.  Rusty…

Rusty Roth stated, um, I’m Rusty Roth and it’s my home that’s going to be built, I own the lot now, bought it off Perry, um the main reason for the variance is the screened in porch, not the entire home, um that side of the house and the main reason for the variance that we’re requesting it is one we do not have to redo the stock plans that we have ordered, um that would be one setback for us in time and money the other is the over all just the antithetic look of the home, um, if  we have to take that in what will happen is that whole side of the house is going to be flat versus having some different angles and um I have enclosed here letter from the neighbor that is directly effecting to the west of me and their in total favor of it and express that here in the letter and they would have been here tonight only he had to go in for gall bladder surgery.  Um, him and his wife and then I also have the 2 adjacent neighbors the other way which is the only direction that this variance is going to affect is to the west um, those 2 neighbors have also written me a letter and signed it and they’re all in favor of the over all enhancement of the house and to the neighborhood um and all other regulations and setbacks were within it’s just the screened in porch.

President Stimmel stated, okay Charlie.

Charlie Mellon asked, one of them neighbors on the west is Maxine Cory?

Rusty Roth stated, no.

Charlie Mellon stated, well you got something.

Director Weaver stated, she’s to the east.

Charlie Mellon stated, okay.

Rusty Roth stated, she is, she is to the east and I’ve spoken with Maxine and I think her, she’s concerned about is my house just being built there in general because there hasn’t ever been a house there and it’s a big change but as far as she is concerned with how far my house is forward but my house is not far forward then some of the other houses along there and it is within the variation guidelines, 30’ setback from the lake easement owned by SFLECC or NIPSCO and so it’s within that.

Charlie Mellon stated, her house would be back farther than yours though.

Rusty Roth stated, correct but It doesn’t have to be, it could come up to its variance as well and come up further it’s just not but um the variance that I’m requesting tonight has nothing to do with how far my house is set forward.

Charlie Mellon stated, I know, I know.

Perry McWilliams stated, yea I actually think Charlie on this um, I know everyone’s always concerned about views, line of sites, things like that but I really think that by pushing that which once again we’re fine coming towards the lake but in a way it is better that it is forward so we’re not you know cramped in house to house as far as directly across from each other and actually her line of site, Maxine, she’s going to be able to see about on a 45Degree angle through you know the back side of that house and still be able to see so yea but once again that’s, I guess that’s not what we’re…

Rusty Roth stated, and I understand that some of Maxine’s blocked view, maybe blocked but and I totally understand that but no matter what home goes there they can bring it up to the setback variances that are set forth from the beginning and I mean…

President Stimmel stated, we understand that all ready.

Rusty Roth stated, and the other reason I would like my house up that far um some homes in that neighborhood uh including Maxine’s do have like an extra garage in the back and from my understanding you have to have a 20’ setback from the road as well and if I ever wanted to put a garage like some other people have their setback I need to be within those guidelines and my house does need to be forward so I don’t want to have…

Dave Scott stated, well your meeting that setback that’s not even an issue I don’t think.

Attorney Altman stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, it’s not an issue.

Rusty Roth stated, no okay, I just want to make sure that it doesn’t play into the…

President Stimmel stated, there’s a lady that would like to speak right behind you, will you give here a chance, okay.

Rusty Roth stated, yea, I’ll sit down.

President Stimmel asked, yes ma’am.

Maxine Cory stated, I’m Maxine Cory, and my husband and I own the property to the east and I’d like for people to look at the view of my house from the front, inside to see how much would be blocked and this also would show it.  Um…

Charlie Mellon stated, yea, we got that.

President Stimmel stated, we got it.

Director Weaver stated, they do have copies of the packet that you brought to me.

Maxine Cory stated, I had an assessor, no an appraiser come out and he put a value, a dollar value on how much would our property would be, go down if we lost that view see from there from on we wouldn’t see anything.

President Stimmel stated, we have those Mrs. Cory.

Maxine Cory stated, and um, I have no quarrel with the side variance in fact if he wants to move it closer one the east side, if that will do him any good I would agree to that if it would help him if he would move it back.

President Stimmel stated, it sounds like the issue is between the neighbors and not with the Board of Zoning Appeals quite frankly on where it sits on the lot front to back okay.  That’s really none of our concern other than the fact that it’s meeting the setback requirements.  The only thing we’re going to discuss tonight it the variance to the side so we appreciate your input Mr. Cory and your information is very good, we appreciate that.  Any questions for her?  Dave, Charlie?  Is there anybody else that wants to speak for or against the variance?  Yes sir?

Gary Ottinger stated, my names Gary Ottinger I live next door to Maxine so what you’re telling us is we have no say as far as where this house can or cannot sit.

President Stimmel stated, Gary there is setbacks, there’s legal setbacks and, and that’s, this house is going to meet those setbacks.

Gary Ottinger stated, okay when I bought my house 8 years ago it was because of the view on the lake, I welcome them building a new house there, I think it’s great but what that does is that knocks off about 50% of my view from my house and it doesn’t conform to the setback of the other houses that are all ready there so what your saying is I could go in front of my house and build another house and block my neighbors view.

President Stimmel stated, up to the 30…

Director Weaver stated, 30’ from the waters edge easement.

Gary Ottinger stated, so we virtually have no recourse.

President Stimmel stated, the only recourse would be to get the ordinance changed quite frankly, I mean that is possible I mean you might want to talk to the commissioners or somebody like this to try to get the ball rolling on something like that to make that setback more.  That might be another option for you I mean I’m not, who knows what would happen.

Gary Ottinger sated, um hum.

Dave Scott stated, the quickest option, I don’t know, you might sit down with them and see if they would entertain moving the thing back but like he said they’re meeting their setback, their front setback so we don’t have any, we can’t stop them as far as the front setback goes.

Gary Ottinger asked, so who do we talk to about that?

Dave Scott stated, to the owners.

Charlie Mellon stated, to the owners.

Dave Scott stated, I mean you know I mean legally we can’t stop them.

Gary Ottinger stated, I think their minds all ready set as far as where they want to put the house and I have no objection to them building but it doesn’t conform to the other houses in the neighborhood as far as the distance it is away from the lake and when I first moved there I wanted to put a small shed out by the water just to put fishing poles and stuff like that in and there was also several others down through there that were all ready there but I was told that they were grandfathered in and I couldn’t put one there because I might block somebody’s view.

President Stimmel asked, Gary how far is you back off the water?

Gary Ottinger asked, my house?

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Gary Ottinger stated, approximately 75, 80’.

Dave Scott asked, Diann did that setback change for that L zoning with the new ordinance?

Director Weaver stated, not the front setback.

President Stimmel asked, since the front setbacks considered the water it’s 30’?

Director Weaver stated, right.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Charlie Mellon stated, that would be the rear setback.

Gary Ottinger stated, but see now if this house goes where they’re wanting to put it to see the lake I’ve got to walk clear almost out to the water.

President Stimmel stated, yep.

Gary Ottinger stated, when you pay that kind of money for a place it doesn’t help any when somebody blocks your view like that.

President Stimmel stated, I sympathize with you, I think everybody else does too but there’s just not a thing we can do.

Gary Ottinger stated, okay thank you very much.

President Stimmel stated, I appreciate your comments.

Gary Ottinger stated, you bet.

President Stimmel asked, anybody else have anything to say either for or against.  Yes sir, go ahead.

Rusty Roth stated, I’d just like to say I’m not putting my house where it is to block anybody’s view or to be a burden on their view but everyone that buys a piece of property buys it for a reason.  These homes aren’t right on the main water there in the Isle of Homes bay and the water front that you actually are paying for is the water front what your lot is, if it’s 78’ then that 78’ is your water front.  The bonus was getting to see out the mouth of the bay, um where my house is um, I’m putting it there because it could be 10 years, it could be 5 years, someone else could sell their house and they could move, they could bulldoze their house, they could add on to their house, they could put their house up to the front, um and there are other homes up that close 2 doors from me not the house next to it which is up all most as far as mine within 10’ to the east side and the house to that’s even up further, further to the east.  So I’m not out of accordance with um some other homes in the neighborhood basically everyone to the east is up as far as mine.  Um, it’s to the west and there not for a good reason, my home where it’s going to go is on a vacant lot that was actually part of Mrs. Cory’s at one time but that’s been a vacant lot and at some point it was going to be built on it just so happens to me so I don’t want everyone to think that I’m trying to take their view away or trying to do this on purpose so.

Dave Scott stated, it’s a mute point.

Rusty Roth stated, I know, I’m just…

Dave Scott stated, my votes not going to have anything to do with the front setback.

Rusty Roth stated, okay I understand.

President Stimmel stated, the way my votes going to go is because I don’t think there’s a hardship demonstrated period, okay it’s just that I want this okay and that’s not exactly in the realm.  Was there any fan mail that came in besides this?

Director Weaver stated, just the packet that we all ready discussed.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Any other questions from the Board?  Are you ready to vote Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, okay, vote.  Thank you gentlemen.

Attorney Altman stated, announcing the vote on petition #2771, with one member recluse himself that’s Mr. Cartmell, that leaves 3 votes and the vote as follows is of those 3 is 1 vote to grant the variance, 2 vote to deny the variance.  This matter is tabled until the 20th, right Diann?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, of November for further action on that.

President Stimmel stated, sorry about the delay Perry.

Perry McWilliams asked, Jerry is sick tonight, right?

President Stimmel stated, Jerry is sick tonight.

Perry McWilliams asked, he’s not making that up, right?

President Stimmel stated, no he promised me he was going to be here so I know he’s sick.

Perry McWilliams stated, okay, all right.

President Stimmel stated, it’s just the way it’s going to work.  Thank you gentlemen.

Attorney Altman stated, you can look at it another way, that might have been 3 against you.

President Stimmel stated, yea, you never know.

Perry McWilliams stated, hey, don’t talk that way.

****

#2772     Bruce E. & Mary S. Luetschwager; The property is located on Lots 18, 19, & 20 in Elmer Girtz Camp, located Northeast of Lowes Bridge at 4671 E. Elmer Girtz Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 7 ½’ front setback variance to build a new home.

President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, Bruce Luetschwager.

President Stimmel stated, okay Bruce, thank you sir.  Anything you want to add Bruce to what I just read?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, no sir.

President Stimmel stated, okay, great.  Any fan mail on this one Diann?

Director Weaver stated, no not that I’m aware of.

President Stimmel asked, anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the variance?  Okay.  Board Members, Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, I was out there.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Charlie Mellon stated, looks like he’s got plenty of room, he’s got cleared off, I believe and not going to bother the neighbors it didn’t look like, I don’t know whether you got anything from the neighbors or not, did you Diann?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Stimmel stated, no.

Charlie Mellon stated, that’s all I got.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Dave?

Dave Scott asked, is this single story structure or 2 story or…

Bruce Luetschwager stated, single story with a walk out basement so 2 levels.

President Stimmel asked, Gerald?  Okay.  Bruce can you give me some sense of what a hardship might be that you have to have that setback variance?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, sir I did bring up a blueprint and that first 5’ to the foundation, this is part of what we’re asking for is the covered roof of the porch that goes around the front of the home and so the older home that was on there that we had to tear down at a plywood foundation and a crawl space and of course the moisture went under there, inadequate ventilation in it that rotted out the joist and the wooden footings so we had to tear that down and that home was much closer and so there is an existing detached garage that’s there and so we wanted to avoid positioning the home in front of the detached garage there that’s positioned at an angle.

President Stimmel stated, okay, in other words the edge of the garage is 42 ½’ from the front line and the front part of your porch is 22 ½’ so you’ve got to be 20’ closer to the lake then, that’s what the garage is, the leading edge of the garage and what we looked out there it’s actually going to sit somewhat in front of the house to the south of you a little bit.  At least that was what we kind of lined up, we went over there and stood next to the fence to the north and looked at it in a couple of different areas.  That’s the way it lined up to us anyways.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, yea the lake does kind of angle off a bit, there’s a bit of a curvature where it kind of slight bend.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, but yea that, I do have some pictures if you want to see where the old house was positioned which of course we don’t want it that close but you can kind of see where the older house…

Dave Scott asked, do we keep these?

Attorney Altman stated, yes we do.

Dave Scott stated, we take them we’re going to keep them, is that okay?

President Stimmel stated, we’ve got some pictures of the new lot but we don’t have anything where the old one set.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, the old one so you can see where the old home was of course we don’t want it that close.  It’s obviously a little, almost up to the property line by the lake.

Director Weaver asked, you’re saying the new house is going to be closer to the water then the old one?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, further back.

President Stimmel stated, further back.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, at least.

Gerald Cartmell stated, I was trying to figure out that survey.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, the survey doesn’t show the old home.  The old home is gone, it’s been gone for 2 years.

Director Weaver asked, so is the out line then, of, distinguishing the porch?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, the outline on the survey is the porch and the actual foundations the inner boundary and so there’s a 5’ to the actual foundation so actually looking for 2 ½’ if you because we’re only, if your only given 16” for you know a roof over the porch.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, but since then we’ve put in a seawall to stabilize the frontage and we’ve got somebody there now putting in some retaining walls to also further stabilize, the riprap wasn’t doing much there to stabilize the lot.

President Stimmel stated, okay, anymore questions from the Board?

Gerald Cartmell stated, he can’t move this any way to get away from us right?

President Stimmel stated, say that again.

Gerald Cartmell stated, he can’t move anything to get away from us, he can’t go towards the lake.

President Stimmel stated, no he can’t go towards the lake that’s what he’s asking the variance for.

Charlie Mellon stated, no he’s getting away from the lake.

President Stimmel stated, move 7 ½’ back to, you know is what he needs to do, that’s what he’s trying to do is to get a variance for that 7 ½’.

Attorney Altman stated, or build smaller.

President Stimmel stated, yea or build smaller or move it back. 

Bruce Luetschwager stated, what we’re planning is 1100 sq. ft. on the upper level and 1100 on the lower level for 2200 total.

Dave Scott stated, so some of that that you need the setback for is the porch across the front.

Bruce Luetschwager stated, yes sir.

Dave Scott asked, and a, is it enclosed?

Bruce Luetschwager stated, that is a covered, yea, they, it shows the roof coming out and then covering that, we’ve allotted 5’.  It’s covered on the front.

President Stimmel stated, I don’t know for me Bruce the lots 133, 120’ deep it just seems like there’s not, I don’t see a hardship, that’s what I’m struggling with quite frankly.  I understand what you’re saying, that’s just for me.  Are you ready to vote Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, I guess.

President Stimmel asked, okay, everybody ready?

Attorney Altman stated, for the record I marked the photos that were submitted by the applicant as exhibit A 1, 2, 3, and 4 of 4.

Attorney Altman stated, okay announcing the results of the balloting on petition #2772, we have 4 votes cast, 2 votes vote the variance is granted, 2 votes vote the variance is denied.  The matter is tabled till November the 20th for further action.

President Stimmel stated, sorry Bruce, that’s why we need that 5th member.

****

#2773     Richard F. Jr. & Kathleen M. Kohs; The property is located on Lots 3 & 4 in Bass Center, located North of Lowes Bridge at 5477 E. Bass Center Road.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting an 8’ height variance to build a detached garage.

President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?

Jason Knoll stated, I am Jason Knoll here on behalf to speak for Mr. Kohs, um I do have a signed letter here from him.

President Stimmel asked, I’m sorry Jason your last name is what?

Jason Knoll stated, Knoll.

President Stimmel stated, Knoll, okay.

Jason Knoll stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, yea, I’ve just been handed a document dated September 15, 2008 to the White County Area Plan Commission from Richard Kohs, I am unable to attend I give permission to Jason Knoll from J&M Home Improvement to speak on my behalf.  If there are any questions concerning the variance of the proposed garage on my property at 5477 E. Bass Center Rd. Sincerely, Richard Kohs and bears his signature there on.  Thank you.

Jason Knoll stated, thank you.

Director Weaver stated, I would like to clarify for the record that this proposed garage is a 2 story garage, just so everyone is aware of that.

President Stimmel asked, and the intent of the understanding is for them to live in the garage while they…

Jason Knoll stated, well right now the garage is, we’re just framing it up basically, we’re not doing anything to the upstairs inside, no walls, no plumbing, no electrical, no windows, no doors, no nothing.  There’s going to be a, an outside porch, and entry door going into the second story and that’s it.  The second story is basically there for future, he’s got the money right now to go ahead and build the garage, do what he needs to do to get that built, he doesn’t have the money to finish the project.  Um, the reason he wants to do it now is because uh, with the futures the way that they look obviously with you know properties um, it’s not really good but um, the septic system up there really isn’t very well you can’t build a new house, you can’t um, he can’t really add on to the house that’s there because of the way that’s it sits on the property so you can’t really do any additions on to the house that’s there um, and there’s so many variables going into the problems with the property to begin with that the garage is, it is going to be a 2 story garage like I said, it’s nothing on the inside.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dave Scott asked, so is he going to eventually live in the garage and tear the house down, is that what you’re saying?

Jason Knoll stated, yes, yes that’s the…

Dave Scott stated, so the garage will be the…

Jason Knoll stated, as soon as the septic systems come up there um, which I don’t know if you guys have heard anything about what’s going on up there, they had a meeting um, September 27th up in Buffalo…

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

Jason Knoll stated, um, I wasn’t able to attend, I don’t think he was able to attend as well um, he’s from Orland Park, Illinois so you know so I don’t exactly what happened, I don’t know what was discussed.  I do know that there was a septic meeting up there other than that that’s all I know.

Attorney Altman asked, you mean a sewer meeting?

Jason Knoll stated, yea, yea.

Dave Scott asked, if this garage was going to be the primary structure…

Jason Knoll stated, the septic.

Dave Scott asked, he wouldn’t need a variance, is that right?

Director Weaver stated, he wouldn’t need a variance for the height but I was just looking at this and it will not meet the requirements for setback on the side for a house.

Dave Scott asked, what is…

President Stimmel stated, 8’.

Director Weaver stated, well it needs to be at least 9’.

Charlie Mellon asked, 90’?

Director Weaver stated, 9.

Charlie Mellon stated, 9.  Well it’s 8.

Director Weaver stated, so they would not be able to make it a dwelling as it sits.

Jason Knoll stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, unless you move it in.

Jason Knoll stated, unless it’s moved.

President Stimmel asked, but it is okay as an accessory building?

Director Weaver stated, as an accessory building its fine.

President Stimmel stated, okay but if it were converted into living space then it would not fit.

Director Weaver stated, that’s right.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Jason Knoll stated, right now it’s an accessory building.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Jason Knoll stated, and on the plan, I don’t know, I think you guys have got a floor plan for the building, um on the floor plan there is rough end plumbing in the garage.  There’s no plumbing going up anywhere except for in the garage.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dave Scott asked, so if we, if he puts this here 8’ off the property line then he won’t be able to improve the upstairs.

Director Weaver stated, he won’t be, that’s right.

Dave Scott stated, without a variance.

Director Weaver stated, that’s right.

Dave Scott asked, would a…

Jason Knoll asked, so if I moved the building over, over a foot…

President Stimmel stated, right.

Director Weaver stated, then they wouldn’t have to come back.

Jason Knoll stated, then down the road we wouldn’t have to worry.

Director Weaver stated, that’s right.

Jason Knoll stated, assuming that the ordinance doesn’t change again.

Charlie Mellon stated, build on top of it.

Jason Knoll stated, right.

President Stimmel stated, it’s not likely the county’s going to spend another couple hundred thousand dollars in the next couple of years.

Jason Knoll stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, I think you’re safe for awhile.

Dave Scott asked, what, does he have any kind of a time frame to do the upstairs and tear down the, the other house?

Jason Knoll stated, um, obviously his time frame depends a lot upon what happens with the septic systems up there, um, you know if the sewer board decides up there that they’re going to do it and they’re going to do it now then you know that dictates as to how soon he’ll be able to do that as well as how much money he has in his pocket.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Jason Knoll stated, he’s trying to keep away from financing anything to…

President Stimmel stated, all right, Jason we’ve got a gentleman in the back who would like to speak.  Yes sir?

Roger Wilson stated, I’m Roger Wilson I attended that sewer meeting for Buffalo and they said it’d probably be a year and a half to 2 years before the sewers come in.

Charlie Mellon stated, it’d probably be more then that.

President Stimmel asked, are you happy about that?

Roger Wilson stated, not really.

President Stimmel stated, thank you very much for the input sir.  Okay, Jason what about a hardship, I guess I’m looking for some, if the garage goes up and the guy, and Mr. Kohs builds a house and attaches it to the garage?

Jason Knoll stated, that’s another portion that could happen as well, you know.

President Stimmel stated, I know that’s what I’m struggling with a little bit that…

Jason Knoll stated, the garage could be, there could be a house attached to the garage that’s in the proposed building.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Jason Knoll stated, I’m not going to say they can’t have it.

Dave Scott stated, so if he attaches it to the house and it’s part of the house then he doesn’t need the height variance.

Director Weaver stated, yea, it can be as tall as the house.

President Stimmel stated, that’s where I was going. 

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, I was trying to get there but I was having a terrible time, yea so he wouldn’t, it would not be an issue.

Director Weaver stated, right.

President Stimmel stated, if he attaches it to the house.

Jason Knoll asked, to the house that’s there?

President Stimmel stated, or to…

Director Weaver stated, or to another one.

President Stimmel stated, or to a new house.

Jason Knoll stated, to a new house, exactly, that was another portion that we, that me and him have discussed is attaching the house to the garage down the road, it depends on again money and the time line.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Jason Knoll stated, if…

Dave Scott asked, other then giving them a variance what, can we get just a commitment that says that uh, in a certain length of time he’s either going to make this a primary structure or…

Jason Knoll asked, or put a, attach a primary structure to it?

Dave Scott stated, attach it to the house so that he doesn’t need a variance, I mean there’s no hardship out side if I can understand what he’s trying to do here.

Director Weaver stated, well but if he attaches it to the house he still needs a variance.

Jason Knoll stated, if he attaches it to the house existing home, um the existing home actually sits over the property line by 2’.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Jason Knoll stated, which in itself is another fun bag of paperwork and meetings and…

Dave Scott asked, why, what kind of a variance does he need to, if he’s going to make this into the primary structure?

Director Weaver stated, well if he’s going to do that now he would have to tear down the other house.

Jason Knoll stated, right.  Right now it’s just an accessory building, the future that could be the upstairs of that building could be a play room or anything else it could be, you know.

President Stimmel asked, Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, all he’s asking for is the height variance now.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Charlie Mellon stated, as far as that goes.  I was back there and there’s not problem with the height variance because it’s on a dead end and he’s the last house on the dead end road and the height of the trees on west there wouldn’t bother anything.

President Stimmel asked, if there, if just having enough space was the only criteria Charlie I’d go right along with you, that’s, unfortunately that’s not the only criteria.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea, but that’s all he’s asking for right now, if he puts a double deck on top of there later he’d have to come back again and as far as the hardship deal I think we might be stressing that really too much.  I know it’s in the…

President Stimmel stated, the law says, if you want to just throw out the law then we could throw out the law.  We can just throw out the hardships and move along.

Charlie Mellon stated, okay I won’t say anything then.

President Stimmel stated, what ever you want to do, um, okay.  We ready to vote?  Any other comments?  Ready to vote?  Ready to vote.

The Board finds the following:

That no objectors were present at the meeting

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

That the request is for an 8’ height variance to build a detached garage on Lots 3 & 4 in Bass Center, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION:  Property is located North of Lowes Bridge at 5477 E. Bass Center Road.

(1) The variance request (is) (is not) a variance from a use district or classifications under are plan law.  Vote: 3 is not, 1 is.

(2) The granting of this variance (will) (will not) be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and welfare of the community.  Vote: 3 will not, 1 will.

(3) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance request (will) (will not) be affected in a substantially adverse manner.  Vote: 1 will, 3 will not.

(4) The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance is being applied to a situation that (is) (is not) common to other properties in the same zoning district.  Vote: 1 is, 3 is not.

(5) The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance (will) (will not) result in unusual and unnecessary hardship.  Vote: 1 will, 3 will not.

(6a) This situation (is) (is not) such that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question or to the intended use of the property that does not apply generally to other properties or class of uses in the same zoning district. Vote: 1 will, 2 will not.

(6b) this situation (is) (is not) such that such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zoning district and in the vicinity. Vote: 1 will, 3will not.

(6c) This situation (is) (is not) such that the authorizing of such variance will be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will materially impair the purposes of the ordinance of the public interest. Vote: 1 will, 3 will not.

(6d) This situation (is) (is not) such that the Board specifically fins the condition or situation of the specific piece of property for which the variance is sought is of so typical or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation, under an amendment of the ordinance, for such conditions or situations. Vote: 1 will, 3 will not.

The variance was denied based on the findings of fact by a vote of 1 for and 3 against.  A vote of 3 “for” is necessary to grant a variance.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, announcing the results on petition #2773, 4 votes cast, 3 votes vote to deny the variance, 1 vote for to grant the variance.  The variance is denied.

****

#2774     Paul L. & Carolyn S. Coonse; The property is located on 4 in Camp Tippecanoe Addition, located North of Buffalo at 7648 E. Camp Tippe Court.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 15’ rear setback variance and a 3’ east side setback variance to roof an existing deck.

President Stimmel asked, and you are ma’am?

Carolyn Coonse stated, Carolyn Coonse.

President Stimmel stated, thank you ma’am.  Is there anything you want to add to what we’ve read or what…

Carolyn Coonse stated, I would just like to have a deck so I could sit out in the rain and possibly the snow and ice off of the steps and convenience and cooler inside.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Have we any fan mail on this one at all?

Director Weaver stated, no, I haven’t received anything on this but I might want to clarify that this request is bringing the existing mobile home into compliance as well.  This doesn’t stated that but that’s, the request is reflecting that.

President Stimmel stated, right.  In other words the setbacks that were varied, the rear and the east side so not have anything to do with the deck, is that correct?

Director Weaver stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, okay that’s the way I’d say.

Director Weaver stated, but the reason she’s requesting the variance is because she’s doing the deck.

President Stimmel stated, okay and it has to bring the rest of the mobile home into compliance, okay.

Director Weaver stated, right.

President Stimmel asked, does that make sense?

Dave Scott stated, let me ask you this, once we, what if they pull a mobile home out do they have, if they want to replace it in the same spot do they have to, or if they want to build something there does the variance stick or does it?

President Stimmel asked, Jerry how does that work?

Attorney Altman asked, you mean if this is granted then, then what or you mean right now?

Dave Scott stated, I have no problem with her covering her deck, what I have a problem is if we grant a setback variance for 3’ off this property line and 10 years down the road they pull the trailer off there is the next guy going to be able to build 3’off the property line or does the next project go back to the original setbacks.

Attorney Altman stated, again, I would tell you that I think the law would say that basically that if they replaced the existing mobile home with something comparable or similar…

Dave Scott stated, my point is I don’t want to bring the trailer into compliance.  I think they should give her a permit to put her deck on there the way it is without bringing the property into compliance because then they, if somebody tears something down and rebuilds it back they need to meet the setbacks.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, uh, so that I guess what I’m saying is, is as I understand this application if it’s approved and whenever somebody wants to put a different mobile home in there rather than the existing one assuming that it is comparable, not an expansion it would be allowed to do that if you grant this today.

Dave Scott stated, but if somebody wanted to pull the mobile home out and build a house there they would have to meet the setbacks.

Attorney Altman stated, they would, they would have to be comparable to what they have there right now.

Dave Scott asked, can we give her a permit to build the deck without bringing the trailer into compliance?

Attorney Altman asked, uh, that would, Diann do you know whether that permit would be granted, the variance doesn’t have anything to do with that proposed deck does it?

Director Weaver stated, yes it does.

Attorney Altman stated, it does.

Director Weaver stated, that’s why she’s here.

President Stimmel stated, all right.

Dave Scott asked, it does?  I thought…

Director Weaver stated, the deck is not going closer to the property lines but she’s, when she’s improving a noncompliant structure.

Attorney Altman stated, okay, I see…

Director Weaver stated, over you know, over a certain percentage then the whole thing has to be brought into compliance first.

President Stimmel asked, can we pass it with the stipulation that it only is for this trailer or this owner or can we get into that?  I mean how in the heck would anybody ever find that in the records. 

Dave Scott asked, what is the percentage, 50%?

Director Weaver stated, 50% of the appraised value.

Dave Scott asked, so you think that the porch and the deck is going to cost half as much as the trailers worth?

Director Weaver stated, on an older mobile, yes that is possible.

Charlie Mellon stated, just a roof over the deck, the decks all ready there.

Attorney Altman stated, I suspect that you could in fact restrict it to this, this particular existing home, particularly specifically and if you do that and as a condition for granting the variance to allow the deck to be topped, yes I think you can restrict it that much but you have to be specific about doing that.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Dave Scott asked, can’t we just vote to let her, give her a permit without bringing the thing into compliance?

Attorney Altman stated, that’s possible, I, the Board, let me think.

President Stimmel stated, Dave I would rather just bring it into compliance but just bring her into compliance and not grandfather it in, if somebody puts another trailer up, a home up they’re going to have to meet the setbacks.

Dave Scott stated, so there’d be a condition on their…

President Stimmel stated, there’d be a condition on passing this variance, bring it in.

Dave Scott stated, yea to get the conditions to stay with that particular mobile and what about 10 years from now the mobile needs to be replaced and she wants to put another one there, does she have to come in for another variance?

Attorney Altman stated, she certainly would, yea.  I mean you know, can’t have your cake and eat it to.

Dave Scott stated, well there’s no guarantee she will get it though.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s right.

Carolyn Coonse stated, I doubt if I’ll be around that long.

President Stimmel asked, so we…

Dave Scott stated, I don’t like bringing that into compliance and being 3’ off the property line.

President Stimmel stated, I don’t either, I do not either.  The one right next to it is 2’.

Dave Scott stated, yea.

Director Weaver stated, yea its close.

Dave Scott stated, but I don’t worry about, she’s, what she’s going to do is not going to affect anything.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Dave Scott stated, I mean and it meets the setbacks.

Charlie Mellon stated, yep.

President Stimmel stated, it meets the setbacks.

Charlie Mellon stated, that was probably grandfathered in years ago, all she’s wanting is the roof over the deck.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Charlie Mellon stated, the decks already there.

President Stimmel stated, we’re all trying to do, we can’t figure how to do it.

Attorney Altman stated, Dave, I guess my issue is I think the answer is the Board has the authority to do that, to order that a building permit be issued.  My question is whether that’s been properly noticed up to do that.

Director Weaver stated, well the request only says to build the deck with a roof.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s what I’m saying, that’s what I’m saying is, is I’m not sure that it’s noticed up to…

Dave Scott stated, there’s no variance required why would, what would be the, I mean she’s going to meet setbacks with what she’s wanting to the new construction she’s going to meet setbacks.  She’s just going to tie it on to a nonconforming.

Attorney Altman stated, yea I understand you just asked my opinion.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Attorney Altman stated, you can vote, you can make that restriction on your vote about a motion and your restriction on the vote.

Dave Scott stated, I don’t want her not to get her variance through because of…

Attorney Altman stated, when you make your motion and…

President Stimmel stated, Mrs. Coonse you can sit down.

Carolyn Coonse stated, okay.

President Stimmel stated, I think this is, I hate to make you stand up, I couldn’t stand that long, I know.

Dave Scott stated, I’m going to try to make that motion then,  I’m going to make a motion as to we direct the Building department to give her a permit for the proposed improvement without bringing the existing structure into compliance.

Gerald Cartmell stated, you need to keep going.

Director Weaver stated, okay it’s not the Building department though it’s our office.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

Gerald Cartmell stated, you need to keep going, she’s the only one that can do that, the next person can’t.

Dave Scott stated, if we just bring, if we just give her, authorize her permit for the improvement, if that mobile home ever goes out of there then they have to address that at the time.

President Stimmel stated, but the new owner, somebody can become a new owner and continue the existing situation.

Dave Scott stated, yea as long as that trailer stays there.

President Stimmel stated, even though it doesn’t come into compliance.

Dave Scott stated, right.  You don’t like that Diann?

Director Weaver stated, well I’m questioning and I don’t know if we ask her this at the time, are you changing the roofline on the mobile home itself at all?

Carolyn Coonse stated, no.

Director Weaver asked, no changes at all to that mobile home?  Okay.

Charlie Mellon stated, no the decks on the east end.

Director Weaver stated, well a lot of times though when they do this they do change the roof of the mobile and I wanted to make sure that we are all on the same page.

Dave Scott stated, yea this is just for the improvement, the area of the improvement, the 10 x 35 area.

Charlie Mellon asked, is that deck as wide as the trailer or is it narrower?

Dave Scott stated, no it’s 10 Charlie.

President Stimmel stated, it shows it as being 10’, the trailers 14.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea, okay.  I was up there, I didn’t get out of the pick up.

President Stimmel asked, do you want to restate your motion Dave?

Attorney Altman stated, I think the tape just went off.

President Stimmel asked, did it?

Director Weaver stated, no it whistles when it does that.

Attorney Altman stated, I heard it click.

President Stimmel stated, all right, I’m sorry Dave.

Dave Scott stated, I’m going to make a motion that we authorize or direct the Area Plan Office to go ahead and issue a permit for the 10 x 35 property improvement without bringing the mobile home into compliance.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Do I hear a second.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea, I’ll second.

President Stimmel stated, Charlie seconds.  All in favor say aye.

Board Members stated, aye.

President Stimmel stated, all opposed say no.

Gerald Cartmell stated, no.

President Stimmel stated, 3 to 1.  But it passes so, all right so are we ready to vote then the motions carried.

Dave Scott stated, we don’t to vote now.

Attorney Altman stated, you do need to vote.

President Stimmel asked, we still need to vote?

Attorney Altman stated, yes you certainly do.

President Stimmel stated, so the variance is denied.

Dave Scott stated, if the variance is denied, the property doesn’t get brought into compliance.

Attorney Altman stated, that’s right.

President Stimmel stated, that’s right.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

Gerald Cartmell asked, is this going to bite us one of these days?  I’m thinking it is too much…

President Stimmel stated, some good attorney sitting in the front row.

Gerald Cartmell stated, he’s eating that up.

President Stimmel stated, he can’t wait to get back to Joe and tell him.

Attorney Altman stated, no he’s got one tonight.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Attorney Altman stated, got one tonight guys.

President Stimmel stated, yea I know.

Gerald Cartmell stated, it sounds like we’re trying to reinvent the wheel.

Attorney Altman stated, for the record, we have a motion to authorize and direct the Building depart and the excuse me, actually our department to issue a building permit for this request that was adopted by a 3 to 1 vote.  Then as to the vote on the petition and the variance requested #2774, the following vote, 4 votes cast, 2 votes vote to deny the request, 2 votes vote to grant the request.  That again is tabled to the 20th of November 2008.

President Stimmel asked, can I look at my ballot?

Attorney Altman stated, yes you surly may.

Dave Scott asked, can I see my ballot?

Carolyn Coonse asked, is it still 3 to 1?

Attorney Altman stated, 2 to 2.

President Stimmel stated, 2 to 2.

Carolyn Coonse stated, or 2 to 2.

Attorney Altman stated, yes ma’am, still 2 to 2.  I did announce the ballot and the vote one time wrong.

President Stimmel stated, okay, so the result was 2 to 2.

Attorney Altman stated, 2 to 2.

President Stimmel asked, can I ask for a poll…

Gerald Cartmell stated, so that leaves here where?

Attorney Altman stated, that leaves her basically she’s to get a building permit but not a, the variance was not granted to bring it into compliance.

President Stimmel stated, it’s tabled with a 2 to 2 vote.

Sandy Coonse asked, but she can get a building permit to build?

Attorney Altman stated, yes, oh yea.

Sandy Coonse stated, okay thank you.

Dave Scott stated, yea she can…

Gerald Cartmell stated, that’s all she needs.

Dave Scott stated, right.

Attorney Altman stated, and that’s all she needs I would think.

Director Weaver asked, so does it go back on the agenda or is it tabled?

Attorney Altman stated, it’s still on the agenda, she can take it off the agenda and I’d suggest she did. 

Director Weaver asked, then how are you guys acting on it?

Attorney Altman stated, by the motion.

President Stimmel stated, 2 to 2, by the motion.

Attorney Altman stated, by the motion of Dave’s and seconded it, it has been voted 3 to 1 but the departments ordered to issue a building permit.

Gerald Cartmell stated, okay and that’s 2 to 2 vote…

Attorney Altman stated, on the variance.

Gerald Cartmell stated, she drops it.

Attorney Altman stated, if she wants to she could drop it.

President Stimmel stated, if she doesn’t want to bring it back.

Sandy Coonse stated, she wants to.

Dave Scott stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right, great.

Sandy Coonse stated, she’s out in the hall.

President Stimmel stated, yea, it still ends up with the same result quite frankly, at least it seems like it.

****

#2775     City of Monticello; The property is located on pt lot 135 & lot 136 in Barr’s Addition, located in the City of Monticello

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 26’ front (Marion Street) setback variance and an 11’ height variance to build an addition to an existing accessory building.

President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?

Bob Gross stated, my name is Bob Gross from RW Gross and Associates, land surveyors and civil engineers at 136 South Main St.  Um, yes we were hired by the City as consultants to, to locate their building addition on their property and the, they are in desperate need if you’ve been down there to the water works department, they’re in desperate need of storage space and this provides them this storage space.  I’ll be a, they’re planning a 2 story um, pole structure, pole type structure, pole barn.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Thanks Mr. Gross.  Did we get any fan mail on this one Diann?

Director Weaver stated, no.

President Stimmel asked, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against this variance?  Okay.  Board?  Charlie you ready to vote?

Charlie Mellon stated, yep.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

The Board finds the following:

1.    That the property is properly zoned R-3, Multi-Family Residential.

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

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

4.    That 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 26’ front (Marion Street) setback variance and an 11’ height variance to build an addition to an existing accessory building on Part 135 & 136 in Barr’s Addition, in the City of Monticello, Union Township, Indiana.

COMMON DESCRIPTION:  Property is located South of Marion Street on N. Bluewater Drive in the City of Monticello.

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

The variance was granted based on the findings of fact by a vote of 4 affirmative and 0 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, okay announcing the results on petition #2775, we have 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

****

#2776     Randall Seabolt; The property is located on NE ¼ 21-27-3, located North of Monticello at 1904 N. East Shafer Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a Special Exception for a Manufactured Home to be placed in an L-1 Zoning.

President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?

Randall Seabolt stated, Randall Seabolt.

President Stimmel stated, thank you Mr. Seabolt.  Anything you want to add to what we’ve read?

Randall Seabolt stated, no other than there was a mobile home in there, there’s been a mobile home there for the last 40 years and because of the flood it was damaged to where I have to replace so I am improving this as a double wide, it looks more like a house then just a trailer, there’s a, I believe there’s a picture enclosed of it there.

Dave Scott asked, Diann they don’t allow manufactured homes in an L?

Director Weaver stated, not any more.  The only way they can go in is with a Special Exception.

President Stimmel stated, okay, and elevation, one of the things we were concerned about when we were out there to look at it Randy was the, was being at what 429, I think or something like that.

Dave Scott stated, I think that’s what it was.

President Stimmel stated, I mean are you going to have it, I mean there’s nothing on the survey that says that you’re going to be at that level.

Randall Seabolt stated, well yes it will but according to the DNR we’re not in, that’s the, part of this is we’re fighting to stay out of the flood plain.  Where we’re putting the house is actually not in the flood plain.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dave Scott stated, no but you’re in, I think you’re in the fringe.

Randall Seabolt stated, no I have a letter there, I don’t know it should be in there, there should be a letter from the DNR stating that they have no concerns about it.

Charlie Mellon stated, yes, we got it. 

Dave Scott stated, uh…

Randall Seabolt stated, but it will be, the last one that was there was 3 blocks high this one will be 5 with the motor which will come about 44 or 45” high.

Dave Scott stated, okay do you have a bench mark out there or do you know where the, do you know where this is, this 627, according to, or is that the building department, you have to be…

Director Weaver stated, building department enforces the flood ordinance.

Dave Scott stated, okay you have to be 2’ above the flood plain.

Randall Seabolt stated, right.

Dave Scott stated, so just for your information you know you’re going to have to be 2’ above the flood and I can’t remember what Dave told me but I think it was 229 I think so…

Director Weaver stated, their letter says that they’re…

Randall Seabolt stated, 627.2.

Director Weaver stated, 627.2.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Director Weaver stated, so they’d have to be 2’ above that.

President Stimmel stated, 629.2, okay.  Okay, anybody in the audience want to speak for or against this variance?  Yes sir?

Allen Welch stated, my name is Allen Welch I’m director for disaster assistance for Northwest Indiana, we’re the long term recovery organization helping folks that had damage from the flood and I just want to speak in behalf of Mr. Seabolt.  If it hadn’t been for the flood he wouldn’t be having to ask for this variance he would be living where he was living um, so he’s trying to go back to the same place and actually it a little bit better and we’re in support of that if the variance isn’t granted then um, as one of our clients we’re working with those folks to try to find a way to make that better and that’s going to be quite a hardship to try to find the funding to be able to do that.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Attorney Altman asked, and will this be higher then what he had?

Randall Seabolt stated, yes.

Allen Welch asked, you mean elevation wise?

Attorney Altman stated, yes.

Allen Welch stated, that’s my understanding yes.

President Stimmel stated, okay I mean…

Gerald Cartmell asked, I think we need documentation of that though don’t we?

Attorney Altman stated, yea that’s what…

Randall Seabolt stated, well it will have to meet the building code at that point.

Dave Scott stated, yea the building inspector will…

Gerald Cartmell stated, the building inspector will take care of that.

President Stimmel stated, it’ll have to meet the building inspector.

Attorney Altman stated, and that would make it higher.

Randall Seabolt stated, right.

Attorney Altman stated, okay.  So why is the need for a variance Diann?

Gerald Cartmell stated, has to get a special because it’s a…

Director Weaver stated, Special Exception.

President Stimmel stated, because it’s a manufactured home.

Director Weaver stated, because it’s a manufactured home.

Attorney Altman stated, oh but I see a variance coming up.

Director Weaver stated, yep.

President Stimmel stated, right and there’s also a setback variance that’s coming up.  So, yes ma’am, I’m sorry.  I apologize, if I don’t see you hold you’re…

Diane Seabolt stated, that’s okay you were looking down.

President Stimmel stated, if somebody hold their hand up somebody shout at me because I’m…

Diane Seabolt stated, well Diann took care of it.

President Stimmel stated, okay, great.

Diane Seabolt stated, and my name is Diane also, I’m Randall’s wife.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Diane Seabolt stated, I would like to mention that Mr. Seabolt has had this property for 30 years and he spent his entire lifetime working in the steel mills to retire here and has done so and um, we had to tear down a hundred year old cabin which was really emotionally upsetting for him obviously so he’s had some medical problems as a result of the flood.  He was, he had back surgery in February of course you recently know about our grandson and then he had a heart attack last week.  So we’ve got to do something to get him back in his home again.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Diane Seabolt stated, this is his home, thank you very much.

President Stimmel stated, thank you ma’am.  You guys ready to vote?  I’m sorry another one, I’m sorry.

Frank Hemersbach, I’m Frank Hemersbach, also with Randy, I’m his case worker and we’ve been working along trying to get him back into his home it’s been a long time since the first of the year when he got flooded out and definitely he’s been going through a lot of hardship and therefore we recommend that he can get this exception so he can get back in.  He, looks like the best thing to go in there and it’s  definitely going to be an improvement then what he had and what he had is gone so I just want to put a word in for him.

President Stimmel asked, so you’re confident then that it’s not going to happen again?

Frank Hemersbach stated, I’m never that.  I hope I get out of a job, but I don’t know.

President Stimmel stated, okay, the only reason I ask is because this, I mean the floods we had were above the 100 year flood stage is my understanding and I don’t know some of this was almost biblical in proportion, I don’t know.  Yes ma’am, sorry Randy.

Diane Seabolt stated, I just forgot to mention that we put earnest money down on this home at the beginning of August and um, the ordinance wasn’t done until September, am I correct or August?

Randall Seabolt stated, no it’s been in longer then that.

Director Weaver stated, it was done the first of August.

Diane Seabolt stated, oh shoot, missed it like 3 days then, we had no idea.  We’ve been working with the office and we had no idea that there an ordinance of the kind.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Thank you ma’am.  You ready to vote Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, no I want to ask him, or tell him do you realize there’s going to be a lot of activity there on that corner.

Randall Seabolt stated, there has been and it’s been that way all summer.

Charlie Mellon stated, well it’s going to be a lot more.

Randall Seabolt stated, right.

Charlie Mellon stated, in the next 6 months or maybe a year.

Randall Seabolt stated, yes.

Charlie Mellon stated, they’re going to over haul where all the stuffs at washed out.

Randall Seabolt stated, yes, I’m well aware of that.

Charlie Mellon stated, and the only way they can get in there is down your drive.

Randall Seabolt stated, right.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea, okay.

Randall Seabolt stated, but the house won’t be in the way of any of that.

Charlie Mellon stated, no it’ll be back farther, I just wanted to relate that whether you knew that.

Randall Seabolt stated, oh yes I know that, yes they’ve been in there with the gas lines and in and out of there all summer.

Charlie Mellon stated, okay, yea I’m ready to vote.

The Board fins 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 Special Exception for a Manufactured Home to be placed in an L-1 Zoning on A parcel of land beginning at a point One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty (1320) feet South of the North East Corner of Section Twenty-One (21) in Township Twenty-Seven (27) North Range Three (3) West and running west to the ordinary water mark of the Tippecanoe River, thence East One Hundred Twenty (120) feet, thence North Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet, thence West One Hundred Twenty (120) feet, thence South Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet to the point of beginning.  Containing Six Hundred Eighty Nine-Thousandth of an acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION:  The property is located North of Monticello at 1904 N. East Shafer Drive.

7.    (1)    The special land use shall be and is designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding area.

(2)    The special land use shall not and does not inappropriately change the essential character of the surrounding area.

(3)    The special land use shall not and does not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property.

(4)    The special land use shall and does represent an improvement to the use or character of the property under consideration and the surrounding area in general, yet also be in keeping with the natural environment of the site.

(5)    The special land use shall not be and is not hazardous to the adjacent property, or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes, or glare.

(6)    The special land use shall and is be adequately served by essential public facilities and services, or it shall be demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use shall be able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special use under consideration.

(7)    The special land use shall not and does not place demands on public services and facilities in excess of available capacity.

(8)    The special land use shall be and is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance, and the objectives of any currently adopted White County Development Plan.  

The special exception 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 #2776, 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote the Special Exception should be granted.

****

#2777     Randall Seabolt; The property is located on NE ¼ 21-27-3, located North of Monticello at 1904 North East Shafer Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a 17’ rear setback variance to place a manufactured home on this property.

President Stimmel asked, okay, is there anything else that anybody wants to add to this?

Attorney Altman stated, I would request that the Board consider that all the evidence and record that was made and Special Exception #2776 be incorporated into the record and part of the variance #2777.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Attorney Altman stated, to save time.

President Stimmel stated, right.  Is the Board ready to vote?  Thank you.

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 17’ rear setback variance to place a manufactured home on this property on A parcel of land beginning at a point One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty (1320) feet South of the North East Corner of Section Twenty-One (21) in Township Twenty-Seven (27) North Range Three (3) West and running west to the ordinary water mark of the Tippecanoe River, thence East One Hundred Twenty (120) feet, thence North Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet, thence West One Hundred Twenty (120) feet, thence South Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet to the point of beginning.  Containing Six Hundred Eighty Nine-Thousandth of an acre.

COMMON DESCRIPTION:  The property is located North of Monticello at 1904 N. East Shafer 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 1 negative.

Attorney Altman stated, announcing the results of the balloting on petition #2777.  We have 4 votes cast, 4 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

Randall Seabolt stated, okay thank you very much.

****

Appeal #5     Janice L. Herman, Appellant; Appellants are appealing the Area Plan Director’s revocation of Improvement Location Permits #17597 and #17598 for construction of detached garages at her residence.

President Stimmel asked, and you are sir?

Steve Meyer stated, Steve Meyer with Ball, Eggleston out of Lafayette.

President Stimmel stated, thanks Steve.

Steve Meyer stated, I’m here representing Jan Herman.  I think maybe, I don’t know if you’ve got the packet that I sent earlier.

Director Weaver stated, they do have.

Steve Meyer stated, okay, great.  Um, basically if I could just give just a brief history, this sort of started really back in July, Jan Herman had purchased this property a couple of years ago and in July she had petitioned to get a building permit for a garage at her property and the property next door that she purchased and those are located at 5491 and also 5499.  So July 11th she applied for the building permits to put, to erect both of the garages and they were both issued.  After reviewing the application they were approved by Ms. Weaver and also approved by the Building Commissioner and they were issued on July 14th.  In reliance upon that Jan then moved her septic on one of the properties, paid about a thousand dollars and began construction.  During the course of that construction her contractor was notified to stop all work because that July, because these July 14th permits were revoked in some manor.  Ms. Herman did not know anything about it, did not receive any written notice.  Um, upon further investigation found out that the Area Plan officer or someone had requested some more detailed drawings, the original applications included just sort of a rudimentary sort of drawing about where the garages will be placed so there was a request for some additional about a boundary and site plan.  She provided that and amended the original application by providing the site plan and then on one of the garages she agreed to shorten it by 2’ so then the applicant, the permits again were reissued by the Area Plan office and approved by your Building Commissioner on August 28th.  This one it says, amended on August 28th.  Um and so they were reissued once again Ms. Herman thinking that now she’s satisfied everything had intended to proceed further on September 12th she received a letter from Ms. Weaver advising her that the Area Plan Commission had decided to revoke the second permit and now remember that she, Ms. Herman had gone through the process twice, received approvals twice with no problems, no, they weren’t issued conditionally there were no other problems so upon notification receiving the letter advising her that the Area Plan Commission had revoked her permit she contacted us.  The good news here tonight is we're not asking for a variance.  You’ve been dealing with variances all evening.  What were asking for you to do is to simply follow your set procedures in the White County Zoning Ordinance Code Book and the procedure as we have reviewed and researched and it’s detailed in the letter addressed to Mr. Altman is this, once the Director Ms. Weaver issues the building permit, that’s a final action to be taken, that’s considered a final action by her.  The only way that then that action is changed, it’s our understanding is that if a neighbor or some aggrieved person and asked for an appeal before the Board of Zoning Appeals, you folks then you folks have the authority to review it and make a determination.  That procedure was not followed here.  As I understand what happened was that the APC decided on it’s own to revoke this permit.  They have no jurisdiction to do that, that’s within the realm of the Board of Zoning Appeals not the Area Plan Commission so we’re appealing it based upon the fact that the revocation of the permit was made by a body without any legal authority to do that.  Three other grounds for our appeal is um, secondly uh, well first the Executive Director had no authority to revoke the permit, only you guys can the Board of Zoning Appeals, second of all the APC had no authority to revoke the permit only you guys can, the BZA.  Most importantly though there was no proper notice when the APC acted and issued its letter on September 12th advising Jan that the permit was revoked.  Jan didn’t know a thing about it and under your code if you do review a building permit or location improvement permit on an appeal basis you’re required to give notice to all interested parties.  So Jan had no opportunity to come before the APC and find out what the problem may be or respond to the concerns.  The fourth reason why we’re appealing it is because there was no specific appeal filed.  In review of the file there were some complaints made by neighbors but it doesn’t appear to conform with your requirements about how to file an appeal and it wasn’t presented again to this body to the Board of Zoning Appeals so our position is, is that the revocation action taken was simply improper and illegal and we’re asking you to find, make that conclusion and to find that the action by the APC was null and void.  I believe then procedurally that would then reinstate the permits.  I am authorized on behalf of my client to stipulate um, that if you approve her appeal and um, find that the permits are still valid she will stipulate that the garage on under permit #5499 would be reduced to 20’ instead of 22’.  Um, and as I understand the original problem with this is that some of the neighbors have complained that some of the garage, that the garages may extend to far out into the road and cause some problem with their sight.  I’ll be happy to get into the merits of that if you’d like because we fundamentally disagree and I think we have some pictures and some things to show to you but we are willing to stipulate that if the appeal is granted and the permits stand we would amend permit #17598 no I’m sorry it’s permit yea, #17597 to reduce the depth of that garage from 22’ to 20’.  So um, it’s really a procedural matter we feel that this woman has been wronged because number 1 the wrong body took action, number 2 she was never even properly notified of the action, she had no opportunity to come and voice her concerns or respond to the concerns.

President Stimmel stated okay.

Dave Scott stated, the only question I have.

Steve Meyer stated, sure.

Dave Scott stated, you said from 20 to 22, the drawing that we have here says the garage is 24 x 24.

Steve Meyer stated, that’s on the, let’s see which one is that.

President Stimmel stated, it says 22 x 24 on mine Dave.

Several people are talking at once.

Steve Meyer stated, you have the original, you have the original…

Dave Scott stated, oh okay.

Steve Meyer stated, then it was, the site plan was…

President Stimmel stated, I’m looking at this packet Dave, this packet from Ball, Eggleston.

Dave Scott stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, the packet where it says site plan.

Dave Scott stated, okay, all right.  Okay I found it thank you.

Steve Meyer stated, I have copies as well.

Attorney Altman stated, so Mr. Meyers effectively that would move it but it’s hard to tell in a southeasterly direction so that it would not be 6.9 it would be 8.9’ from the road.

Steve Meyer stated, from that I think the measurement you’re looking at Jerry is just from the right-of-way.  Actually it’s about our measurements indicate that it’s about 10’ from the road, if we were…

President Stimmel stated, excuse me Steve your drawing says EP or edge of pavement there.

Director Weaver stated, edge of pavement, apparent right-of-way.

Steve Meyer stated, okay.

President Stimmel stated, that’s what I would consider to be to the edge of the pavement.

Steve Meyer stated, okay well we got, what we did was and I’ve got photos to actually show we got a ruler showing that it’s about 10’ is what we’ve calculated but at any rate yes Jerry your right it would give it 2 more feet between the garage and the road.

Attorney Altman stated, a right-of-way what ever that is.

Steve Meyer stated, yes, yes.

Attorney Altman stated okay.

President Stimmel asked, is safety ever an issue Steve when we’re being discussed, I mean?

Steve Meyer stated, it was never, let me say this, it was never brought up during the application process that Jan went through first and second.

President Stimmel stated, no I mean just, I mean, excuse me but I mean just, if I was building a garage next to a busy highway, which that is in the summer time, a lot of people driving fast down there, I mean I would think one of the first thing I’d be thinking about is if I get my 17 or 18’ vehicle 8’ out into that highway, I’m not even out of the garage yet or I might be having some problems and I guess that’s what I’m really concerned about and I think it’s what other people are concerned about too maybe.

Steve Meyer stated, it’s that way right now without the garage or with the garage.  There’s just limited space for those cars to park there anyway so it’s not going to change that situation any.  Now if you look at lot 50, or permit of the address 5491 on the left side of that.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Steve Meyer stated, what you see basically there is she’s proposing to put the garage up closer to the house which will allow her actually to bring the car in closer to the house then what it is right now.  Um, and I’ve got some photos probably to show you, explain it better but on 5491 there’s a fence that’s in front of the house and then she has to park her car you know between the fence and the road under permit or under the permit for 5491 she will move that garage, she’ll move her fence and she’ll move that garage closer to the house which allows her to park her car up closer toward the house and away from the road but with regard to address 5499 it’s that way right now, it’s not going to change anything.

President Stimmel stated, yea, I understand what you’re saying.

Steve Meyer stated, just because of the placement of the house.

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Thank you Steve.  Go ahead Diann.

Director Weaver stated, I would just like to clarify a couple of things, um, first these permits were issued under the old zoning ordinance.  I think this Board needs to know that, secondly they were not revoked the first time and that was all handled through the Building Department.  I had no dealings with that until after he had stopped those permits and they were not revoked.  These permits are the permits that were originally issued.

Steve Meyer stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, okay.

Steve Meyer stated, yea and I was not sure so that’s fine.

President Stimmel asked, so was there a stop work order Diann or how did…

Steve Meyer stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, I don’t know if he actually posted a stop work order or not, not that I’m aware of.

President Stimmel asked, did he stop?

Janice Herman stated, there was nothing posted, no written, what happened.  In fact the contractor had called in a couple of times the week before and a couple of times the morning of…

President Stimmel stated, Ms. Herman I have to apologize for interrupting you your fine I just ask you if you would step to the microphone.

Janice Herman stated, I’m sorry.

Steve Meyer stated, this is being recorded.

President Stimmel stated, I’m sorry for that but I just want to make sure we get it on the record, thank you.

Janice Herman stated, my contractor uh, had started the work and upon you know the second or third call that morning into the Building Department just to kind of verify the setbacks and what everything could be from side to side not towards the road, the, he said he, the contractor, I was standing right there.  The contractor called in to schedule to have the Building Inspector come out and do the inspection for the excavation of the foundation and at that the Building Inspector, Dave Anderson said oh no, that permits been pulled, stop work right now and they did, they just packed up and pulled out.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right, thank you very much.

Director Weaver stated, so see that was handled through the Building Department.

President Stimmel stated, right, right, okay.

Director Weaver stated, and the reason he stopped it was because the original site plans were not accurate.  She was not meeting the required setbacks.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, that’s why it was originally…

President Stimmel asked, do we have copies of the original site plans.

Director Weaver stated, I believe you have them here.

Steve Meyer stated, yea those, those were what Mr. Scott you had originally looked at sort of a hand written, yea it’s a hand sketch.

President Stimmel asked, hand sketch?

Steve Meyer stated, that was submitted that…

President Stimmel stated, there it is, I got it, thank you.

Steve Meyer stated, yep, and then she supplemented it then with the more formal site plan.

Director Weaver stated, that is correct.

President Stimmel stated, Steve it looks like on the site plan there are some measurements that look like they were added after the fact, is that just me or with a different pen or something where it says 7’.  Am I misreading that which is about what you’ve got right now.  Just trying to determine if the site plan was put this way when…

Several people are talking at once.

Janice Herman stated, yea and those were my, that’s what I wrote in there when I submitted it.

Steve Meyer stated, I might also add that during this process somewhere when it got to the APC by September 12th there were 3 neighbors that had by then I think had written some, some letters indicating some concern about that.  One of the neighbor since now has written another letter kind of backing off on what some of his concerns were.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Steve Meyer stated, and then I think another neighbors here Mr. Hanik and I’ll let him speak.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.  Did we answer my question you gave me about whether the print on this, it shows 7’ on the original site submission.

Steve Meyer stated, yea.

President Stimmel asked, do you think, do you think that was originally on there?  It looks like to me like it was done in a different pen or…

Steve Meyer stated, no I think that she said that that was her own rudimentary.

President Stimmel stated, resubmitted just like that.

Steve Meyer stated, yea, yea.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Janice Herman stated, yea it would have been setback 5’.

Steve Meyer stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, because you had mentioned that it was about 10’ and it shows.

Steve Meyers stated, yea.

Janice Herman stated, the newer, the newer professionally done site if you would look at that was done better and the measurements were put in better.

President Stimmel stated, maybe I’m not making myself clear.  I see 7’.

Steve Meyer stated, the new one still says 7’.

Janice Herman stated, 6.9 is to the eave, it’s not to the wall.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Janice Herman stated, but we, but we, I do have pictures showing where I actually took a board out there with one foot increments and laid it down there between the edge of the road and where that spot is and it’s greater then that.

President Stimmel stated, so you’re telling me the surveys wrong.

Janice Herman stated, no I’m saying that you know when um, no I’m not saying the surveys wrong.

President Stimmel stated, that’s what I’m hearing.  Am I misunderstanding that then?

Janice Herman stated, no.

Steve Meyer stated, well she’s done a…

Janice Herman stated, I’m not saying that.

Steve Meyer stated, um, she’s done a, a rudimentary kind of a thing she took a board, measured off 1’ at a time.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Steve Meyer stated, laid it there and that counts out to be 10 so but at any rate it’s still within the 5’ setback.

President Stimmel stated, okay I’m just trying to understand what Dave Anderson was looking at.

Steve Meyer stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, is really all I’m trying to understand Steve.

Steve Meyer stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, when he was looking at in and originally stopped the project, he was looking at the hand drawing.

President Stimmel stated, at this drawing.

Steve Meyer stated, um hum, yep.

Director Weaver stated, um hum, now I don’t know if he had been out to the property or not, I cannot tell you that.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.

Director Weaver stated, I did not really come into this until after he had stopped them and when this site plan that was drawn by a surveyor was brought in.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Charlie do you have any questions, I’m sorry I went off on this.  Go ahead Dave.

Dave Scott asked, don’t get my work back, this right-of-way is the edge of the road?

President Stimmel stated, it says E.P.

Director Weaver stated, and E.P. stands for edge of pavement.

President Stimmel stated, edge of pavement is the way I understand that.

Dave Scott stated, so the edge of pavement is less then 10’, it looks to me like 7 1/2’.

Gerald Cartmell stated, according to that drawing.

President Stimmel stated, its 7.9’ from the edge of pavement to the building itself.

Dave Scott stated, um hum 6.9, oh I see it’s a foot overhang.

Steve Meyer stated, right that 1’ overhang.

Director Weaver stated, and the old ordinance did go to the overhang so.

President Stimmel stated, building to pavement.

Steve Meyer stated, yea.

Attorney Altman stated, and that would be changed to 8.9 by the terms of the proposed 7’ and stipulation.

President Stimmel stated, 9.9.

Steve Meyer stated, and it would really be 9.9, wall to street, wall to street.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Charlie Mellon stated, 2’ off of that side.

Director Weaver stated, I did give the Board a copy of a letter from…

Steve Meyer stated, Mr. Rojkowski.

President Stimmel stated, John…

Director Weaver stated, Powers, John Powers.

President Stimmel stated, John Powers.

Steve Meyer stated, oh okay.

Director Weaver stated, um, he requested that the hearing tonight be tabled because he could not attend.

President Stimmel stated, I’ll just read it quickly Diann. It’s 10-9-08, Diann received it on 10-14-08 in response to the enclosed letter I received on 10-8-08, I will be unable to attend the meeting on 10-16-08 due to the limited notice.  Which how much notice was that?

Director Weaver stated, we mailed the letters out 10 days prior to the meeting.

President Stimmel stated, okay, in an effort to be in an effort of fairness of both parties could you please table the matter until a timely notice can be given.  This matter's very important to me as I will be greatly affected either positively or negatively by the actions of you Area Planning and my neighbor Janice L. Herman.  May I please have a copy of your ruling governing notification please.  Thank you John Powers, signed John Powers.  And he gives his phone number.  Okay.

Director Weaver stated, now the other letter that Mr. Meyer was referring to from the neighbor where he kind of backed off from his complaint.  I didn’t get copies made of that but I do have the original here if you’d like to see it.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  Dave, I’m sorry go ahead.

Dave Scott stated, that’s all right.  We were out there and I was in a regular size pick up truck and my issue is a safety issue because of the traffic coming through there, at what, what he said is exactly, I mean I’m sure he’s right with, but I think that the Area Plan wanted that stop order put out because of a safety issue.

President Stimmel stated, right.  I mean what I hear Dave is that if we agree with what Mrs. Herman is saying, if we just go back and issue the permits but then we would do it the way we properly should do it and that is to bring the, bring it before the BZA in some kind, in a meeting if we wanted to revoke the permit or is that the way I’m understanding it?

Steve Meyer stated, well yea what we’re asking right now is to really nullify the action of the APC by revoking it because I don’t think they had the authority to do that.

President Stimmel stated, right, right.

Steve Meyer stated, if you rule that, if you rule that that way tonight then the permits stand um, I guess then it’s a question of whether or not somebody can come in and file an appeal after that point.

President Stimmel stated, exactly, exactly and that’s all I’m saying.  Somebody can file an appeal.

Dave Scott stated, so all your wanting is, is to be able to come in front of this Board and, but what’s he, I mean…

Steve Meyer stated, no I’m not asking for that.

Dave Scott stated, he’s not, he’s not needing a variance.

Steve Meyer stated, no.

President Stimmel stated, no.

Dave Scott stated, it’s a setback, the issue was they were trying to define what the property line was and they, I think what they were talking about was that some court had decided that the property line if the property line exceeded out in the road the property line would be the edge of the pavement because if you look their property line actually is out in the pavement.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Dave Scott stated, so it’s the paved portion of the road is the edge of the property line and uh, my issue is just a safety factor in that particular spot you got curves and an intersection and uh, my other question is this 24 x 16 garage, do you enter from the road or…

Steve Meyer stated, from the road.

President Stimmel asked, from the south or from the west side?

Steve Meyer stated, west.

Dave Scott stated, you take an 18’ vehicle and your sitting in the front part of it and you’ve only got, your out in the road before you can see traffic coming any way, either way if your backing out of a garage and then I don’t know what it does to the line of site for these other properties on each side as far as those people wanting to back in and out of their driveway and my only defense in this thing to defend this is a safety factor.

President Stimmel stated, gotcha.

Dave Scott stated, I think what you said is probably absolutely correct the way you’re representing it but I don’t know…

President Stimmel stated, Dave let me go back because I think there’s a gentleman in the audience that wants to speak.

Dave Scott stated, okay.

President Stimmel stated, let me back up just a second to I think uh Steve’s original question as procedurally Jerry, would you agree that he’s correct procedurally, that the procedure, the proper procedure was not followed in the ramification of permits?  Is that something you studied? 

Attorney Altman stated, um hum.

President Stimmel asked, do you agree that this is the, that’s the case?

Attorney Altman stated, I agree that uh, that if we are settling this tonight based upon this uh proposed modification and stipulation that that’s the case.

President Stimmel stated, that the permits were not pulled properly, am I saying that correct?

Attorney Altman stated generally speaking, yes.

President Stimmel stated, okay that’s what I’m going to say, that’s what I’m trying to understand, okay.  Yes, sir you had a question, or a comment.  There are many yes, help yourself.

John Hanik stated, good evening first off, my names John Hanik, I’m the neighbor to Jan.  I’m located 1 house north of one of the proposed garages, okay.  Uh, let me first start by saying that Jan and I have had several conversations over the last few weeks discussing her needs and her wants and I understand and I appreciate them, okay and I expressed to her like you did my safety concerns, that of my family, myself and a general public, all right.  Um, she understands where I’m coming from but we couldn’t reach an agreement.  That’s when I told her I’m coming here, it’s in your court, you know.  Um basically I’ve got some history for you.  If you go back to last year shortly after Jan or even before Jan was living there, I could pull out of my driveway, I had over 220’ view looking south down West Shafer Drive.  I believe it was early spring Jan put up a 6’ solid stockade fence.  It comes out about 12’ from the front of her house approximately I didn’t measure it I didn’t want to trespass but that cut my view down to 110’, all right.  When she parks her vehicle she parks them in front of that fence, my view is less than 50’.  Believe me I’ve almost had 3 accidents all ready.  I’ve had to pull out in the road, see a car coming I had to back up right away.  My wife is petrified about driving, she won’t even drive out of our driveway now, okay.  Jan has been courteous the last few days, she’s pulled her vehicle putting her own vehicles in danger off to the roadway so I have a 3’ window looking between her fence and her cars, that helps but it’s not the whole story.  We get to the point of the garage, okay, Jan and I were out there last Monday, okay, we measured everything out, I got my line of site and I’d like to present to the Board a copy of what it’s going to look like when my vehicle is right here here’s the lot lines, the total footage.  That’s C the first vehicle coming around the curve, okay I’ve got 125’ view not.  That doesn’t mean that the driver sees me yet all right.  I went to the website and looked up the national transportation safety board.  The speed limit along Shafer Drive believe it or not is 30 miles an house, okay.  Everybody laughs and I do too, the national transportation safety board says it takes a car 3 seconds to go 120’ at 30 mph if the driver is alerted it takes them ¾ of a second to take his foot off the accelerator and put it on the brake.  That means he’s going 30’ before he’s even done anything.  Further from there once he applies the brakes its 85’ to bring the car to a stop now the government does other things too.  They say well if he’s had a long day at work that can make things longer or if it’s a long drive, if he’s had a meal, a big meal so on and so forth.  Weather plays a factor the condition of the vehicle, all I’m saying folks is this is dangerous.  I’d like to also point out and I’m not trying to tell you how your job is but I’m trying to do my homework.  If you look at the White County Zoning Ordinances, there’s 5 particular areas that I wanted the Board to look at, one of them is section 12.5-7 it talks about general welfare, it says the approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the community.  Adjacent property is part B, the use or value of this area adjacent to the property included in the development standard variance request will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner.  Under 12.4.A, preserving the character of the area, I believe that the variance sought does not essentially, what will essentially alter the character of the surrounding area and lastly and I’ll give you a copy of this, the conditions and or commitments, the condition or safeguard must be designed to protect natural resources that health, safety, and welfare of the social and economic well being of those who will use the land or activity under consideration, residents, landowners, and immediate adjacent to the proposal land use or activity and community as a whole.  All I’m asking is pleas take that into consideration.  I have one final question too, last week when Jan and I looked at all this line of site and all of that there’s been so many survey’s done, when we looked at it there’s 2 surveys out there, mine originally that was done 9 years ago because I wanted to build a garage.  I didn’t do it because of my neighbors, because I knew it was going to be a safety hazard.  My stake was here, her new stake survey moved over 18” onto my property.  Today I went out there, my stake was gone, it’s been pulled there’s no rebar, no stake, now I’ve lost 18” of my property, I am upset about that.  What does that do for me?  Could somebody answer that for me please?

President Stimmel stated, that’ll be up to the surveyor’s.  I apologize but thank you for your comments sir.

John Hanik stated, thank you.

President Stimmel stated, yes go ahead Mr. Meyer.

Steve Meyer stated, just a couple of things, I didn’t look at all those statutes that Mr. Hanik sited but I heard him say the word variance and I heard him say the word land use and zoning so I don’t know if those conditions actually apply in this particular situation when we’re only talking about the approval of a building permit.  It’s my understanding as long as we’re within the setback and all, meet all the other zoning requirements, uh, we’re okay.  Um, I did bring some other pictures for you to understand this line of site issue that Mr. Scott and Mr. Hanik has raised, if I could pass these to you a little bit.  I just try to touch on it briefly here. 

Attorney Altman stated, okay I marked Mr. objector, Mr. Hanes objector exhibit A, apparently it ages that the ordinance 12.8, 12.9, and 12.7 and the picture.

Steve Meyer stated, and again I don’t want to get, I don’t want to lose sight that the basis of our appeal basically is procedurally the permits were revoked improperly and I think that that’s enough grounds for you to vote for us for the appeal but since we got into this issue I don’t want to miss an opportunity to address it.  Um, the first page of the photos that I gave to you actually are a picture of if you see the top photo with the red SUV there, that is one of Jan’s property’s and so this would be like, this would be the line site, basically from Mr. Hanik’s view and if you see then there’s the wood fence that was mentioned earlier.  Jan had gotten, properly gotten a permit and put up a fence earlier.  Oh yea sure I’ll give you a copy.

President Stimmel stated, thank you very much.

Steve Meyer stated, so Jan earlier had gotten um, a permit to build a fence.  Actually the permit was to build the fence out even closer to the road but she didn’t do that so anyway, so there’s the fence there.  Well now what happens is with the fence up she can only pull her car up so close to the house which does cause it to be close to the road and um, you can see by the pictures uh, and then the other picture below is from the opposite direction, it’s from I think the uh, south looking north anyway, so you can see that by the placement of the fence, her cars have to be out that close to the road.  All approved and all okay, but with the proposal for the garage, at least at that particular property the garage, she will remove the fence and move the garage closer to the house which means these cars will actually be parked closer to her house and actually improve Mr. Hanik’s line of site and also improve the neighbors to the south line of site because then she’ll be able to move her car up closer to the house, further from the road.  We estimate if you look at the next photos, page 2 um we estimated what Jan did was she took this stick out to sort of show you the footage, about where the end of the, the distance between the new garage and the street and on that lot we estimate there’ll be 14’.  So that will actually improve the situation as it exists, if you take in consideration the fence so we believe actually this is a better plan for the neighbors because it will improve Mr. Hanik’s line of site.  Um, the second piece of property is reflected on page 3 where again she’s taking her board and she’s taken it to the edge of the pavement and there are some reflector um, devices sticking up out of the ground and there again we estimate there’ll be at least 10’ between the end of the garage and the road, um, and again it’ll allow her to pull the cars all the way in as close to that house as possible so that they’re not sticking as they are right now.  So we believe actually this will improve this situation as it exists and I think in talking with Mr. Hanik the other day he even said he, in his math you said, the math that he did, under this proposal he would gain an additional 80’ of site then what he has right now with the fence as it exists so it’s, it may not be as ideal but that’s the way the road is situated and it’s been that way for a long time and these cars are parked right in front of these houses um, the garages will not, I don’t think detrimentally effect that.  One of the neighbors has backed off on saying that, in fact the garage at the address of 5491 will improve the situation as it exists today.  But again I’d still want you to focus on the procedural part because I think that we’re on solid legal footing there.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Dave Scott asked, procedure, when the permits were initially issued uh, they were issued with the, under the old ordinance and they were actually meeting the setbacks for an L-1 on the property…

Director Weaver stated, not with the original site plan, no.  That’s why the Building Department stopped it because he discovered that they were not meeting the required setbacks.

Dave Scott stated, okay, well I was under the impression that under the old L that if you had a detached garage it could be within 5’ of the property line.

Steve Meyer stated, yes.

Director Weaver stated, and that’s true and that’s what her drawing showed but in actuality it was not meeting that requirement.

Dave Scott stated, well you know, I can see the Building Department issuing that permit from uh, from the setbacks that he was supposed to issue the permits but once that there was attention brought to it and there was a safety issue, I can see him revoking that permit, I guess I’m justifying…

Director Weaver stated, he did not revoke the permit, the Building Department never revoked the permit.

Steve Meyer stated, the first time around, yea between the July and August…

Director Weaver stated, they never revoked the permit.

Steve Meyer stated, okay, right.

Director Weaver stated, Area Plan revoked the permit.

Steve Meyer stated, they put a stop order on it then, somehow she was told to stop work.

Director Weaver stated, right.

Steve Meyer stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, and that’s unclear, I mean I’m sure…

Steve Meyer stated, right, that’s unclear.

Director Weaver stated, that must have been verbally.

Steve Meyer stated, right.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Steve Meyer stated, then the Area Plan stepped in and revoked and our position is that was improper, Area Plan did not have the authority to do that, only you guys could have done that.

President Stimmel stated, yea, so and that’s really, really supposedly really that’s all we should be dealing with tonight.

Steve Meyer stated, yes.

Dave Scott asked, is what?

President Stimmel stated, is that.

Dave Scott stated, is that.

Steve Meyer stated, yes.

Dave Scott asked, so what do we do?

President Stimmel stated, well then it’s up to somebody else to appeal the building permits that were issued, I believe, right Jerry.

Attorney Altman stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, appeal the fact that they were issued.  You know that could be the gentleman in the back here…

Attorney Altman stated, or anybody.

President Stimmel stated, one of the neighbors or anybody else, it could be somebody from the Area Plan or it could be anybody.  Yes sir?

John Hanik stated, again I just wanted to set the record straight, what he did say was correct, my line of site is going to improve, it’s going to go from 55’ to 125’.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

John Hanik stated, again that only gives me from a dead stop getting out of my driveway 3 seconds, that to me is not sufficient.  This will, on page 3 of his illustrations this will give you a better idea of what I try to do from the aerial, I thought that would work better but if you look at the first reflector, that’s the one corner of the garage closest to my house.  It lines perfectly with that telephone pole, it is the line of site.  That’s my view and you can’t really see it but put yourself back here and that’s the, you’re going into.

Dave Scott stated, I agree it’s a safety issue, I, I agree but.

President Stimmel stated, I heard…later.

Dave Scott stated, yep.

Charlie Mellon stated, that’s not square with the road.

President Stimmel stated, pardon me Charlie?

Charlie Mellon stated, them two reflectors are not square with the road.

Gerald Cartmell stated, well it’s on a curve.

Dave Scott stated, yea, it’s on the curve.  So…

Charlie Mellon asked, where you going to enter this garage, off of the highway?

John Hanik stated, yea she’s going to either pull in or back out.

Charlie Mellon stated, on the east side well man there’s not much room, 10’.

Steve Meyer stated, that’s the way the cars line up in front of the house right now anyway.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Steve Meyer stated, with or without the garage.

Charlie Mellon asked, when you leave your car sit in front of that garage your going knock out a lot more view, east.

Jan Herman stated, no.

John Hanik stated, she’s not going to be able to leave it, she’s going to have to pull it all the way in.

Dave Scott asked, so where do we go from here, what’s our, do we address the procedure?

President Stimmel stated, I can only give you my opinion and that is that I think that what we’re looking at is just, that’s why I asked Jerry what we asked before and that is that procedurally it was done improperly probably, okay.  In other words the APC had no authority to do that.  That should have come before the BZA so the permit should be reissued.  The question is, to me is, is knowing that there’s going to be somebody appeal those permits, I’m just talking loosely here, some, you know I would think it wouldn’t be in her best interest to start construction right away because it could get halted and those permits could legitimately be rejected or revoked if, once they come before us.

Dave Scott asked, is there a time period that once issued, once a permits issued you have to file?

Steve Meyer stated, um hum, it’s uh, 30 days.

Dave Scott asked, and when was the permit issued?

Steve Meyer stated, but, well the permit actually was issued, the one that we’re appealing to say reinstated that was issued on um, August 28th.

President Stimmel asked, so are we saying it’s too late to appeal that?

Attorney Altman stated, maybe.

Steve Meyer stated, I may be taking that position.

Attorney Altman stated, yea, maybe.  I won’t say that is it but it may be.

Steve Meyer stated, because procedurally there was some, because there were some defects procedurally is…
Gerald Cartmell asked, so they have no other alternative then?  We have no other…

Steve Meyer stated, well what we’ve said, what we have said tonight and I think Jan’s still willing to stand by that is the garage that Mr. Hanik has raised the most concerns about with this corner, she has committed to shave 2 more feet off of that if this is approved, we’ve stipulated that we would do that.  That’s about the best that we could do but um, but that will help improve the situation.

Dave Scott asked, um, can we table this issue until we get a chance to investigate and see what are…

President Stimmel stated, we sure can.

Attorney Altman stated, and see what, I mean yea you can do it no matter what I’m just curious what you’re looking at.

Dave Scott stated, well we need to find out we’re in some muddy water here that…

Attorney Altman stated, okay, then table it till the next meeting, you don’t have to give a reason.

President Stimmel stated, Mr. Meyer there’s another gentleman that want to join us speaking.

Steve Meyer stated, oh I’m sorry.

President Stimmel stated, thank you.

John Hanik asked, does it count when I went down and filed a complaint which was done before she submitted the last uh…

Charlie Mellon asked, permit?

Dave Scott asked, you had a complaint there that was filed?

John Hanik stated, yea, I gave it to Diann Weaver.

Gerald Cartmell stated, that was after the APC meeting, I think.

Dave Scott stated, time out.

President Stimmel stated, time out.

John Hanik stated, you folks believe me, you know it’s not a matter of if an accidents going to happen it’s just a matter of when.

Attorney Altman stated, excuse me we’re, excuse me we’re in a…

President Stimmel asked, can we take a 5 minute recess, does everybody want to…

Gerald Cartmell stated, take some time out.

President Stimmel stated, take a 5 minute recess I think there is some…

Director Weaver stated, okay.

John Hanik stated, again she’s looking out the complaint.

President Stimmel stated, she did find the complaint by the way.

John Hanik stated, oh okay.  Again it’s not a matter folk if an accident going to happen, it is going to happen.  My concern is, is that somebody’s going to get hurt, I don’t want anybody to get hurt.  If it’s caused by me or any member of my family I’m going to loose my house, you know, and god knows they may even come after White County, I don’t know.  I’m not a lawyer, I can’t speak for anybody but I’m retired, I’ve worked all my life to enjoy myself.  I can’t face this, believe me.  It’s horrible. 

President Stimmel stated, okay.  Thank you very much sir.  Mr. Meyer?

Steve Meyer stated, I don’t repeat myself so I’m going to offer a little bit of new information, the complaint that Mr. Hanik referred to, he filed it on August 22 of 08, if that was considered as an appeal of the original permit which was filed July, which was approved on July 14th then he’s beyond the 30 days to have appealed that, secondly there was no notice of this given to Jan so it’s deficient I think on it’s face because she wasn’t properly notified so I don’t think he’s preserved an appeal.

President Stimmel asked, on the complaint itself?

Steve Meyer stated, yes.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Steve Meyer stated, I don’t know that this would preserve the appeal.

President Stimmel stated, yes.

Attorney Altman stated, Mr. Meyer I’m looking at that, there’s apparently 3.

Steve Meyer stated, yea.

Attorney Altman stated, one is 8-22-08, one is 8-25-08, one is 8-28-08 and they are by different people.  One is Mr. Hanik that’s the 22.

Steve Meyer stated, um hum.

Attorney Altman stated, and another person is 8-25 and then uh, and I guess I don’t know who did the last one that is received 8-28.  I would imagine these need to be acted on properly noticed up and acted on.

President Stimmel stated, I think the sentiment of the Board right now would be to consider to tabling this Steve because I think we want to get some more information and try to assess where we’re really truly at and I think we can do that all tonight.  That’s what I was getting during intermission is that in fact the?

Dave Scott stated, yes.

President Stimmel asked, so do I hear a motion to table this?

Dave Scott stated, yes, I’ll make that motion.

Gerald Cartmell stated, second.

President Stimmel asked, all in favor of tabling this item?

John Hanik asked, could I ask one last question?

President Stimmel stated, yes.

John Hanik stated, you know everybody’s talking about notification and all of that, and I never knew that these garages were going to be built until they started moving sewer lines and all of that.  Am I because they were supposed to be building was I supposed to be notified that she was requesting a permit or anything?

Director Weaver stated, no.

Charlie Mellon stated, no.

Director Weaver stated, we do not notify people when a permit is issued.

John Hanik stated, okay that’s all.

President Stimmel stated, all right.  The vote, ready to vote was on the floor.  The question was we’re going to table this item.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, and the vote is all in favor say aye.

Board Member stated, aye.

President Stimmel stated, okay, carried.

Director Weaver stated, I might add to my comment though they do appear in the local newspaper.

President Stimmel stated, okay Mr. Meyer we’re going to, it’s tabled for right now, we’ll bring it up the next meeting and we’ll have, simply by that time we’ll be able to make that decision.

Steve Meyer asked, can I only request that if there’s additional information, I don’t know like by the Building Commissioner or somebody else that we have an opportunity to know that ahead of time so that I can come prepared?

President Stimmel stated, I think that’s appropriate.

Attorney Altman stated, totally, totally.

President Stimmel stated, absolutely.

Steve Meyer stated, I don’t know what additional information you’re looking for but I’d just like a heads up.

President Stimmel stated, yea but if anything else comes up, yep, yep absolutely.

Steve Meyer stated, okay, thank you.

John Hanik asked, and that’s going to be November 20th?

Director Weaver stated, November 20th, yes.

****

President Stimmel stated, I apologize for taking too long, we’ve still got one item on the agenda,  Wilson, appeal the fine.  Is this the last one or was these folks, were you folks…

?stated, she’s got to bring something else.

President Stimmel stated, oh okay there’s something else, okay I apologize.

Director Weaver stated, under business.

Roger Wilson stated, yea that’s fine.

President Stimmel stated, no go ahead, your fine, your fine go ahead.

Roger Wilson stated, I was going to say take my name and number…

President Stimmel stated, no go on.

Roger Wilson stated, okay I’m Roger Wilson.  I was in here, I forget what day it was but you wanted more proof that I said that the property lines weren’t correct and what I’ve got is some, if you don’t mind.

President Stimmel stated, we don’t have anything.

Roger Wilson stated, these are showing the lots and if you’ll notice on these lots, the three lots that says UL Jones, there’s the lots, that’s the house that my parents bought and the Wilson lot is what my parents owned and I bought from them.  On that paper on lot #86 when I bought my parents from them which is lot 87 they sold me 30’ of lot 86 but still by this map it showing that 60’ now if you look on the next page you see the survey that was done on my parents lot and that’s showing that the 1, 2 the left where it says lot 88 vacant.

Charlie Mellon stated, oh yea.

Roger Wilson stated, okay so that’s the edge of lot 89 and I said I told you I took measurements of the lots and I’ve got 2 sets of pictures here that I was shown where I…

President Stimmel stated, thank you sir.

Roger Wilson stated, okay if you look at picture 1 that is the corner of my parent’s house towards Red Maple Court.  On picture 2 if you look down the measurement from the house to that stake is 15’ as it shows in the survey on the second page, now in picture #3 that’s the stake looking towards the opposite side of the street towards the other end of the property.  Picture 4 you’ll see where the birdbath is and just to the east of that there’s another yellow stake which didn’t show up in the picture to well but on page, the next page of the pictures you see on picture 6 that’s the stake and that stake is 15’ from the other corner of the house.  Picture 7 and 8 is showing the stake at number, picture number 6 facing towards my house.  Picture #9 measures 60’ from that stake to the edge of lot 88.  Picture 10 shows that 60’, picture 11 is showing the stake that’s on my lot, on lot 87 and if you look at picture 12, it says 60’ now if you look on picture 11 it’s showing that that stake that my house is sitting almost approximately 18” on my neighbor’s property line.  Now the pictures, I gave somebody pictures here the last time that I was here showing the previous survey that was done which showed where my house and my shed was approximately 32” from the property line.  And what I’m trying to show here is that which survey is correct.  When we built my parents house in, I think we started it in 90 or 91my parents couldn’t find the building permit, they have it someplace but at that time they were strict as can be, 6’ from the property line was the house, we even had to have the septic system checked out, had everything checked out, everything checked out fine like I said the survey and the building permit they can’t find but to me there’s 3 different surveys and what I’m saying is I’m getting a $500 fine for my shed being too close to the property and what’s the right survey because now I noticed down at the end of my street where it runs into Maple Bend now last year it wasn’t there but this year there’s a stake sticking about 12, 14” above the ground then it’s 14”, well it’s 14” high approximately and it’s painted orange and it was never there before.  Now is that supposed to be their story marker or what?  So what I’m saying I’m getting a fine for $500 and nobody can come up with the right survey and like I said when the house was built they were strict as can be, we had to have the septic tank checked out, had to have the house 6’ from the property line back then.  And I know I built the house.

President Stimmel asked, am I the only one that can’t remember this?

Director Weaver stated, and I apologize, I went and looked for the file and I can’t find the file.  I thought I had it here tonight.

President Stimmel asked, what was this fine on?

Director Weaver stated, built a 2 story shed too close to the property line.

Roger Wilson stated, but the shed was built exactly where it was before except I extended it 2’ and like I said my neighbors never had any problems with it until we got in a battle and then she had her property surveyed and then it comes up 32” from the property line.

President Stimmel asked, so this is the shed is the 20 x 20 shed, right?

Roger Wilson stated, no it’s an 8 x 10.

President Stimmel stated, it’s an 8 x 10.  Don’t see it on that survey.

Director Weaver stated, I apologize.

Roger Wilson stated, and the height is supposed to be no more then 17’ and I think it’s approximately 16’ high and like I said I built the shed 2’ closer towards the house so it did not move any closer towards the property line, and like I said the shed pretty much lines up with the edge of my house.

Dave Scott asked, okay but the shed is on your property…

Roger Wilson stated, yes.

Dave Scott stated, even with the survey, the discrepancies in the distance from the property line.

Roger Wilson stated, yes.  Because like I said that when we built the house we had to build it so far because there was a trailer sitting there and I forget what my parents wanted to build it but we had to go 13 ½’ is the widest we could go with it because then we were too close to the property line.

President Stimmel asked, so the drawing that you have us here on page 2…

Roger Wilson stated, that’s my parent’s house.

President Stimmel asked, okay your lot is which one?

Roger Wilson asked, pardon me?
President Stimmel asked, your lot is which one, which lot is yours?

Dave Scott asked, 88, 89, 90…

Roger Wilson stated, my lot is…

Dave Scott asked, 90 or 91?

Roger Wilson stated, 87.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

President Stimmel stated, not even on the picture then.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea it is.

Roger Wilson stated, the lot is my parent’s, that’s the survey that they had done when we built their 2 car garage.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right, okay.

Dave Scott stated, okay so, 2 lots down and here is…

Roger Wilson stated, yes.

Dave Scott asked, Diann do you have any thing you want to add to that or, did you issue the fine or did it come from the building department or…

Director Weaver stated, no we imposed the fine when we sent out the violation letter.

Dave Scott asked, okay and how did you find out he was in violation or?

Director Weaver stated, through the building department, Dave had been up there, um I think in conjunction with the fence maybe on the neighbor’s property.

Dave Scott asked, did he have an issue with the building outside of the fact that it was built in the wrong spot, I mean does it…

Director Weaver stated, no, no, not that I’m aware of.

Dave stated, okay, well I’m going to make a motion that we wave the fine and…

Charlie Mellon stated, I second it.

Dave Scott stated, as long as the thing is in fact on his property, when was this thing built anyway?
Roger Wilson asked, pardon me?

Director Weaver asked, when was this built?

Dave Scott asked, when was this shed built?

Roger Wilson asked, the shed built?

Dave Scott stated, yea.

Roger Wilson stated, uh, I finished it, it’s not completed I still got to side it and stuff but it was completed last November, almost a year ago, oh excuse me, 2 years ago.

Dave Scott asked, and we didn’t require a survey at that time before that permit did we?

Director Weaver stated, we only required a site plan, a hand drawing site plan was all and the site plan did show that he was meeting the 6’ setback.

Roger Wilson stated, and here’s the picture of the site plan, I think this is what your office gave me and like I said I don’t know where these measurements come from but on here if these measurements were correct…

President Stimmel stated, well I got to tell you my feeling is I’d rather, I don’t have any information, I mean…

Director Weaver stated, well and I apologize.

President Stimmel stated, I understand that but I mean I guess I’m saying that I don’t and I, if Mr. Wilson is mad as hell I would understand that but I would prefer to table it.

Dave Scott stated, until we get some more information.

President Stimmel stated, because I don’t think we have, we don’t have any information to base a decision on.

Roger Wilson stated, well see what I’m trying to say is that when she gave me this piece of paper there’s one thing you see from the property line to where the square is drawn on there it says 57’ well then from the back side towards the right a little bit you see a line that says 70’ to the edge of the house well my room addition is only 10 x 20 so I mean it’s going off 3’ on this whoever wrote these in and if you went by this like you said uh, as a matter of fact if you went by the 57’ by my screen porch, my property would run almost to the edge of their trailer.

President Stimmel stated, time out, okay here’s what I really think we ought to do, I think we ought to table it number 1 but number 2 I think we ought to encourage Mr. Wilson to sit down with Mr. Anderson and see if they can agree on a single print that makes sense you know either to this or one way or the other in the mean time, that’s all I’m saying I, right now I don’t think we have anything to deal with because I’m not making a decision on nothing.

Dave Scott stated, I’ll withdraw my motion.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.

Director Weaver stated, and I’ll try to find the file.

President Stimmel stated, all right, all right, okay.

Dave Scott stated, and make a motion to table it till next meeting I guess.

President Stimmel stated, okay, all right.

Gerald Cartmell stated, and him and Mr. Anderson meet and see if they can…

President Stimmel stated, well that’s just a recommendation. 

Gerald Cartmell stated, I think that’d be a good idea.

President Stimmel stated, I’d get with Dave Anderson and give him your story about how the surveys are different is what I would do quite frankly.

Roger Wilson stated, well see I had all ready confronted Dave about that.

President Stimmel stated, okay well maybe we’ll have information from him by the next time and we’ll be able to make some kind of sense out of this.

Roger Wilson stated, because matter of fact he’s the one who brought up how did my parents survey come up to mine.

President Stimmel stated, all right we’ve got a motion on the floor, second?

Dave Scott stated, I’ll second.

President Stimmel stated, second, all in favor of tabling this one say aye.

Board Members stated, aye.

President Stimmel stated, okay it’s tabled to next month, hopefully we’ll all have a little more information by that time.  I would recommend talking to Dave.  If you feel like you’ve already exhausted then you know we’ll just have to do something else.

Roger Wilson stated, well I called Dave on Monday and asked him if he could come out and I never got a reply yet so.

President Stimmel stated, you got a month now I’d be working at it you know what ever you can do to make your case that’s the only thing I’m saying you know if the, you know find a survey that you can agree on and that Dave agrees on and we’ll go from there.

Roger Wilson stated, okay.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Roger Wilson asked, so when is that tabled till?

Attorney Altman stated, the 20th.

Director Weaver stated, November 20th.

President Stimmel stated, the 20th of November.

Roger Wilson stated, November 20th, okay thank you.

****

President Stimmel stated, thank you sir appreciate your indulgence as well as the next 2.  What was on the table here?

Director Weaver stated, okay under business I am coming to you, we had a variance last month for Calvin and Patricia Belt, I don’t know if you recall that they were building a big garage and they were going to attach it to their existing mobile home.  Um, I, when they came in to apply for their building permit, I was not aware of the extent that this addition was going to be this, a garage and I no the problems we’ve run into before on some of these variances that things weren’t clear and I talked to them asking if I, if they’d wait bring this to you guys let you look at this because I want to make sure that everybody realized what this addition was prior to issuing their permit.  So I’ll just pass those around how’s that.  I think that staff report.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Director Weaver stated, so the staff reports on the other side.  Do you have anything you want to add?

Calvin Belt stated, well I brought a little model so you could see what it would look like because I’m thinking everybody’s looking at these pictures and it’s kind of home made.

President Stimmel stated, Charlie.

Calvin Belt stated, and uh, we had talked about a height and I didn’t mention the height because when they said when it was attached that it would be, and then they said it August they changed it to 19’ so from the road I figured this best way I could explain it.

President Stimmel stated, it’s pretty darn good.

Calvin Belt stated, now this is 20’ and it’s with storage and attic, it’s, starts out with a gamble style garage with a storage and attic.  I wanted to add the which is on the variance was, we had a 2 decks now and just put a brand new deck 12’ all the way through with covered and then here’s the mobile home she thinks I’m crazy because my garage is bigger than her, is what it looks like.

President Stimmel stated, I understand that totally.

Calvin Belt stated, it’s 12 x 24, you know I mean 24 x 32 and this is 12 and 12 and so I talked to the building inspector and we had originally, I had it drawn out which is scale and a quarter, 20’ to the top and as we did the talking he said I like trusses better then rafters, he said and 4/12 in this application came up to 21’ but we didn’t think nothing about it we just figured out the whole plan and he told me exactly what I have to do to be to code and I got all that on paper and everything so he said okay and then I’ll give you the permit and she called me and said there’s a problem, well she didn’t want me to start till I talked to you guys about it.

Director Weaver stated, I didn’t realize until, until I saw their plans that this was a 2 story.  I mean I had no idea, no concept that this was this large and I…

Patricia Belt stated, the attic was my idea.

Calvin Belt stated, yea.

Patricia Belt stated, he just wanted to have a big garage.

Director Weaver stated, wanted to make sure you guys had no problem with it.

Calvin Belt stated, I haven’t parked in my garage for 20 year ago, there’s furniture and everything else in there.

President Stimmel asked, was there a height variance that we approved?

Director Weaver stated, no, it was just setbacks.

President Stimmel stated, no, it’s just setbacks.

Director Weaver stated, and he doesn’t need a height variance.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Dave Scott stated, yea.

Charlie Mellon stated, that was the one that was on the back, your building on the back of your mobile home.

Director Weaver stated, and maybe I’m just being overly cautious.

Patricia Belt stated, the front.

Charlie Mellon stated, the front, yea that’s right.

Calvin Belt stated, it’s off to the side of the…

Patricia Belt stated, because we’re on a hill and we need it…

Charlie Mellon stated, yea I was out there.

Calvin Belt stated, it’s on the road, my setback the way it is and when they did the survey, I’m like about 6’ from the road before it starts from the setback and I mean you know from my property line and I measured from there to here is 26’ actually to the road.  Is how far it’s off the road because we had to get the variance for the mobile because it was to, they had built it closer to the road so that’s where the variance came in and when I first went about this part she said oh you got to get a variance because it’s grandfathered in, it was closer to the road.

Dave Scott stated, I see that.

Calvin Belt stated, anyway I don’t know if that helps but basically most of its back here and…

Patricia Belt stated, I asked for the attic in the house because we’re moving from a full size house to a mobile and I’ve got junk.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea.

Dave Scott stated, we all have junk.

Calvin Belt stated, the whole thing came about because I’ve got this hill and he knew about that he told me yea I’m way down this big hill and that’s how I brought…

Charlie Mellon stated, oh yea.

Calvin Belt stated, everything up.

Charlie Mellon stated, you couldn’t put enough fill back there.

Calvin Belt stated, no, I couldn’t…

President Stimmel stated, well I think it was well past…

Calvin Belt stated, 100 tons and so that’s…

President Stimmel stated, I don’t have a problem with it, I’m okay.

Director Weaver stated, like I said maybe I’m just being overly cautious but they were very cordial when I explained.

Patricia Belt stated, I’d rather know for sure before we started.

Calvin Belt stated, yea I wanted to know for sure.

Patricia Belt stated, I don’t want to wind up like…

Director Weaver stated, right I understand.

Calvin Belt stated, and I told her I can work with the height too…

Director Weaver stated, and I didn’t want you to.

Calvin Belt stated, in August they changed it to 19 on a stand alone building.

President Stimmel stated, right.

Calvin Belt stated, one lady told me that once it’s attached that was…

President Stimmel stated, 35’ then.

Calvin Stated, not a problem with that part so.

President Stimmel asked, builder?

Director Weaver stated, I thought it was easier to bring it to you before they built then have to say so.

President Stimmel asked, what do you think Charlie?

Patricia Belt stated, we appreciate that.

President Stimmel stated, okay.

Charlie Mellon stated, yea I think so.

President Stimmel stated, I do to, that’s just me.

Gerald Cartmell asked, the neighbors aren’t complaining are they?

Patricia Belt stated, oh no, we’ve talked to all of our neighbors and that’s fine.

President Stimmel stated, I’m so sorry you had to wait.

Patricia Belt stated, oh that’s okay, I understand.
President Stimmel stated, I sincerely apologize.

Patricia Belt stated, you guys had to wait to so thank you so much.

President Stimmel stated, thanks for being patient and nice model and I’m serious.

Calvin Belt stated, yea.

Patricia Belt stated, well you should see the big one.

President Stimmel asked, you got grandkids that…

Patricia Belt stated, oh yes we do.

President Stimmel stated, I got a grandson that would love one of those, I’ll have to think about that.  Any other business?

Director Weaver stated, the only other thing um, I did have the lady from Happy Tails stopped in the office the other day with a concern, she new that they entered into the commitment that they would have no more than 10 dogs and 10 cats, well after the fact I guess they got to thinking does that include if there’s a litter of cats or a litter of dogs.

Gerald Cartmell stated, 10 is 10.

President Stimmel stated, 10 is 10.

Director Weaver stated, 10 is 10, okay.

President Stimmel stated, 1 female and 9 babies.

Gerald Cartmell stated, they can’t handle them anyhow so, I mean I feel sorry for them but it’s never going to fly.  There’s just not enough money, they don’t have enough money, they’re not going to be able to raise enough.

President Stimmel stated, wow, they were working out there yesterday.

Gerald Cartmell stated, Doc Hites was just in a panic, he says they don’t realize how much money this is going to take.

President Stimmel stated, yea.

Gerald Cartmell stated, I tried to get a cash flow out of them and I’m not sure they ever heard of that word.

President Stimmel stated, I don’t think they’re that far along.

Director Weaver stated, that’s all I have.

President Stimmel stated, thank you.

Dave Scott made motion to adjourn.

Gerald Cartmell seconded the motion.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,




David Scott, Secretary




Diann Weaver, Director
White County Area Plan Commission












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.”

_________________________________________________