Get Adobe Flash player



The White County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

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

Visitors attending were:  Mitchell E. Billue, Don Lang – Burns Construction, Doug Haygood, Shawn Richards, Keith Hill, Charles Robinson, Michael Kesler, Jan Conwell, Martha Rockey, John Rockey, M. Wellman, Wilda Wellman, Steve Parrish, James C. Phillips, Pam Gibbs, Dean Cook, Paul J. Wiltjer, Bob Porte, Bob Gross, Terry Pickens, Joseph, Gilda Hickman, and Ben Woodhouse – Deputy.

The meeting was called to order by President David Stimmel and roll call was taken.        made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the minutes of the, November 20th, 2008 and also from October 16th and October 23rd meeting.  Motion was seconded by and carried unanimously.  Attorney Altman swore in all Board members and audience members. 

****

#2738     W. Dean & Marcia Cook; The property is located on 1.164 acres, Part NE NE 22-27-03, located East of State Road 39 on C.R. 175 North before C.R. 725 East.  Tabled from November 20, 2008.

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


****

#2779     N. J. Properties II, LLC; The property is located on proposed Lot 2 in Jordan Subdivision, located in the City of Monticello at 821 N. First Street.  Tabled from November 20, 2008.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 156’ lot width variance.


****

#2787     Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 16 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, located just North of C.R. 225 N at 2412 N. West Shafer Drive.

Violation:    The shed and deck were built larger than was approved by the previous variance and without permits.
Request:    He is requesting a 17’ front setback variance for a 12’ x 16’ shed with a 16’ x 16’ deck to bring them into compliance.


****

#2788     Pamela J. Gibbs; The property is located on Lot 15 in Green Acres Subdivision, located West of State Road 39 off of C.R. 1100 N. at 10944 N. Green Acres Court.

Violation:    None
Request:    She is requesting a 20’ rear setback variance to put a manufactured home on the property.


****

#2789     Charles M. Robinson; The property is located on 3.286 acres, Pt N SE & Pt S W NE 15-28-3, located South of Buffalo at 8513 N. State Road 39.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a 35’ rear setback variance and a 30’ south side setback variance to build a pole building as a primary structure.


****

#2790     James C. Phillips; The property is located on 11.391 acres, Out W/S SW SE 36-28-2, located on the Northwest corner of C.R. 1450 E. and C.R. 500 W. at 5025 N. 1450 E.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a 37’ front (C.R. 1450) setback variance to rebuild a home that burnt and put an addition on it.


****

#2791     Kenneth G. & Huldah L. Haygood Trust; The property is located on Lots 71 & 72 in O.P. of Hanna, located at 112 W. South Railroad Street in Idaville.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 20’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance and a 24’ front (Logan St.) setback variance to rebuild a home that burnt and add an addition.


****

#2792     John F. & Martha Rockey; The property is located on Lot 8 in Dolby Addition, located South of Lowes Bridge off of C.R. 400 N. at 3880 N. Dolby Court.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 23’ front setback variance and a 4’ North side setback variance to build a new house.


****

#2793     Shawn & Jacqueline Richards; The property is located on Lot 7 in Lake Breeze Subdivision, located North of Lowes Bridge at 5763 E. Bass Center Road.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting an 11’ front setback variance and a 2 ½’ West side setback variance and a 2’ East side setback variance to raise the existing home and add an addition to the East side.


****

#2794     Robert A. Porter & Paul J. Wiltjer; The property is located on Lot 17 in Lake View Subdivision, located South of Lowes Bridge, off of Lake Road 28 E at 4770 E. Lake Front Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting an 8’ East side setback variance and a 6’ rear setback variance to rebuild a cottage and add an addition.


****

Appeal #7     Pride Properties, LLC - Appellant; Appellants are appealing from a decision made by the Executive Director in interpreting Rules 4.5.2, 4.5.3 and 4.5 with regards to the Applicant’s request that Lot One (1) in Frank’s Wayside Lodge Subdivision, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, is a grandfather building lot and that a residence can be constructed on said lot.


****




Jerry Altman stated, this is a quasar judicial body, anybody giving the evidence or testimony this evening needs to be sworn in.  Would please stand and raise your right hand if you’re going to testify.

Do you and each of you do solemnly swear that all the evidence and testimony you give this evening be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but that?

All stated I do

Jerry Altman stated,  as an applicant you have an absolute right to table your request if you wish to do so.  You can do this up to two times.  After that it will be dismissed.  The board may table your request, they will sometimes do so  for what ever reason  but you have an absolute right to do that.  The one reason you can’t have tonight is waiting for extra board members as all the board members are here this evening.  Diann and I do not vote but it is a 5 person board and all 5 board members are here this evening so you have the array this evening.  Does anybody have any questions?  If you table your request you must do so before we begin voting. I think it will be very obvious when we are, if not, put your hand in the air and ask that question before you do so.  Could you remove your hats too please. Thank-you very much.   If someone wasn’t sworn in during the time here, we can swear you in later on.  It’s just easier and faster to do it all together, thank-you.



Commissioner stated, we have 11 variances tonight and were going to want to move them along so everybody gets there say.  We have the reading of the minutes.  We have minutes from the November 20th and also from October 16th and October 23rd.  Do I hear a motion to accept?

Commissioner stated, I’ll make that motion.

Commissioner stated, moved that we accept the November 20th and the October 16th and October 23rd .  Second?

Minutes were approved.

Commissioner stated, Variances number 2738  W. Dean and Marcia Cook, the property is located on 1.164 acres, pare NE, NE 22-27-03, located East of State Road 39 on C.R. 175 N before C.R. 725 East, tabled from November 20th 2008 meeting.  There is violation.  They are requesting a 54 foot front setback variance to build a new pole building.  Dean, anything new?

Dean stated, No, nothing new.

Commissioner stated,  anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the variance?   

A gentleman stated, I’m just still Opposing request just on the right of way issue.

Commissioner stated, ok, dully noted.  The board, Jerry any thoughts, questions?

Jerry Altman stated, not yet.

Commissioner stated, ok.  Gerald, any thoughts? Dave?

Dave stated, has anybody been able to establish the fact that the ride of way does go clear through to the property?

Commissioner stated, Dean, do you got any comment on that?

Dean Cook stated, no one as far as I know.

Commissioner stated, ok, Charlie anything?

Charlie stated, no

Commissioner stated, this here affidavit, that was just to make the legal description right, is that what that was all about?

Woman said, I believe so, um hum, um hum, the original legal description, it didn’t  close and I believe that was the correct address.

Commissioner stated, what do you think?

Commissioner stated,  I thought the point on this earlier was for them to comeback when they got the easement issue cleared up.

Commissioner stated, Dean, I think the easement issue is not going to be cleared up.

Dean Cook stated, well to my knowledge there is no easement issue.  I own what he calls the easement.

Commissioner stated, there is, because it is grown up right?  With trees and the whole nine yards.  So there is not anything that’s been an active easement or at least has been in use for quite sometime.

Commissioner stated, did anyone else feel that way or was I the only one who thought that?

Commissioner stated, no your right, that was the deal.

Commissioner stated, so have we gained anything?

Commissioner stated, I don’t think there was ever an easement recorded that I’m aware of and I think Dean…they’ve said that or stated that.

Commissioner stated, I understand that but I though that’s what we asked of them?

Jerry Altman stated, they were to come back and get the easement issue cleared up.  If  I’m wrong, I’m wrong.

Commissioner stated, it would have to be in the courts.

Diann Weaver stated, it would have to come from court to clear it up was what was discussed.  I think that’s what I recall.

Commissioner stated, that’s correct, however he can still go ahead and ask for_

Commissioner stated, even though that’s what the board asked him to do.

Commissioner stated, ok, ready to vote?

Commissioner stated, yea

Commissioner stated, announcing the results on petition 2738.  5 votes cast, 4 votes vote the variance is herby granted, 1 vote votes that the variance is denied.  The variance is granted.

Commissioner stated, you need to get a building permit before you begin building.

Dean Cook stated, ok, thank-you


#2779     N. J. Properties II, LLC; The property is located on proposed Lot 2 in Jordan Subdivision, located in the City of Monticello at 821 N. First Street.  Tabled from November 20, 2008.

Violation:    None

Commissioner stated, they are requesting a 156 foot with variance.

Bob Gross stated, Mitch Billue from the parks department is here.  This is Jordan Property, you guys can see that.  What we’re proposing is a two lot subdivision.  Lot 1 would be where the skate park and some other things are going to be.  Its 1.1 acres and this is almost 1.2 acres and the whole reason for the variance request is because of the odd configuration of this property.  We cannot achieve 200 feet of frontage for both lots, or 250 feet of frontage for both lots as required.

Commissioner stated, so this lot complies and this lot is 93 almost 94 feet of frontage.


Commissioner stated, so this came before the Area Plan did it not?

Diann Weaver stated, it went to the Area Plans commissions for the subdivision and they have given it primary approval contingent that this variance be grieved.

Commissioner stated, for the record, I just want to note that we do have a map similar to what engineer Gross, suggested testifying in front. The notes on file, it was received 10-27-08 and it bears surveyor’s certificate of Robert Wm. Gross, just for the record.

Commissioner stated, didn’t area plan say that if they sold lot number 2, they had to sell it with a…

Diann Weaver stated, they talked about it but they didn’t make that a contingent.

Commissioner stated, they didn’t make that?  I know we talked about it.

Diann Weaver stated, yea we talked about it.

Commissioner stated, the other thing was about the road.  Who owns the road?

Someone stated Jordan owns it.

Commissioner stated, yea Jordan owns it.  That’s a private road right now.

Diann Weaver stated, that was another contingency

Commissioner stated, yea they talked that the other night too.

Diann Weaver stated, that 3 feet dedicated to the public.

Commissioner stated, has the street been dedicated?

Commissioner stated, no not yet

Commissioner stated, but that is the plan.

Commissioner stated, ok, what about the railroad, now there was a request the other night about the railroad, the fact that some of that is abandoned right?  

Commissioner stated, it’s all abandoned?

Commissioner stated, but basically it’s not used.  It is no longer used.  The tracks are up except for just a little areas that are still there but a..a..the property is owned by the railroad in fee simple so they own that strip, at least today they do.

Commissioner stated, so this is going to go back to the area plan for secondary approval and they will put what ever commitments on there that they deem necessary if we…

Commissioner stated, they basically put those on already and that is that the dedication of First Street and that this variance be granted by this board as a condition on the approval of that subdivision.

Commissioner stated, right

Commissioner stated, I think those are the only two right Diann?

Diann Weaver stated, I believe so.

Gerald Cartmell stated, I know we had a long conversation and I’m just trying to recall what all was in that.

Diann Weaver stated, we had a long conversation and a lot of it was about it being joined to the property to the south but when it all came down to the vote, that was not made….

Commissioner stated, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against the variance?  
Commissioner stated, we are ready to vote.

Commissioner stated, the results of the balloting on petition #2779 again 5 votes were cast.  5 votes vote for granting the variance.  Variance  granted.


#2787     Terrence M. Pickens; The property is located on Lot 16 in White Point Hinshaw Addition, located just North of C.R. 225 N at 2412 N. West Shafer Drive.

Violation:    The shed and deck were built larger than was approved by the previous variance and without permits.
Request:    He is requesting a 17’ front setback variance for a 12’ x 16’ shed with a 16’ x 16’ deck to bring them into compliance.

Terry Pickens stated, I’m here to request that my variance be amended for the shed.  The deck was approved at 16x16 but the problem we ran into was access because of existing cement stairs.  We had to set the doorway 4 ft further back for accessibility.  I thought I had it right the first time so I had the surveyor come back out.  We ended up with a 12 x 16 instead of a 12 x 12.  I had Mr. Milligan redraw it.
Diann Weaver stated, we are showing that the shed is 12 x 16.

Terry Pickens stated, right it is now.  It was originally to be 12 x 12.

Diann Weaver stated, you are not amending your request as it is presented tonight, you are amending your request from what it was previously, correct?

Terry Pickens stated, correct

Commissioner stated, is the shed already built?

Terry Pickens stated, yes it is.

Commissioner stated, you put the cart before the horse.

Terry Pickens stated, I walked out of the office with permits in hand but when the carpenter called me and he had finished the job, actually there was no permit, it was overlooked.  I got there around closing time and picked up several permits.  The garage was suppose to be in there and what I paid for was everything but the shed permit.

Terry Pickens stated, I was responsible for getting the permits and I thought I had them in hand but what I had was a permit for the carport and the garages.  I set them on the table and I had a family emergency and had to leave town.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody who wants to speak for or against this variance?

Commissioner stated, we have seen Mr. Pickens in here several times and we are pushing the limits here.

Terry Pickens stated, I’m sorry for my mistake. 

Commissioner stated, I don’t see any hardship other than what’s been imposed by yourself.
That’s just my opinion.

Commissioner stated, ready to vote.

Commissioner stated, #2787  there were 5 votes cast, 2 votes in favor of the variance 3 votes to deny the variance.  The variance is denied.

Commissioner stated, we will address the violation now, the fact that the shed and deck were built larger than what was approved by the previous variance and without permits.

Terry Pickens stated, I think the deck was built according to the allowed dimensions.  The problem was with the shed not having a door that would be accessible.

Diann Weaver stated, that’s true.
Commissioner stated, the shed was the only issue.

Commissioner stated, how long has this been completed?

Terry Pickens stated, since the last meeting,

Commissioner stated, did he bring this to our attention?

Terry Pickens stated, I did, I turned myself in. When I saw the end result, I immediately called.

Commissioner stated, when was it built?

Terry Pickens stated, maybe 60 days.

Commissioner stated, what if we give him 60 days to bring it into compliance?  I would be in favor of waving any fines.

Terry Pickens stated, I don’t see any way to bring it into compliance.

Commissioner stated, you take it off.

Commissioner stated, this hardship was imposed by you not by us.

Terry Pickens stated, can I agree to a fine?

Commissioner stated, the fine is not going to make the building in compliance.  That’s not what it is intended to do.

Terry Pickens stated, ok

Commissioner stated, motion was made to give him 6 months to get it into compliance and not use the building.  If he does that we will wave all fines associated with this.

Commissioner stated, if he doesn’t bring it into compliance then the next option for us is law suit to have it removed.

Commissioner stated, so what your saying is the motion is to give him 6 months to be in compliance and table the issue as to the fine.

Commissioner stated, that is correct

Commissioner stated, He reports to us.

Commissioner stated, motion was made, vote was 4 yes 1 opposed.                                                                                 

#2788     Pamela J. Gibbs; The property is located on Lot 15 in Green Acres Subdivision, located West of State Road 39 off of C.R. 1100 N. at 10944 N. Green Acres Court.

Violation:    None
Request:    She is requesting a 20’ rear setback variance to put a manufactured home on the property.



Diann Weaver stated, I just want to clarify to the board that this subdivision was platted with different setbacks than what we are normally accustomed to.  The front is 50 feet, the rear is 80 feet and the sides 20 feet for each.  Mrs. Gibbs came in and picked her permit.  Her site plan indicated that she thought she could meet her setbacks.  They pulled the home in and started to work.  They realized they could not meet the setbacks.  She did stop and contacted me and let me know what was going on and she filed for variance.

Commissioner stated, did you tear down an old house?

Pamela Gibbs stated, there was a mobile home sitting there and I lost it due to storms.  I am just replacing it with a modular.  Its going right back in the same spot only its just wider.

Diann Weaver stated, we’ve had some neighbors call just to say that the home was there but I was already aware of that because she had contacted me.

Commissioner stated, what year mobile home are you moving in there?

Pamela Gibbs stated, it’s a 1996 modular

Commissioner stated, what was the purpose for the setbacks being different?

Diann Weaver stated, I can’t tell you that.  It was done years ago.  1978 was when this was plotted.  I think the setbacks across the road from her are different yet.  I think they are deeper lots.

Commissioner stated, did any of the neighbors have a problem with the fact she was not going to meet setbacks?

Diann Weaver, not that I recall

Commissioner stated, it seems like they set the trailer originally on there out of compliance.

Pamela Gibbs, to be honest with you there is not a place out there that is 80 feet off the back of that property line.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody who has any comments for or against the variance?

Commissioner stated, we are ready to vote.
Commissioner stated, announcing the results of  petition #2788 5 votes were cast,  5 votes vote that the variance is herby granted.  You need to get your building permit consistent with the variance.




#2789     Charles M. Robinson; The property is located on 3.286 acres, Pt N SE & Pt S W NE 15-28-3, located South of Buffalo at 8513 N. State Road 39.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a 35’ rear setback variance and a 30’ south side setback variance to build a pole building as a primary structure

Charles Robinson stated, I plan to put a home on it later.  It depends on the economy.

Commissioner stated, the reason for not being able to meet the setbacks is?

Charles Robinson stated, they changed it on me.  When I first inquired about the permit, it was supposed to be 5 feet from the property lines.  I went and cleared the property.  I came back and asked to get a permit and then he told me in August they changed all the variances.

Diann Weaver stated, that’s because of the change of the new ordinance.  Under the old ordinance it would have been looked at as an accessory structure.

Charles Robinsons stated, I will have to do more clearing if I have to go with the 50 feet and I already have a considerable amount of money wrapped up in clearing it already.

Commissioner stated, how tall is your building?

Charles Robinson stated, 18 foot tall

Commissioner stated, The plans for the use of this building are for what Mr. Robinson?

Charles Robinson stated, for storage

Commissioner stated, I would be willing to consider this if he would meet the setbacks of the new ordinance for an accessory building. I would just write in to the permit that it needs to be what ever the height of the building is, it needs to be that far off the property line.  That way if we don’t put a footage on it, if he decides to build a 25 foot instead of a 20 foot, he is still going to have to be the distance from the property line.

Diann Weaver stated, do you understand what he is trying to say?

Charles Robinson stated, no not really.

Diann Weaver stated, he is saying he would be more willing to grant the variance if you would be willing to match the setback requirements on the side and rear for an accessory building under the new ordinance which means it has to match the height of the building.

Charles Robinson stated, that means I would have to go 20 feet all the way around instead of 15.

Commissioner stated, yes

Charles Robinson stated, I already have the plot surveyed in because I was asked to do this after I came back in September.

Commissioner stated, you are required to do that but they are not required to vote for it.

Charles Robinson stated, I understand that.  Did you get my letter?  I sent a letter to area plan.

Commissioner stated, yes we got it.

Don Lang stated, I’m the building contractor that sold the building to Mr. Robinson.  Just to clarify and I think you understand it but his intension was originally was to do the building and he went to see what the building code was and so he hired an excavator to do so and they did that.  When he went down he got caught in between the change.  His intension wasn’t wrong so when he came down to get the building permit, things had changed but he has already invested the money and that is why he is asking for that variance.  I think you understand that but I just thought I would clarify a little more, his intension wasn’t wrong to do it.

Commissioner stated, he is building a pole barn here?

Don Lange stated, yes

Commissioner stated, what is the extent of the excavation that has been done so far?

Don Lang stated, nothing to the building, just for the pad.  He had trees cleared out and dirt brought in to build a pad for the 40 x 60 building.  That’s where his predicament is.  He has the pad cleared where the building is supposed to sit.  It’s all level, he has already paid an excavator to do that, then when he went to get the permit, he didn’t know they were changing the code and that is how he got caught in between.  I just want you to understand that. 


Commissioner stated, I wish I had an idea of the cost to you to make this thing meet the setbacks that I talked about, the 20 feet because we just got a new ordinance in place and here we are.  You have 3 acres here and we are making an exception.

Charles Robinson stated, I will have to spend probably another $600.00 or $700.00 dollars to have some more trees removed.  It was in the woods.  I would have to have more fill put in.  It would probably be another 5 or 6 hundred dollars so we are talking at least another thousand dollars more than what I’ve already spent.  When I had them build this pad, I thought it was 5 feet.  I did a lot of the tree removal myself, that’s why it took so long.  Mr. Lang couldn’t get at it until the end of September anyway so I cleared a lot of the trees my self.  I didn’t take the stumps out.

Commissioner stated, are you related to the guy that owns the brick house?

Charles Robinson stated, no

Commissioner stated, are you going to make a driveway in off the lane to get into that pole barn?

Charles Robinson stated, there is one already.  Where the old house trailer was at when I bought the property.  There was two house trailers there.  Its right across the street from the house on the east side.

Commissioner stated, so we are talking about 5 feet of additional excavation is what your saying?

Charles Robinson stated, no, I’ll have to move the whole building over 5 feet.  Then I will have those trees right in the side of my building.  I would have to go more than that.  I have to move it to the west.  I have plenty of room for that, I have 280 feet.

Commissioner stated, motion made for him to meet the setbacks of an accessory building in the new ordinance which is the distance of the height of the building off the property line.

Commissioner stated, second

Motion carried

Commissioner stated, we are ready to vote.

Commissioner stated, the voting is based on the fact that you are going to comply with the accessory building ordinance.

Charles Robinson stated, the height of the building is going to be 18 feet so that means I have to be 18 feet off?

Commissioner stated, yes those are the conditions we are voting on.

Charles Robinson stated, ok

Commissioner stated, this petition has been modified by vote and order of this body and conditioning the application meeting the setbacks of the new ordinance for an accessory building.  Based upon that, the petition has been voted on 5 votes were cast and 5 votes vote to grant the variance as modified.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

Charles Robinson stated, ok, I understand that.  I have one more question, since I had this surveyed, can I just measure 3 feet farther to the west without having to have it surveyed again?

Commissioner stated, make sure your right because if the building inspector comes out and its not he will stop you.

#2790     James C. Phillips; The property is located on 11.391 acres, Out W/S SW SE 36-28-2, located on the Northwest corner of C.R. 1450 E. and C.R. 500 W. at 5025 N. 1450 E.

Violation:    None
Request:    He is requesting a 37’ front (C.R. 1450) setback variance to rebuild a home that burnt and put an addition on it.

James C. Phillips stated, that is actually on the Northeast corner of those roads, not the Northwest corner.

Commissioner stated, Correct

Commissioner stated, all your wanting to do is extend your porch, right, the porch that’s there.  All you want to add is the rest of that porch to cover the side of the house.

James Phillips stated, no its actually on the back side of the house where the addition is going to be.

Commissioner stated, well the addition we don’t have anything to do with because you’re alright there but your porch is going to be extended to the south on the west side of the house right?

James Phillips stated, yes that’s right.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against the variance?

Commissioner stated, we are ready to vote

Commissioner stated, results for petition # 2790 5 votes were cast, 5 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

Tim Q stated, I’m with  T & T builders working for Mr. Phillips, do you want a copy of our insurance and plumbers license when we come in for the permit?

Diann Weaver stated, that is handled through the building department and no I don’t believe they require that.




#2791     Kenneth G. & Huldah L. Haygood Trust; The property is located on Lots 71 & 72 in O.P. of Hanna, located at 112 W. South Railroad Street in Idaville.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 20’ front (Railroad St.) setback variance and a 24’ front (Logan St.) setback variance to rebuild a home that burnt and add an addition.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody in the audience who has anything to say for or against this variance?

Commissioner stated, are you going to follow the existing line of the house north and south?

Doug Haygood & Dean Mote stated, yes, that is correct

Commissioner stated, who is your builder guys?

Dean Mote stated, actually I talked to Vern Criswell and Leigh Miller on this.  Like I say its on contingency of the variance on buying the property.

Commissioner stated, how long ago did the property burn?

Citizen stated, end of July.  Just mainly the back small area 18 x 12 foot.  It was contained in the kitchen and then it went upstairs into the attic area but that would all be replaced with the addition put on it.

Commissioner stated, you understand that if his variance is granted that lot number 71 and 72 would essentially be married together and you could not sell any part of them.

Citizen stated, yes, correct

Commissioner stated, we are ready to vote

Commissioner stated, results for petition # 2791, there were 5 votes cast. 5 votes vote that the variance is herby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

Citizen stated, On removing the contents on the inside, is there a permit that I have to have for that?

Commissioner stated, you need to contact the building department to check on that.

Citizen stated, ok


#2792     John F. & Martha Rockey; The property is located on Lot 8 in Dolby Addition, located South of Lowes Bridge off of C.R. 400 N. at 3880 N. Dolby Court.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting a 23’ front setback variance and a 4’ North side setback variance to build a new house.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against the variance?

Jan Conwell stated, I live directly on the north side of this proposed home.  There are 19 homes on Dolby Court and I don’t think one of them would meet your setback variances, those lots are pretty small.  We’ve been next door to that house for almost 30 years and it is going to be farther away from me than the existing house.

Commissioner stated, what about the one on the other side?

Jan Conwell stated, they have no problem with it either.  I have been in contact with them.

Commissioner stated, is that kind of a log house?

Jan Conwell stated, yes

Commissioner stated, how far off is the existing house from the property line?

Commissioners stated 3 feet, not very much.

Commissioner stated, so this is going to be 6 feet is what you are saying.

Citizen stated, we’ve narrowed the house up a foot to what we were originally going to do and moved the house as far toward the Booth property south as we could but the well is right there.  We are going to be about 2 feet from the well. We don’t want to be any closer.

Commissioner stated, yea we saw that.

Commissioner stated, ready to vote

Commissioner stated, results for petition #2792, there were 5 votes cast.  5 votes vote that the variance is hereby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.


2793     Shawn & Jacqueline Richards; The property is located on Lot 7 in Lake Breeze Subdivision, located North of Lowes Bridge at 5763 E. Bass Center Road.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting an 11’ front setback variance and a 2 ½’ West side setback variance and a 2’ East side setback variance to raise the existing home and add an addition to the East side.

Shawn Richards stated, there is one correction.  It is only 2 feet not 2 ½ feet on the left side. 

Commissioner stated,  he doesn’t even need the side, all you need is a front variance.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against the variance?

Mike Kesler stated, I’ with Extreme Contractors.  Milligan had a couple of drawing going around when we got started.  Do you mind if I see the drawing that you have to make sure its right.  The first one he had for us was not correct. See he has 7 foot 5


Commissioner stated, 7 foot 5 and 8 foot that is what we see.

Mike Kesler stated, we went back and forth on this easement side, 4 feet.

Shawn Richards stated, that was originally there when I purchased the home of 4 feet on the west side.

Commissioner stated, what is the east side then? 

Shawn Richards stated, currently now? Well what I’m asking for would be 8 here and the existing 4 here but 8 on this side as opposed to the 10.

Commissioner stated, so its 4 foot west side and the east side is 11 foot 7.

Commissioner stated he does need the variance because he does not meet the total.

Mike Kesler stated, were not compliant on the 4 foot side so if were going to do the variance we might as well make sure we get it right.

Shawn Richards stated, we say the 7 ½  last minute and we weren’t sure but the original I bought when I bought the house and the way it looks by measuring it is that 4 feet.

Commissioner stated, we have to go with the last survey

Shawn Richards stated, That was just a copy when I bought the home with the original survey.  I had is done when I purchased the home, from Milligan 3 years ago.

Commissioner stated, are you going to start construction on this right away?

Mike Kesler stated, we’ve got the house elevated and we are waiting on you folks to dig the footings for the addition and grant the variances before we go any further.  We have the flood plane permit, we know how high to raise it. 

Shawn Richards stated, I would rather go with the 4 and just have that established as opposed to the new one.  Then I know there is more than enough there.  If you go out there and visualize it, it appears to be as opposed to 7 ½.

Commissioner stated, did you find your corners.

Shawn Richards stated, he did, I was there when he found it.

Commissioner stated, stay in line with the existing house on the west side.

Commissioner stated, that would get your foundation right.

Mike Kesler stated, were not traveling north or south.  We are going straight up with a 12 foot     out the east side.

Commissioner stated, all you need is a front setback from the river.

Shawn Richards stated, Milligan did find the ground stakes.  They are exposed now.

Mike Kesler stated, in the event that we find that that is a 4 foot setback, then should we reapply for a variance?  It’s going to slow this thing down even more for a guy that’s already been through enough.

Commissioner stated, well its my opinion that if goes straight up with the existing house, because he might go out there and find the pin and how many times have we gone out there and there have been 2 or 3 pins in different places.  I say stay in line with the existing house.  That’s my opinion.  It’s already existing anyway.

Mike Kesler stated, correct.

Commissioner stated, just stay in line with that side of the house and make sure you come out 12 foot and you’re good.

Commissioner stated, for the record that there is some discrepancy and if he stays in line with the existing house that he won’t be penalized with that.

Commissioner stated, results for petition #2793 5 votes cast. 5 votes vote the variance is herby granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.



#2794     Robert A. Porter & Paul J. Wiltjer; The property is located on Lot 17 in Lake View Subdivision, located South of Lowes Bridge, off of Lake Road 28 E at 4770 E. Lake Front Drive.

Violation:    None
Request:    They are requesting an 8’ East side setback variance and a 6’ rear setback
variance to rebuild a cottage and add an addition.

Commissioner stated, is there anything you want to add to that gentleman?

Citizen stated, question in the 8 foot east side.  I thought our survey showed 4.1 with the existing building there.

Commissioner stated, are you tearing down that building?

Citizen stated, no

Commissioner stated, just building on top of it?

Citizen stated, yes and fixing the retaining wall that caved in.

Commissioner stated, is there anybody here wanting to speak for or against the variance?

Commissioner stated, you changed your garage from 24 x 24 to 20 x 22.

Citizen stated, there wasn’t no garage there.

Commissioner stated, I know but you changed your plan here evidently because this says 20 x 22 and here it says 24 x 24.  “We would also like to put a 24 x 24 foot attached garage.

Citizen stated, oh that was my letter?

Commissioner stated, yea

Citizen stated, we are going with a 20 x 22

Commissioner stated, ready to vote

Commissioner stated, results of petition #2794, there were 5 votes cast and 4 votes that the variance is granted, 1 vote that the variance is denied.  The variance is granted.  You need to get a building permit before you proceed.

Appeal #7     Pride Properties, LLC - Appellant; Appellants are appealing from a decision made by the Executive Director in interpreting Rules 4.5.2, 4.5.3 and 4.5 with regards to the Applicant’s request that Lot One (1) in Frank’s Wayside Lodge Subdivision, Liberty Township, White County, Indiana, is a grandfather building lot and that a residence can be constructed on said lot.


Terry Smith stated, I am an attorney here in Monticello.  I represent Pride Properties.  Let me just give you my spiel.

Commissioner stated, I would like to be honest with you Terry that I have not had time to review this as much as I would like and there seem to be some issues that quite frankly that I need to look at harder and I have not had time to do it.  Is everyone else ok with proceeding with this or no?

Commissioner stated, I don’t oppose Mr. Smith giving us the spiel.  I think we have Diann’s information.  I’m just telling you from my personal perspective where I’m at with this.

Terry Smith stated, here is historically what I think has happened.  Pride Properties went to Diann and Dave and requesting….well lets go back even further.  Initially they came before this board and requested a variance for lot 1 and some additional land.  That variance was not approved by a 3 to 2 vote.  They came back and asked for a building permit for lot 1 in Franks Wayside.  The building permit is prefaced upon complying with the existing setback requirements but under the new zoning ordinance, we don’t have enough square footage for that lot.  My legal position is…is that it is a grandfathered lot and if we can meet the setback requirements then we should be able to get the building permit.  Diann orally told Pride Properties that she believed that under 4.5.2 since they own lots 1 and 2, it’s a contiguous ownership, therefore you cannot build…there is a building on lot 2 at the existing time…you can’t build on lot 1 and obviously if we transfer the lot to somebody else we would lose any grandfather status so that doesn’t work.  I think that’s a misinterpretation under this factual situation legally because 4.5.2 states it has to be continuous frontage.  Frontage under the ordinance is defined as that portion of the property that abuts a road.  In this particular case lot 2 abuts a public road, lot 1 does not.  If you can look at the survey, lot 1 shows a platted roadway.  That roadway has been vacated therefore lot 1 does not abut any road therefore we can’t have contiguous ownership of frontage.  That’s my legal argument and I think I’m right be that as it may.  From a practical standpoint, I’m going to ask you if you haven’t been asked yet as a board to consider this.  This zoning ordinance has come into effect. A hypothetical if I had been a developer and I had 10 1 acre lots which I subdivided with everyone’s approval prior to the enactment of this ordinance and I’m not serviced by sanitary sewer.  It’s my reading of the ordinance that I now have to have 3 acre lots to comply and get a building permit.  If I still own all the lots, I have continuous ownership and I can’t believe that’s the intent, I would then no longer be able to build on any of those lots under this ordinance.  There is another and it’s not hypothetical, I know there was a hundred foot lake lot subdivided properly before the enactment of this ordinance into two 50 foot building lots, same owner.  If that person would now come before whoever and say may I have a building permit?  I think you can get one building permit but I don’t think you can get if we apply the ordinance as Diann has orally advised us.  My position is that lot 1 is a separate lot that….Franks wayside was platted in 1923.  a portion of lot was sold off in 1960 before there was any zoning in Liberty township.  When Liberty opted in, I believe what remained of lot 1 was grandfathered and I believe that it is now grandfathered again as long as they can meet the setback requirements.  We don’t meet the square footage requirements and we never will but I think it’s grandfathered and I don’t believe that just because the same individual owns both lots that they should be prohibited from constructing a house on lot 1.  That’s our position.

Commissioner stated, do you have any questions,

Commissioner stated, is this zoned L or is it an R zoning.

Terry Smith stated, I think it’s L-1

Commissioner stated, so the front would actually be the front side instead of the roadside, is that correct?

Terry Smith stated, I don’t see that in here. The only frontage in this ordinance talks about road frontage.

Diann Weaver stated, what I’m told is that it is up to our interpretation.  

Commissioner stated, make a note that we need to straighten that out.

Diann Weaver stated, I did talk to ______ about this because I questioned this when I discovered this in the ordinance to make sure that I was in understanding of what I thought I was reading correctly and really she agreed with me and she agrees that when a subdivision, even though it’s been properly subdivided, if it is not meeting current standard that they…..

Terry Smith stated, because that’s the current property owners so theoretically and I know there is a subdivision in White County guys and it was party of a law suit for 3 or 4 years and I think that she will be the developer still owns all the lots.  She under this interpretation would be precluded from building anything.  She can build one house, she can build her house or one house.  I’m not sure that’s intent.

Commissioner stated, Mr. Smith are your clients ready to build now?  What’s the time frame?

Terry Smith stated, no

Commissioner stated, I’m going to make a motion that we table this thing.

Terry Smith stated, if I could if there is going to be a legal response could I be privy and receive a copy so that I would have the opportunity to….

Commissioner stated, you bet.

Commissioner stated, we have a motion on the floor to table this.

Commissioner stated, second

Commissioner stated, tabled until January 15, 2009

Commissioner stated, the next meeting will be January 15, 2009



made motion to adjourn.

seconded the motion.

The meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,




David Scott, Secretary




Joseph W. Rogers, 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.”

_________________________________________________