BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

Regular Meeting
March 19, 2003

M I N U T E S

The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals was held on March 19, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Porter County Administration Center, 155 Indiana Avenue, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Those members present were Marvin Brickner, Richard Burns, Richard Hudson, and Robert Detert. Staff members present were Stephen P. Nigro, Attorney Lily Schaefer and Toni Byers.

Mr. Burns moved to waive reading of the minutes for the meeting of February 19, 2003 and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Brickner seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Pending Business:

Case 93-UV-2. Richard E. Stahl, 290 S. 725 W., Hebron, seeking a renewal of a Use Variance permitting an art studio on the West side of CR 725 W., between CR 275 S. and CR 350 S., in Porter Township. (This is the last renewal available on this Use Variance.)

Mr. Stahl stated that he would like a Permanent Use Variance for this business. He stated that he has been operating for 10 years without any complaints. He stated that he keeps the property clean and has trees for a buffer zone and he's helped the community in the last 10 years. He stated that he has donated a sculpture to Porter-Lakes School, a memorial for the Hebron park service and also a bench for the Boone Grove Middle School.

Mr. Burns stated that he made a comment that he is asking for a permanent use variance.

Mr. Stahl stated that it was his understanding…

Mr. Burns stated that he is here for an extension of the use variance.

Mr. Stahl stated that he would like a permanent use variance.

Mr. Detert stated that he can't do that. He stated that he would have to file differently for that. He stated that he is here for a renewal of the use variance.

Mr. Stahl asked what he does in the next 5 years.

Mr. Detert stated that he can go back and get another use variance for another 15 years, or he could file for a permanent use variance.

Mr. Stahl stated, but I have to wait another 5 years to do that.

Mr. Detert stated that he guesses he could file any time for a permanent use variance, but, what's up tonight is an extension of the existing use variance, but that's a different procedure, so he needs to file differently for it.

Mr. Brickner stated that if we approve this tonight, he has 5 years without doing anything, so he would just wait if he were him.

Mr. Detert stated that that's what he would suggest.

Mr. Stahl stated that then he would like to extend it for 5 years.

Mr. Burns asked if there have been any complaints.

Mr. Nigro stated that there have been zero complaints on this.

Mr. Detert asked what the circumstances were of the original.

Mr. Nigro stated that he does not believe that a sign was included. He stated that he does not have a copy of the original minutes in the file.

Mr. Brickner asked if he does have a sign.

Mr. Stahl stated that it's a very unobtrusive sign and it's well located off the road, 3 by 5 feet.

Mr. Brickner stated that he's not really allowed a sign in a residential area.

Mr. Stahl stated that he was told, when he asked about a sign after the first five years that as long as it was 50 feet off the road it was okay.

Mr. Detert stated that there is no record of that.

Mr. Stahl asked if he is telling him that his sign is illegal.

Mr. Detert stated, yeah, at this point it's illegal. He stated that he needs to request a sign. He stated that this Board can grant you the ability to have a sign.

Mr. Stahl asked if he could request a sign.

Mr. Detert stated that he could do it at this time.

Mr. Stahl stated that he would like to request a sign then.

Mr. Detert stated that it's not obtrusive. He stated that he goes by that way and…

Mr. Stahl stated that if you went by and you didn't know I was there, you wouldn't know I was there.

Mr. Burns stated that he has no problem with his business. He stated that the sign, we've been kind of strict on the signs.

Mr. Brickner stated that he would rather not approve the sign.

Mr. Burns moved to approve Case 93-UV-2 for five years, without a sign. Mr. Brickner seconded the motion, which carried on a 4-0 roll call vote.

Case 80-V-3. John Dille Jr., 240 E. U.S. Hwy 6, Valparaiso, seeking an extension of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for a mobile home at 240 E. U.S. Hwy 6, between SR 49 and Mander Road, in Jackson Township.

Mr. Nigro stated that there has been no correspondence from the petitioner regarding this matter.

Mr. Hudson moved to continue Case 80-V-3 to the 4-16-03 meeting, with staff to send the petitioner a certified letter. Mr. Brickner seconded the motion, which carried on a 4-0 voice vote.

Case 86-V-9. Frank Wheeler, 3 N. 575 E., Valparaiso, seeking an extension of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for a mobile home at 3 N. 575 E., between CR 575 E. and County Line Road, in Washington Township.

Mr. Nigro read a letter from the petitioner stating that the mother who had occupied the trailer had died and asking for an extension for the permit so that they might sell the mobile home and move it off their property.

Mr. Hudson moved to approve Case 86-V-9 for 6 months. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on a 4-0 roll call vote.

Case 03-V-6. Petition of Timothy A. Jones, 179 S. 75 E., Valparaiso, seeking a Variance to permit construction of a pole barn in the front yard and, if approved, to reduce the minimum required front-yard building setback from 60 feet to 45 feet, to be located on the Northeast corner of CR 75 E. and Lamplight Lane, in Morgan Township. (This case was tabled at the 2-19-03 meeting for more information and the petitioner has asked that it be put on tonight's agenda. The public hearing is closed.)

Mr. Jones stated that I would like to ask if I could have a person speak on my behalf and I think it will be important in the decision that you have to make as the previous owner.

Mr. Detert stated that the public hearing is closed and those have had an opportunity… been given an opportunity.. to speak was at the last meeting. He stated that if the Board wants to recognize somebody, they can.

Mr. Jones asked, may I have a person speak on my behalf? He stated that this person has owned the property when the subdivision came through.

Mr. Hudson stated, Mr. Chairman, before I consider recognizing this person, I think when we tabled this at the last meeting there were supposed to be some things that were brought back to us as…I believe information from the Health Department possibly, location of the septic field, issues like that. He stated that I guess that I'd like to hear that first.

Mr. Detert asked, do you have that information?

Mr. Jones stated, yessir, I do. He stated that I got another survey from Don Bengel and I turned the paperwork in. He stated that it should be in your packets and it does have my septic field located on my survey and I have a letter from the Health Department, and, um, as you can see it says that they don't recommend moving it any closer to my septic because if you, if your septic system fails, you have to have a set-over area. He stated that you cannot put your septic in the same place that it already was at.

Mr. Detert asked, would you pass that letter to the Board so that we can read it?

Mr. Hudson asked, is the well in the front of the house?

Mr. Jones stated, yessir, it is. He stated that the well is facing 75 E.

Mr. Hudson asked, is it between 75 E. and the front of your house, or is it to the South, like closer to this new road?

Mr. Jones stated that it is between 75 E. and my house.

Mr. Brickner asked, your driveway actually goes between your house and the existing pole barn, right?

Mr. Jones stated, yes.

Mr. Brickner stated that it comes out 75 and goes straight back…

Mr. Jones stated, yessir. He stated that I would also like to say that I recently found out from the previous owner - I've had a hard time tracking him down - I've also found out that I have a drain tile and I do not have this on the survey - I just found it out recently that I have a drain tile around my house and the drain tile exits, completely going behind my house to the end of my property for the natural flow and that's also there with the septic.

Mr. Detert stated that it would appear to me - I went out this afternoon and looked at this again - it would appear to me, I talked to our building commissioner, and he said there's enough room that screening could be planted between the road and his pole barn, which might help alleviate the situation, just a suggestion.

Mr. Jones stated, and I'm willing to do that. He stated that I talked to the property owner, Judy Aragon, and, uh, she, when I talked to her and contacted her, uh, we spoke briefly. He stated that she had plans that she was getting ready to do, and she said that she would call me back, and I didn't get a phone call. He stated that I was asking her about, um, how we could work something out between my property and the subdivision, and, uh, one of her main concerns was me accessing her road, I guess that was a major concern. He stated that she was afraid where I put my barn at that I was gonna put a driveway into her subdivision and I talked to her a little bit and she said that she was going to be talking to neighbors that owned the lots in the subdivision and get back a hold of me, and I never received another phone call from her. He stated that I'm willing to work with them, make screening for it. He stated that I have here some pictures -- a friend of mine - just, for instance - I don't know if it has any bearing, told me about the big pole barn/utility shed that they have at Aberdeen. He stated that a big concern is that they're talking about how I depreciate property values, and, uh, if the Board would like to see them, I have a bunch or pictures that I stopped by and took at Aberdeen and, uh, I was seeing what they did to put up to where the building is not as noticeable and, basically, the only thing they are doing is they are building a tall berm, completely around it.

Mr. Detert stated that you don't have the room for that.

Mr. Jones stated, nossir. He stated, but I am willing to…

Mr. Detert stated, it would seem to me on my visit that the most unsightly part is there is a brand-new house right across from his pole barn and every time they look out their window or drive out their driveway, they see his pole barn and that would be pretty obtrusive, but I would think it could be screened in some manner.

Mr. Brickner stated that we have two problems here: First of all, it's in the front yard. He stated that he already built it, which is…but he built it in the front yard, and he's also violated the setback. He stated that we really can't do much about the front yard thing - he could possibly move it back enough to get within the setback and not interfere with the septic field if he moved it back to the North, he could get away from the setback violation, but still be in the front yard, and so we have to…

Mr. Detert stated that he's only in the front yard because he has a side street, which he didn't show on his sketch, which he said we didn't ask him to show it. He stated that I guess this case is typical - and I can't say it enough times, when you do something like this, you need to get a surveyor. He stated that the small price of a surveyor - which I understand is around $300 - would save all this aggravation. He stated that I just say it for the audience's sake. He stated, better be safe than sorry. He stated that it's not mandatory by us, but I highly recommend that when you build something, you get a surveyor and have it staked out.

Mr. Burns stated that I'm like Marv. He stated, I still have a problem with it being in the front yard and the setback.

Mr. Brickner stated, we have so many of the people in that area are really upset about it, and it really is obtrusive when you come, you know, if you live across the street and you have to look at that pole barn and it's set right on the edge of the street. He stated, to me…I feel extremely sorry for Mr. Jones, but, to me, it's the wrong place for a pole barn.

Mr. Hudson stated, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones alluded to either some testimony or letters or something…he started to say and we kind of got sidetracked from…did you say the prior owner or something like that?

Mr. Jones stated, yes, I did.

Mr. Hudson asked, is it verbal or written or what?

Mr. Jones stated that there is (sic) two private (sic) owners and when the property went up for sale between the two owners is right in the time of the subdivision and so I had a letter which I turned in from one owner - she could not make it - she lives in Arizona now and the other owner is present, but, um, it's on the fact that, um, it seemed to be..the issue has came (sic) up that I did not own the property when the subdivision came in, and, I, um, contacted the previous owners, and they know nothing about how this restricted the use of my land, and I would like to have one speak on behalf of that, if that's all right.

Mr. Hudson asked, you're asking if he could speak?

Mr. Jones stated, yes.

Mr. Hudson asked, he's here tonight?

Mr. Jones stated, yes, he is.

Mr. Detert stated, if we do this, we're opening up the public hearing and there are letters here that need to be read. He stated, if we do that, there may be other people that want to speak, but once you recognize that person, and then anybody that wants to speak on this, it's open again. He stated that it's up to the Board. He stated, I'm not telling you not to, I'm not telling you to do it, I'm just telling you what the consequences are.

Mr. Hudson stated, well, I guess, when we asked Mr. Jones to bring information back, I don't know if this was specifically information that we asked him to bring back, but it certainly could have a bearing on the case. He asked, this other letter that he talked about, do we have that?

Mr. Nigro stated, I don't believe he brought it in.

Mr. Jones stated, I turned it in. He stated, I have another copy of the letter, if you'd like to have it. He stated, I could turn this letter in if he wants to read that.

Mr. Nigro asked, do you want to read that?

Mr. Jones stated, it's very long. He asked, would you like me to summarize it?

Mr. Nigro stated, whatever suits you.

Mr. Jones stated, basically, it says that they knew no idea of how this makes two front yards and, um, it states in here and I'll read it for you, um, it says "the reason I am surprised to hear of your troubles is because we had always planned to build a garage in the same location you attempted. In addition, it had been discussed on several occasions with Judy Aragon, and she never mentioned any disapproval. She was a friendly neighbor and we talked of the plans each of us had for our respective pieces of property. We had even discussed the possibility of moving our driveway so that the entrance came off to Lamplight Lane, rather than 75 E. Again, there was never any reason to think these improvements would not be acceptable." He stated, and this is a notarized letter from the previous owner.

Mr. Brickner stated, I think you stated last time that it would cost you $8,500 to move your pole barn.

Mr. Jones stated, yessir, and that's why…

Mr. Brickner stated, and the only place you have to move it is just a little bit further towards your house, towards where your existing driveway is?

Mr. Jones stated, yes.

Mr. Brickner stated, I mean you can't put it in the back of your house? He stated that that would eliminate the one violation, of the setback, if you could do that, it would eliminate that violation. He stated that it wouldn't, of course, take care of the front yard problem, and we could maybe discuss that a little bit further. He asked, are you willing to do that?

Mr. Hudson stated, Marv, I'm not sure what you're saying.

Mr. Brickner stated, move it back this way, back North, far enough to not violate the setback from the road and that would solve that problem and he'd be legal that way.

Mr. Hudson stated, he'd have to move it 30 feet then.

Mr. Detert stated, Ray Weltz, our building commissioner is in the audience. He asked, do you have any help here for the Board that…

Mr. Weltz stated, not really. He stated, I haven't seen his drawing in reference to the septic location, but I thought I heard him make the statement that if he did move it it would be jeopardizing the septic location and relocation if he had to replace the septic system.

Mr. Detert stated, we have a letter from the Health Department that says that they feel where it is is appropriate to the septic problems that he may have in the future.

Jeannete Utpatel, Lot 6 in Lamplight Lane, asked, may I ask if the audience is going to be able to speak?

Mr. Detert stated, the public hearing is closed…

Ms. Utpatel stated, but he has presented new evidence and there is some opposition to some of the statements that he has made.

Mr. Detert stated that this information he has given is information that we had asked for.

Ms. Utpatel stated, but you have the information from the Health Department and I would like to know if the supervisor initiated that letter and if it was an authorized person who knew exactly where the septic system was.

Mr. Detert stated, he can read the letter from the Health Department.

Ms. Utpatel stated, I do know what it says. She stated, you also have in your packet a letter that myself and Mrs. Aragon initiated and it is also signed by many of the homeowners.

Mr. Detert stated, see, the place for all of this was the last meeting.

Ms. Utpatel stated, well, we did present all these items, but he is bringing further evidence.

Mr. Detert stated, I don't know how much more clearly I can say it when I stop the public hearing, I stop it, and if we do this we are going to continue on and on with all our cases if we keep re-opening them up. He stated, we have to follow some kind of rules in order to get our business done.

Ms. Utpatel stated, I know, but you didn't particularly ask for that letter from the Health Department, which I believe is in error.

Mr. Hudson asked, are you saying we didn't ask for the letter.

Ms. Utpatel stated, you didn't ask for the letter to make a statement that there is not room.

Mr. Hudson stated, I think I specifically did.

Ms. Utpatel stated, okay, but the person that wrote that letter is a secretary at the office.

Mr. Hudson stated, no, she's not, she's one of the sanitarians.

Ms. Utpatel stated, we were told by the head person that uh…

Mr. Hudson stated, the person that signed it is one of the sanitarians, Julie Wolf.

Mr. Detert stated, you may disagree with it, but we have to go by what the Health Department says, not what you may feel is correct.

Ms. Utpatel stated, I'm just wondering if she made a statement that there is areas to the East of his area.

Mr. Detert stated (reading from the letter): "Dear Mr. Jones, based on the site plan information you provided of your property, the Porter County Health Department has determined that the location of your pole barn meets our setback requirements with regards to your septic system. When additional buildings are built on properties with septic systems, a minimum of 10 feet separation distance from building foundations to septic field laterals and septic tank is required. According to your site plan, your pole barn is located approximately 60 feet from the septic field. The pole barn should not be located any closer to your septic field. Doing so would encroach on the area needed for future expansion of your existing septic field should a failure occur." He stated, so what they're saying is, if you meet that pole barn you're going to be encroaching on an area that may be needed in the future if the existing septic system fails, so they would like to see it where it is, that's the way I interpret it.

Mr. Brickner stated, well, that eliminates the possibility of moving it any further North, which is what I thought he might be able to do, because he'd have to go 30 feet and there is 60 feet, so he'd be encroaching on that field that she's talking about.

Mr. Detert stated, he has the ability to do that right now, because that's not where the septic field is, but they're keeping that available for future. He stated, I understood that when I went out today, and that's why I came up with the thought that some kind of screening there that would screen that might be appropriate. He stated, it's up to the Board. He asked, any other comments? He stated, if not, the Chair will recognize a motion for disposal of the case.

Mr. Brickner moved to deny Case 03-V-6, finding that the grant will be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the building is set too closely to the road Lamplight Lane, and it would be obtrusive to the neighbors as far as visual aesthetics were concerned and it cannot be moved in any direction without compromising the septic area; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will be affected in a substantially adverse manner because of the close proximity to Lamplight Lane, the violation of the setback and the fact that it's in the front yard is objectionable to the neighbors; the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will not result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because the pole barn will not be permitted in the area and location that it's in. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which failed on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - No
Detert - No

Mr. Detert stated, we have an impasse, tie vote, no action is taken. He stated that unless there's another motion, it will be continued until the next month and hopefully we'll have five members so we don't run into a tie again. He stated, seeing no other motion being made, the case is continued until our meeting next month.

Case 03-V-5. Petition of Mehran Javid, 319 W. North Ave., Chicago, seeking a Variance to permit construction of a pole barn for storage of equipment and building material, prior to construction of the residence, to be located at 417 E. Furness Road, in Pine Township. (This Case was tabled at the 2-29-03 meeting, and the petitioner has requested that it be put on this agenda. The public hearing is closed.).

Mr. Javid stated that as you know I own the property on 417 E. Furness and as you remember a neighbor raised the issue last time whether we can have a barn or we can't have a barn. He stated that I have some pictures that I've brought for you. He asked, may I hand it to you? He stated, and there's a little drawing of the distances between the two properties and there are some pictures. He stated, in addition, I have some immediate neighbors that are here that would like to come forward and speak, if need to be regarding this matter.

Mr. Detert stated that the public hearing on this matter is closed. He asked, do you have somebody that you want to speak?

Mr. Javid asked, on which matter? He asked, on the first one or the second one?

Mr. Detert stated, the first one.

Mr. Javid stated, yes.

Mr. Detert stated, this is for construction of a pole barn prior to construction of a residence, that's what we're hearing right now. He stated, now, on the second one, it will be a public meeting and it will be open to whoever wants to speak, but this one, the public hearing was closed, so unless the Board recognizes somebody to speak, speaking is over with.

Mr. Javid stated, it's up to you, but I have some neighbors here that really should voice their…

Mr. Brickner stated that I certainly don't have any objection to letting him have the pole barn because it's such a mess out there that it would certainly be an improvement if he could get that stuff stored in a pole barn. He stated that the place is really…if anybody went out there and saw the same thing I saw, it's really a mess, so I don't have any objection to that, but we'll get into the second part, as far as building the pole barn in the front yard, afterwards.

Mr. Detert stated, we have two questions. He stated, one, is can he have a pole barn ahead of the residence. He stated, Question 2, is can he have it in the front yard.

Mr. Brickner stated, as long as we make the same restrictions that he has two years to build his house and he can live with that…

Mr. Detert stated, that's up to you.

Mr. Brickner asked, how big is the pole barn you're planning to build?

Mr. Javid stated, it is 60 by 46.

Mr. Detert asked, how many acres do you have,.

Mr. Javid stated, 15.

Mr. Brickner asked, this pole barn, will it house all the equipment and stuff you have out there stored?

Mr. Javid stated, yes.

Mr. Brickner asked, you'll get all that put in the pole barn, including your front-end loader?

Mr. Javid stated, it was a small Bobcat, sir. He stated, the front-end loader is not mine. He stated that it belongs to Mr. (inaudible)

Mr. Brickner asked, but all the stuff you have stored out there, you'll get that all under roof?

Mr. Javid stated, yes.

Mr. Detert stated, I can remind the Board that if you approve this you can add the contingency that he has to keep all the stuff inside.

Mr. Brickner stated, I still don't have any objection to the pole barn being built before the house, as long as we make all the contingencies for building his house and putting all of the stuff in the pole barn.

Mr. Brickner moved to approve Case 03-V-5, subject to the house being built within two years of the pole barn being constructed or the pole barn has to be removed, that all of the equipment and everything that is stored outside the pole barn be stored inside the pole barn and that area be cleaned up and that a written commitment, to be recorded, be entered into, finding that the grant will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the pole barn would be an improvement to the property as far as storing all of the equipment and debris he has on his property now; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because the pole barn will be an improvement in the property and will improve the appearance of the property, as far as the neighbors are concerned; the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because it does not allow a pole barn to be built before the primary residence and in this case we will allow the pole barn to be built with the requirement that the house be built within two years. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - Yes
Detert - Yes

Public Hearings:

At this time, Mr. Detert read the rules of conduct for a public hearing.

Case 03-V-9. Petition of Mehran Javid, 319 W. North Ave., Chicago, seeking a Variance to permit construction of a pole barn in the front yard, to be located at 417 E. Furness Road, in Pine Township.

Mr. Javid stated that I would like to ask the Board to consider that we build a barn on the side of the house, on the East side of the house, or the property and it sits approximately 65 feet away from the road. He stated that the closest neighbor is 270 some feet away and this at some point will be within 10 to 20 feet of the line of the house, going from East to West, so it really sits on the side of the property, on the side of the future home, not in front of it, and if I move the barn any further back it would be just too much traveling for the equipment, it's just not feasible for me to build a house with having the barn so far away from the road. He stated that the other area is a wetland, it's a lowland and if I move the barn further North, then we would have to cut down a whole bunch of trees and I would really like to avoid doing that and the present location, it's already set, and it's kind of like a little high sand land that we felt that by putting the barn over there it would stay out of the harm's way, since the lowland is quite wet in wintertime and would be really much more expensive to built the road going all the way across the 200 feet from the road.

Lawrence Koltan, 444 Furness Road, stated that I'm totally in favor and I'm the neighbor down the road from him. He stated that I'm in favor of it because where he's building the barn, the location is way back on a hill in the woods. He stated that he's got all these trees in front and so you can't even really see the barn. He stated that he builds first-class stuff and I know that it'll be a beautiful improvement on the property. He stated that I don't see where it would be obtrusive to anybody in the neighborhood.

Racheal Angotti, 444 Furness Road, stated that I'm the wife of Larry Koltan. She stated, when people say the front yard, his front yard has 15 acres. She stated, so when you say he's going to put it in the front yard, it's almost a football field back from the yard, so, I mean, and then, too, it's going to be on the side of the house, so it's not really the front yard. She stated, we're not talking a yard like a city. She stated that it will be very unobtrusive. She stated that there are many barns in that neighborhood, and he does build first-class things. She stated, in fact, he built the house next door and remodeled it and it's a beautiful thing now, properly landscaped. She stated that I walked the property this evening and where he wants to put the house is up on a nice sandy knoll and if he moves the house further in, you're taking away from the beauty that he has and if you move the barn further back, it would be a little low for it and he has his road going in so nicely. She stated, it's going to be fabulous when he gets done.

Basil Cross, 427 E. Furness Road, stated that my property borders Mehran's property for a quarter of a mile. He stated that I bought 25 acres there in 1961 and have spent the last 40 some years. He stated that I built a new house several years ago. He stated that you people gave me a permit to tear the old house down and put a house trailer there while I built a new one for security sake. He stated that I've spent the last 40 years developing and preserving the property, so I'm very hypersensitive to anything that goes on in the neighborhood, because I have a life's work besides a fortune sunk into it. He stated, from my house, looking out the window, if he puts the barn back in the woods and disturbs a pristine woods that hasn't been touched in years, he will be doing more damage to the environment than I would care to think about. He stated that where the barn is going is to the East of the house, 60 feet back. He stated that the house itself will be set back on the hill looking into this woodland, which is why I think he bought the property. He stated that I've known Mehran since he was a student at the school of the Art Institute. He stated that that goes back over 30 years, and, in his whole lifetime, I've known the kind of work he does and the energy that he puts into his work, and since this is going to be his home, I don't think, as a neighbor that I'll have anything to worry about as far as the quality of construction or how he will maintain it. He stated that right now it looks like a pig sty because it's just garbage goulash, because there's just so much equipment around, which is what he is as sensitive to as we are and that's why he wants to put the barn in this location for easy access and I know it will be landscaped, I know that because that's his business.

No one spoke against this petition.

The public hearing was then closed.

Mr. Hudson asked, this picture is wrong then? He asked, is this right? He stated, I keep, I'm confused.

Mr. Brickner stated, the gentleman that spoke with the crutches - the house is going to be back on the knoll and the barn up from, not vice versa.

Mr. Hudson stated, okay. He stated, you said it the other way around.

Mr. Burns stated, he's just concerned. He stated, I know we approved the barn, but the comment about the business, I asked you that last meeting. He asked, are you going to run a business out of this barn?

Mr. Javid stated, no sir. He stated, I'm almost retired. He stated, I only do landscaping. He stated, I own a business in Chicago and we are not going to run a business from here.

Mr. Burns stated, I heard a comment that you built the house next door.

Mr. Javid stated, that was the original house on this property. He stated that there was a much, much older house that the gentleman that was here last time was here and this was an old schoolhouse, I believe, and I remodeled it and I kept it in a very good shape.

Mr. Burns asked, so you're not going to operate a business?

Mr. Javid stated, no, absolutely not.

Mr. Brickner asked, how far can you move that back without going into the woods back there; I mean, there is some distance you can go back. He asked, can you go back another 20 or 30 feet. He stated, I guess, now that I've listened to your neighbors, I, when it is an isolated area, I've maybe changed my mind a little bit, but I still would like to see it back as far off the road as you could possibly get it without disturbing the woods, and where you have it right now is a lot closer to the road than it maybe needs to be. He asked, can you go back another 30 feet with that thing?

Mr. Javid stated, that would go into the woodland.

Mr. Brickner stated, maybe not entirely, because it looks like there is some area that you left behind that you could still move back.

Mr. Javid stated, we are already 60 feet away from the road.

Mr. Brickner stated, so, you're telling me that you can't go any further.

Mr. Javid, stated, no, I can. He stated, there's nothing set in stone. He stated, I need a permit to do this. He stated, that's why we are here. He stated, it's not impossible to do; of course, anything can be done, but it's a preferred area if we don't, but I'm open to the recommendation of the Board.

Mr. Brickner stated, I agree with the lady, I mean, there is no front yard. He stated, it's all woodland, you know, and the house would be on a knoll that actually goes into the woods and to put the barn in back of this house I know is impossible because there's a lowlands back there. He stated, maybe get it back a little further would be better, maybe 90 feet from the road would look better.

Mr. Detert stated, I think, it's unknown exactly how far you could move it. He stated, I would suggest if that's what you want to do, and you make a motion to approve it, that you have them work with staff and/or TAC to get the pole barn as practically as far back away from the road as possible.

Mr. Hudson stated, I wouldn't have a problem. He stated, I don't…like this gentleman, I don't like to see the woods, um, encroached upon, or, if there's wetlands there, the property is wet, um, but I guess I would go along with moving it back, if you could back 90 feet, to go back another 30 feet without going into the woods.

Mr. Brickner stated, I think you could get almost 30 feet without being in the woods, from where I saw your pad was. He asked, is that where your, you know, you still have some distance to go back there. He asked, how about moving it back another 30?

Mr. Javid asked, may I have a chance to work with the Board, with someone to help measure and see how I would set it. He asked, do I have to give you my answer tonight?

Mr. Hudson asked, do you want to continue it then?

Mr. Detert stated, well, we could continue or can leave it up to TAC with the understanding that what we want is it moved back as far as it is practical to move it back from the road.

Mr. Hudson stated, at least 60 or 90 from the road.

Mr. Detert stated, somewhere in the 60 to 90 feet range, and, at least that would…he wouldn't have to wait a month if he did that. He stated, he could work with staff, actually.

Mr. Burns stated, I guess I have a problem. He stated, he has the space between his barn and the woods - 90 feet, you would not be into the woods, right?

Ms. Angotti stated, yes, he would.

Mr. Burns asked, he would be?

Mr. Detert stated, that's what we don't know yet. He stated, that's the thing, that's why I'm suggesting he work with staff to get it back as far as possible.

Mr. Burns stated, I thought he had enough space so he would not be in the woods yet.

Mr. Brickner stated, I think he does, but that's just eyeballing it.

Mr. Detert stated, I guess if you said 90 feet back and that is the motion, then that would hold it up for another month.

Leigh Beck, 472 E. Furness, stated, my mother lives across the road and my concern is that if the trees were taken down and you look across the street, then you're going to see a pole barn without any type of covering. She stated, it's just going to be open, and she looks directly across the house.

Mr. Brickner stated that I know where her house is. He stated that she lives directly across the street and should be the one most affected by the presence of the barn.

Mr. Detert stated that you could ask him for screening; that's another option.

Mr. Brickner stated, we could ask for screening.

Mr. Burns stated, pine trees.

Mr. Javid stated, of course we just cleared the woods, so we got rid of some old Scotch pines over there. He stated that of course we would landscape properly. He stated that there would be plants planted to hide the barns to my advantage. He stated that there would be a new set of hedges that's going to set approximately 15 feet away from the road and there would be a set of evergreens that would sit behind it to camouflage the barn and the property from the street.

Mr. Detert stated, as far as I'm personally concerned, if he sits that back as far as practical and plants some screening, I have confidence that Mr. Nigro can handle that for us and I would vote in favor of the motion.

Mr. Hudson stated, Mr. Chairman, just one comment, and then I'm ready to make a motion. He stated, I guess if the house was going to be up as close as the barn was, the barn could be there in front, line with the house and there would be a house there, too, so she'd be looking at both of them. He stated, it just so happens that I think the places where the gentleman is putting them are probably the most appropriate places sensitivity wise to nature, I guess I want to say.

Mr. Hudson moved to approve Case 03-V-9 for the construction of a pole barn in the front yard, the distance back from the road to be a minimum of 60 feet, but that the petitioner would work with the staff to position the barn back as far as possible (90 feet would be nice) and that the barn will not be used for any sort of business and that the screening that he indicated would be placed and that all of the existing debris that is currently outside the pole barn be cleaned up and stored inside the barn, finding that the grant will not be injurious to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because of the sensitivity to the location of the barn, which is back a minimum of 60 feet will not be going into the woods to disturb the nature; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the Variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because the barn will be landscaped and they will try to get the barn back as close to the woods as possible, with a minimum of 60 feet; and the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property since there would be no other place in the open that would not be a detriment to the woods and the sensitive areas that are located there. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - Yes
Detert - Yes

Case 03-V-8. Petition of Mike Kaminsky, 168 Springwood Drive, seeking a Variance to permit construction of a 1,500 square foot storage building, larger than the 1,200 square feet permitted in a subdivision, to be located at 168 Springwood Drive, in Porter Township.

Mr. Kaminsky stated that what I am trying to do is construct a garage large enough to park my work vehicle in and some of my personal vehicles in there. He stated, I've got a boat, trailer, snowmobiles and other things. He stated that I want to build the building with a 4-foot frost wall, um, brick in front of it so it's architecturally correct to the front of the house, make it 30 feet wide by 50 feet deep, which would be set back behind the tree line at the back of my property. He stated that the 30 foot wide would match the existing garage, the attached garage, width-wise, so it would look, I think, in place to the architecture of the size of the house, set in the back. He stated, if I'm going to go through the expense of bricking the front and the frost wall and footing and foundation, I just would like to get another 300 square feet on the back instead of like a 30 by 40, I'd like to go to 30 by 50.

Mr. Detert asked, is this plat correct as to where you want to put it?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, yes.

Mr. Detert asked, all the way back?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, yes, all the way back. He stated that it's actually going to be up off the property line a little bit. He stated that there are some trees there that I don't want to remove to put the driveway in and I'd like to set it closer behind the existing garage so that it isn't sticking out.

No one spoke in favor of this petition.

Robert Randham, 1735 S. 645 W., stated that the only concern I have is that I live directly East or West of the man here and I was wondering if there is any way the pole barn is going to be higher than the regular elevation and is that going to hurt the wetlands?

Mr. Kaminsky stated that there is an issue of property ownership in the back portion of my lot. He stated that he seems to feel that he owns a portion of my lot, which is a low-lying area, which was surveyed and deemed not a wetland by the Army Corps of Engineers. He stated that he seems to feel that it is an issue with the Army Corps of Engineers --- that it is a wetland. He stated that it's a low-lying area and it's located…and he feels that that is a wetland and a low-lying area that is federally protected, I guess. He stated that I'm not sure what he's really after there.

Mr. Hudson stated, but you're not building there.

Mr. Kaminsky stated, no, I'm building on the other side, on the high side of the property, because it does drop off from the front to the back 6.5 feet.

Mr. Nigro asked, the Northwest corner of the property, then?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, yes, that would be the high spot, then down on the Southwest side is the low-lying area.

Mr. Detert asked, is that your concern, sir?

Mr. Randham stated, yeah, about the drainage and what not.

At this time, the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Burns asked, why the 4-foot frost wall?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, well, because I've looked into pole construction, and it's rather expensive and I can block in a foundation, put in a brick ledge so that it's all tied together so that when I brick the front of the building it stays together, instead of doing pole construction, doing 4-foot posts in the ground and then building some type of wall or floor and then letting the brick float on that; I don't want to have any problems with the brick coming off the front of the building.

Mr. Burns asked, are you going to have a bathroom?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, no.

Mr. Brickner asked, what's your business?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, I'm a mobile tool salesman.

Mr. Brickner asked, you're not going to be conducting any business out of this building?

Mr. Kaminsky stated, absolutely not.

Mr. Detert stated, if we get any complaints that you are you would be shut down.

Mr. Brickner moved to approve Case 03-V-8, with no business to be run out of this property, finding that the grant will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the structure is located in the extreme back of the property, a considerable distance from the road, and is pretty well isolated from view and it's going to be an aesthetically pleasing structure; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because of the location of the building will be back away from the front of the house or the property lines; the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because it does not allow a building that large to be built in a subdivision and this is a variance for a larger building. Mr. Hudson seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - Yes
Detert - Yes

Case 03-UV-2. Petition of Amy Golembeck, 39 E. 600 N., Valparaiso, seeking a Use Variance to permit an antique shop, to be located on the North side of CR 600 N., between Meridian Road and Calumet Ave., in Liberty Township.

Ms. Golembeck stated that I would like to get a temporary zoning variance to have an antique shop in my home.

No one spoke in favor of this petition.

John Frank, 47 E. 600 N., stated that this is just to the East of that property. He stated, we had a couple questions.

Loretta Frank, 47 E. 600 N., stated that one would be the changing, like signs or advertisements or anything on the property and then how much traffic do you think this is going to occur (sic) to the area and what would your hours be for the operation and would there be any auctions on weekends or…and are you planning on using one of your buildings? She asked, is she planning to use one of the buildings on the property?

Ms. Golembeck stated that I wasn't planning on doing any signage whatsoever. She stated, I'm an at-home mom and I have five children and I'm just trying to get a little more income coming in. She stated, I think we'll just start it off to be by appointment only, more like church members, family, friends, school friends, you know, like that, coming back. She stated, I don't think we would need to use our out building, but I don't know what your policy is on that or what I would need to do about that. She stated, we have a 3,000 square foot home that has antiques in it already and our pole barn is 48 by 42 and it is heated, but at this time I don't find it necessary to use that.

Mr. Nigro stated, just to clarify, you're not going to use the pole barn, you're going to use the home.

Ms. Golembeck stated, the home.

Mr. Frank asked, how much traffic would be coming down the road and that type of thing and hours.

Mr. Detert stated, it will be up to this Board to decide what hours she can operate her business. He stated, she can make a request, but we will make a final decision and the traffic, I assume you've already testified that it's going to be very minimal.

Ms. Golembeck stated, right. She stated, I've talked to other antique shop owners that have it in their house and they said they're surprised if they get two or three cars at the same time and they're open 9 to 5 and I'm not planning on doing that. She stated that I have small children, so, like when they're in school is when I wanted to do this.

At this time, the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Brickner stated that that's close to my house, where you are planning to have your business. He stated that the driveway is just a gravel driveway, it's a fairly narrow driveway and it's extremely isolated area, I mean, there is a house immediately West of you and I guess there's a house East of you and that's their house. He asked if you have a place to park at the top.

Ms. Golembeck stated, oh, yeah. She stated, we just had our wedding there last summer and you could easily park like 16 to 20 cars in between, not like I plan on doing that, but in between if you have this diagram, between the house and where the pole barn in there's a big gravel - it looks like a parking lot. She stated, in fact, they used to have an antique shop there, I guess, from what I hear.

Mr. Brickner asked, and you plan to have the antiques in your house and people are going to come and look at them?

Ms. Golembeck stated, right. She stated, that's why it would be by appointment only because there are seven people living in our house, so.

Mr. Brickner asked, there won't be any other employees?

Ms. Golembeck stated, no, just me and my husband and my five children.

Mr. Brickner stated, I looked at the place and I wouldn't have any objection to her having a business there.

Mr. Burns stated, I have no problem with it.

Mr. Hudson stated, no problem.

Mr. Hudson moved to approve Case 03-UV-2 for five years, with the sale of the antiques to be from the home, no auctions, no signs and that the hours of operation would be 9 to 5 and that there be no employees except the family, finding that the grant will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because of the location of the business being within the house some distance off of CR 600 N. and pretty much secluded; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because there is not additional buildings being built and the areas for parking are all ready existing and the driveway exists and there are no signs; the need for the variance does arise from a condition peculiar to the property because of the residential area and this is an in-home business; the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will constitute an unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought because of the fact that it is residential and the business is not allowed except with a use variance. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - Yes
Detert - Yes

Case 03-PUV-1. Petition of Robert & Melissa Janda, c/o Todd A. Leeth, Hoeppner Wagner & Evans LLP, 103 E. Lincolnway, Valparaiso, seeking a Permanent Use Variance for an automobile repair, all indoors, as a hobby business, to be located at 6-1 N. 550 W., in Union Township.

Todd Leeth stated that I'm here on behalf of your petitioners tonight, Robert & Melissa Janda. He stated that the property in question was purchased by the Jandas May 4, 2000 and is 3 acres in size. He stated that it's located on the North side of Division Road and it kind of an L-shaped parcel. He stated that prior to the commencement of tonight's hearing I placed at each of your places two items or two exhibits. He stated that one is a reduced copy of a survey that was prepared immediately prior to the petitioners' purchase of the property in 2000 that shows their property L-shaped. He stated that the Southern boundary or leg of the L is Division Road. He stated that the other exhibit that I provided to you is a series of three photographs which are labeled and show the property in question and the neighboring fire station. He stated that the Lake Eliza

Volunteer Fire Department is immediately adjacent to the Jandas to the East. He stated that the property in question and the community as a whole is generally zoned rural residential under your zoning ordinance. He stated that Mr. Janda is employed by Team Chevy in Valparaiso and is in their service department and his profession is an auto mechanic in the service department there. He stated that he enjoys working on cars and does so on his own and family and friends at this property. He stated, as I indicated, it's a large parcel, 3 acres in size, and there are a series of out buildings and from the photographs you can see the second photograph shows actually the first and the second photograph shows the tan structure, which is his out building where he performs the service work on, again, his own cars and vehicles, which is not a violation. He stated that he does so, also, on family and friends' cars and from time to time they certainly pay for parts and from time to time they provide him with some financial contribution, as well. He stated that that, in and of itself, I think Mr. Nigro has determined, places this as a business under your ordinance. He stated that I don't know that I agree 100 percent with that legal interpretation that this is, in fact, a business, but be that as it may, this petition has ensued because of Mr. Nigro's visit to the property and with discussions with the Jandas. He stated that one thing that I think is important is that this is not a business in the true sense; in other words, Mr. Janda does not solicit the people who would bring automobiles to his place for work. He stated that as I indicated, it's basically family and friends' automobiles that he works on and there's no fee schedule, if you will, that is charged for people whose cars he does work on, somewhat as a hobby. He stated that the terminology that I used in the petition was a hobby business. He stated that perhaps that's an oxymoron, but I think that describes a little bit about how Mr. Janda has in that short period of time since he's owned the property utilized that out building. He stated that the other thing that you need to understand is that not all of the vehicles that come to Mr. Janda's property are, if you will, customers of his business. He stated that it's a busy household with young children, one of whom is ill, and there are many well-wishers and family who come to visit. He stated that in those times, and other children and active in sports and Mrs. Janda is mom's taxi, driving the children around, as well. He stated that one other thing that I wanted to bring to your attention is that when they purchased the property, it appraised for a certain amount in May of 2000. He stated that they refinanced just last October and it was appraised again and the appraisal in that 2.5 year period since they've owned the property has increased $50,000, so I think that there's been a significant amount of work that they've done on the property to improve its appearance and value, so any suggestion that the use of the property has been diminished or is adversely affecting property values I think is wrong in that assumption. He stated that I will provide you, also, with a petition that the Jandas have circulated through the neighborhood. He stated that each of these people who have signed this paper and are supporting this petition and there are 26 of them are within .4 of a mile of Mr. and Mrs. Janda's property, so I'll submit that for the record, and I know there are a significant number of perhaps some of these same people are here to support Mr. and Mrs. Janda in their request, seeking a use variance from that. He stated, with that I'll close my comments and respond to any questions you might have or those that come from the public.

Curtis Reifon, 542 W. Division Road, Valparaiso, stated that this is about 4 houses away from Bob's. He stated that I've used his garage for my personal use to fix my car and my kids play with his kids. He stated that I have been living there at my present location for 11 years and there is another gentleman that lives three houses away that races stock cars and he makes more noise than anybody in the neighborhood. He stated that Bob doesn't make any noise or anything and his property is clean and I approve.

Amanda Cousino, 3274 Trailside Place, Crown Point, stated that I been to the Jandas about three or four times already. She stated that the only reason I go over there is because I'm dating Bob Janda's cousin. She stated that my car has been over there because there was an oil leak and with Bob working at Team as a mechanic, and my boy friend working at Team, as well, I needed to fix a problem. She stated that Bob told me what was wrong and I got it fixed. She stated that the other reasons I came by was just for visits and birthday parties.

Bruce Janda, 6275 S. Randolph, Hobart, stated that I am Bob's cousin and I do work with him. He stated that I go over there and I am learning from him how to work on cars and stuff like that. He stated that pretty much Bob is my role model. He stated that I've never met anybody who works like him and who is as nice as him, and I am also, he has animals there, and I am also fond of animals and I go over and I play with the dogs and I get to look at the horses and pet them and learn about them, so I have no complaints.

Brad Hines, 788 W. 100 N., Valparaiso, stated that I am a Union Township resident and I just became an acquaintance of Bob about a year ago when I was visiting one of his neighbors and I just found out that Bob's kind of a person like myself. He stated that he's interested in helping people and that's the kind of person I am. He stated that I've seen the compassion Bob's had for people that he's come in contact with, and I just want to say that Bob is one of a kind and he's been a role model for my boy, who's also interested in working on cars. He stated that Bob has done a couple things for me. He stated that I've left the car over there and he's taken it and given advice on many occasions and he's taken my car into his place of employment and I left my car over there a couple of times and he's had some warranty work done on it and he's been, I'd just be missing an opportunity by not speaking in his behalf, because if you take the time to get to know Bob, you realize that this is not a, this is not about a business.

David Barnett, 585 W. Division Road, Valparaiso, stated that I live probably about five or six houses down from Bob. He stated that

I met him about two years ago and he was at the auction when they auctioned the house off, and that's where I met Bob. He stated that I kind of took him on as a friend and took him on and he's pretty good people, he's pretty straight up. He stated that I have no problem with what Bob's doing. He stated that he's improved the house, like they say, $50,000 and he's really done a nice job on it and I don't see any problem with him asking for what he's asking for so I don't have any problems with that.

Kevin Brumfield, 3270 Trailside Place, Crown Point, stated that I work at Team Chevy with Bob and his house is on the way home, so I stop there a lot just to talk and hang out with him. He stated that I also own a Chrysler product, which I inherited when I got married, and I can't get it worked on at work, so I've taken it to Bob's house and he's worked on it and given me advice.

Al Cherny, 551 W. Division Road, Valparaiso, stated that I am directly Southeast of Robert. He stated that he's helped me, I've helped him. He stated that I don't see any problem at all. He stated that I just don't understand what's going on, I really don't. He stated, I mean, he's good, no business, no money, nothing, he's just good people.

Warren Byers, 218 N. 500 W., stated that I've dealt with Bob for two years and he's helped me out and they're real nice people. He stated that I can't see nothing (sic) wrong with what he's doing.

Michael Hendrixson, 1206 Sturdy Road, Valparaiso, stated that as the deputy fire chief for the fire department, the fire department is angled just a little bit from Bob's house. He stated that I see no problem with what Bob's doing. He stated that I can speak for the whole fire department. He stated that I've had questions a couple of times on different pieces of apparatus that we've had had problems with and the next thing I know I hang up on the phone with him and he's let me know what I need to know and the next thing I know he's knocking on the door to help me do it. He stated that he's a good man. He stated that he keeps the property clean and I don't see a problem with what he's doing. He stated that I don't think it's a business whatsoever.

Rod Norton, 50 S. 600 W., Hebron, stated that I've been with the Lake Eliza Volunteer Fire Department 35 years. He stated that Bob moved in and we're glad he did because he works on my squad car and he also works on our apparatus and he also plows our snow and he also takes care of our gravel. He stated that he really does a good job there, so there's not much I can see, but, we need him.

Gary Hollibaugh, 2207 Penwick Drive, Valparaiso, stated that Bob is my son-in-law and he's a very good man and I'm here to lend moral support and I'm all for what he does. He stated that I don't see anything wrong with what he does and I'm all for him.

Martha Hollibaugh, 2207 Penwick Drive, Valparaiso, stated that Bob is my son-in-law and he'll just do anything for anybody who asks him, so if there is a lot of activity at that house, it's because people ask him for help and he gives advice and he's just a great guy.

Michelle Green, 656 W. 250 W., Hebron, stated that he's a good guy and he takes care of everybody and he helps everybody in the town. She stated that I got (sic) a '69 Camaro and we talk about how we're going to fix it and stuff like that and he'd help anybody do anything.

Terry Shotliff, 1855 W. 58th Ave., Merrillville, stated that I met Bob through mutual friends and I've been around many times when he's helped them out and have been over to his property on several occasions. He stated that I can see nothing wrong as far as excessive noise or any problems that might be created with neighbors and I live right in the middle of Merrillville, so I know what it is to deal with neighbors and I think he does a fine job.

Adrian Kuypers, 10 N. 550 W., Valparaiso, stated that I live in the property that's just North of Bob's property and my property borders his and since Bob's moved in he has done many improvements to their property. He stated that my property value has definitely gone up due to his efforts. He stated that addressing his working on cars, I never (inaudible). He stated that he's worked on my car numerous times and he's generally he doesn't charge me anything to work on my cars. He stated that when he does, it's for parts, and also, um, concerning the traffic at his place, um, if you want to have friends you have to show yourself friendly and Bob is one of the friendliest guys I know, and people are over there all the time because of his friendship. He stated that if his business is gone, it doesn't matter. He stated that that place would be booming with people, because that's the way he is. He stated that I don't' see where that issue would even enter into this situation, so, thank you.

Laurie Burton, 660 W. 250 S., stated that I've known Bob for a couple of years and I'm here as a character witness. She stated that one of the greatest things he does is when our darling daughter, because she's too busy with her friends, forgot to put oil in her Blazer and ruined the engine, Bob said, well, you help me fix it to our daughter and she was over there for many, many nights figuring out how difficult it was to fix an engine and I don't think she's ever, ever forgotten to check her oil and I appreciate the time he spent with her because someone had to teach that girl, and you did. She stated, thank you very much.

Natalie Hartwig, 680 W. 100 N., Valparaiso, stated that I own the property at 526 W. Division Road, which is .2 of a mile from the Jandas. She stated, I know the Jandas from school and they are very involved in all three of their kids' extracurricular activities, basketball, soccer, swimming and they have a lot of friends at school and they support our school.

Ken Burton, 660 W. 250 S., stated that I have known Bob for quite a long time. He stated that he's very good family, very good with children. He stated that he has three kids of his own and they are the only kids I've ever heard say, sir, or Uncle Ken or Mr. Ken, and the point I'm trying to make is he has a good family there and good neighbors and that's why you see all these people standing here today to talk about his friendship. He stated that I own seven vehicles and never once has Bob worked on one of my cars. He stated that he did work on one of my daughter's once. He stated that I could have said that as of the last BZA meeting, but the last meeting you held, we came in to see what was going on and on the way out I said to Bob, hey, I have a problem with this ignition switch on my motor home. He stated that that was 10:30 at night. He stated that at 11:00 he was in my driveway at my house fixing my motor home just because I asked. He stated that I didn't ask him over, but this is the type of guy you're dealing with. He stated that we're not talking a business; we're talking friends. He stated that it's a rural environment. He stated that we go do things for them and they go do things for us. He stated that I had a neighbor need a Bush hog and I go to Bob's, can I borrow your Bush hog and a favor for a friend. He stated that that's the type of things that's going on here and I hate to see this put down just because you got one person in the neighborhood that wants to cause a problem. He stated that I don't know how to say it. He stated that it's a rural environment - we help each other. He stated that he has lots of friends and I'm over there probably once a week. He stated that I know there's a neighbor that's been taking pictures and he probably has pictures of my cars there - I drive seven different vehicles, as I said. He stated, oh, by the way, it could go up to 12 vehicles - my snowmobile and my airplane and that stuff, but the point is, one occasion in all the time that I've ever been over there have I ever been over there to ask, hey, can you do this for me, and that time I did go over there was done right outside the door here at the BZA meeting. He stated, all I'm asking is, don't stop the guy. He stated that he's in the neighborhood and he's a good neighbor, he's a good friend and that's what you're hearing from all the people here. He stated that he's had some problems with some neighbors and I know he's too kind to say anything about it. He stated that he's had horses poisoned, a dog poisoned, a garden poisoned - that's the kind of thing that's going on, but he's not the type of guy to stand up and say anything about it, so I'm telling you about it. He stated that you take what you hear and understand what's going on. He stated that all I'm asking of the Board is to let the guy be a good neighbor and leave the rest of us be friends and continue on the way it's been.

Pat Guest, 349 W. 100 S., stated that the reason I wanted to come tonight and talk for Bob is I have a little different story than anybody else. He stated that Bob and I went to high school together, though he looks much older than I do, and, in fact, Bob had a garage then. He stated that I believe it was his father's garage or a friend's that, at the time, as high school kids do, we drove cars and hung out together. He stated, well, Bob's place was somewhere where we could go and hang out. He stated that we went there and he helped work on cars numerous times and he helped my car and never charged me anything then and we had no problems. He stated that my wife and I built our home in Valparaiso about six months ago, just moved out here. He stated that I had lost contact with Bob all those years from high school as many of us do and I was happy to find out through a mutual friend that Bob was in the area. He stated that I've been over to his house several times visiting with him and talking to him. He stated that recently with our new home I purchased a large tractor and I've had problems with it. He stated that I'm a manager of the MIS department at St. Anthony's, so, to me, it's a big greasy thing that I won't even touch. He stated that if it's a computer, I'll fix it; engines I don't touch. He stated that Bob has offered me batteries for my tractor when I thought I had a battery problem - no charge. He stated that with the big snowstorm we had I was out plowing my driveway and for some reason my tractor just stalled, right in the middle of my driveway. He stated that Bob heard about it and said he would be over and help me if I needed it. He stated that again, I knew nothing about any of this stuff and he volunteered free of charge to come over and help. He stated that as long as I've known Bob I've been that way and we had a lot of friends in high school that hung out and he was always there for them and I'm very fortunate now to find out that he's here for me now, because I know if I have a problem with a car, Bob can come to my house and help me, or, if it's running, I can bring it to his house and again, as many people have said, the stipulation is, I have to get my fingers dirty and work on it there, but I know that I've got someone that knows what we're doing and can help me out, not just taking it to a place and paying them exorbitant fees. He stated that I can take it to somebody where, as long as I buy the parts and say thank you to him, he's going to take care of it for me. He stated that I really appreciate that.

Randy Duncan, 553 W. Division Road, Valparaiso, stated that now that we've established that Bob is the most wonderful person in the whole, wide world, a person can be a wonderful, wonderful person, but you don't see my issues with the situation. He stated that the reason why he's here is that he's been running an auto repair business out of his building and I can't help but remember earlier in the meeting you were talking about someone building a garage, and your statement was, are you going to run a business out of it; no, okay fine. He stated, again, you did the same thing, are you going to run a business, no, fine. He stated that this is the problem here. He stated that he's running a business out of his garage. He stated that we're talking about how clean he keeps his property. He stated that he is showing pictures to the Board. He stated that that's a 6-foot fence there and you will see multiple amounts of automobiles on the property time after time, garage door opening, not visiting, garage door opening, not visiting. He stated, more junk cars all over the place, cars in the driveway, more cars, not his, more cars, not his, more cars not his. He stated that that is what has been happening in his yard. He stated that everybody comes up here and says yeah, his yard is all clean and everything. He stated that yeah, his yard is clean now because he's had two warnings. He stated that the first warning was the 31st of October and he did not do nothing (sic). He stated that he had a second warning from the lawyer, and that's when he decided to clean the yard up and now everyone is saying his yard is clean; pictures don't lie. He stated that you see cars that have been sitting overnight, snow-covered cars, another car in the garage, another car on the other side of the garage, here's another car in the garage and another car in the garage on his lift rack that he put in and it wasn't there when he bought the property, multiple cars going into the garage, more cars on the property. He stated that these are all within a 60-day period, more cars on the property. He stated that this is after the second violation was sent to him, this was a 15-day period. He stated, you look at this picture out front - that's where he keeps his cars and works on them and he makes it look like people are just visiting his home. He stated that here's cars stored on his property covered with snow and been there for months. He stated that here's another car going to be worked on and here's another vehicle out front - that's where he puts all his cars…more cars in the garage, now he's decided since he's been caught and has to clean up his property, you'll notice there's a tarp put on his garage so you can't see cars going in and out, and, if you look close on this picture, you can see a car going in there. He stated that he's got the tarp set with the fence so if you're out at the road you can't see. He stated that over the weekend he put a fire truck in front of the garage, thinking that I'm going to take pictures of the cars going in and out, there was four of them Sunday and there was (sic) two of them being worked on in the driveway. He stated that one thing I also want to mention is that I have bought two 24-hour surveillance cameras and they are on my property now and are in operational method and they are scanning the perimeter of the property, so, therefore, who knows? He stated that there is another wrecker you see coming in, bringing cars on his property. He stated that here is another car being worked on on his property, three or four cars being worked on on his property. He stated that here is another truck being worked on on his property. He stated that here is another wrecker coming to his property. He stated that we have established already that he's not running a business and his property is nice and clean. He stated that if you look at this one picture here, both these cars belong to Al Cherny, the one man that was up here and both the engines were taken out of these cars and put in two other cars that he had so these were his cars sitting on his property and they sat there, you can see, with the pictures when the trees were full of leaves and then as the leaves left the trees they were there. He stated they were there for a lengthy period of time. He stated that the letter was totally ignored by Mr. Janda and that's where you see where these pictures come from and the second letter was sent to Mr. Janda on 1-15-03 and it was ignored because I showed you he kept on doing his business out of his garage. He stated that I've taken these pictures to Steve Nigro on January 13, 2003 and at that time the second notice was sent to him to clear his property and in that third set of film you see that it was not cleared and he kept on doing his business out of his garage. He stated that in these pictures you also see cars in his garage and they are clearly a professional situation here. He stated that I don't think you all work on cars like this. He stated that during this period of time, you can see, I don't know the exact number of cars, but I counted over 70 vehicles during the first period of time and the second period of time, about 15 vehicles on those pictures, so this is basically seeing that he's a nice guy, but he's doing a business in that garage. He stated that this is what I've had to put up with. He stated, traffic at a residential auto repair shop, ongoing activity unacceptable with a residential area. He stated that as you can see, it's been pretty heavy and it's been this way since those guys moved in that property. He stated that the only reason he cleaned up is because he got letters. He stated, cars in and out of the property at any given time, loud cars with bad mufflers, exhaust from cars at hours at a time in the driveway, headlights shining in my windows at any given time, and drinking, loud talk, vulgar language and coming back and arguing over misjudged or bad auto repairs. He stated, also listening to impact wrenches. He stated, he's saying he's going to do all this inside and he's saying it's going to be a hobby, but the letter still says "auto repair business" on the petition. He stated, also listening to impact wrenches at any given time, customers using my back fence as a toilet. He stated, even one time somebody actually peed on my arm, through my fence and laughed at me, customers at his property. He stated I seen (sic) on the Janda property, and Mr. Nigro has, also, cars with leaking antifreeze, leaking transmission fluid, leaking oil and the girl just admitted she had an oil leak in her car, driving it on and off of Mr. Janda's property. He stated, I seen (sic) a pile of motors and transmissions that set there for months, leaking into the water table and they just set there leaking in the water table. He stated, also, Mr. Janda cannot show any receipts on any chemical being recovered from his property, such as I spoke, transmission fluid, oil, anything like that by any reputable recovery service, such as Safety-Kleen or Future Recovery. He stated that by law an automobile repair shop, if you buy a gallon of oil, the recovery service better come there and get a gallon back. He stated that that's not happening over there. He stated, please keep in mind, my water supply comes from this water table he's polluting with his water repair shop in my back yard. He stated that, property values, you're talking about my property adjacent to the Janda residence. He stated that if Mr. Janda is allowed to continue in his running this auto repair as a business, which, in the letter that I received states, the property, which it states on that letter that he's running a business. He stated that this drastically ruins the value of my property. He asked, how am I - in fact, I want to - sell my own property. He stated that it will devaluate (sic) my property so that I will have to sell it at a loss. He stated that I did not buy it to take a big loss. He stated that the law requires that when there is something adjacent to the property that you are selling, you have to disclose any problem to the buyers of the property, such as an adjacent auto repair shop, garbage dump, toxic waste, junk yards. He asked, who would buy my property if I told them, hey, I've got an automobile repair shop back here, be it indoors or outdoors; who'd buy it? He asked, who would want to give me what the property is worth? He stated, okay, tax issues. He stated that I hope the County will not allow this to continue on the Janda property. He asked, how can the County allow Mr. Janda to continue running a cash business on his property which is, in anyone's eyes is tax embezzlement, tax fraud. He stated that he's also buying parts, paying sales tax and passing these on to the customer and not reporting this. He stated that in anyone's eyes that's tax fraud, tax embezzlement. He stated, also, if approved, is the County going to give him permission to commit tax fraud. He stated that since he's been there I've counted 522 vehicles on his property. He stated that that's in the 2.5 years he's been there. He stated, he never thought I was keeping an eye out on him, but I was. He stated that if he's allowed to continue this, I will turn him into the IRS for tax evasion, believe me, I have the evidence. He stated, so, the County, I say, do not approve this. He stated, to Mr. Janda, I say, stop, before I do turn you in, because, believe me, I will call the IRS. He stated that what I want to explain here is that letter is called hobby; to me, this is restoring a car, does this mean you are working on your own vehicle, your own truck, a hobby project, which is on your property, or is this just a way to get a permanent variance and you will go back to the past working on vehicles for the general public for cash money that I've already proved you have a very large clientele, and also, the County, is there still states auto repair business and it's zoned residential. He stated, to Mr. Janda, you yourself have told me in the past have told me your garage is your cash money business, more than you make at work. He stated, to the County: This isn't just a hobby. He stated, no one would even have noticed it or bothered with Mr. Janda. He stated that it's not about that. He stated that he also hired a lawyer so he could continue his hobby to me, sounds like a desperation to continue his cash flow business, which, once again, is tax evasion. He stated, to the County, any variance will be, if so approved, be specific to Mr. Janda's personal property or will it be allowed for the general public. He stated, Mr. Janda, on the tax issues, I spoke earlier, I advise you - in no way am I threatening you, it is good advice for you to stop. He stated, to the County, at the time of need for tax money from all of us, why would you let anybody get away without paying taxes when the County is in dire need of tax flow business. He stated I've got a lot more.

Mr. Detert stated, well, I wish you would summarize it, because we have additional business and you are being somewhat redundant.

Mr. Duncan stated, okay, we'll start with Number 1 on the first page: We are talking about safety and stuff. He asked, now what if he pulls a car in his garage and it's got a gasket and all of a sudden the whole neighborhood is leveled. He asked, does he have insurance to cover this? He stated, say it does happen, okay, then let's go to

A. He stated, access adjoining the property. He stated that it will be difficult and frustrating because it's in my back yard, 40 feet from my fence. He stated, he's got 3 acres; put it on the other side of his 3 acres - I wouldn't have a problem with it, but it's 40 feet from my fence. He stated, B: He's saying that people don't have to back out on the road. He stated that 90 percent of the people have to back out on Division Road, so what does that have to do with letting him run a business there? He stated, C: it will generate additional traffic right there. He stated, yes, it will, okay D. He stated, okay, it will, a home auto repair service will change the character of the locality, absolutely. He stated let's go to Number 2, A, we've got two A's there: it says this has, uh, changed, the values of the property by 31 percent - it's done nothing but hurt my property. He stated, we'll go to A again: Once again, loud cars, exhaust fumes, air tools, so how am I to enjoy my back yard. He stated, B, I put that privacy fence up because people were parking straight off from his garage and using my yard as a toilet. He stated I put it up to block it from my wife and my family and myself. He stated, cars were brought in, dropped off, people get out and they leave and get the other car. He stated, he probably never even knew that was happening, because he never speaks to me. He stated, we don't get along very well because of this issue here. He stated, so the fence is mine.. you can see in the pictures that it does nothing to block his garage and what is going on there. He stated, on C, if so granted, if so it is granted, there has to be maximum restrictions here, and I am hoping the County will not grant this at all. He stated, Okay, Number 3: You read what it says, peculiar of the property; if he wants to run a high-volume repair shop in his back yard, I don't want it. He stated, A: It's 3 acres in size, but, once again, it's right adjacent to my back property. He stated, once again, all the doors are facing my property, so I have to put up with cars in and out, the lights, the traffic, the cars running, the exhaust fumes on and on. He stated that now we're going to 4, it says there, why would it be a hardship to him - he has a good job. He asked, how would this be any kind of a hardship to his property when he has a good job? He stated that I don't understand exactly what that means. He stated, then, on his own letter it says he has a right to work on his own private property. He stated, nobody ever said anything about him working on his own private property. He stated, then, again, it jumps back and says so long as they're conducting a business on his property, on his own petition. He stated, and I don't want a business on his property. He stated that then we go on about the vehicles and he put that in himself, so that's not a good point. He stated, go on to Number 5: Okay, should the comprehensive plan be changed because of one man, or is it the auto repair shop, indoors or outdoors that won't be good for a residential area, especially for me, adjacent to it. He stated, that was A, sorry. He stated, okay, yes it does, on my behalf, my back yard is only 40 feet from the garage and he will be using it for a high-volume repair business and you do not want to think when it's 90 degrees outside, are his doors going to be closed, is this going to be outside, is the public going to be outside, are his customers going to be outside? He stated, I say, no, and I will, again, I say, no, and I will again have my enjoyment interrupted by air tools, exhaust fumes and traffic going in and out and I will have no enjoyment from my back yard if he continues to pollute the ground and I will lose my…my well will be poisoned. He stated, that's what I have to say.

Mr. Detert stated, thank you, sir.

Mr. Leeth stated that one of the things I think is important is to recognize that what is transpiring on this property is a large number of people are visiting the property. He stated that the photographs show that. He stated that the testimony from the supporting public reflects that, as well, but not all of the vehicles that you see represented in those photographs are being worked on, and not all of the vehicles that are being worked on, is there any cash or contributions being made to Mr. and Mrs. Janda. He stated that the payment of money, I believe, is what you have indicated is the triggering for your business, under your ordinance. He stated that there was a significant amount of testimony tonight that indicated that Mr. Janda donates, by and large, his services, and there is, perhaps, from time to time, a repayment or reimbursement of expenses in the parts; that's the testimony tonight. He stated that Mr. Duncan hasn't testified at all that he is aware of any exchange of money; he just surmises that there is, but he hasn't presented you any evidence - I certainly didn't see any - that there was an exchange of money, which makes it a business. He stated that we've testified that it happens, from time to time and that's what brings us to you for our petition tonight. He stated that when Mr. Janda received the notice from your office, from Mr. Nigro, it was (inaudible). He stated that Mr. J anda contacted the Plan Commission office and I was contacted shortly thereafter and on Feb. 19th we were anticipating having a hearing. He stated that, unfortunately, my schedule did not allow my attendance, so we asked Mr. Nigro to allow us to continue the case over to this evening's hearing; it was not ignored. He stated that there was evidence presented that there was some type of contamination occurring because the work includes fluids of waste oil. He stated that those are collected and taken to Mr. Janda's place of work for proper disposal. He stated that there was testimony that his property values have decreased, but we don't have any evidence as to how he comes to that conclusion or what expertise he has to make that statement to you. He stated that the testimony I gave to you was that when he purchased the property, there was an appraisal made. He stated that when he refinanced his property just last October, 2.5 years after he acquired the property, the appraisals, the difference in the appraisals, was an increase of $50,000 over that period of time. He stated that it doesn't sound to me like his property value is being diminished by the use of the property. He stated that there was all sorts of evidence of tax fraud, tax evasion - I'm not exactly sure how Mr. Duncan arrives at that legal conclusion, and I'm not going to try and sort through the facts and conclusions that he's made, but I don't see how that is, in any way, a credible statement. He stated that with regard to the fence that was erected, Mr. Duncan does have a rather nice privacy fence that's been erected, and some of the photographs, particularly the first one that I want to show to you, the first one, is I believe, the first photograph that Mr. Duncan presented to you. He stated, as well as a subsequent photograph. He stated, if you'll notice, the shingles of Mr. Duncan's roof appear in the foreground and that's because Mr. Duncan is on his roof taking that photograph. He stated that here is a photograph that Mr. and Mrs. Janda have taken from ground level showing Mr. Duncan's house. He stated that you can see the ladder in view and the ladder was there when I view the property, as well, so Mr. Duncan ascends the ladder to his roof to see the unsightly vehicles that he's expressed to you this evening. He stated that I guess if Mr. Duncan would like to remain with his two feet on the ground, then, perhaps, some of the unsightliness wouldn't be visible. He stated that what we have here, gentlemen, is a neighborhood dispute. He stated that I asked Mr. Janda for some public assistance, help. He stated that his neighbors, he indicated to me, were supportive and I suggested to him that it would be helpful to have a petition circulated and have some show up and speak on their behalf. He stated, in that conversation he asked me how many and I said, well, let's get five or six credible people who are in close proximity to your property, and that's how the petition was presented, and that's how Mr. and Mr. Janda have prepared for tonight's hearing. He stated that I got a voice mail message from Melissa approximately two days ago and she said on that message, gee, Mr. Leeth, I hope it's not a problem, but we're going to have more than five or six people here tonight at the hearing. He stated that I think you can tell what kind of people Mr. and Mrs. Janda are, and that's why the neighborhood has come out to support them. He stated that again, it is a business, under your technical interpretations, but it is something that is performed throughout the entire county and because of that, because it is a technical business, because there is money exchanging hands, from time to time, we are seeking a petition to allow Mr. Janda to continue to do what he's doing, and that's simply to help people, and if they choose to pay him, to compensate him for his time, but, by and large he doesn't take compensation and only gets reimbursed for parts, and that's the neighborly thing to do.

Mr. Duncan stated that it's still residential and is zoned residential and is not zoned for this.

Curtis Reifon, 542 W. Division Road, stated that I'd like to say… I know Bob ain't (sic) going to say it, but another gentleman said it…uh, Mr. Duncan's son is not well regarded in the neighborhood because of the way he acts…

Mr. Detert stated that we're not going to get into personal things.

Mr. Reifon stated, it's not personal. He stated that he walks into Bob's garage and doesn't even tell him. He stated that I seen (sic) him do it from the fire department when I been (sic) there.

Mr. Detert stated, you're out of order; sit down.

The public hearing was then closed.

Mr. Burns stated that I'd like to hear from Steve. He asked, Steve, what do you know about this case, what complaints?

Mr. Nigro stated, basically running a home auto repair business and a few items such as unplated vehicles, transmissions, engines, therefore, categorizing it by our definition as a junk yard.

Mr. Burns asked, you have seen vehicles being worked on?

Mr. Nigro stated, I've not seen vehicles being worked on. He stated, I'm not sure what hours Mr. Janda works on his vehicles.

Mr. Burns asked, what have you seen or your staff?

Mr. Nigro stated, unlicensed vehicles, I mean they're there to be worked on; automotive parts outside of that structure.

Mr. Burns asked, how many complaints?

Mr. Nigro stated, one.

Mr. Brickner stated that the question I have is that there were two letters sent to you? He asked, why did that require two letters to be sent?

Mr. Janda stated that after the first letter we called Stephen Nigro and asked what we had to do. He stated that all he told us to do was clean the place up, so we took all the engines, cause I work for a Chevy dealer and take the old parts and scrap up what I think is good and then I get rid of them. He stated that it accumulates and when I get a big enough pile I get rid of them, which is, I don't think that is wrong. He stated that there is no oil being drained out in the field or anything like that. He stated that I have horses, I have dogs, I'm not going to drain oil. He stated that I'm not going to put antifreeze out to have animals die. He stated that I had a dog die, I had a horse die overnight. He stated that they don't die overnight from antifreeze, they don't die overnight from oil. He stated that I don't know what caused it, I'm not blaming anybody, but I just don't think it's right. He stated that as for unlicensed cars, my wife has an uncle and he pulled the car and it's probably in that picture, the fire truck is my son's, I mean he's got that for 4-H, he's going to redo it and we got tractors, we're going to redo those, I mean it's for my son, I mean I ain't (sic) going to get rid of them for nobody (sic). He stated, uh, the unlicensed car - yeah, I still have it. He stated that it's in my garage. He stated that my wife's uncle bought it and I think he wants us to take it - it's a Cadillac and he wants it for my wife, but it needs a little bit of work. He stated that I had it outside, I put it in the garage because Mr. Nigro…

Mr. Brickner stated, but it took two letters, I mean…

Mr. Janda stated, no, the first letter I cleaned up. He stated, I had just about everything cleaned up.

Mr. Detert stated that I think you're getting into a lot of extraneous things that I think you need to answer his question.

Mr. Janda stated, the second letter…well, the first letter we did exactly what Steve said and we thought we were done; we didn't think we had to do anything else. He stated that we thought we were done, clear and fine, and then we got the second letter, so we contacted staff.

Mr. Brickner stated, but now you're asking the Board to approve something that we already have had a problem with and it took two letters to get cleared up. He stated that that doesn't bode well with me, anyway, that doesn't sit well. He stated that there's overwhelming evidence that this is a business that you're running here. He stated, I mean these pictures and these cars and the motors and the transmissions that Mr. Nigro saw.

Mr. Janda stated that they're all in one spot.

Mr. Brickner stated, and you do take money for repairing cars.

Mr. Janda stated, no, I don't. He stated, if I buy parts.

Mr. Brickner stated, to me, there's overwhelming evidence that this is a business, and, um, personally, I think it's a pretty big business. He stated, this is a permanent use variance that you're asking for, right? He stated, not temporary. He stated that this is a permanent use variance that you'd like this Board to grant, so that we have no recourse after tonight, if, in fact, the same situation does occur.

Mr. Leeth stated that what we have asked for is a permanent use variance - you are correct. He stated that it would be perpetual in time.

Mr. Brickner asked, why would a temporary variance…be more appropriate. He stated that we would have a chance to look…

Mr. Leeth stated that that is something that you can do. He stated that you can change a permanent use variance petition to a temporary. He stated that you can't go the other way - you can't take a temporary variance and make it a permanent. He stated that that's the first reason why we applied for a permanent use variance. He stated, Number 2, though, whether it's permanent or whether it's temporary, what you can do is attach reasonable conditions and that's what I invite you to do, because what we have seen is a large number of automobiles, but I disagree with you, Mr. Brickner. He stated that I don't believe that what you've seen in those photographs indicates that it's a business. He stated that we've admitted that there's acceptance of money tonight; that's what makes it a business, but the number of photographs doesn't make it a business, because I can drive out to any parking lot in downtown Valparaiso and find a large number of cars, but does that make it a business? He stated that it's what's happening to those cars, and I suggest to you that Mr. Janda is really the only one working on the cars that receives payment. He stated that it is our testimony tonight that some people bring their cars to Mr. Janda's property and they themselves work on it. He stated that that's not a business, that's not illegal, under your ordinance. He stated that the only thing that makes it a business is if Mr. Janda accepts money from someone else for him working on their car. He stated that we've heard testimony that most of the people don't pay Mr. Janda. He stated that some do. He stated that what I've done is I've accepted Mr. Nigro's interpretation that this is a business and I've done that because Mr. Janda tells me that his in-laws or his mother or father and family will maybe not pay him directly, but will give the children money because he's worked on their car. He stated that if that's a business, we'll acknowledge that and that's why we're here, but I don't think that that's the true sense of what your ordinance means when it says a business. He stated, when I think of a business in an auto repair shop, I think of the flashing lights, the Joe's Auto Shop and hours of operation. He stated that Mr. Janda is a one-man shop, if you will. He stated that he does it himself, he works full-time and this is his hobby, as well as his business. He stated that he's accepting money, and that's what we're asking for you to accept: let him do what he continues to do with no employees, reasonable hours of operation, those are the things that you can do to impose reasonable restrictions to allow this petition to proceed.

Mr. Brickner stated that I just have one other question and then I'll let somebody else talk. He asked, how many vehicles do you own? He asked, how many vehicles do you have at your place?

Mr. Janda stated, three, three that are operable, but I have a fire engine, I have four tractors, uh, and hay wagons, I mean…

Mr. Brickner stated, but you own three cars.

Mr. Janda stated, we drive three cars.

Mr. Leeth stated that the other thing that I wanted to mention is in one of the photographs there was a low-boy with two junked cars on there. He stated that those were neighbors of Mr. Janda's cars and he's getting them on his low-boy, getting them out of the neighborhood - he's cleaning things up. He stated that Mr. Duncan comes along and snaps a picture and all of a sudden it's supposed to be a black mark on Mr. Janda's property. He stated that I think we've heard testimony that he's cleaned up his property to the tune of $50,000 in 2.5 years.

Mr. Burns stated that apparently Bob is a good neighbor and a nice guy, but he's operating a business. He stated, okay, maybe some money is exchanged, maybe some is not, maybe it's bartering - it's still a business and it hinges on a junk yard. He stated that some of the pictures that I've seen looks like a junk yard. He stated that it's a full-fledged business and this is not a neighborhood business.

Mr. Hudson asked, you work 40 hours a week?

Mr. Janda stated, 40 to 50.

Mr. Hudson asked, Monday through Friday?

Mr. Janda stated, Monday through Saturday.

Mr. Hudson asked, and most of your hobby hours are…

Mr. Janda stated, from 6 to 9 - I mean that's about all the time I have to spend.

Mr. Hudson asked, Sundays?

Mr. Janda stated, no, never. He stated, I mean I'm out in my drive and my cousins may come over and have their cars or whatever. He stated that that Sunday that he was talking about four cars, well it was my uncle and my cousins that are sitting back there. He asked, what am I supposed to tell them to do? He asked, tell them not to come over?

Mr. Hudson stated that through these photos here we've seen a lot of vehicles.

Mr. Janda stated that this is one of the vehicles that was unplated - that's my wife's uncle.

Mr. Hudson asked, the blue pickup.

Mr. Janda stated that that's Greg Dille's. He stated that it broke down on Division and I told him to put it there and then get it out of there.

Mr. Hudson asked, the red one?

Mr. Janda stated that that's my vehicle.

Mr. Hudson asked, the truck?

Mr. Janda stated, that's Keith Sweeney's, he's a neighbor, he's a friend.

Mr. Hudson asked, he has a towing service?

Mr. Janda stated, yes. He stated that these two cars in question (inaudible).

Mr. Hudson stated that there are a lot of vehicles. He asked, this green pickup?

Mr. Janda stated that that's my sister-in-law's . He stated that plus I work for Team Chevy and I do a lot of diagnosis. He stated that I do a lot of drivability. He stated that I drive cars home from work all the time. He stated that he's got a letter from my boss stating that I do that. He stated I do it all the time. He stated that I probably drive two or three cars a week home.

Mr. Hudson asked, in your hobby - how many cars do you have there at any one time, can you estimate, that you would be working on?

Mr. Janda stated, one or two.

Mr. Hudson asked, one or two a day, one or two a week?

Mr. Janda stated that maybe I would say three to four a week, at most. He stated, and most of them are family and friends that come over. He stated, I mean, I didn't think it was a crime. He stated that this truck here - that's my brother-in-law, Steve. He stated that he couldn't make it tonight. He stated, this truck here - this car is mine. He stated, this truck here is (inaudible) - he's in the back there.

Mr. Hudson asked, how do you take care of the, uh, you say you take the fluids - how do you collect them?

Mr. Janda stated, I take them to work. He stated that I've got a drain pan and I dump it in a 5-gallon can and I take it to work on my truck. He stated that my boss says it's okay because they have, they come and collect it. He stated that I don't dump anything out there, I mean…

Mr. Hudson stated, so, if you drain and I don't know if it's possible - my wife's car is always down a quart, so if she puts five quarts in there wouldn't be five coming out because she only has four, like her daughter. He stated, so, but you take, you take out and you put in and everything that you take out…

Mr. Janda stated, everything, and it's always in the garage. He stated that there is nothing outside.

Mr. Hudson stated, when you take a transmission apart…

Mr. Janda stated that I don't take transmissions apart, I don't do that. He stated, I mean, it's just something that I don't have tools for that and I have no reason to do that.

Mr. Hudson asked, do you paint?

Mr. Janda stated, no, never.

Mr. Hudson stated, the loud noises, the jack hammer, I mean the impact hammer…

Mr. Janda stated that this gentleman right here lives closer than he does and he says 40 feet - he lives 150 feet from my door to his back door.

Mr. Hudson stated, vehicles running, I think he said, for hours at a time.

Mr. Janda stated, no, I don't think there's ever been one out there running for hours at a time. He stated that the fire department's there almost five days a week and they always have their fire trucks outside running, always, every time they're there.

Mr. Detert stated that I guess the part that bothers me is one of the things that was mentioned, asking for a permanent use variance, which would mean that's transferable to somebody else that may come up.

Mr. Hudson stated that it would be more palatable for me as a use variance, and not a permanent use variance, and Mr. Leeth explained that.

Mr. Detert stated that I guess the other thing that bothers me is there's an awful lot of vehicles there in the pictures and it would seem to me that that's not acceptable on a residential lot. He stated that if he's going to work on cars, it has to be quietly and the cars have to be inside.

Mr. Hudson stated, if all those cars that were sitting there he was working on, I would agree. He stated that if we limit his number of cars that he would have there to be working on, if he wants to have 50 people over, and he would have 50 cars, that's…

Mr. Detert stated, that's his business, but unlicensed vehicles are not palatable. He stated that there was testimony that there were unlicensed vehicles.

Mr. Leeth stated that the point is well-taken: No matter what you do with the petition tonight, Mr. Janda is still going to have all these friends and they are still going to come and visit and the photographs are still going to be there. He stated that it's what he does with the business of the auto repair. He stated that we've heard Mr. Janda testify that he's doing three or four cars a week.

Mr. Detert stated, I guess it's bothering me - if there are unlicensed cars there they don't belong there. He stated that if there are transmissions or motors or something sitting around, you know, that's kind of unacceptable - you wouldn't want it next door to you, so…I think that kind of stuff, if he's allowed here, needs to be cleaned up.

Mr. Leeth stated, and that's true and I think what we've done in my first meeting with the Jandas is we talked about the unlicensed or unplated vehicles and I indicated to him that he needed to remove those from the property or put those indoors, and I think he's done that since he's received the letters of notification from Mr. Nigro.

Mr. Detert asked, but didn't he continue working after he received the first letter?

Mr. Leeth stated, yes.

Mr. Detert asked, why didn't he conform after the first letter? He stated that obviously that stated that he was not allowed to run a business on his property. He asked, why would he ignore that?

Mr. Leeth stated, well, perhaps that's my fault then, because it's always been my understanding that when a citizen receives a zoning enforcement letter, as long as they have applied to this Board there is no enforcement action until after the action of the BZA. He stated that that was my understanding and I didn't advise Mr. Janda to conform his activity otherwise.

Mr. Hudson stated, the parts that were talked about - you said you…

Mr. Janda stated, yeah, when I bring parts home…

Mr. Hudson asked, why do they have to…

Mr. Janda stated that well, I stopped doing that after the first time we got the letter. He stated that Steve, I contacted Steve and I talked to him, and I asked him what I needed to do. He stated that he said get rid of the engines because it's considered a junk yard. He stated that I think it was that weekend that I had everything gone, so then we have a wood rack, my wife called up Steve and asked if we could put a couple under the cover so nobody could see any of that.

Ms. Janda stated, no, that wasn't him?

Mr. Janda asked, who'd you talk with ?

Mr. Detert stated, ma'am you're out of order.

Mr. Janda stated, anyway, we called to see what we had to do, and then when we did what we had to do, and there has been no junk lying around since that day.

Mr. Hudson stated, they talked about tarp or something that was covering the garage…

Mr. Janda stated, no, it was covering the door. He asked, how would you feel if every time you opened your door, somebody flashed a picture of you? He stated that it gets old.

Mr. Hudson asked, it wasn't over the building?

Mr. Janda stated, no, it's on the inside of the building when I open the door. He stated that it's just so that he doesn't have to be taking pictures of me. He stated that I feel like I'm a fish.

Mr. Detert stated that there's another gentleman that we've had trouble with at 675, and I guess it's been noted that his truck has been at your house.

Mr. Janda stated, he's a friend of mine.

Mr. Detert asked, are you doing work for him?

Mr. Janda stated, never, I never have once.

Mr. Detert asked, are you sending work to him?

Mr. Janda stated, no.

Mr. Brickner asked, why is his tow truck there?

Mr. Janda stated, he's a friend. He stated that he drops his dog off. He stated that it's his primary truck and his wife has a car. He stated that he visits me at work and he's been where I live many times, I mean…

Mr. Leeth stated that I would like to submit to the record, Mr. Janda referred to the letter from his service director at Team Chevy that he does bring vehicles home on test drives at the lunch hour for diagnostic purposes.

Mr. Hudson asked, if you couldn't take the spent oils or spent fluids to your business, do you have another outlet?

Mr. Janda stated, sure, any quick oil change will take it.

Mr. Brickner moved to deny Case 03-PUV-1, finding that the proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because it is proposed, as is presently the case, there is a business being run from this facility that entails repairing of automobiles and the changing of oils and fluids that have to be disposed of and the extremely large number of cars at this residential area would be a hazard; the use and value of the area adjacent to the property would be affected in a substantially adverse manner because the large number of automobiles that are being stored at this facility, either to be repaired or that belong to the petitioner is exorbitant and the petitioner does perform repairs on these automobiles that could be noisy and a nuisance to the adjoining property owners; the need for the variance does not arise from a condition peculiar to the property because of the zoning in this area is rural residential and does not allow any type of business to be run at this site; the strict application of the terms of the ordinance would not constitute an unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought because this petitioner has a job that entails working 40 to 60 hours a week and is not dependent on repairing automobiles at this site for a living.

Discussion:

Mr. Detert stated that I guess my only comment is that if this is rejected out of hand, the gentleman does do some free work and particularly close to me is the fire department and he does free work for them. He stated that I would think that we could have through a use variance and monitor it and if he didn't conform then we could take appropriate action, but I think since he's helping a legitimate enterprise like the fire department that is dependent, to a great extent on the citizens of the area, I feel like, maybe we've gone a little too far without exploring alternatives.

Mr. Hudson stated, I would agree.

Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which failed on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - Yes Burns - Yes Hudson - No
Detert - No

Mr. Hudson moved to approve this Case for 2 years, changing it to the appropriate use variance number, subject to only three vehicles a week, Monday-Saturday; that there be no outside storage of any unlicensed vehicles; the hours Monday-Friday would be 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturday from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.; no outside storage of any parts; no signage of any type; that work for the fire department be done at the fire station itself; no Sunday work; the area to be kept clean. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which failed on the following ballot vote:

Brickner - No Burns - No Hudson - Yes
Detert - Yes

Case 03-PUV-2. Petition of Jeffrey Jirtle, 252 W. U.S. Hwy, 6, Valparaiso, seeking a Permanent Use Variance for a landscaping and excavating business and contractor's storage yard, to be located on the South side of U.S. Hwy 6, between SR 149 and CR 200 W., in Liberty Township.

Mr. Jirtle stated that I'm seeking this Permanent Use Variance so that we can use the frontage for signage and prove that we do exist in this County and that we're a productive member and this would be our permanent location. He stated that the storage yard is something that we need to keep our materials, whether they be something that would be left over from a job or something that we would have delivered in a bulk type, um, those items would be stored to the back of the property around the existing barns and they would be settled in permanent bins, such as you see in some of the other landscape yards.

Andy Bruce, 162 Mallard Pointe Dr., Valparaiso, stated that I oppose this. He stated that I presently work for a general contractor in Chicago and I know some of the wonders of a construction site, um, one, the high traffic volume. He stated, presently on Route 6, if you go down Route 6 in the mornings there is a high traffic volume and roads, 200 W. in particular, that is not the greatest. He stated that the traffic volume, with this added traffic from a landscape company it will be a little bit later than I travel in the morning or when I come in the evening or on weekends, but when I intend to leave, I now have to wait longer to get out on Route 6. He asked, are they going to put a traffic light there to accommodate this increased traffic? He stated that he also says that he's going to use this as an excavating storage site or equipment storage site. He stated that the equipment is very heavy. He asked, are we going to increase the maintenance of Route 6? He asked, how about the added lanes if you want to go that route for the added traffic; where are you going to put the added lanes? He stated that I don't think anyone in Mallard Pointe Landing wants a highway any closer to their back yard, nor the subdivision across Route 6. He stated that he says that's he's going to use this area as a materials storage. He asked, is he going to be storing a whole bunch of dirt behind, mounds of dirt, rock? He stated, I definitely don't want to see that every morning and every evening when I come home. He asked, what about all that stuff that falls off the vehicle as he goes up and down Route 6? He stated that I don't need to wash my vehicles off. He stated that I ride a motorcycle. He stated, if I hit that stuff I could wipe out and injure myself or injure someone else.

John Mitchell, 171 Mallard Point Drive, stated that I echo his sentiments on the traffic. He stated that my biggest thing is that it's a nice country area out where we live now with a lot of trees and the land he's talking about was a cornfield. He stated that it's kind of nice right now off my front door and my front gate looking at something like that rather than tractors and bulldozers and equipment that would be sitting around. He stated that things do tend to get out of hand after a while with construction companies. He stated that what they say at the beginning is okay, down the line, 6 months, a year from now what it may look like, I'm concerned.

Michael Nowak, 184 Mallard Pointe Drive, stated that I am the president of the association. He stated that we have gone around and gathered a petition, which I would like to present to the Board, of all homeowners within the association. He stated that unfortunately, some are not able to attend this evening, but they have provided us with their signatures in opposing this landscaping business being put across from our subdivision. He stated that one of the problems we;/re looking at is decreasing our property values. He stated that what's the chances of people wanting to purchase our properties with a large business with equipment right outside our windows? He stated that as other people have mentioned, we've already had problems with traffic at 200 and Route 6. He asked, what's it going to be like when we have trucks? He stated that right now that whole area, except for that piece of land, is all residential homes. He stated that if somebody was proposing to put residential homes here at this time, we wouldn't be here this evening, but being a business we can see that being a very negative impact on our community.

Tom Sullivan, 163 Mallards Pointe Drive, stated that I am the vice president of the association. He stated that I believe that the land he is talking about is zoned residential and I think it should stay that way and I believe Mike and the other fellows just said about everything that I could say.

Dorothea Snyder, Coldwell Banker, stated that I represent Wind Ridge, which is across the street. She stated that I do the marketing for them over there. She stated that I'd like to read a very brief letter, if I may from the developer of Wind Ridge: "Dear Board members, as the developer of Wind Ridge subdivision, we'd like to express our views strongly against the permanent variance to the property located across the street. This property should remain zoned residential, which is consistent with the zoning of the surrounding adjacent properties. Changing the zoning would negatively impact on all the homeowners in the area. This area has seen a positive turnaround in the last few years with the development of homes in the $175,000 to $270,000 price range. The addition of a storage yard and landscape material business would create noise, dust, unwanted traffic and additional drainage concerns in this area. I believe a review of traffic, noise and drainage studies will prove this point. We recommend that due diligence be done in providing these. I strongly urge you to consider the views and wants of the residents in the area and vote against this proposal.'' She stated that it is signed by Donald Kislett, the managing partner. She stated that I just had several other points that I would like to raise, if I could. She stated that again, the issue here that it is zoned residential and we have some beautiful homes out there and also the Mallard Pointe out there, as well. She stated that the dirt and the noise and the dust from there would be a real problem. She stated that if, indeed, part of that is asphalted, then we'd run into the problem of drainage, which has always been a very delicate issue in that corridor right through there and that would be a serious challenge. She stated, in fact, when we were putting in Wind Ridge, one of the things that we had to do, one of the things that was required, was retention ponds, etc, which would be very helpful to pursue that problem, if, indeed, this wo