August 16, 2012

Chairman Neuer noted the time and stated that the Board will recess for 10 minutes and Mr. Stewart can address those items when they resume. Chairman Neuer called for a recess at 9:32 pm. Chairman Neuer resumed the meeting at 9:42 pm. Mr. Keller stated that the applicant does require a “C” variance for side yard encroachment of the 24’ access driveway. Mr. Davis asked to amend the application including the “C” variance for the driveway encroaching on the side yard. Chairman Neuer stated that because this is a minor variance the applicant is not required to notice again. Chairman Neuer noted, for the record, that Mr. Quentzel could not vote on this application and he has left the meeting. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Keller to continue where he left off regarding the items on page 3 of his technical review memo, dated 6/4/12, regarding the site plan comments which still needed to be addressed. Ttem #2 - The stop bar has been noted as 12” in width. Item #3 - The driveway design is subject to NIDOT approval. Ttem #4 - Width of the driveway is not dimensioned on the plans; it will be noted on the plan at a minimum of 6’ wide. Item #5 — Installation of a sanitary pump in the sewer line will be added to the details on the amended plans Item #6 - Additional spot grades at the exit door will be included in the amended plans. Item #7 - Stability calculations and velocity for the slope of the 18” pipe to the scour hole will be included in the amended plans. Item #8 — The applicant has submitted a copy of the soil logs. Item #9 - Soil type will be indicated on the soil erosion plan. Item #10 - Architectural plans will identify the location of the HVAC units and the screening that will be provided; Mr. Freedenfeld will address this. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Stewart to confirm the height of the wall. He asked if the highest point of the wall is on the east side of the building in the rear. Mr. Stewart said yes, and stated that the wall is 10’ and the fence on top of itis 4’, Mr. Keller recommended that they amend the application and ask for a height variance. Mr. Davis moved to amend consistent with Mr. Keller’s suggestion; the amendment was accepted by Chairman Neuer as minor and not requiring further notice. Mr. Buechler questioned the 12 parking spaces that are currently being proposed. He said that at the last meeting they proposed 13 spaces and asked why

euer as minor and not requiring further notice. Mr. Buechler questioned the 12 parking spaces that are currently being proposed. He said that at the last meeting they proposed 13 spaces and asked why they reduced the number. Mr. Stewart said that it has to do with the configuration of the driveway and the dumpsicr location. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Stewart if he thinks 12 parking spaces are adequate for this facility. Mr. Stewart stated that the first set of plans shows 12 parking spaces. Chairman Neuer stated [9]