Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homeowner offered $1,500 settlement after county finds post‑construction setback violations
Summary
After the county said an after‑the‑fact violation exposed the owner to fines of up to $300 per day, the Kosciusko County zoning board approved a $1,500 settlement and required an after‑the‑fact permit and a $250 fee as an alternative to court action.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Kosciusko County Board of Zoning Appeals on July 14 approved a $1,500 settlement option for the owners involved in an after‑the‑fact setback violation, offering the alternative of paying the settlement and obtaining an after‑the‑fact permit instead of pursuing civil enforcement.
Director Matt Sandy and board members outlined the county’s enforcement exposure: under the ordinance, the county could seek daily fines of up to $300 per day plus attorney’s fees for work built without required permits. Staff estimated the violation window at a minimum of six months, which could translate to substantial penalties if pursued in court.
Dean Bontrager, speaking for the builder, told the board the construction error occurred because foundation layout used a drip line instead of the intended stake reference. Bontrager said he did not realize the error until after the house was built.
The board voted to offer the petitioner the settlement option of $1,500, plus a mandatory after‑the‑fact permit and fee ($250), and deferred further legal action if the petitioner accepts. Board members also discussed the possibility of pursuing the full statutory remedy in court should the petitioner decline.
What the settlement does and does not do: The settlement allows the structure to remain if the owner pays and secures the post‑construction permit. It does not erase the county’s statutory right to seek higher penalties if the settlement is not accepted; the record shows the board chose settlement as a pragmatic alternative to litigious enforcement.

