PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2004
10:00 A.M.

The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioner convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 in the Commissioners' Chambers of the Administration Center.

Those present: Commissioners David Burrus, John Evans, and Robert Harper and County Attorney Gwenn Rinkenberger.

President David Burrus called the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Evans moved to approve the payroll of January 12, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes of November 4, 2003 and November 18, 2003, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

BOARD APPOINTMENTS FOR 2004

Com. Burrus, "This is a holdover from our previous meeting where we had a delay on some of our annual board appointments. There were some questions that had to be answered regarding the qualifications of certain candidates. We want to address the remainder of these today. The first one was an expiration of term on the Drainage Board. We did not have a complete application on that but as the president of the Board, I would like to recommend that we re-appoint Harold Haberlin. Because of some changes in the Board structure, the rotational dates are not exactly where they should be."

Drainage Board

Com. Burrus moved to appoint Harold Haberlin for a one year term to expire on December 31, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Hospital Building Board of Trustees

Com. Burrus, "The next item going down our list would be the Hospital Building Board of Trustees. The incumbent did not reapply and we have two names who have applied. John, do you care to look at those or make a motion?"

Com. Evans moved to appoint John Dimos for that position,

Com. Burrus, "John, you may want to check to be sure that is your intent."

Com. Evans withdrew the previous motion and moved to nominate Wayne Weaver,

Com. Burrus, "Any discussion?"

Com. Harper, "No, but he doesn't have a second yet."

Com. Burrus, "Do you care to second?"

Com. Harper, "No."

Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

PTABOA

Com. Burrus, "The third position here, I don't know if we are prepared at this point. It is the for the Porter County Tax Appeal Board. John, do you know what the status is on that one?

Com. Evans, "We haven't received another candidate, there is still one position vacant."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, then we will stand by on that one. The next board that has a remaining appointment to be made is the Board of Zoning Appeals."

Board of Zoning Appeals

Com. Burrus, "We have two vacancies to fill. Both of those are required to be Republican affiliates. Any discussion on these two?"

Com. Evans, "No, I will nominate the two incumbents board members."

Com. Evans moved to appoint Richard Hudson and Marvin Brickner, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

South Haven Advisory Board

Com. Burrus, "John, you had a comment about the South Haven Advisory Board?"

Com. Evans, "We have received no applications at all for that Board so I think we will wait to hear from them. All their appointments expired on the 31st of December, 2003."

Joseph Kasper, "Excuse me, but I did apply."

Com. Evans, "And you live in the city of Portage, is that right?"

Mr. Kasper, "Yes."

Com. Evans, "You are not a resident of South Haven. I thought you were advised. To be a member of that Board, you need to be a resident of South Haven, and you were the only one that applied. I take no stance on that Board."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, so no action at this time."

Plan Commission

Com. Burrus, "The final board we have to address today has to do with a position on the Plan Commission as a result of a resignation and we have several nominees. The critical thing we had to look at was that it had to be a Republican to maintain the ratio and they had to be a resident of the unincorporated areas of Porter County. We had a number of applicants who were from within municipalities. Any discussion?"

Com. Harper, "I think the requirement, just to clarify, is that you can't be in the same political parties, not necessarily Republican, Democrat or Independent or another party. I just want to mention that to clarify that is the law. I want everyone to understand that I understand. That is the only thing I have to say."

Com. Evans, "The only other requirement is you can't be a resident of a municipality."

Com. Evans moved to appoint Michael Sheets as a member of the Plan Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Animal Welfare Board

Com. Burrus, "We did have resignation from the Animal Welfare Board and we will have to fill one additional vacancy there. The person who resigned is Pat Hardesty."

Com. Evans moved to appoint Steve Kirscher to the Animal Welfare Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "That should conclude the appointments with the exception of the PTABOA Board."

Com. Evans, "One further clarification on the Plan Commission appointee, he is serving the unexpired term of Mike Herzog."

APPOINTMENT TO SOLID WASTE DISTRICT BOARD
Therese Davis, Director of Porter County Solid Waste District

Ms. Davis, "As you know, the Commissioners make an appointment to this Board for a municipal representative. That position was held in the past by Mayor David Butterfield with the election of Jon Costas. He has just learned of that responsibility, and has to make some further inquiries and Dave Hollenbeck . . . . (inaudible)."

Com. Evans moved to defer the appointment to a later date, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

INTERIM APPOINTMENT TO VALPARAISO LAKES CONSERVANCY DISTRICT--Robert Westfall
Attorney David Hollenbeck

Atty. Hollenbeck, "Good morning. As I have been before you in the past, provisions of the Indiana Conservancy statute provide that when a vacancy occurs on the Board of Directors of a Conservancy District you have the responsibility of making an interim appointment to those boards and that interim appointment lasts until the next annual meeting of the conservancy district at which time the conservancy district conducts an election to fill the remaining term. There are two such vacancies in our four county conservancy districts that we need to deal with this morning. The first one would be the Valparaiso Lakes Area Conservancy District and Robert, if you could come forward. David Collins, a long time conservancy board member representing the Ridge Wood Creek Subdivision has resigned due to the fact he has moved out of the subdivision and no longer can serve on the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors did a search and Robert Westfall, who is with me this morning, is the candidate we are recommending you make the interim appointment of to the Board of Directors. Robert is a 14 year resident of the Ridgewood Creek Subdivision and has shown an interest in the activities of the conservancy district and also will bring to the Board, as you know the conservancy district operates water and sewer utility in the Lakes Area north of Valparaiso, he will also bring 30 years of experience in the utility regulatory business to the Board so we think he will be a good addition and bring a significant amount of insight and knowledge into our activities. We stand before you this morning and ask the Commissioners to appoint Robert Westfall on an interim basis to the Board of Directors of the Valparaiso Lakes Area Conservancy District."

Com. Harper moved to appoint Robert Westfall to the Valparaiso Conservancy District on an interim basis, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Evans, "Thank you for your volunteerism, it is a difficult situation to find people to serve on these boards of a conservancy district and someone with your credentials will really be an asset. Thank you for applying."

Motion carried.

Atty. Hollenbeck, "I would re-iterate with what Commissioner Evans said. Thank you for your willingness to serve."
INTERIM APPOINTMENT TO LAKE ELIZA AREA CONSERVANCY DISTRICT -- John Cyphert
Attorney David Hollenbeck

Atty. Hollenbeck, "At Lake Eliza we had our annual meeting in January and we had two Board positions; at Lake Eliza they all serve at an at-large basis. We had two positions up for election and this is really unusual we had three candidates for the two positions. In the interim, Dennis Brandy, who is a long time Board member at Lake Eliza had a big meeting conflict and resigned. So the two top vote getters we filled with the election and then with the vacancy, John was our third go getter and John has indicated his willingness to continue in the conservancy district at Lake Eliza. John is retired, has lived at Lake Eliza for about 6 six years, is a regular attendee of our meetings, which I can attest to because we have so few attendees. We see John's face all the time and the Board of Directors at the Lake Eliza Conservancy District unanimously voted to recommend that John be appointed until the next annual meeting on an interim basis where it will stand for election to fill the remaining portion of Dennis Brandy's term."

Com. Evans, "My kudos to you just like Mr. Westfall. We are appreciative of the volunteers on this Board."

Com. Evans moved to appoint John Cyphert to the Lake Eliza Area Conservancy District on an interim basis, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF VENUE FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH VISITORS COMMISSION-
Attorney David Hollenbeck

Atty. Hollenbeck, "The Visitor's Commission annually makes a monetary commitment to what we call the venues in Porter County. That has again happened for 2004. In consultation with the County Council, the Visitor's Commission has allocated $87,100.00 to the venues. Those venues consist of the Porter County Exposition Center, the Porter County Memorial Opera House, Porter County Old Jail Museum, and the Porter County Board of Parks and Recreation. As to three of those four, you are the overseeing Board. The Expo Center, Opera House and Old Jail so I brought with me today agreements that need to be signed. They are identical to last year's agreement both as to form and to dollars. Again, this was in consultation with the County Council; an allocation of $22,275.00 to the Expo Center; $22,275.00 to the Opera House; $8,910.00 to the Old Jail Museum, and $35,640.00 to the Parks. Lorelei, could you refresh my memory of the percentage."

Ms. Weimer, "The percentage is 40% to the Park Department, 25% for the Expo Center; 25% for the Memorial Opera House and 10% for the Old Jail Museum."

Atty. Hollenbeck, "And this is money we try to distribute on a monthly basis?"

Ms. Weimer, "Yes."

Atty. Hollenbeck, "We distribute this money directly to those venues to help them operate on a monthly basis. I will answer any questions you may have. The program has been in place for a number of years. We are here asking your approval and the authority of your president to sign the agreements so I can distribute them to the Auditor and for the State Board of Accounts."

Com. Evans, "These amounts shown here are for the whole year?"

Atty. Hollenbeck, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "We do have representatives from several of these entities; are there any comments anyone would like to make?"

Lonnie Steele, "We are pleased to be the recipient of those funds and since at the Expo Center we do certainly encourage tourism through Northwest Indiana, particularly Porter County and see ourselves in partnership with the Tourism Bureau."

Com. Evans moved to accept the distribution, Com. Harper moved to accept distribution which provides for the Exposition Center getting $22,275.00, the Memorial Opera House getting $22,275.00, the Old Jail Museum getting $8,910.00, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Burrus, "The outstanding issue is the Parks?"

Atty. Hollenbeck, "The Park Board makes that approval."

Com. Burrus, "There was a distribution to the Park Board?"

Atty. Hollenbeck, "Yes, $35,640.00."

Motion carried.

PORTER COUNTY CHAMBER COALITION-COUNTYWIDE GUIDE LINES
Lorelei Weimer

Ms. Weimer, "Thank you for allowing us to be here this morning to give you an update on a project that the Chambers and the Commissioners are working hand in hand with. I will ask Sara Tilden to come up here, she is with AC Incorporated, which is an advertising agency in Valparaiso that was awarded the bid to this project. I would like to also introduce Deb Butterfield from the Valparaiso Chamber of Commerce; she is the president. We have Laurie Franke-Polz who is the executive director of the Chesterton-Duneland Chamber of Commerce and we have Terry Hartford who is from the Portage Chamber of Commerce. We are all working together on this project. As you are aware, Countywide Guides, which is a company that approached the Commissioners to do a resource guide for the county and upon hearing this, the Chambers felt that this guide was really a cookie cutter guide and no matter what community you picked out, it looked the same and it didn't really have a feel for those communities. We felt strongly that as a group, we could work together with the Commissioners and come up with a new guide and we have a better feel for who Porter County is and kind of represent us in the light that we feel does better justice for that. We have identified three groups that would benefit from this; the residents as a resource guide; people wanting to move into the community; as well as small businesses that would want to relocate. One of the key things to this piece is that it is information driven. We wanted it to be user friendly and yet graphically appealing and be able to find that information. I think AC Inc. has done a great job in terms of giving it a good look that gives us feel for Porter County. If you look at the cover, there is a great idea of representing the diversity of Porter County which includes industry, quaint hometowns, quality of life amenities and most importantly, the people of Porter County. When you get inside the piece you can see how we have taken the cover design and really carried that throughout the entire piece. Again, keep in mind that information is critical. We have designed information that there will be a section on the county so people could get an overview of what the county is. Then we actually go into individual communities to look at what Porter County has to offer as a whole. To actually get this piece printed and produced it will be delivered and paid for by advertisers. The advertising will be in the back of the piece so it doesn't take away from the overall look of the front. We actually are getting close to contracting with an account to go out and sell that advertising space on behalf of the Commissioners as well as the Chambers. AC Inc. has said they would actually gather the information as the key part of this. They are working with the Chambers and the Tourism to get that information in place. They are working on that side of it while we start the advertising campaign. Our process is to actually get this project completed by the end of April. So what we are doing is, two things, the graphics and the information and then because the advertising is in the back, they can get that done while we work on ad sales. One of the things to get the advertising kicked off is a drive of direct mail to the community of a letter from the Commissioners as well as the Chambers to get that letter out to people. That is just quick update. I can answer any questions you may have regarding this project."

Com. Evans, "I am glad to see it is moving forward; it has been a little bit of time and I think the addition of AC will pick that up because it is difficult for all the communities to have a central point to drop their info and their data and then to have to pick up somebody else's to have an equal amount of interest in that as their own is kind of hard. I think this will facilitate that. Do you have a target date for production?"

Ms Weimer, "Yes we really think the end of April is very doable. Like I said, we are ___________with having the advertising in the back is that we can do that separately from the actual information in the piece."

Com. Harper, "So you are here because you want the Commissioners to sign a letter, is that why you are here?"

Ms. Weimer, "The project started out in the Commissioners' office and after consulting with myself and the Chambers, we kind of felt that instead of having outsiders do the project, it made more sense for the Commissioners and the Chambers to team up to do this project. So, basically, we are mainly here to give you an update on the project and then see if we can get this cooperative letter signed off to kick off the advertising campaign. I think all of us are excited because what it will be one piece."

Com. Harper, "In your letter, are you going to guarantee the printing of so many?"

Ms. Weimer, "Yes, what we will do is when we set the ad rates, it will be no problem with the quantity and we will also identify the distribution plan of that as well. The Chambers will be distributed from their (inaudible.)"

Com. Harper, "So you have no doubt you will be able to publish as many as you are going to tell them you are going to publish."

Ms. Weimer, "Absolutely, because all of our pricing will be based on that one
item."

Com. Burrus, "It is a good effort and I think it also represents a local effort and a cooperative effort and I think you should all be complimented for your efforts. We are looking forward to seeing the finished product."

ORDINANCE FOR VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROBLE WOODS SUBDIVISION--- 2ND READING

Com. Burrus, "This is a second reading for an ordinance for vacation of right of way in the Roble Woods Subdivision north of Valparaiso. John, I believe that is in your district."

ORDINANCE NO. 04-01

AN ORDINANCE VACATING PLATTED RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN RUBLE WOODS SUBDIVISION AND WITHIN THE FIRST ADDITION TO RUBLE WOODS SUBDIVISION

WHEREAS, the owners of certain real estate have petitioned the Board of Commissioners of Porter County for vacation of platted right-of-ways, and;
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of Porter County conducted a public hearing on December 16, 2003 with regard to said request and determined that the platted right-of-ways should be vacated:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Porter County, Indiana as follows:
1.The following described platted right-of-ways be and are hereby vacated and pursuant to law title shall vest in the current owners of real estate abutting and adjoining the same free from any right of interest of the public:
A parcel of land within the FIRST ADDITION TO RUBLE WOODS, as per plat thereof, recorded in Plat File 14-B-1, in the Office of the Recorder of Porter County, Indiana described as follows: Beginning at the N.W. corner of Lot 17 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence Northerly 60 feet , more or less to the S.W. corner of Lot 23 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence Northeasterly along the Southerly and Easterly line of Lots 23, 24 and 25 in said FIRST ADDITION, 192.63 feet to the N.E. corner of Lot 25; thence East 60.0 feet to the N.W. corner of Lot 4 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence South along the West line of Lot 4 in said FIRST ADDITION, 100.0 feet to the N.W. corner of Lot 1 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence Southerly along the West line of said Lot 1 to the East line of said FIRST ADDITION; thence South along said East line to the intersection with the East line of Lot 7 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence Northwesterly along the East lines of Lots 7 and 6 in said FIRST ADDITION, to the S.E. corner of Lot 5 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence Northerly, Northwesterly and Southwesterly along the East and North lines of said Lot 5 to the N.W. corner of said Lot 5; thence Southwesterly along the Northerly line of said Lot 17 to the N.W. corner of Lot 17 and the Point of Beginning.

AND ALSO

A parcel of land within the FIRST ADDITION TO RUBLE WOODS, as per plat thereof, recorded in Plat File 14-B-1, in the Office of the Recorder of Porter County, Indiana described as follows: Beginning at the N.W. corner of Lot 25 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence North along the West line of said FIRST ADDITION, 30.0 feet to the S.W. corner of Lot 52 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence East along the South line of said Lot 52, 80.0 feet to the S.E. corner of said Lot 52; thence continuing East 60.0 feet to the S.W. corner of Lot 51 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence South 30.0 feet to the N.W. corner of Lot 4 in said FIRST ADDITION; thence West 60.0 feet to the N.E. corner of said Lot 25; thence continuing West along the North line of said Lot 25, 80.0 feet to the Point of Beginning.

AND ALSO

A parcel of land with ROBLE WOODS, as per plat thereof, recorded in Plat File 14-B-1, in the Office of the Recorder of Porter County, Indiana described as follows: Beginning at the S.W. corner of Lot 13 in said ROBLE WOODS; thence Southwest along a Southwesterly extension of the Southerly line of said Lot 13, to the West line of said ROBLE WOODS; thence North along said West line to the Southwesterly extension of the Northerly line of Lot 15 in said ROBLE Woods; thence Northeasterly along said extension to the N.W. corner of said Lot 15; thence South along the West lines of Lots 15, 14 and 13 in said ROBLE WOODS to the Point of Beginning;

AND ALSO

A parcel of land within ROBLE WOODS, as per plat there, recorded in Plat File 14-B-1, in the Office of the Recorder of Porter County, Indiana described as follows: Beginning at the N.E. corner of Lot 15 in said ROBLE WOODS; thence South along the East lines of Lots 15,14 and 13 in said ROBLE WOODS to the S.E. corner of said Lot 13; thence Northeasterly along a Northeasterly extension of Southerly line of said Lot 13, to the West Right-of-Way line in the former Gary and Valparaiso Railway; thence North along said West Right-of-Way line, to the intersection with a Northeasterly extension of the Northerly line of said Lot 15; thence Southwesterly along said extension to the N.E. corner of said Lot 15 and the Point of Beginning.

2.Notwithstanding the vacation of said right-of-ways, any public utility presently occupying or using all or any part of said right-of-ways shall not be deprived of said use unless and until said utility waives said right by filing its written consent to this vacation proceedings or by executing and recording its waiver of said use.

This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption.

Adopted this 20 day of January, 2004.

S/David Burrus, President
S/John A. Evans
S/Robert P. Harper
Attest:s/Sandra Vuko, Auditor


Com. Evans moved to approve Ordinance No. 04-01 on 2nd reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

County Comprehensive Plan-Phil Griffith, EMA Director

Com. Burrus, "The first agenda item in this category is the Communications Task Force represented by Dave Lain. Dave has postponed that presentation so the next item is a County Comprehensive Plan presented by Phil Griffith."

Mr. Griffith, "This is the update of the plan that we put in place last year meeting with all the agencies and the municipalities. This is updating all the information and as we get it signed, I am already meeting with them to go though it again this year so we will be ready for next year. It is very similar to the one you signed last year. There are a lot of administrative changes and stuff throughout the state and municipalities."

Com. Burrus, "Obviously everyone in government became acutely aware of the risks and some of the dangers of the terrorist acts of a couple of years ago. One of the things Phil and his office and the Commissioners at that time wanted to make sure we were prepared for was an accurate and operational emergency response plan. Phil began to update ours and to bring it into a more current status through coordination with state efforts that were renewed at that time to generate a state wide format. I believe what we have right now is the current, compatible with the state format, and is reflective of Porter County's emergency response capabilities and probably our threats as well."

Mr. Griffith, "There are 30 different agencies as well as governmental agencies that actually help the Highway Department. We are already meeting and going over cases we would like to see for 2004 which will probably get in here January 2005."

Com. Evans, "Does this make up some of the basis for the grants that you applied for?"

Mr. Griffith, "Yes. Without this, we wouldn't be able to get anything. This allows us to that. Our current plan, which you have a document up here, what I will do, is pick it up, take it back and recycle it and you will keep this one up here. I have electronic versions that will be given to all the municipalities and hard copies. . . (inaudible.) I am going to leave this with you. All I need is a signature and you can go through it and give me a signature and I will submit it down state to show you have received the updates and you have reviewed them."

Com. Evans moved to adopt the County Comprehensive Plan as submitted by Phil Griffith, Emergency Management Director, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "I think an important component of this is that it deals with coordination, visual response, is that the term, Phil?"

Mr. Griffith, "Yes. Mutual aid, mutual co-response. A lot of departments now have gone to what they call a mutual response on a borderline where both agencies would respond. Say two parties might respond, two police agencies might respond. This allows us to . . . "
Com. Burrus, "I think this is a dynamic document. The environment we live in today being on the periphery of Chicago and being a transportation focus around the bottom of Lake Michigan, we need to be prepared. This lays the groundwork for us."

Mr. Griffith, "It is a living document; it will never be completed because after we get done with it, there will be changes that come up; different equipment, different tactics, etc."

CATERING CONTRACTS, EXPO CENTER
Lonnie Steele, Expo Manager

Mr. Steele, "I have presented you with eight contracts for caterers for the Porter County Expo Center. Ten different caterers expressed interest after discussion but all eight of them decided to officially submit contracts. We are recommending all eight of those be approved by you. It gives us a wide variety of choices for the customers that are renting the facility. All of them except one are Porter County catering firms. The eighth one, that is a firm we recommend comes to us from LaPorte and has been a very quality catering service that many of customers prefer. So we recommend all eight be approved by the Commissioners."

Com. Evans, "Would you read the names for us, please?"

Mr. Steele, "Birky's of Kouts; F&P Enterprises of Portage which was a new contract; Miller Enterprises of Boone Grove; Kelsey's, Valpo and Portage; Billy Jack's from Valpo, Fazoli's from here in Valpo; Strongbow's Restaurant and Catering from here in Valpo; and Master's Catering from Laporte."

Com. Evans moved to accept the eight caterers as named by Mr. Steele as approved contractors for the Expo Center for 2004; Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS

North District: Com. Evans

1. Jackson Minor Subdivision #2415-B-1 Road Agreement, located on the west side of CR 400 East between Burdick Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total amount of $750.00.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Center District: Com. Harper

1. Washington Minor Subdivision #2428-C-1 Road Agreement , located on the
north side of CR 500 North between CR 300 East and CR 400 East. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $750.00. Owners and subdividers are Brian Neal Blake and Michael L. O'Dell.

Com. Harper moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

2. Pheasant Hills Performance Letter of Credit #496 from Centier Bank in the amount of $75,000.00. Expiration date is January 29, 2005. Recommend approval.

Com. Harper moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

3. Letter to Robert Cerri, District Engineer for Canadian National Railroad (CN) requesting that they repair several rough railroad crossings in Porter County. The crossings are at CR 625 West, CR 250 West, SR 2 and SR 450 East. The crossing at SR 2 is of highest concern.

Com. Harper moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Harper, "That crossing at Highway 2 , this is the second time the Commissioners had written a letter on that. It is out on 2 north of Valparaiso. I just want the public to know we are doing everything we can. The school bus drivers have a terrible time there; the crossing is terrible. So we are in communication but we don't have any direct power over that railroad but we are trying to do what we can to straighten that mess up."

Com. Burrus, "You are right on recent developments, Bob, but in the late summer or early fall we had written a previous letter and had gotten a response from the railroad who assured us that the crossing would be overhauled and repaired prior to the end of the construction season. With January here now, we can see they have not performed according to their plan. Again, I would endorse what you said."

Motion carried.

South District: Com. Burrus

1. Yellowstone Subdivision, Phase A-2 Performance Letter of Credit #450 from
DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $34,000.00. Expiration date is February 2, 2005. Recommend approval.

Com. Burrus moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

2. Prairie Landings of Porter, LLC, Performance Letter of Credit #2004-ILC-499
from Bank Calumet in the amount of $531,000.00. Expiration date is July 20, 2006. Recommend approval.

Com. Burrus moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "With respect to Highway. I mentioned to you Bob that during this past summer and during Larry Sheets' illness, we had experienced some difficulties with the performance of the developer in the Bridlewood Subdivision west of Valparaiso. At that time, the Board of Commissioners recommended a moratorium be placed on building permits and that was in fact implemented by the Plan Commission in the late summer-early fall time frame. Since that time, the developer has made significant efforts towards completing all the unfinished items on the list. The only thing remaining has to do with asphalt patching which would be warm weather oriented type responsibilities. The Highway Department has expressed their satisfaction with the work and at this time I would recommend that we forward a recommendation to the Plan Commission to retract that moratorium."

Com. Burrus moved to retract the moratorium on building permits, Com. Harper seconded,

Com. Evans, "I think there were a couple items they needed to finish in the spring, is that correct and they have agreed to do so?"

Com. Burrus, "That is correct. And they do have an agreement to that effect."

Motion carried.

CORRESPONDENCE

Building Department monthly report for December 2003 is on file.
Court Security Activity Report for December 2003 is on file.
Treasurer's monthly report for December 2003 is on file.
Building Department Annual Report for 2003 is on file.

American Red Cross Blood Drive request

Com. Evans moved to approve the American Red Cross to hold a blood drive at the Administration Center on Friday, March 12, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Civil Engineering Department of Valparaiso University project on terrorism

Com. Burrus, "As part of their senior engineering department they are looking at the vulnerability of certain public facilities as well as private facilities; water treatment plants, airports, and industrial complexes with respect potential terrorist threats. As part of their study they are requesting to have access to the Porter County Courthouse to do a review of that structure from the perspective just mentioned. If we choose to approve this, they request we give them a set of engineering architectural drawings on a temporary basis and provide a tour of that facility. Any discussion?"

Com. Evans, "I would say they need to coordinate with our security and establish their motives to them."

Com. Evans moved to approve,

Com. Harper, "Yes, I would say to make it clear they have to talk to head of security at the courthouse and as long as Shinneman okays it, I won't have a problem with it. Once they do that, I would second it."

Com. Harper seconded contingent upon Larry Shinnemans' approval, motion carried.

Com. Burrus moved to recess until 11:00 a.m., Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

PLAN COMMISSION-11:00 A.M.
Request to rezone R1 to R3, Dean Froberg, Owner

Com. Burrus, "I have a couple of comments before we begin. First is the format. In the interest of trying to have everybody receive the opportunity to speak and to be heard, I would like to first have the Plan Commission make their presentation on each issue. Then we will offer the opportunity for those that want to speak in favor of the proposed rezoning. When they are concluded, we will offer the opportunity for those that want to speak against. We will do that cycle one more time. We want to discourage any interaction between the two sides. The developer will have an opportunity to respond to any of the criticisms or difficulties with the development and so on. There will be opportunity but we want to keep and maintain order. The first development is to be presented to us in two petitions. The Plan Commission will present it as a single package and we will vote on it individually into the two separate petitions. That will become apparent when we get into it. The final item is that as we hear comments from the audience, we do need to receive your comments on our recording devices and we ask that you speak clearly and loudly enough to be heard. As you stand and speak, give your name and address for the record. So with those introductory comments, we are prepared to begin. Bob Thompson, if you will, make your presentation on the first two petitions."

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission Resolution 03-19, petitioner Dean Froberg requesting an amendment to the Master Plan requesting an R1 single family residential parcel to be amended to R3-multi family. This was at the Plan Commission at their October 8th, November 12th, and December 16th meetings. The December 16th meeting, the Plan Commission voted 6-2 to give no recommendation to forward to the County Commissioners. The other case is Resolution No. 03-20, petitioner Dean Froberg requesting an R1 Single Family Residential amendment to C2-offices and institutions. This was heard before the Plan Commission at their December 8th and November 12th meetings and was forwarded to the County Commissioners with the recommendation of approval."

Com. Evans, "What was the vote?"

Mr. Thompson, "The original recommendation was for a recommendation of denial. The recommendation of denial had three votes for it and five votes against it. By rules and procedures, if the majority votes a certain way, then in this case, the majority was voting in favor."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, thank you Bob. At this point, we will open the public hearing and the first speaker will be anyone who wants to represent or speak on behalf of the development."

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Attorney William Ferngren

Atty. Ferngren, "My name is William Ferngren from Hoeppner Wagner and Evans here in Valparaiso. I am here today on behalf of Mr. Dean Froberg, Jake Wagner on behalf of 400 North, LLC, the proposed developer of Pepper Creek and Chris Lannert, our land planner who has been involved in designing and developing the property as well. The project is known as Pepper Creek and is located on the northwest corner of Valparaiso, not actually in the city limits, in CR 400 North and CR 150 West are the intersecting streets. The project consists of approximately 150 acres and includes three components. One is a large single family residential component with single family lots ranging in size of on average 3 to 5 acres in size. The second component would be the parcel of property we proposed to have rezoned to R3 today which would include a multi family condominium type of development. That is on approximately 27 acres of property. The third and final component immediately at the intersection and the corner of 400 North and 150 West is about 2.6 acres of property we propose to rezone from R1 to C2 today. While the entire development itself is not technically before you today, I believe that it actually is. These three components I explained to you already are completely entered (inaudible). The urban fringe development, a concept which is part of your growth management plan, has been taken into consideration. Careful account has been taken to insure this is the type of development that falls squarely within urban fringe. Those three components tied together make it an appropriate fringe development and again while we are talking here today simply talking about the rezoning of two of the parts of this 150 acres and three of those components are truly matched and inseparable. Mr. Thompson briefly explained some of the administrative history of how we actually go to this meeting today. I think it is important to note this project was initially shown to Mr. Thompson back in the summer of last year before we had any petition for anything, we felt it was important to deal with the Plan Commission executive to determine if this is something that fits within a scheme of development that is appropriate for the county. I invited Mr. Thompson out to Jake Wagner's office and discussed what this project consisted of and why we felt it was appropriate and I am very confident to say that when he left like this was a project that was appropriate in this location. After our meeting with Mr. Thompson and through a series of additional meetings with our land planner, we met with Dave Schelling and Kevin Breitzke privately at Jake's office to say here is this plan, we have met with Bob Thompson and from a planning perspective, this falls within what Porter County is trying to do. How does this work from a technical perspective. Mr. Schelling approved the development. In short order, this was a project that fit in the area. I will get to a letter that Mr. Schelling has provided to the Plan Commission earlier that clearly says this is a project that supports the project and this project won't have an adverse impact on the residents of Porter County. Kevin Breitzke was thoroughly encouraged by the object of this property which is to develop it in the urban fringe and with an economic environmentally sound development plan much like Harrison West Subdivision which is a project Mr. Wagner recently completed nearby. Incorporating what is known as bioswale into the technology of how you are going to absorb storm water to purify the water that eliminates even more possible run off even though our development plan completely falls within all of the requirements of our development design ordinance. This is a project Kevin Breitzke was very encouraged about. The Technical Advisory Committee meetings and restating those things publicly to the members at that meeting just as he had to Jake Wagner and myself. As Mr. Thompson indicated, we filed two separate petitions that were heard at a public hearing October 8th, a lot of questions were asked and we answered a lot of questions and both matters were continued to the next meeting. We came back and I believe we answered them once again with concrete, uncontroverted, uncontridicted sound evidence that is based on fact demonstrating how the things being circulated in public were simply not true. Mr. Thompson indicated that the commercial was actually forwarded to you folks with a favorable recommendation, there are three at Mr. Harper's request that said lets move this thing forward with no recommendation so you can hear this project together as I think you recognized how they are all to intertangled upon each other. Next, I would like to introduce Chris Lannert who is our land planner. He is going to go through a series of placards that will more specifically identifies where these components of the development are and what they exactly look like and how we got to the point of saying here is how we are developing single family multi family as one big sound project."

Mr. Lannert, "I am the architect and planner of this project. I have had the good fortune of working with Dave on a number of projects and would like to give the audience an overview of why we are doing these types of things and why we are in the county's development programs. Hopefully, it will give everyone a common ground experience of what the project will look like when it is finished. As was stated earlier, this project size is approximately 150 acres, it is a unified piece of property. The first thing my firm does when we start to evaluate a program, we do an aerial photo on a scale of 1 inch equals 400. The first thing we do is put the corporate limits of the neighboring supalities that gives us a change to see where the plot is actually sited; what times of things will impact it. As has been stated, 400 North and 150 East are the intersections, you can see we are very close to the corporate limits of Valparaiso. The uncolored portion indicates the county jurisdiction. You can start to see the other subdivision has been developed within the area. We start to look at the demographics of the project, it must be determined early on is that the development of the urban subdivision within the corporate limits, some of the other smaller lots developments will be in the county. One of the ____ that was not being served was that tying in of luxury____ state. So we wanted to try and see if we can serve that market. In addition to that market, being aware of the urban inflow plan, which is part of the county's plan, or to look for something that could be a mixed use to them. Because of the key component of the intersection with the potential of Vale Park Drive connecting through at some point in time, we had enough energy at that intersection to consider a mixed use development and that would be something in the neighborhood of a small commercial component. As you can see, on our photo across the street there are other commercial zonings so we felt we had some consistencies. Certainly we had the opportunity and the demographics to be able to look at a mixed use development. The last component we looked at when we decided on the larger lots single family is that within 150 acres, within the R1 classification, and many things are possible in terms of numbers being generated, is the glue between the two pieces. The large lot single family and the state lot single family and the commercial, we wanted to have a lifestyle change which would be age targeted and serve that part of the market. The mature resident who doesn't want to move to Florida, or Arizona, for the large scale developments. We are looking for a component for those people to be part of this mixed use development and they became another feature and another development. From the large photo, the next thing we looked at is the specifics of the site itself. This is nothing more than a similar photo with a scale of 1 inches equals 100. This gives us the opportunity to see if the surrounding development gives us the tree line and starts to show where Pepper Creek winds through the property and gives us the first overview in terms of the things that a landscape artist looks at trying to incorporate the features of the program which I just discussed. The way we implement those strategies is by looking at site analysis. The site analysis is a system where we start to overlay the existing natural features of the site because those site ________ are the things that limit the amount of development and the intention of the development. We are trying to look for things which might have an impact in terms of the total design. We still haven't designed yet, we are trying to prepare for that. What this does through the definition of the high points be located in terms of the stars, and the low point being indicated in terms of the flower. The highs and lows indicate the red lines shown. The highs and lows indicate where the storm water goes and that indicates where the development should occur. I have some other things we will get into later. In addition, Pepper Creek has gone through an inventory analysis where we have been able to identify where the wetlands are, we certainly want to preserve and protect those wetlands as opposed to trying to _________. We also are trying to look at plantings. We are not as familiar with the site as the neighbors are. At this point we are ready to start to determine what kind of features which are going to be implemented as part of the development. We develop what we call ___________, some of the things we are trying to using Pepper Creek as the environmental corridor, we start to look at a spinal boulevard which would be the transportation spine for the development. We want to use the amenities of that spinal roadway boulevard along with the natural features of the Pepper Creek. In addition, we look at areas for the trails, we are borrowing from the details that have been successful at Harrison West, incorporated by the swales, reduced storm water infiltration and with water on the site for natural resources opposed to flushing it down the pipes into the river and lakes. We start to look at roadway cross sections. From those features, when we first started to develop the project and this is the concept of the plan. It is really meant to be a rough plan, it is a use plan, this is the first time we started to test whether or not we are incorporated in the mixed use element of urban design. Whether or not we are accomplishing from a land use. (inaudible). On this particular project identified by these green dots, all of the best places for the housing that we are trying to incorporate. If our market is going to be a high end market, we are trying to develop a target in that market, we wanted to site the homes in the best locations. So this plan enabled us to put on all of the high points next to the red lines and topographic features, those best elements for the houses. Then we took our boulevard and spines and went back through the project, we actually split the boulevard. As we split the boulevard or that crescent where they have two different elevations, as you noticed in the site analysis, they basically fall from the north to the south end so if you go across these ridges, it will split the roadway, cut into the side of the rolling terrain which gives us a cut on the back of the slope. By separating the boulevard you get a change into that (inaudible). The other thing we have is to protect the greenway corridor of Pepper Creek. That corridor gives us the absolute edge to develop our mixed use aspect of the property locating only at the corner that commercial piece of mixed use. Keeping the association across the street at C1 and C2 and then buffering in terms of approximate 17 acres. Those areas which would be the multi family portion. From this plan, you actually start to go up. Your plans come to this plan through those other steps. You can see what we have done is that when this nose, when indented, would then wrap the road around that point, you go to (inaudible) . . surrounded by fence rows so we are selecting that. So now we are drawing the lots around the building plans. We then can more specifically look at the creek end of Pepper Creek and we can protect this environmental corridor. We then go into the balance of the area and started to site within that multi family area. The targeted market we are looking for as 'empty nesters' or 'near nesters', 55 and older age group which is still actively involved in the community, who don't want to move out of the area and get lots of features of a walkable community and wants the features of the convenience of commercial. We are trying to incorporate both from a roadway approachability aspect of the commercial zoning so we need the intersection for the traffic to do that but we continue to make it walkable. So that is how we came to these particular points. This inspection at the top shows the split boulevard nature of the crescent features. Then finally as a way to further articulate the specific request before this commission, we enlarge this area to look at it more carefully. The unit we selected is a condominium building that will be owner occupied. This is a representation of what we are going to build. The kinds of things we can say they will be are ownership, it will not be rentals. It will have an access that comes into the clubhouse, part of the lake feature, all of those things will be part of the every planned unit once we obtain the zoning. Most importantly it shows the feature that we will have access from the internal portion of our site. Additionally, because the trail crosses down Pepper Creek, we will be able to have other people from the development and cross our creek. We think in reality the results of this effort has been to coordinate a large 150 acre parcel into a multiple (inaudible) large lot R1 zoning, the request for the multi family for the R3 and the mixed use aspect of a commercial zoning and blend this together consistent with the County's plan."

Atty. Ferngren, "I think it is quite obvious that there has been a lot of time and effort, money, thought, careful attention to the County's plan in developing this project. This isn't something that was thrown together at the last minute. Unfortunately, the project has been subject of a smear campaign. There has been a series of three fliers distributed that contain wholly inaccurate and misleading information despite actual knowledge to the contrary. The gentleman who I believe is circling this is here today, Bob Marischen. I would like to point out his initial flyer was simply wrong. There is a lot of inaccurate misstatements on that. In fact, the only thing that is right is the date and time of the meeting and where it is. Everything else is incorrect. I explained all that at the first meeting. Subsequent to that first meeting, Mr. Marischen, Jake and I invited him to Jake's office and we sat down with him and showed him all of these plans. We showed him how we arrived at these things, why it is appropriate; discussed urban fringe development and he simply said 'not in my backyard, I lived here in Porter County, I have moved here within the last 90 to 120 days and I just don't want this project here.' I will hand his flyers out to you; there are three of them. This was distributed just prior to the first public hearing; and again if you look at that, I will explain some concrete evident here shortly, that it is simply not true. Dean Froberg wants to rezone property, and that is true, but he wants a huge apartment complex with entrances on both Froberg Road and 400 North. As you can see, that is wrong. All the good reasons we chose to move to Winter Park are in jeopardy. Again, that is wrong. I will show you an unbiased uncontridicted evidence why that is true. Besides decreased property value, increased traffic on an already busy road, parking lot lights, noise. I assure you this is not the type of development that will increase crime anyway. All of these things were stated without any site whatsoever or any resource. Here is the second flyer that was distributed; subsequent to our meeting with Mr. Marischen. Some of these things he picks up on from the public hearing such as spot zoning; this isn't spot zoning. Indiana Supreme Court says this is not spot zoning. Compliance adherence to your master plan, rezoning property is not spot zoning. The case law in Indiana is very clear. Brings in higher density despite our explanation that this won't be more dense than the areas of the existing development. Again, it states that property values will decrease. None of these things are true. Then he leads you to believe there are strengths in numbers and somehow giving an impression there is a political component to this that the Commissioners and Plan Commission members wont listen to their constituents as opposed to listening to their staff and they have been planning ideas at the Plan Commission that has already adopted for urban fringe and the county's land use plan. The third flyer that has been recently distributed, again, since our meeting with Mr. Marischen and since all the facts have been disclosed in public, the same type of letter is included in this. Again, relying on existing zoning, trying to control the property of others; that is simply inappropriate. Spot zoning, as I mentioned, this is not spot zoning. The Indiana Supreme Court says you can do this, this body can do this, it is not spot zoning. Higher density; again, even after the facts have been clearly disclosed, this is not going to be any more dense than any of the developments in the existing area. It says property values will decrease. Simply not true. They are inconsistent with his first flyer that says that bad traffic will increase on an already busy road. Then in the final flyer he indicates that its quiet country, which is it? I think these are inconsistent and wrong all the way through. It is simply a scare tactic without any regard to facts or to what the plan actually includes. I think it is simply wrong. It is a case of not in my back yard. From day 1, this is the same development that Bob Thompson met with and saw; it is the same development that Mr. Marischen saw in Jake's office, nothing has changed. We did not change anything other than to answer the questions of the Plan Commission. I would like to also point out Mr. Marischen is actually the only person who contacted us. I offered publicly Jake's phone number, my phone number; to call us and ask any questions you like. He was the only one that did that, no other citizen has approached us or asked us any questions about anything. I would like to hand out a binder of information. I think it address issues on hand. There is a series of documents in this and beside from the respect that this rezoning is consistent with the land use plan, I would like to run through how this is appropriate. If you flip to the first half, this is a copy of the county's Land Use Plan. The colored copy for the future Land Use Plan. On the center, there is a blue dot for urban fringe development. It couldn't be anymore in the center of that section that the county has determined is urban fringe development. The next tab, tab 2, urban fringe development, this again comes straight from the Porter County Land Use and Thoroughfare Plan. Urban fringe areas are located adjacent to existing cities and towns and are proposed to encompass future expansion. These areas are proposed for primarily residential growth and density comparable to that of adjoining urban areas. In addition to single family residential uses, these areas may include multi family developments, institutional uses such as churches, schools, libraries, etc. and some neighborhood commercial uses oriented to the neighborhoods in which they are located such as daycare centers, drycleaners, drugstores, dentist's offices. The recommended density is four to six units per acre and in a few minutes I will explain we are nowhere near that, including multi family. Connections to public water and sewer systems are required for this land use category. There isn't public water and sewer out there yet. The city is anticipating expanding to that area but we haven't formally approached the city to decide when and if that is going to occur because we are not through in this process yet. So there isn't water and sewer there but it will be there. Tab three, there was a request made by the Plan Commission for agreement for written commitments. Now this tab only addresses the commercial property and the things they didn't want to see. If you can turn to page, section four, clearly it states the things we are not going to do there. We won't have a filling or service station; commercial greenhouse; radio or television; automobile repair, mini warehouse. Those are all permitted uses in C2 that we are saying you don't want that and we don't need it either. We will commit to you, with a legally binding document that you can't have that there and we are making that commitment as the Plan Commission requested. I would also like to point out across the street the property that was recently rezoned to C2 in 1999 consists of about ten acres of completely unrestricted commercial use. So we are committed to saying no filling station, auto repair. The property across the street doesn't have any of the same restrictions whatsoever. Tab 4 is another agreement for written commitments. This addresses the multi family component. This again was asked by the Plan Commission because of a concern of what we are going to do. We are saying we are agreeing to what we initially did agree to and that is not putting apartments out here. We don't want a huge apartment complex. That is not what is shown. So what we have agreed to do, as we clearly stated to the Plan Commission, is the real estate will consist of not more than four residences per acre. It will be comprised of single family homes, duplexes, tri-plexes, or four-plexes. Nothing any larger than that. No apartments will be located on the real estate consistent with what we have been saying all the way through despite representations to the contrary. Again, no structure with more than four residences may be located on the project. Certainly not on the property, certainly not a huge apartment complex as has been represented. Tab 5 is the staff report from Mr. Thompson and he runs through an initial density calculation which I think refutes wholly Mr. Marischen's contentions that this is a higher density project. It is simply not true and your own staff agrees with it. The area there that is circled clearly points out that the density will be less than half or approximately half of what is across the street existing. I have also added a couple other pages here and highlighted some of the important parts and that is that the parcel is located in the urban fringe development area consistent with what we have said and what you planner said and that the Land Use Plan does support mixed use development within urban fringe; precisely what is being proposed before you today. Tab 7 is the Highway Department report that I indicated earlier. What Mr. Schelling states is that the two roads, CR 400 and 150 West will definitely handle the traffic from the single family lots and should be able to handle the increased traffic due to the multi family and commercial. The road agreement and right of way dedication will provide the county the opportunity to address future road issues as they arise. We have never suggested will not participate in the road agreement or that we are not going to dedicate right of way, in fact, our plan shows we are dedicating right of way. We recently received the road agreement that we fully intend to be a part of. The next states 'I want to assure you that I like your proposed development.' Another staff member from the county while reviewing the plans, liked the development. 'I like the fact that you have two entrances and am looking forward to seeing some of your traffic _______ features in use when the roads are built. Mr. Lannert discussed the separated roads, the winding nature of the roads, all of those things, are what Mr. Schelling is talking about. Next he says the road can handle the increased traffic of the proposed development. Lastly, and very significantly, he states that this development will likely have less of an impact on the county roads that what would be normally expected from the 150 acre development. Tab 7, we met privately with the Fire Department Chief, Tom Steinberg. He reviewed the plan and we asked for his suggestion since Valparaiso is the emergency servicing department that would handle this and we accommodated his request. He states as the primary response unit for the proposed development, the Valparaiso Fire Department believes that the roads provided meet or exceed what is required. Once again, meeting with the appropriate bodies to determine what is the best way to handle this development. Tab 8, Density. Density was all over these flyers and I think very clearly that it simply isn't true that things were being stated. Your own planning executive indicated this is less dense than Windsor Park; the densities that Mr. Marischen has been talking about. You will see here that Pepper Creek is 150 acres, the development Mr. Marischen discusses is 54 acres, a third of the size. Pepper Creek proposed to have approximately 139 units; Windsor Park has 114. The units per acre in Pepper Creek, 1.07 versus 2.11 acres across the street along with unrestricted commercial property. Clearly, Pepper Creek is three times the acreage yet half the density. It is very clear it is inaccurate to say anything else that will bring higher density to this area. To have nine single family detached housing, this comes from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a body that is widely recognized as the group that is responsible for the traffic calculations. The average trip rate for a single family home is 10 trips per day. The average trip rate for a residential condominium is under five. The entire traffic being brought to this area is not going to be the result of this project. Tab 11 is traffic. Single family, detached homes, at ten per day; condos, six per day. Pepper Creek, 39 homes. Windsor Park, 114, therefore single family trips, simple math, 390 trips from Pepper Creek, 1,140 from Windsor Park. Condominiums 100, 290 in Windsor Park, condominium trips, 600. Doing the math, 990 total trips per day in three times the acreage versus 1,140 in Windsor Park across the street. Clearly this is not the project that will increase traffic in the area. The last component of information before you is an affidavit of Ed Campbell. Ed Campbell is a licensed real estate appraiser in Valparaiso. He has appraised property all over Northwest Indiana for over thirty years; lives in the area; is very familiar with Valparaiso and its outlying areas. Mr. Campbell in paragraph 10 of his affidavit, indicates that this rezoning request, the R3 and the C2, will not have any adverse effect on the property values of Windsor Park or outlying property areas. It simply will not. That is based on his experience as a licensed appraiser of over thirty years. Surely it contradicts the evidence set forth by Mr. Marischen that property values will be decreased. You can see those things simply aren't true and a lot of time, effort, study, careful attention to detail, was made to the urban fringe development concept. The Plan Commission has thought it to be the appropriate use of this property. It is an urban fringe development. This is a great project and a project that falls squarely within what you have asked as developers, such as Mr. Wagner, to do. The County Land Use Plan calls for it as Mr. Lannert indicated, there is a demand, a market demand for it. With that I would respectfully request that you rezone the property as petitioned. The first item of support from somebody, from John Curley, who can't be here today, sent this letter and I faxed a copy to Mr. Evans this morning, I hope you received it. But Mr. Curley is in the construction business as well as being an office holder in Lake County knowing what the effects on property taxes are and deals with payroll, deals with sales tax, all of those things, and understands the importance of economic drive such as the building industry in Porter County. As you can see in his letter, he supported the whole project and the idea of the urban fringe development as being appropriate in this location."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Bill. Is there anyone else in the audience who would care to speak on behalf of the project?"

Bob Coolman, "I am a competitor of Mr. Wagner's. My family has been in the developing business in Porter County for something like 50 years and for the 30 years I have been in the developing business after I got out of the Navy, we have developed largely within the context of mixed use development. Certainly beginning with Heritage Valley, Keystone Commons, Aberdeen, are all mixed use developments that have been part of things that my family has been engaged in for that number of years. I think it is important from the development community's perspective to clarify some issues. One of the reasons I think you folks are looking at this as a rezoning request in the way it comes to you, is at the present time, the way your Planned Unit Development ordinance is constructed, it becomes a tool that, quite frankly, we can't use. The degree of engineering required is beyond the expense of being able to do the proper job of land planning, in order to present a PUD under your current ordinance, it just becomes totally prohibited financially. So you are looking at a kind of a piece meal zoning because your PUD ordinance, which would have given you the opportunity to take a look at this as one thing, is forcing you into this context. That is unfortunate that we don't have a better tool under your current master plan and land use ordinances to do this with. This is what we have to work with. I want to clear up, what is from my perspective, a misconception about mixed use development. I know of no agency, no school of architecture, no school of land planning, no state planning agency, no regional planning agency, no federal planning agency, no land use organization. The Urban Land Institute, or the Congress for New Urbanism, that does not advocate mixed use development as the primary useful vehicle to do good planning. In fact, it is almost universal across the board, including almost all environmental ____________ that would propose that mixed use development is the appropriate way to look at the land planning. That if a world in which the only acceptable land planning tool is conventional large lot development goes against almost every reasonable attempt to do good planning that you can imagine. As far as I know, I don't think you would be able to find a single appraiser in Porter County or Northwest Indiana that would make the case that as a result of good mixed use development, and I am not going to speak to Mr. Wagner's development, that has to stand on its own, its simply the issue I don't think there is an appraiser that make the case by virtue of the fact that somebody is proposing mixed use development, that you are going to believe it will impact property values. I think almost everybody, who is familiar with Briar Ridge and Chandana Point, and Quail Ridge, all of which are mixed use developments, and all of which are premier locations in which to reside in Northwest Indiana. Probably the premier locations to live in. I am not aware of any appraiser anywhere who make the case and that by virtue of the fact somebody is proposing a mixed use development, that in and of itself will have a negative impact on property values. Quality mixed use development, across the United States today, will demonstrate an enhancement of quality of life, an enhancement of the creation of good neighborhoods for people to live in, and will enhance the opportunity to do good communities. Quite frankly, the prohibition against mixed use development is a prohibition against the plan. I cannot imagine that Porter County would want to take the position that they don't want to see mixed use development, because quite frankly they don't want to see good enough. The development that would address the issues of people in all price ranges in all categories and all lifestyles and age ranges, and I think is part of this proposal. From our perspective in the development industry, as we try to contribute to the quality of life of doing good development in Porter County, this body saying no to something like Pepper Creek would be a tremendously deleterious statement as it relates to what Porter County wants in the way of quality development. I can't imagine you would want to take that position. I think that concludes my remarks. I would hope some sort of a knee jerk reaction that is not based on good quality mixed use development would not be a part of your decision making process."

Pat Bankston, "I live at 2002 Hidden Way in Valparaiso, in Harrison West Subdivision that Mr. Wagner developed. Thank you for listening to this group and me. As you know, I have sat in your seat and understand the delicacy these kinds of matters are judged by and the difficulty; the complexity (inaudible). .. . . I have lived in two developments that Mr. Wagner designed, Keystone West and currently Harrison West and everybody in the room knows that Jake Wagner is a quality developer that produces developments that are the envy of people in Porter County. He has recently won the state environmental award for the designing of Harrison West because of the drainage system using vegetated swale so that it has less of an impact on water management and drainage. That all being the case, I don't want to speak in favor of this development but what I want to do is speak in favor of the whole idea of land planning. When I was County Commissioner, I heard from clients as Mr. Coolman stated about the PUD ordinance and thought that it needed to be upgraded; the County Commissioners were in favor of that at the time but didn't do it. The reasons for that was it put heavy burdens on the developers to come up with engineering plans that are very expensive and with no assurance they are going to be approved. In lieu of that, Mr. Thompson and the County Council and County Commissioners opted, around the year 2000, to do a land use plan and spent lots of money on a consultant to come in an organize people to talk about the people of Porter County wanted their land to be used. I was part of that; people in this room were part of that: Marge Hefner, Herb Reed, and other people like that. I remember multiple evening meetings where we were lead through the process of land use and planning. Putting little stickers on boards on how you would like to see the land used and that has resulted in these massive urban fringe and protecting farm land and protecting open space and parks. At the time when that was done in 2002, it was presented before the Commissioners and the County Council and the statement was the Master Plan has not been updated since 1983 that would not be done, there were some subsequent steps, like the transportation plan, and other things that were supposed to occur before the Master Plan was updated but in lieu of that, those maps were going to be used by the Plan Commission and the Commissioners and the if development fit within the spirit of those words and maps that were part of the land use plan that the county spent thousands of dollars on them. There was every indication they would be improved. We went through that process and using the language of the land use plan, Mr. Wagner did a development like this exactly within the spirit of that land use plan including multi family dwellings and the small commercial. It is a service to the community so you don't have people going great distances and putting burdens on the roads to get to simple things they can walk to or ride their bicycle. It fits perfect; to me, I am speaking in favor of following the spirit of that land use plan and all the people, many of whom are still in this room, who spent all of those hours working out what it meant to be a good land planner. I would also like to say that from the onset, R1, one acre lots with driveways on the county roads, is considered to be the poorest use of land and the reason that we went into this process. So I am speaking in favor of following the spirit of the land use plan and a lot of people in this room spent time on and the County Council and the Commissioners agreed would be adopted in lieu of changing the master plan. Thank you."

Bill Dodrill, "I live at 85 East Division Road, Valparaiso. I am a member of the building industry of Porter County. It is the largest industry, largest single employer in this county. I would ask you folks when you have a plan as good as this to consider this plan because Mr. Wagner, now he is a good developer, but this is good planning. Our industry needs to continue on with good plans. We are kind of the economic engine that is driving this county right now. Our ________ industry is dried up and the trickle down effect from any plan, any usage, any new building, effects our whole community. I would urge that you consider accepting this plan."

Sandra Moroney, "I am a former member of the Plan Commission, about ten years ago I was on the Plan Commission. Mr. Froberg has a legal right to develop his land within the constraints of the law. The law now says he can go R1. One of the things he wants to do is change the laws to develop this property other than R1. One of the responsibilities that the Porter County Commissioners, Plan Commission, and Zoning Commissioners have is to make sure that the decisions they make will react properly through the long terms of the county. Our county government is separate from the city governments that are located in our county, but it is all one large group of physical land with physical people that move from one place to another. By allowing our multi family units and commercial units to come out of the center of the towns to go farther away, is pulling the economic and living people from the centers of the towns and leaving the centers of the towns economically deprived, kind of empty of people. One of the good things about multi units land ______ is to give people a chance to walk from where they live to a little commercial area like the gas station or maybe the hair dresser. One of the things that is in Heritage Valley is because it is on Highway 30, everything was close. There was a highway there to take all the people and the traffic. One of the good things about this development is it is a wonderful, wonderful place to live. One of the things we, as people who live in the county have to think about is this kind of thing good for the county long term. Now it is a good thing for this little community, but is it a good thing for the county long term to have small little sections spread out all over the county that pull from the centers of the town. One of the things that we, as members of the community, have to decide is if this is really good. Mr. Froberg has a right to develop his property. We live in a country that gives us the right to do what we want with our land so this is one of the things and he is doing a wonderful job. We have to, as people who live in the county, want to make sure the county grows well and properly. Are these actually the best things to do for long term. I am for this part of the development and I am for this only if it is good for the long term of our county and will keep our towns like Kouts, Valparaiso, and all the other little towns that are fading because of the commercial development, that is pulling customers out of the centers of the towns then people that live in Valparaiso are being pulled out of the centers. I don't want the long term part of the town of Valparaiso and other towns to become waste lands of dumping areas because we allow things like this to happen. So the Commissioners have to decide if that is really good long term. Otherwise I think this wonderful, Mr. Wagner does a nice job. Thank you."

James Zimmer, "I live at 935 N 550 East in Jackson Township. I am also a member of the construction industry. I believe it is important that we look at quality issues, quality of the building and quality of life. I believe these things are here. I really think economically growth produces jobs, and I am in favor. Thank you."

Mike Alyesworth, "I will keep this as brief as possible. I live at 171 West State Road 8, Hebron. I am also the Executive Officer of the Porter County Builder's Association. I am in favor of this from the history I come out of and I have had the privilege of serving as a county board member for two terms in a land far, far away and long, long ago. I was a member of the Plan Commission for four years where I lived in charge for updating the county's original 1959 Master Plan which was terribly outdated and needed to be revised. I think the document you gentlemen operate on today has my signature on the last page as an ordinance of this county. This development is a good development; it is a great development. This is all the things that those of us that have labored in the trenches of good planning and zoning have wanted; smart growth and focused development in the right areas, not scattered on an eighty acre housing development two miles from nowhere. Mr. Wagner has a reputation along with Mr. Coolman of doing some of the best work in Porter County. This brings it to what needs to happen to the County Commissioners to approve this and continue the patterns of excellent growth that we have an pride in our community. This exudes that and that is why I am really thrilled to be a part of the building trade organization and promote this project. This is the type of thing we are all proud of. I sat on the county Plan Commission and Board of Commissioners when Bob Coolman brought that Heritage Valley plan to us and we were all scratching our heads because this was a new concept, having the commercial and mixed use high density housing and apartments within a single family area in county jurisdiction. We looked at this and did some studies and realized this is where the future of American development in communities like ours is. It is a smart thing to do; it is a wise thing to do. I urge you to smile favorably on this recommendation."

Gary Green, "I live at 250 Whitethorne Lane. I come to the Commissioners with a little bit of a union background. I have intimate knowledge of the development process and the results of this. I also in my tenure as the president of the Builder's Association in the year 2000, with a process for the land use map was put together. I sat through many, many meetings and heard a lot of public input as to the result of that plan. I am also responsible for all the construction activities related to Wagner Homes so I have another vested interest in this project. My background is one in planning, I have a degree in architecture. Our business thrives on good planning so I think that is an advantage. In talking about the land use process and the amount of public input that was given to that plan. One of the things that we heard overwhelmingly repeatedly across the board is we want to retain the character and quality of life in Porter County. Everybody that stood up that was their goal because people choose to live here because of the quality of life. At that time, representing the Builder's Association, I said that is exactly what we want, is the Builder's Association. People come here for the quality of life and character so we want to do whatever we can to encourage quality growth and development to retain this character. I know exactly what the land use plan is we are looking for. The Builder's Association, you need to understand as builders in this county, we don't create the growth, all we do is merely respond to the growth. The development of Pepper Creek, there is a lot of time and effort in that; and demographic studies of what buyers are moving into this area want to see. Quality of life is at the top of the line, with schools, and we need to put together developments that offer opportunities. In Porter County, Jake saw a need for the upper scale, larger lot developments. Additionally, we have a lot of quality for lifestyle. There is, as many of you know, the population is aging, not everybody needs a single family home that has four bedrooms. The residential portion of developments of home owners is responding to that. With respect to the land use plan, the opening statement says "The purpose of the land use plan is to provide guidance to the Plan Commission and those that wish to develop land in Porter County as a desired future growth pattern of the county." This is why we go through the land use process. Future land planning is not zoning. There is no way imposing legal limitations to land development. The plan is simply one of many tools the County uses to implement its desire to the future, obviously, for us and everybody that lives here in Porter County. Almost everybody that is in here lives in Porter County for the most part. These people have a vested interest in seeing Porter County develop in a very good way. The County should consult the plan whenever future developments propose in order to give recommendations about location, density and other relevant factors, the County should decide rezoning requests based on plans and recommendations. Further, the land use plan is a flexible document open to new interpretation for changing circumstances over the next twenty years. Thus, the actual growth area may prove to be smaller, or larger, than shown on the plan for future demand for the land. I read you that so you would understand that we refer so much to this land use plan, that when you get plans that have addressed the things you are looking for, the recognition not from the County but from all of us involved in the plan, you need to consider those pretty seriously. I want to touch briefly on a point of why Pepper Creek does a good job of responding to that land use plan. Obviously we think that the land use plan is the best use. We have multiple mixed uses for a variety of different needs. The R2 zoning isn't necessarily to cram more units on there per acre. You can see from Bill's statistics that is simply, we could go for much higher density on that lot but the reason we chose that in addition to going for a life style type of product, would also there is also one basic tendency that comes out of the land use plan and that is closer housing, for us to say we are going to put four units per acre is one thing but to say the four units are going to be _______, we actually have more open space, that is just good planning. In terms of the development's sensitivity of the existing landscape character, obviously this development team has done a good job of looking at those things and for the buyers. They are obviously being very sensitive to those things. A provision for a commercial is based on neighborhood commercial use. Again, another tenant of good planning. So in closing, being involved from the development side and also the land use plan, I think this is a good plan for the land and it is good for Porter County. Obviously, we think that good quality growth is what we want. Thank you."

Zenon Horb, "I have been a resident of Porter County for 17 years. I own a small business in Valparaiso. We employ nine full time employees, each subcontractors. When I came to Valparaiso about 17 years ago to attend Valpo University. I came from the suburbs of Chicago. One of the reasons I have called Valpo my home is I appreciated some of the smaller planning that has been done coming from a very dense population in the Chicago suburbs. Also, I am speaking from selfish reasons, across the street is Windsor Park, my company has had the opportunity to visit with residents in that subdivision, I am speaking on behalf and for good planning and good growth because businesses like mine in Valparaiso, especially since I have 27 people that are affected by my business that all live in Valpo also, I think that is important."

Herb Reed, "I live at 1453 North Tremont Road, Chesterton. My classification is kind of yes, but, I have some concerns. First I would say I have had, for almost a half a century, the privilege of living in a rural, wooded area and enjoyed the fact that I didn't have to look out my window and see some ugly building that somebody else designed and built. I agree with some the previous statements that we should have good planning and should have sensitive awareness of the need for open space and preserving wetlands and rivers and corridors. Here is my concern: I ask you to ask several questions. Is there enough open space in this development? All I see is the green area up around the river and around the fringes. Ask yourself, is there enough? Is it open to the public or open only to the residents? Who owns the green area? As you know in Coffee Creek, I raised the big fuss about that and they ended up by having it owned by a separate 501C3 corporation and the developer can come back and change it. The area of where the condos would be, some of the wetlands, how much area around that is protected permanently? Permanently protected means that nobody can build on it or drain it or fill it in the future. So I am not familiar enough with this particular situation to know whether or not those questions have been answered but I ask you to investigate. Thank you very much."

Dave Buchanen(?) "The address I live at right now is 388 Cherry Hill Drive. The reason I say right now is I lost my house to a fire about 2 ½ months ago. I have been in the process of purchasing a new home. I did recently purchase a new home just a few miles north of this subdivision. I was not aware of this subdivision and I am delighted to go home and . . . for my family because . . . (inaudible)."

John Worstell, "76 Shore Drive, Ogden Dunes. I am a builder, developer, and president of the Realtor's Association and the Builder's Association in Porter County. I don't really think we are really talking about quality in this subdivision. Jake Wagner in known throughout the United States as Builder of the Year in the United States. He has been Developer of the Year in the state of Indiana, I think he was the first one to receive the award. I think we are not really talking about growth either, because if we were talking about growth, and I have lived here all my life, in 1960, the limits of Valparaiso was Evans Avenue. We haven't stopped growing. We have continued to grow, if we want to stop growing, I would be very happy if we stop growing. It was a beautiful old town of 6,000 people. Really a wonderful place to live, but you can't stop it. One developer, planner that is an expert in the area says it is like zoning or developing, it is like you have a sand pile and you drop sand on top of the pile and the sand goes down the sides and spreads out. Those grains of sand are like people coming in. I assume that a good portion of the people in this room have come into this area since 1960. Believe me, I am happy to have you, so I don't think it is about growth or the other things I mentioned. The remonstrators, and I am not saying this because of what one remonstrator said in the flyers, in anticipation of what the remonstrators are going to say, and I have been doing these things since the '70's and the remonstrators say about the same things all the time. I think if you sit through them like I have, you know, it is always the traffic, too many people, high number of schools; it is the same 10 or 20 things every time. So, none of that is new to anybody. I think that is the main crux of every time I come to one of these it boils down to the same thing; 'we love to have growth in Porter County. I probably wouldn't be here, but don't put it next to me. I am in this little area and when I get here to this little area, shut the door behind me because I want the same view, I want the same of everything as when I bought this house.' I've got subdivisions where people get mad when I build a house next to them. 'I like that lot. Why do you dare build a house on that lot next to mine?' It comes down to the bottom line of all of these, now with everybody, because there are things I don't like. A lot of builders don't like it but when you have a development like this, please don't remonstrate against it because of issues like traffic or drainage. Please don't remonstrate it because you say you don't want it next to you. People on the other side of your subdivision didn't want you there either, believe me. So I just want to say I have know Jake, he is one of the best builders in the United States; one of the best developers in the United States, and it is just a great project."

Marge Frame, "18 East 1050 South, Kouts, Indiana. I am in the construction industry, I am the past president of Porter County Builder's Association. Obviously there has been a lot of planning, a lot has been done for this property to come to this point and I feel that you should definitely go ahead with it."

Tim Chesna, "550 East 150 North. I am in the construction industry. I think any time you drive through Valparaiso you go through one of Jake's developments, you see top quality. I don't think this is going to hurt the community at all; I really think you ought to approve it."

HEARING OPENED FOR THOSE AGAINST THE REZONING

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, everyone. Hearing none and seeing no others to speak on behalf, at this time we will open the hearing to those who would like to speak against. Again, I would like to remind you to please stand, state your name and address, speak as clearly as possible so our recorder can pick it up. Who would like to begin?"

Dorothy Peterschmidt, "I live at 2501 Chesterfield Drive in the Windsor Park neighborhood. First I want to hand out some maps of the immediate zoning in our area. Windsor Park is clearly shown there, it also shows one of the C2 areas that is currently in existence. I have brought in the other one that is not on the map. The smaller one shown there is currently a residence. Mr. and Mrs. Marischen and their family live in that residence. The other area of C2 was there when Windsor Park was developed and when the majority, if not all, of the families that live in Windsor Park at this time bought their homes. I also have another map showing a slightly larger area of zoning that currently exists in our area. The lavender area there shows Windsor Park. Recently an area adjacent to Windsor Park was rezoned R2 and will be part of Windsor Park as I understand it, but I am not clear on that. You can see just behind that R2 area is a large area of R3. Also in the northwest corner there is another area of R3 and the pink area is currently zoned industrial. I just wanted to hand those out as I go on with my presentation. I would like the Board to consider not lumping this entire project together. First of all, the R1 is not in contention here. There is no objection to the R1. Mr. Ferngren has said that this R1 that is going to be developed is high end luxury homes, homes that are estimated to be four to five acres each; 36 homes on 150 acres and will have two entrances. One of the entrances to those 36 acres will be up near Ransom Road. The other entrance will be west on 400 North. Both of those entrances are some distance from this proposed R3 and C2 area. In addition, Mr. Ferngren mentioned that Mr. Marischen simply stated that he was against the proposal because he didn't want it in his backyard. Mr. Wagner doesn't want it in his back yard either. He lives along 400 North and if you look at the overall picture of the area there is a small square out of the larger project and that is Mr. Wagner's home. There has been no discussion about moving the R3 or the C2 further up 400 North towards the industrial area where it might be in Mr. Wagner's back yard. I would like to keep our neighborhood rural. Right now we use terms like turn at the Victorian to get to our home, not turn at the Walgreens, not turn at the CVS, not turn at the daycare center. The number of strangers that enter our area right now is continually declining as our subdivision nears completion. Also, light pollution is non existent. For my husband's birthday, I got him a telescope and we have great fun going out and looking through that telescope. I don't care how fine a commercial development is, I don't care how high quality an R3 development is, the lights in that area will be on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to advertise the locations of those areas. The area residents have purchased homes in the boonies on purpose. We don't want to live near a commercial or condominium development. We already have enough of the types of commercial construction as proposed by Mr. Wagner as I will show you. The residents are comfortable with the current status of the C2 area _______ Windsor Park's entrance. We know that they are C2, we know they are unrestricted, we knew that when we moved in. This additional zoning change is a change to what we expected our life style to be. On the next page, I show you the current yellow page listings in Valparaiso and in the area. We have eight dry cleaners in the Valparaiso city limits and in the phone book, there are 14 listed. Thirteen daycare centers in Valparaiso, 31 total listed in the book. Eight drug stores in Valparaiso, 35 in the area listed. Dentists: seven pages of dentists. Too many to count. Right now Valparaiso already has active older adult communities, we have Meridian Woods on Campbell; Autumn Trails on the corner of Silhavy and Glendale; there is no commercial development near those. Pines Village Community is close to the county corridor and there are cottages on Campbell, no commercial there to walk to. I am not sure that people in an active older adult communities necessarily want to walk to an area nearby for commercial opportunities. Mr. Wagner had argued that car traffic will decrease as people walk to the C2 areas. Now the large homes in Pepper Creek will not even have sidewalks. In the summertime in Northwest Indiana, it is often too hot and too humid to walk anywhere, and the same goes for the winter. I don't think many of us are looking forward to walking three or four walks over to the local restaurant. We will jump in our cars and drive. Mr. Ferngren had a map, he figures 100 condos at 5 trips per day would be 500 trips and he stated that Windsor Park had about 1,140 trips per day and that is a 50% increase for our little neighborhood. How many trips per day will be entering the C2 area? That is just for the R3. How many cars will be going in and out of that area every day? There is no way to know. Mr. Worstell had mentioned, but I am going to say traffic patterns will allow safety; narrow 150 is not safe to walk along and Mr. Ferngren did address that, he did say they would be looking at increasing the right of way to support that. Mr. Wagner also argued that the land use plan supports this plan. I was interested in some of the folks who spoke in favor of Mr. Wagner's plan. Mr. Coolman specicifically called it piece meal zoning. The second speaker said he didn't want to speak to support the project but wanted to talk about the land use plan. So several of the other speakers also supported the land use plan without specifically endorsing this project. One speaker even addressed an issue that I have as well in that putting commercial development away from the city will pull customers away from our downtown businesses of which my mom owns one. Urban fringe to me implies that fringe is attached to the urban. The fringe on my bedspread is not separate from the bedspread and this urban fringe development is not attached to Valparaiso; it is not attached to the urban, this entire area is rural. The four to five acre estate homes that are also being planned in the area are also not typical urban lots. County roads are not the best place for commercial development. Highway 130 is just a mile away in two different directions, it is already zoned industrial. You have a gas station down there, lots of traffic. The people that live there are already used to that kind of traffic. I think that is a much better choice for locating a commercial and R3 development where the roads are already handling thousands of cars a day. Mr. Wagner has argued that the city of Valparaiso has planned for this corridor to be commercial, well this corner is not Valparaiso right now, it is still a county corridor and who knows what the city's plans will be now with the change of administration. You, the Commissioners, have the power to keep this area residential. Mr. Wagner has stated that urban sprawl and large commercial developments take over prime farm land and we should have this mixed use residential. Mr. Froberg is going to be compensated for his farmland I am quite sure. Mr. Wagner and Mr. Froberg and many others in the building community stand to gain significant financial benefits from this development while the area resident's property values in enjoinment decrease because of it. There are alternative solutions. Mr. Wagner said that the C2 and R3 do not yet have city sewer and water and that those would be required in order for him to develop this land. Lets wait to rezone it, lets give the residents of Pepper Creek who will have well and septic, the chance to vote as well, to state their opinions. Once they have their lovely estate homes up there, why not wait to rezone this area and let them say if they are in favor of R3 in their backyards as well as the C2 in their backyard. Who knows what the demographics will be in a few years. A C2 and R3 may not be as lucrative in those areas in that time. Why not keep this area R1 and include it in Pepper Creek? Homes there would have a creek in their front or back yard, they would have a lovely residential buffer to the Highway 130 commercial corridor and it would create a beautiful transition between 130 and the city of Valparaiso. Valparaiso recently spent a ton of money redoing the Washington Street entrance to Valparaiso because it wasn't pretty enough. Now we are also wrestling with the north Calumet area making it more attractive to visitors and residents as they enter the city. We have the opportunity to make this area continue to be pretty and nice and welcoming to people who are coming into Valparaiso. The residents in the area even beyond Windsor Park are opposed to more commercial development at this corner and this area is clearly rural non farm; not urban fringe or anything else even remotely related to urban and they would like to see it kept that way. Thank you."

Robert Marischen, "I live at 2708 North Froberg right at the intersection of 400 North and 150 West. I am the gentleman that passed out fliers and was identified by Mr. Ferngren as the spear artist which I take offense at. I will defend that everything in this last flyer has changed over time as we have become more aware of it and I would defend everything in this last letter. Everything in the prior fliers was to the best of my knowledge as we had from Mr. Thompson at the time. Everything came from them, I have not fabricated a thing. I do have one thing for today, I want to talk about density. There is another development you might be familiar with which is a very non dense development, is the state of Illinois. It is very non dense. However, one corner of this development, which is extremely dense, I don't think anybody would argue with that. There are 160 acres here, a large piece of property, this portion is extremely different from the project as a whole. In particular, the 2.6 acres of commercial property is directly across from my home. Seventy feet out my front door. By the way, I have never used the phrase not in my backyard. Traffic has been brought up, and I think here it was touched on before this, there are lies and statistics. Mr. Ferngren talked about the trips per day, single family home versus condominium. He has declined to mention trips per day generated by commercial property. Part of this might be that we can't calculate it because they have it narrowed down to what they are going to do with it. It is 2.6 acres which is extremely large. You could fit McDonald's and a Walgreen's in there if you want. That could generate how many trips per day and dramatically change the character of the area. We don't know; they won't narrow it down for us. They will eliminate a couple things like the radio tower, gas stations, we are grateful for that, but we have no idea what is _____. They have to rule out something like Walgreen's. This doesn't fit with what is there. There is no market for this, for the retirement community; for the condos, for commercial as well. It is out on a country road, it is a dead end source at this point. So, again, in 8 years there is a market and if it fits with the character of the market, then we have a different story. The appraisal report by Ed Campbell said the development would have no adverse effect on property values. Seventy feet out my front door is an R1 property right now, if this is passed, I will have 2.7 acres commercial out my front door. Mr. Campbell is going to stand in front of you and say that will have no adverse effect on my property value? I think that is incredulous, unbelievable. You are speaking in broad terms of what the density is for the entire development throwing in all the _______ and other factors. I am here today for one reason, I am not a crusader, I have never done anything like this in my life. I moved here with R1 across the street from me and I am looking at 2.6 acres of commercial right out my front door. It is going to destroy the equity I have in my home. It is going to destroy the money we have set aside for my son's college. This is self defense, I am not a crusader. I have gone to great lengths to meet with Mr. Froberg and Mr. Wagner, I will not make this a personal issue. This is self defense, I honestly wish that I live 3 miles away and I wouldn't care, this is going to destroy my life savings. 2.7 acres right out my front door. In meeting with Mr. Wagner, he acknowledged as much in talking about my property and my concern not with his project but with ways to protect the value of my property, he suggested my property is not suited for R1 residential and really should be commercial. He suggested it would make a great site for a bank. Then they won't argue there is no adverse effect on my property value. I live here and bought a home here, you can't turn it into a bank. I think his acknowledgement that this will make it unsuitable for R1 says everything. I want to say the biggest thing for me is the finality of this. If you decide to rezone this today, I have no recourse. It is my property and it is devalued for all intents and purposes. There are 160 acres here. I met with Mr. Wagner and Mr. Froberg and asked them can't we move some things to protect the value of my property. I got no direct answers, just a handshake and a 'hope you can see it our way'. I don't have anything personal against these men, but this is a very large piece of property and I asked them to move some things to protect me and my family. Here they have not. I can only think they want to take their shot if they can get it, great, if not they will come back with something else. I am asking you to give me that chance. They will come back if they are forced to with something to protect my home and my equity. I am not here to fight. I hope this gets developed in a way that it protects everybody, especially me or I wouldn't be here. I am not a crusader, I am not anti-development; most of the people that spoke here in favor were developers. I am not anti-development, I am anti losing 20% of my home equity tomorrow, today, whenever this takes place. I am asking for the chance to save the value of my home. This will be developed, if we can change it he can be satisfied, I can get on with my life. I am asking for that chance. Thank you."

Ruth Wheaton, "I live at 2001 William Drive, I have not lived here long, I am from another state so I am very interested in what was going. The issues that seem so passionate with the residents of Windsor Park and the presentation is too clear enough what the risks the commercial site would be. Maybe if the developer could explain and make it a little clearer it might diffuse some of this skepticism."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, that is a good observation. The developer and the petitioner will have an opportunity to respond shortly."

Jim Miller, "I live at 2302 Old Oak. My wife and I spent more than a year looking for the proper place to build our home. We lived at 2106 Old Oak prior to this home and we love the area. The reason why we purchased a home in Manchester was because everything around us was rated an R1 residential. I certainly a person who hates to see the door kicked open by commercial and by multi family dwellings."

Jacqui Peterschmidt, "I live at 2501 Chesterfield Drive. I am against the rezone because children of Windsor Park very much like to have neighborhood snowball fights with no chance of hitting stuff on the other side of the street."

Ed Froberg, "I live at ____ Froberg Road. I am speaking for the ____ family who could not be here today. I am against the rezoning because R3 zoning . . . (inaudible). The size of the structures is going to be two car garages on each unit, that is eight bays. The size of the structure is going to be between 1500 and 2000 square feet per unit, that is between 6 and 8000 square per building size. It is too large of a structure for out there. We have homes in Windsor Park that are 3 or 4 car garage, we have homes that are 3 and 4000 square feet and something along those lines would fit in there. But having a structure as large that R3 permits is not in keeping in what we have out there or what is planned for R1 zoning. We are strongly against the rezoning. Thank you."

Marge Hefner, "Yes, I was part of the comprehensive plan and I really didn't plan on saying anything today but I am in awe at the builders that are here. The only person I saw at the comprehensive plan meetings was Mr. Coolman. I am in awe that all these people showed up, where were they when we had the comprehensive plan? I said many times when we had these meetings, where are the builders so we can work together."

Valerie Schlink, "I live at 155 West 550 North. My concern is that you could restructure that and rezone it for spot rezone, in the middle of a rural area . . . and end up in where they can take small patches of farmland and do that in those areas in the middle of R1. I don't know whether I am afraid of the slippery slope, if you destroy it, how are you going to stop it? I do agree with the woman who said that urban fringe should be attached to urban areas."

Chris Irwin, "I live at 2903 Prentiss Drive. Unlike most of the good folks that seem to be in favor of this, I am not a builder, developer or somehow involved in this project; instead I am just a resident of Windsor Park. My concern is not with Mr. Wagner, I think his developments are fabulous and I am very excited to have him develop this parcel in the manner he developed Harrison West, which by the way has no commercial, and also some of the other fine areas he has developed. that is not my contention. My contention is the commercial and also the multi family. Clearly, 2.6 acres of commercial property sells probably 5 to 8 times what 2.6 acres of residential property would sell for in even in the high end multi acre portion of the development. In my opinion, clearly the only reason for the commercial is not so someone can walk to the drycleaner and walk home with loads of clothing four blocks. I think that is unrealistic for anyone to tell you that anybody is going to walk to any of the businesses. As other folks have pointed out, there are plenty of businesses I can drive a mile into Valparaiso if I need to go to the drugstore or business or office. We purchased our home in February 2003 after extensive search of the area. We looked at Chandana, Greenfield Creek, Aberdeen, Keystone Commons. One thing that set it apart, specifically Aberdeen and Keystone Commons, is that this does not have that multi use commercial different type of home aspect to it. Because to me, that is not what I wanted. I didn't want to live there. I could have moved to Aberdeen, but some of the homes actually sold for probably less than they were built for, but I didn't want that. I wanted the residential neighborhood in a nice area which is certainly what Windsor Park is and I would like to see it continue to be. I don't believe the commercial in there has any realistic reason for it to be there other than monetary reasons. I certainly hope the Commissioners will take that into the case because that is not why anybody bought their home there, it is different from how it was developed, the commercial that is already there has other specified uses. Walgreen's on the corner is not my idea of a fabulous place to raise my family."

Dr. (inaudible. ), "I moved here in 1990 and I spent six months for a home before I bought my house. I bought it because of the location and it was zoned residential. I had no idea that one of these days somebody is going to build there in the subdivision. My neighbor across the street, (inaudible). . . . "

Vern Christian, "I live at 122 Kinsale Avenue. I'd like to ask the developer one question. When you showed the aerial photo, would you show me where all the trees are at in that picture? Because that (inaudible.) There is no 30 years worth of trees there. It is going to be flat land."

James Greenwell, "2504 Chesterfield Drive, Windsor Park. You are talking about utilizing land. How many houses are they going to build in other end that are three or four acres per house. At the other end by us in Windsor Park they are going to cram in 100 units right across our street, like an army complex. I don't agree with it; he may be a fine builder but we don't need it over there and we certainly don't need the commercial."

Windsor Park resident, "Heard a lot of discussion today about the merits of the plan, the merits of planning and what a good job the county has done to make things positive. I would like to push back to your own land use plans, that specifically say that urban fringe development, which I agree that this is, requires access to public water and sewer systems. They admitted they don't have those commitments right now, they are petitioning today, not in the future, if this is a requirement that has to be simply to uphold the plan you have, then you have to deny this petition. If you want to change the land use plan because twenty years later it needs to be changed, that is a different discussion. As far back as the October 8 Plan Commission meeting, they mentioned commitments from the city of Valparaiso for bringing water and sewer to them. I have looked in the public record and I can't find any indication that administration made any sort of commitment. I can't find a capacity letter from the Valparaiso City Utilities to service this."

Ted Johnson, "466 N. 250 West. I am not opposed to a subdivision by Mr. Wagner being built there, I am opposed to the commercial use and also the rezoning because number one, the rezoning is (inaudible). We rely on boards like this and by our elected officials to give some stability and some prediction as to where growth is going. If we want to avoid commercial, where we build, where we can develop. If there is no reliability based on zoning, then where can we go and what can we do? Unless you are wealthy enough to buy into any communities, you can buy up all the surrounding land to protect against that kind of thing. Normal people like most of us here, rely on you to protect us and to have growth as planned and that provides some stability so we know that this poor gentleman here, buys a home and then now he may be looking at commercial right across the street. It is just not fair for the average person. He did the right thing, he looked for where is R1, and that is what most people do. They don't have the money to maybe go out and buy a development to protect yourself and your surroundings. I don't think changing the R1 is a good idea. The mixed use, yes, mixed use is very popular; I think it is mostly popular with the developers, and when people make money off of this, I don't know that there is a great demand of people who are wise and move next to a mixed use. Most people would move away from mixed use. Common sense tells you that. In this particular case, since there is no commercial there, it is not like Aberdeen where you have Highway 2, a major highway, there are gas stations and there are stores on Highway 2. Heritage Valley, you have Highway 30, so there is an appropriateness to putting some mixed use commercial there but at 400 and 150, there is nothing there so this is just an attempt to want to start that mall and start putting commercial where there is no commercial. I agree, I have seen some of that development up and down 130, 149, that is where I would expect to see that kind of thing go and that is where it is most appropriate. The roadways also in this area are not exactly in a wonderful configuration right now. Ransom Road terminates at 150, it goes no further west. 150 terminates, you have to make that hard left turn and go north. 150 to the south, you can get to 130 if you can stand going over the tracks which are probably some of the roughest in Porter County; nobody uses that little leg there. Everybody diverts over towards Harrison. Those two roads going to 130 now, those are both very dangerous intersections whether you are coming off 130 and turning there or getting on to 130. They are not good now for what is there and to add more development without addressing those intersections is a mistake. The commercial aspect is not appropriate. This is not an Aberdeen with a highway right there. I don't think it is fair for people who made investments in this area to be cut down to R1 zoning and have the carpet pulled out from under them so that a higher use or commercial use can be gained by the developers. There might be a good place for mixed use, maybe in that area closer to 130 or 149."

Peter Nelison, "I live at 601 North 175 West. I have listened to many negative arguments against this particular development. I am totally in agreement with all those statements. I would like to say this, the commercial development is completely out of line. We already have a whole lot of commercial development on Lincolnway, Calumet, along the west part of Valpo, Silhavy and so forth. There is no need for commercial development in that area. We want a family development, we don't need this, we already have more than enough; I am not in disagreement with the development of this area in residential single family. Thank you."

Dottie Campbell, "I live at 2563 Spice Bridge Drive. We lived in Lake Station before. We worked hard to build our home there. Times change like they do everyplace. We would come to places, (inaudible.) We got close to Windsor Park and I said to him, let's drive through there. He said we can't afford to live in there. I said maybe we could. It was just something different, something I had hoped for and dreamed of. Never gave something like this a thought. I believe that the only ones going to benefit from this is, and I can understand all these builders here today looking for jobs, but I feel you should leave us alone and let us have what we dreamed of and worked for."

John Whitcomb, "I live 2059 S. State Road 2. I am really surprised only one person has mentioned sprawl, that terrible multi headed monster called sprawl. You got acquainted with by the consulting company NHTB from Indianapolis that the county spent thousands of dollars consulting with. They said sprawl is going to kill all of us. If you guys get to my age, you are going to be dead because of the sprawl. Now this project looks good and I would say it's a fine thing except it is sprawl. The same Heritage Valley was, Aberdeen, Sand Creek, and many others. It is going to kill us. Thank you."

Ann Marischen, "I live at 2708 Froberg Road. My husband gave out the fliers. We tried to be as accurate as we could, we called the Plan Commission repeatedly to get our information. I guess it we will just go along with the sprawl. In the papers, the past week or two, there is article after article about downtown Valparaiso needs to be revitalized and the area on 130. I can't image why they would start spreading out commercial to the west side. We are working against ourselves here by doing that, not to mention home values and everything else. There are a lot of people that could not be here today because we are not attorneys or developers or builders that can take time off during the day to come to this so we keep our contacts with people that (inaudible….they are so against this kind of commercial and R3 development out there but they could not be here and I think it is very unfortunate that this meeting has to be at this time."

Com. Burrus, "At this time, I want to shift gears and give the developer and petitioner an opportunity to respond to the questions and comments of any of the rebuttal items. As we do this, there will be one more opportunity for the opposition to speak. I would ask both sides to be as brief and concise and limit your time and try to avoid repetition as much as possible."

Atty. Ferngren, "This is a lot of comments today about this not being an appropriate location. I really beg to differ. I think the evidence before you, the Plan Commission felt that this county and the city of Valparaiso clearly state that this is the appropriate location for commercial. The property across the street is zoned commercial at this time, unrestricted as I indicated. The parcels across the street are much larger. What we are proposing to today is limiting those uses to avoid some of those things these folks are concerned about; such as the service station and all of this. That is all written for you. We stand on that submission and we are willing to commit. Again, I think it is important to look in the context of the plan, what is good planning. I think you have heard from a professional planner that this is good planning. The comments from many of the folks opposed to this particular development, while they say they are not opposed to development, not opposed as long as it is not by them. Mr. Marischen indicated he is never done this before he is not worried about it, and he stood right here and told you I wouldn't care if this wasn't by me. Clearly, it is a concern about being _____. Property values will not decrease. Mr. Campbell is a 30 year appraiser, licensed by the state, he has a sworn affidavit that these property values will not be harmed by this project, they simply will not. The property adjacent to Mr. Marischen's property is, in fact, zoned commercial already. Ms. Peterschmidt indicated that their parcel is not zoned commercial and Marischen's parcel is zoned R1. There is a parcel immediately to the south that is zoned. Consistent with the land use plan of Porter County, why that property was rezoned to commercial just four years ago by this body was because at that time it was good planning. It is still good planning. Don't wait for something to come up and then try to plan for it. The time is now to plan and this is a good plan that accomplishes the very items that your early land use plan wants to have incorporated into a development. I think you have heard that today from a lot of people with a lot of experience and history and qualifications about what that plan constitutes."

Jake Wagner, "I am the developer and would like to speak for myself very briefly. In bringing this as a holistic development, all three phases because some people like one phase and some people like the other. But I can tell you from a demographic models we've studied why one relies on the other. The project for it to go forward would rely on all three phases."

John Worstell, "To answer the question . Mr. Campbell isn't here but I know Mr. Campbell but I will take off my builder/developer hat and put on my real estate/appraiser hat. I understand what these people are saying but never in 25 years that I have