The regular meeting of the Development Advisory Committee was held on February 20, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Porter County Administration Center, 155 Indiana Avenue, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Those members present were Kevin Breitzke, Ray Joseph, Ray Riddell, Mike Haller, Joey Larr, Tim Cole and Harvey Nix.  Also present were Fred M. Siminski, Tracy Burrell and Toni Byers.

The following cases were heard by the Committee on this date:

Ingram Manor MHP – leveling earth and digging detention pond – erosion control review.

Chris Garrison and John Doyle stated that they are the petitioners in this matter.  Mr. Garrison stated that they needed fill on the North side of their project, so they got together with Rieth-Reilly to work out a deal that they would take their spoil from the state project of Route 6, and they said they’d have plenty.  So, I figured what was going to be a temporary fill site for extra, if we needed for our North side, well, it came to be that, within a 2-week period, they had most of that 20 acres filled up.  So, they brought it onto us a lot faster than what I expected.  I figured  that would easily be a summer-long, year-long project.  Obviously, we had these large rains and snows.  We noticed that there was going to be a flooding issue, and it wasn’t something we weren’t trying to ignore. We just weren’t sure which way we needed the water to flow. It’s been a low area to begin with.  We dug temporary ditches through that property, even though we had no intentions on expanding. Granted, with what we brought in, it’s made  that problem worse, because that doesn’t allow that overspill from our ditches to go onto that 20 acres and sit, which it usually did.  So, what we’re trying to do with John is take that water now, bring it into retention ponds, and then bring it back to our property like it normally flowed, so that’s why we’re here.

Mr. Larr stated that he met with Mr. Doyle earlier this month, and then we went through these, and he’s already filed his Rule 5.

Mr. Nix reviewed it.  It suffices (sic) everything that Rule 5 would have, until…if development does occur, then a new plan would have to be submitted and another review would have to go again.

Mr. Larr stated that the 20 acres that are in front of us this morning are in the County’s jurisdiction, but it abuts the Portage City limits and any water that collects into the proposed retention area on that 20 acres is, eventually, going to have to go back through Ingram Manor, as well as Camelot.  Just from the contacts in the last month, Portage city is aware of the project, as well.  He talked at length with Craig Hendrix, the engineer from Portage, and he’s aware of the project, as well of today’s meeting. 

Mr. Doyle stated that with the amount of fill that was brought in, they need to regrade the fill area to drain the water to the center of the property.  There’s a high spot in the middle of the property, draining both East and West and then, at  the boundary, the water off  that property would be brought into our property.  So, other than  the side slopes along the banks along the side, which would be the East, West and South sides, there would be no runoff onto adjoining properties.  All their water then would be placed in a retention basin on the North end of the 20 acres, with controlled outlet into the ditch that is in place basically along the East side needs to be redug, redredged a little bit.  This was a ditch that was built probably 1995 or 1996, when the development was basically approved by Portage, the development  to the North.  When they initially started, there were basically no drainage ditches within the area, so what is there now has been primarily created through the development of Ingram Manor itself. 

At this point, Mr. Breitzke joined the meeting.

Mr. Larr stated that they also had some discussion and, particularly, some of the other homeowners around 700 N., 712 W. and County Line area, about water issues in their territory and it’s his impression this retention pond would alleviate some of that water, or at least take it off their property quicker, as well as he also  thinks he proposed to widen the drainage issues along 712 W.

Mr. Doyle stated that they hadn’t addressed any drainage ditches, well, on 712, no.  The drainage ditches on 712 were addressed in 1995 or 1996, when that development was made.  What they are proposing to do, with their retention basin and so forth, is to take the runoff from the 20 acres.  The ditches, primarily the one on the Eastern side of the property, that’s designed to accept whatever flows come into it, which we calculate to be about 125 acres of offsite drainage.  That they do not take through the retention area.  It’s basically just into the ditch system itself.

Mr. Breitzke stated, historically, around 700 N., South of 700, they’ve got issues and, as encroachment continues, they’re adding onto their buildings, they’re building South of 700 maybe another 500 feet, there’s a ditch that comes from 700 all the way across, South of 700 N. that feeds up kind of along what was a tree fence line, maybe  it had some kind of swale or ditch at some time. And this land’s developed with time.  The area is right at that low spot, so it’s been taking on this water. That’s probably one of the reasons it hasn’t been built on all these years.  Recently, with the filling going on by INDOT and Rieth-Reilly, who asked to place their fill on this property, and he thinks Mr. Garrison assumed they had taken care of all the permits and the issues and whatever, and that’s what brings us here today.  Also, they’re doing some pretty positive things, as far as the drainage, particularly from 700 N. and for  the properties from South and East, particularly.  There’s some direction to this water. There’s some polishing and cleaning going on, as it gets directed into detention, and also helps protect Mr. Garrison’s mobile home park.  The water comes into Ingram Manor, which Mr. Garrison’s family owns.  They need to make sure that water gets under control, lest he suffer some damages.  Since he owns the land, he assumes he probably owns many of the trailers, as well. 

Mr. Garrison stated that those are all privately owned.

Mr. Breitzke stated, but, he has a lot of interest at  stake in this thing, and the improvement is conducive to himself, as well, but he thinks it’s generally a community improvement, because it’s all private property and private easements and those kind of things.  Does he know anything about the history of the material that’s coming in?  did INDOT do testing?

Mr. Garrison stated that they did.  That’s why he thought INDOT and Rieth-Reilly had taken care of the paperwork. They came  to their fill site and took soil samples and informed them that they had to have the soil samples taken of all the material that was taken from their jobsite before it was brought to them.

Mr. Breitzke asked if he knows if IDEM has any logs concerning that.

Mr. Garrison stated that he couldn’t tell him.  He would assume that would be with Rieth-Reilly and them. 

Mr. Breitzke asked about how wide the swale is going to be along the common line on the East side.

Mr. Doyle stated that that’s a 10-foot bottom ditch, 5:1 back slopes.

Mr. Larr asked, so they’re widening this considerably?

Mr. Breitzke asked, about how deep would he think this is.

Mr. Doyle stated that on the South end it’s roughly 1.5 to 2 feet.  He thinks there’s an 18-inch culvert that comes underneath 700 that serves whatever areas to the South.  He’d say that’s probably about 2 feet deep  there.  As they go farther North,  they tie into the drainage ditches that were constructed in Ingram Manor development; it’s about 4 feet deep there.

Mr. Breitzke asked about what kind of slope they’re looking at overall. 

Mr. Doyle stated, about .07 per 100 feet.  It’s only about a foot. 

Mr. Breitzke stated that normally they like to have about .5 of a foot, if  they can get it.  His first  instincts are to say, can we get it lower up by 700 N., or to work that water.

Mr. Doyle stated that they are a little bit lower than the culvert that’s there now by about a foot, perhaps.

Mr. Breitzke stated that we would be remiss not to see if we could increase capacity for what they’re taking on in the South. In this case, because of the flat slopes, they need to be very careful about that, so it really can’t be taken down too much more.

Mr. Doyle stated that that’s basically the reason for the wide-bottomed ditch. 

Mr. Breitzke stated that he likes that because it increases capacity, maintenance is easier and it could be a matter of just putting a small machine down there and just driving straight through.  Some of  the locals had brought up the possibility of making it deeper and from everything he’s seen, it would be nice, but he doesn’t think it’s likely there to solve the problem, the problem being that they don’t want to park water there – we want to move it along, and the ponds in Ingram Manor is where it would be held for a long period of time.  Everything he sees is very positive for helping this area to the extent  that he can.  It’s very flat out here.

Mr. Riddell asked if he foresees any more material being hauled to this site.

Mr. Garrison stated, no.  He spoke with the foreman who had dealt with him, and once this came about, they both came to the conclusion that they were not going to take any, and they were not going to bring any more to them.

Mr. Riddell asked who is going to be responsible to maintain the infrastructure.

Mr. Garrison stated that that would be Ingram Manor itself.

Mr. Riddell stated  that Craig Hendrix passed along a letter to him with concerns:  There should be a barricade at the end of Bristol Street to keep people from jumping the bank and going into the pond.  Also, there’s no emergency spillway from the pond and if the height of the water in the pond exceeds the banks it will flow onto Worthington Street.

Mr. Doyle stated that the pond itself has about 89,000 cubic feet of retention; that was about to elevation 606. he’s referring  to the elevation at 607. At 606.5, if  they had an emergency spillway, basically it would be to the West side of the property, to keep the water off of Worthington. To raise the elevation to that, you’re ponding approximately 70,000 additional cubic feet. At 607 they’re over 2.5 times the capacity of the initial pond at the elevation of 606 (sic).  At 607, the swales that are taking the water off the property, they also become part  of the retention area, so, they can drop it down, if need be, but, at the rate he just described, they’re 2.5 times over what they think they need.

Mr. Larr stated that Worthington and Bristol are private roads that are maintained by the mobile home park and Portage City has no  jurisdiction there.  Is Rieth-Reilly also going to repair those roads?

Mr. Garrison stated that he paid out of his own pocket this fall, before winter, had them redug out and repatched, all the areas that  were torn up.

Mr. Riddell stated that it’s his understanding that there are roadways out there made of grindings and he’s just curious what will happen to them.

Mr. Garrison stated that that was just a temporary runway for them.  If and when – he doubts there will be any type of expansion – that’s asphalt rock, that will probably become  the base for a roadway, at one point in time.

Mr. Riddell asked, after the site’s regraded, there will be no more storage of  materials or equipment on the site.

Mr. Garrison stated that they were hoping to keep most of  their large equipment out there, at least right off of their mobile home park, just for the fact that they don’t own a trailer for most of their equipment.  Since everything’s on-site, they don’t go anywhere else with it.

Mr. Riddell asked if  they foresee anything going off of  the site.

Mr. Garrison stated that the only thing they would keep that equipment there for would be for the excavation of the plans that they have before the Committee. 

Mr. Haller asked if an IDEM Rule 5 permit required here.

Mr. Nix stated, yes.

Mr. Haller asked if it’s been posted.

Mr. Garrison stated, yes.

Mr. Haller asked if  there’s a permit required from soil and water.

Mr. Nix stated that he reviewed it and he sent Mr. Haller a copy.

Mr. Haller asked if his office got a copy of that. 

Mr. Joseph stated that he went and got  it.

Mr. Haller asked if there is a permit involved in that, and so is it posted?

Mr. Nix stated that there’s no permit from him.  It would come from IDEM when they send  their NOI letter in.

Mr. Haller asked, how many cubic yards of dirt were brought in originally.

Mr. Doyle stated that he couldn’t tell him.  He stated that he would think it’s probably 60,000 yards.

Mr. Haller asked if the rectangle on the drawing is where  the 60,000 yards were originally deposited.

Mr. Garrison stated, yes.

Mr. Haller asked if  they are going to move some of that in order to construct the pond.

Mr. Doyle stated, some of that on the North end, yeah.

Mr. Haller asked if the dirt itself is going to be used to form  this structure.

Mr. Doyle stated that it will be deposited on-site and re-graded, yeah.

Mr. Haller asked, if by  the time the pond is constructed, all the material will be accounted for.

Mr. Doyle stated, yes.

Mr. Cole stated that this is the first time he’s looked at this. He’d appreciate it if there are any supporting documents that they be sent to him. He’d like to see the IDEM report. The fill that’s in there now, or was in there, what constituted that fill?

Mr. Garrison stated that there seemed to be a mixture of a little bit of everything.  Either IDEM or Rieth-Reilly would have to give him that information on what they pulled out. 

Mr. Nix stated, what happened in this situation is, he was to look at a site on Highway 6 and County Line Road.  That was operated by the state highway department, and INDOT was working there, and Rieth-Reilly. When he went to the site to view the highway department doing construction along Highway 6, he was sitting there making notes and he had to contact the people.  A truck left  and it was a Rieth-Reilly truck.  He also had on his agenda that day to view 700 N., a filling area. So, he drove to Ingram Manor back there, and lo and behold, this Rieth-Reilly truck was leaving Ingram Manor, and he though that was the same driver and the same truck and he wondered why they were depositing there. Then he went and met with Mr. Garrison and he gave him his card and told him IDEM would probably be getting in touch with him and he said, he’s not sure.  He went back to the highway department and started checking with them and he asked if they had a permit to haul this material offsite to deposit somewhere else and, if they do, he would like to see their plans because they need to have a dedicated site where this fill is going.  Well, they didn’t have a dedicated site.  That brought the red flag up with the highway department, and so, from that time on, they decided from when they constructed the road, it’s all gravel, asphalt, sand – whatever was the base of the highway when  they scraped out to resurface, that’s basically what’s all in there. He found mixtures of asphalt, old telephone line cables, some conduit, plastic pipes, which are drain tile, cement – but he didn’t do any borings and Doug Wolf, who is with IDEM the day they were out there, is going through it with Rieth-Reilly superintendent wand was asking them the same thing because he was pulling out telephone cable, too. But  then when they submitted the plan, he could see it’s going to be a lot better than it is out there now. But he does have notes and concerns, permits that they’ll have to post out there.  That was INDOT that he was dealing with.

Mr. Breitzke stated that it’s looking better than it was before.  In fact, it’s looking better than it was before they put the fill on it.

Mr. Nix stated that out of the whole situation, INDOT got cited because their plan that they drew up wasn’t sufficient, either. There was no retention pond.

Mr. Cole stated that INDOT seems to take a lot of flexibility in what they do, what they permit for, what they file for and what they plan for.  I agree that anything to relieve us of what’s been deposited on this site and make it better is better, but we need a plan, and a very specific plan, and we cannot overlook our regulations and ordinances and our requirements to have a plan. First of all, I don’t see any indication of the soil type on here.

Mr. Doyle stated that it’s in this document here, sir.

Mr. Cole stated, the document I don’t have.

Mr. Breitzke stated that this is not a development plan, per se.  they have no plan to do any construction.  We’re in an area where we’re trying to decide how we apply our own ordinances.

Mr. Cole asked what the future land use is here.

Mr. Garrison stated, really, there is none.  At one time, when his dad purchased the land, he was hoping for an expansion of the mobile home development. At this point in time, as long as it’s County, he has no intentions on anything. It was just brought up to bring in extra fill for our areas that we needed it.  He never expected to have the entire area filled. So, at  this point in time, it will probably be drainage and a field. 

Mr. Cole asked where the water goes after it leaves the site. A bike path goes fairly close to this. There’s a nice, significant little dump of personal stuff up there North between the bike path and the residences, which he guesses is part of Camelot.  There’s a sign there and it says Camelot with homes, and they’re not mobile homes, just South of the bike path area, North of you.

Mr. Garrison stated that he thinks there are four or five private residences that area linked between…

Mr. Cole stated that these are more than four or five.   It’s actually not a part of this, but he likes to reference it, because there’s illegal dumping that has been going on there.  He hasn’t reported it.  He hasn’t been there for over a year and a half, but it bothers him that it’s out there where nobody’s checking on it.

Mr. Larr asked, that’s in the city of Portage, right?

Mr. Cole stated that it is now, but he’s not sure if it was originally.  That doesn’t mean that Portage can’t be brought to task for their own housekeeping.

Mr. Larr stated that he will give them a call.

Mr. Cole stated that he wants them to know about it, and he wants to know if they are concerned about it. If they’re not, he wants to know that, too.

Mr. Breitzke asked how long ago it was annexed into the City of Portage.

Mr. Garrison stated he thinks the first one was put in in 1985 and he thinks it’s always been in the city from that point out.

Mr. Cole asked where the water is going.

Mr. Doyle stated that if flows basically from their Northeast corner of the 20 acres and goes North about a quarter of a mile and then goes West roughly another quarter of a mile to the center of the Section and North from there.

Mr. Cole asked, probably into that little watery area between the EJ&E and….

Mr. Doyle stated that it goes underneath County Line Road, South of the railroad, he believes.  There’s about a 72-inch culvert there, or was back when, but that’s the drainage.

Mr. Cole stated that we really should have information on that. We need to know where water goes from leaving the site.  How deep does he expect this water to ever get, maximum?

Mr. Garrison stated that it’s hard to tell, because most of their entire parcel was flooded, due to the farm fields and lack of drains out of us.

Mr. Cole stated that he’s concerned because they are going to have a deep pool of water adjacent to several areas that have a lot of kids, and you know kids.  What’s the protection that they are going to offer to keep kids or people out of here, or once they get  in here.   You  talk about 5:1 slope and the slope in the offset looks fairly considerable.  If you fell in there, could you climb out?

Mr. Doyle stated that he believes so.

Mr. Cole stated that he really would like to know more about Craig Hendrix and not just him – the engineer is not the City.  He’s just an interpreter, an advisor, a person who is hired to look at things.  What does the City feel about this?

Mr. Larr stated that he can only imagine since the City of Portage was involved back in August or September when this originally came into being.  They had  their engineers, they had their code enforcement people out on-site, as well.  They’re well aware of both what happened last fall, as well as what’s happening today.  Both himself as well as the Garrisons and Mr. Doyle have been in communication with them. He thinks Mr. Breitzke has talked with everyone involved in Portage. He truly believes that they have concerns.

Mr. Cole stated that he thinks we need to look at a much more detailed plan.  He thinks we need to really consider the future use of this land property if it remains in the County, or, if it doesn’t remain in the County, our recommendation to the City of Portage, and he thinks we need to be upfront with that.  We need to be good citizens, since we’re planning a corridor study together, and we need to be looking at buffered planning, we need to look at the whole picture here.  He has reservations.  He really would like to see this come back to us before it goes forward.

Mr. Breitzke stated that this is a detention pond on the North end.  They don’t intend to hold water, so the water will flow out.

Mr. Cole stated that it’s flat; it’s not going to flow out fast.

Mr. Breitzke stated, exactly; that’s the intent of detention. Because of the rains over the last year, we had issues with the culvert under County Line Road. The responsibilities of  the culvert and the road are to the communities and the County to the West of us, so Portage and he both were involved, though it’s in Portage City limits, they’re dealing with that culvert and the blockages.  That’s when the water got extraordinarily high, but historically there have been issues with blockages in the Camelot section of the mobile home park.  It’s somewhat flat through that area and it doesn’t take much of an obstruction to bring the water levels up higher.  To Mr. Garrison’s credit, he’s trying to break down some of the blockages to the North.  Here, again, that’s something that Portage and Camelot need to be wrestling with. They’ve been urging them.  Right now, he doesn’t know why we would need to see this come back because this really isn’t a development. This is basically a citizen trying to take care of something that a state agency should have been supervising over the top, and we’re interceding just to redress it.  He’s actually doing a community improvement overall.

Mr. Cole stated that he doesn’t deny that, and it is a better plan than in one area where he’s spoken out publicly a lot about.

Commissioner Carole Knoblock stated that she has a letter from Doyle Wright, 721 W. 700 N., on the East, in complaint of the filling in and its composition, stating that it might have toxins in it. He stated that it’s causing water that’s flooding basements. The letter is in the file.

Mr. Cole stated that he’s been in Ingram Manor and he finds it an exemplary site. He has relatives who live in there.  But if we don’t impose better structure, better planning, better conditions on these sites that INDOT or Rieth-Reilly or whoever  they contract wants to use on the owners of the property themselves, then we’ll never get  the message to INDOT, and we need to get  that message to INDOT that we need to start taking better care of our property, our lands.  While he’s sure  this is a great improvement, we need to be ensconced with the facts with the plan and we need to know as much detail as we can about it.  So, his recommendation stands.

Mr. Breitzke stated that, one, he thinks they need to get going on this project, to take care of some of the issues that got created. Secondly, it’s always been his preference to see them come back at a time certain, something where we can see post-construction, what’s as- built, so we have an idea where we are with this whole thing and to know that it’s working.  He would guess the conclusion of  this would probably be May or June, would he think?

Mr. Doyle stated that it depends on the weather. He imagines he’s looking at a couple of months – so, end of June or July.

Mr. Breitzke stated that he’d say no later than June.  But we need to have some kind of update and maybe have a report in three months to the Plan Commission, but maybe have them appear before us in 6 months.

Mr. Larr stated that Ingram Manor has filed  the proper paperwork and filed the proper permits.  They voluntarily came to DAC.  They are ready to go on the project.  We can issue the permit today.

Mr. Cole stated that he will concede to some of that.  His problem is, is there anything in our ordinance that gives us enforcement rules at a later date when we review it and it isn’t to  our liking.

Mr. Larr stated that as soon as the project starts, they’ll notify both himself as code enforcement for soil and water first and erosion control. In turn, he’ll notify the people down  the line.  IDEM will be involved. Doug Wolf will be doing their audit as soon as the snow melts.  They will be monitoring the project. 

Mr. Cole stated that he thinks we need to look at our ordinance in terms of post-construction review. 

Mr. Breitzke asked if they are going to be back here in 6 months or so to report back to us or how are we going to work that? 

Mr. Haller stated that the Plan Commission has the authority to issue the erosion control permit that Mr. Larr is in charge of.  They also have the authority then to issue the Certificate of Occupancy on that and that’s something that he signs, so he can ask them to come back when they’re ready and set that date.

Issues raised were new Rule 5 to be submitted; create retention basin for runoff from  20 acres; would like to get slopes lower up by 700 N.; barricade at end of Bristol St.; emergency spillway from pond; get info on composition of fill; need specific plan; information on where the water goes after it leaves the site; get Portage’s input and vigilance; recommend post-production report at DAC.

Verizon Wireless c/o Stu Harrison, new cell tower at 900 N. and 200 W.

Stu Harrison stated that he is representing the petitioners in this matter.

Mr. Joseph stated that this Case appeared before the Board of Zoning Appeals last month, and was approved.  One of the requirements in the UDO is one last review by DAC prior to issuing a permit.

Mr. Haller asked what the nature of the Variance was.

Mr. Joseph stated that it’s a Use Variance to permit a cell tower.

Mr. Breitzke asked if  this is a collocate or a new tower.

Mr. Harrison stated that it’s a new tower.

Mr. Breitzke asked if he has no other towers in the area that could service.

Mr. Harrison stated, no.

Mr. Breitzke asked if he has a map of local towers for BZA.

Mr. Harrison stated that he gave it to them.

Mr. Joseph stated that  the BZA already approved this.

Mr. Breitzke asked what the Variances were that he requested.

Mr. Joseph stated that it’s just a Use Variance.

Mr. Breitzke asked how far back the tower is from 850 N.

Mr. Harrison stated that it's like 110.6 feet.

Mr. Breitzke asked if they meet  the fail-safe requirement.

Mr. Joseph stated that the fail-safe requirement applies to subdivisions.  This required a Use Variance because it was not an allowed use in a residential zoning district.

Mr. Riddell stated that they need to come to the Highway Department for the driveway permit so they can recommend the culvert.

Mr. Haller stated that the installer for the tower and the electrical sub-contractor would have to register with the County.

Mr. Cole stated that he’s been reminded by neighbors in the area that a neighbor directly adjacent to this objects to this tower.  He doesn’t have any reason from him.  The land is leased.  The property owner is to the West of the cultivated field that is shown on the plan.

Mr. Harrison stated, yes.   To the East is NIPSCO and to the West is the property owner.   This is 199 feet high?

Mr. Harrison stated, no, it’s 156 feet and no lights.

Mr. Cole asked if the Use Variance is only for the duration of the use of the tower.

Mr. Harrison stated that’s his understanding.

Issues raised were drive permit and register contractors.

Dvorak, waiver of subdivision control proposed at 738 W. 50 N. – review prior to going to BZA.

Rich Hudson stated that he is representing the petitioner in this matter.

Mr. Joseph stated that this case is going to the BZA to waive the subdivision process for two lots.

Mr. Hudson stated that he is here today representing Alyce Dvorak, who was not able to attend this morning.  This parcel is 10 acres at 738 W. CR 50 N.  What they would like to do is parcel off around the existing home an acre and almost .6 and not proceed through the subdivision control process.  The Dvoraks used  to live in this house. They have moved to Sylvan Manor now, just South of Valparaiso.  They are actually paying two mortgages right now in their attempts to sell this.   Trying to sell this as one parcel with the house on there became an economic problem.  It was their desire to sell off just the house and retain the 8.4 acres.  They’re not looking to develop anything. They’re not building anything now. They want to divest themselves of the house and this acreage and hopefully, at some point in the future, make back or at least break even on the rest of it. He handed out today how he did his notification.  It became apparent that you could see better what goes on around it.  He also attached a photo of  the Google aerial photograph with the parcel highlighted on it.  Again, they’re not building anything.  They’re not disturbing any soil.  They’re not doing anything except selling a parcel and, essentially, dividing their parcel into two.

Mr. Nix asked, on the second parcel where the barn and stuff is, it’s got a gravel drive.  Why was the barn ever built?  Was this farmed before?

Mr. Hudson stated that he’s speculating that the barn was constructed at the time they built the house, because if it’s been farmed, it hasn’t been for quite some time with the aerial photograph, because there’s a substantial growth in the Southeast corner, but  then there is a resurgence of vegetation unlike either side, where, to the East, it’s definitely farmland and, to the West, it looks like it may have been farmland, although that has since been platted into a minor subdivision.  It’s out in the country.  Whether they wanted a barn…I would assume it has their mowing equipment in it and those types of things.  Maybe they park their vehicles in it, if they had extra vehicles. 

Mr. Nix stated, if the barn was built there first and then the house, they might have used  the same driveway for both of  them. 

Mr. Hudson stated that he’s assuming that they’re in compliance for both driveways.  He doesn’t know. He can find that information out for them.

Mr. Breitzke stated that having a building is a non-conforming lot. Usually, we try to avoid having  those existing buildings on separate lots, although maybe the intent is for storage, and he likes pole buildings, but they sometimes end up becoming residences, rentals, uses for other purposes than just for storage or parking, so it’s always a concern when a lot gets created or expatriated from the body of an original lot of what the use of the structures is going to be in the future.  He would think the overall impact would be pretty minor from this.  He thinks the other issue would be that they should go ahead and create some kind of swales across these lots to protect the drainage South of the house and pole barn and just maybe have maybe a 30 or 40-foot wide easement from property line to property line where  that low area is.  There’s kind of a draw through there. 

Mr. Hudson asked if he means on what would be the second parcel.  It all slopes, essentially, South.

Mr. Breitzke stated that there’s the top of the hill right behind the house, but mostly right there on that second parcel, make sure that the water can always get away from the house parcel, no matter who ends up owning  the remnant. Are there any other major utilities or anything  that come back here that he knows of?

Mr. Hudson stated that  the utilities only go to the buildings.

Mr. Breitzke stated that he was thinking in terms of pipelines or something.

Mr. Hudson stated that there’s nothing that shows up on any map. County Line is just a little over a half a mile West.  750 is about their West line.

Mr. Breitzke asked if there are wetlands towards the back or any other…

Mr. Hudson stated that the natural features all show up on  the aerial photo.  There’s a substantial growth of trees in the Southeast corner, an emerging some sort of vegetation in  the middle.  There is a line of pine trees that come out from the back of the barn.

Mr. Breitzke stated that the bottom line is that they’re asking for Variances from the subdivision control ordinance, as a whole.

Mr. Hudson stated that they were specific in the chapters that they were looking for a Variance from.

Mr. Riddell stated that there’s a note that says .3 acres to be dedicated for county road right-of-way.  He would like to see it shown that they get their additional 10 feet.  Also, since they are creating another buildable parcel, he’ll have to get him a road agreement. 

Mr. Hudson stated that they’re asking for relief from  that whole process, which he believes would include the road agreement issue.  They’re looking for relief from subdivision, so that would include that.  they’re not creating any new driveways.  There’s nothing to be done.

Mr. Joseph asked if they would have to get a new driveway permit.

Mr. Riddell stated, when they build down the road.

Mr. Cole asked what the row of dots is up there?  He asked, is that vegetation?  From the aerial map, it shows a line that conjoins that along the West side of the gravel drive to the existing pole barn.

Mr. Hudson stated that those are, he believes, bushes.  When he was out there, there was all the snow out there. Course, it’s back again. 

Mr. Cole stated that he feels pretty strongly about any relief from existing ordinances and Variances. He thinks we have an ordinance.  We have regulations and we have all of this in place now, and we’re getting a lot of requests for Variances, releases, and he thinks we need  to be really tough on this.  However, he can understand, they’re stuck with all this property.  They’re getting older.  They probably would like to sell it, and they would like to divide it into just two parcels. 

Mr. Hudson stated that their reason is purely financial.  They cannot get out of it what they have invested in it.  This is purely a financial hardship and our ordinance allows for Variances because of hardships, and this is truly a financial hardship.  Right now, they have no plans. 

Mr. Cole asked how big the barn is.

Mr. Hudson stated that he can only scale it from the drawing here.

Mr. Cole asked, looks like a 30 by 40?

Mr. Hudson stated that it looks like a 40 by 65, maybe.

Mr. Cole stated that his concern is there’s a lot of room here for boats, travel trailers.

Mr. Hudson stated that there may be boats and travel trailers in  there now and it may be theirs and he owns it.

Mr. Cole stated, he will still own it, but it will be for sale as a separate parcel.

Mr. Hudson stated, no, it’s not for sale.  The only parcel that’s up for sale right now is the acre and .6.  They plan on keeping this until such time as…it’s not being sold as two parcels.

Mr. Cole stated, we need to know what their plan is for the barn and how they’re going to rectify this non-conforming use.

Mr. Joseph stated, for them to build South of the barn they would have to get a Variance.

Mr. Cole stated that he also sees this as a great opportunity to dedicate that extra right-of-way for the County road.  He really doesn’t see any reason for release from that.

Mr. Hudson stated that he can’t believe they would object to making that parcel with whatever that proposed right-of-way is.

Mr. Breitzke stated that the bottom line is he was under the impression she was ready to give up that right-of-way period.

Mr. Hudson stated that he’s not sure where he got that impression from.

Mr. Breitzke stated that he thinks that should be a stipulation for the BZA.

Mr. Cole stated, any impending land use that occurs here after they divest themselves of this, at that time, our ordinance is back into effect and they will have to comply with everything for storm water, drainage, etc.

Issues raised were swales to direct drainage South; show additional dedication of right-of-way to County; plan for barn; use of barn; rectify non-conforming use of barn.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 a.m.