PORTER COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION

Regular Meeting
April 14, 2004

M I N U T E S

The regular meeting of the Porter County Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. in the Administrative Center, 155 Indiana Avenue, Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Those members present were Eric Biddinger, Mike Bucko, Robert Detert, Commissioner Bob Harper, Frank Mahnic, Bob Poparad, Mike Sheetz and Kevin Breitzke, President. Those members absent were Rick Burns. Staff members present were Robert W. Thompson, Patricia S. Gibson, Fred Siminski and Attorney Lily Schaefer.

Mr. Detert moved to waive the reading of the March 24, 2004 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Bucko seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Pending Business:

Case 04-SE-2. Inspection Committee Report for Vertical Real Estate c/o CIS Communications, LLC, 165 N. Meramec Ave., Suite 400, St. Louis, MO, for a Special Exception to permit a 180-foot-tall monopole wireless communications tower and equipment cabinets to be located at 810 N. 330 W., in Portage Township, Porter County, Indiana.

At this time, Mr. Thompson read the Inspection Committee Report.

Mr. Mahnic moved to forward Case 04-SE-2 to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Biddinger seconded the motion.

Discussion:

Mr. Bucko stated in relationship to the aircraft, is this registered and listed with FAA.

Mr. Thompson stated no.

Motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Case 04-SE-3. Inspection Committee Report for Hebron Soccer Club, P.O. Box 365, Hebron, IN, for a Special Exception to permit a private soccer development, to be located near the Southeast corner of CE 1000 S. and CR 625 W. in Boone Township, Porter County, Indiana.

At this time, Mr. Thompson read the Inspection Committee Report.

Mr. Mahnic stated presently there is no building planned for that site. He asked when we make a motion will that be part of the motion that if they are building in the future they will have to go before the Drainage Board.

Mr. Thompson stated any future building will have to go in front of TAC for a site review and if it is seen that they are going to be locating close to the 75-foot drainage easement of the regulated drain then they would have to be referred to the Drainage Board.

Mr. Mahnic stated he has reference to where you say, "Any construction activities within the 75-foot drainage easement should be referred to the Porter County Drainage Board." He asked if they wanted to do that before it is approved or before they construct this or in the future.

Mr. Thompson stated they will have to go to TAC.

Mr. Mahnic asked how about the electric fence.

Mr. Thompson stated in that situation the Hebron Soccer Club needs to notify the parents and the children that they would be trespassing if they are next to that electric fence because it is on someone else's property.

Mr. Breitzke stated there is a gravel drive between this large piece of property and then the homes and the minor subdivision to the south.

Mr. Thompson stated one of the requirements for the special exception is that they will have to provide screening up against residential uses.

Mr. Detert stated all these things will come up at the BZA meeting.

Mr. Detert moved to forward Case 04-SE-3 to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Mahnic seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Case 03-P-17. Petition of Hampton Downs LLC, c/o Todd Leeth, Hoeppner, Wagner & Evans LLP, 103 E. Lincolnway, Valparaiso, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Hampton Manor Subdivision to be located on the North side of CR 500 N.
between CR 250 W. and CR 175 W. in Center Township, Porter


County, Indiana. (con't from the March 10, 2004 meeting. The public hearing is closed.)

Bill Ferngren stated he is here tonight on behalf of Hampton Downs LLC. He stated Todd Leeth could not be here tonight and he was asked to come in Todd's place. He stated this project has been reviewed on several occasions by the Plan Commission and also by TAC. He stated this is Hampton Manor Subdivision and it is a 36-lot development on approximately 20 acres and the property is zoned R-1. He stated the development plan that is before you strictly complies with all the terms of the county's zoning ordinance and the Subdivision Control ordinance as it has been presented to the Commission. He stated the public hearing was held on this matter on November 12, 2003. He stated much discussion was had at that time about various drainage issues and after a series of remands back and forth between this Body and the Technical Advisory Committee the final forward of this petition to the Commission occurred on January 9, 2004 from TAC. He stated that was based on engineer Bengel's drainage narrative and other calculations provided. He stated on January 9, 2004 Mr. Walker moved to approve the drainage plan for Hampton Manor and remand it to the Plan Commission and Ms. Caldwell seconded the motion. He stated this carried on a 3-0 vote. He stated this project has been before the Commission on a number of different occasions and there are no remaining issues. He stated the Technical Advisory Committee, the Commission's representative, has approved the drainage plan for this project and it strictly complies with all the terms of the ordinance.

Mr. Poparad stated we received a letter from Mr. Heistand. He asked if we wanted him to speak.

Commissioner Harper asked if a Commission member could request, if the public hearing is closed, to have someone speak.

Attorney Schaefer stated yes.

Mr. Mahnic stated he was told that we cannot do that. He stated there was one time when he tried to recognize people in the audience after the public hearing was close and he was told that it was improper.

Commissioner Harper stated he doesn't think it is and he thinks that anytime we are conducting a hearing we can allow the petitioner to speak if someone on the Commission wants to allow someone else to speak they should be allowed to. He stated if one side talks the other side should have a chance.

Attorney Schaefer stated she always felt that the Boards


could recognize people in the audience if they wish more information. She stated her question is whether it is proper to receive additional documentary evidence.

Commissioner Harper stated this is exactly what we sent them back for.

Mr. Breitzke stated it would have been more appropriate for them to get this to us sooner.

At this time, Commissioner Harper recognized Mr. Heistand to explain this document to the Commission.

Terry Heistand stated he has been here several times on behalf of the Gesse's who are the property owners west of this property who are with him today. He stated someone did state correctly that they were sent away to try to get some engineering. He stated he had some difficulty getting it together with Mr. Nagai. He stated Mr. Nagai offered him his review after he gave him some materials. He stated he tried to summarize his review so that people didn't have to read all the fine print. He stated the problem essentially in this case has always been one of we want to prove the thing for primary plat approval and sort of engineer it later as far as the details of the engineering. He asked how are they going to hook up to the sewer. He stated this has never been presented to the Commission that he is aware of. He stated it has always been a question as to whether they can even have a sewer connection at this property. He stated the memorandum that they have submitted today focuses on the question of drainage. He stated you remember that the Gesse's are downstream from this property. He stated the natural drainage is off of the proposed subdivision onto the Gesse property. He stated the Gesse's have always been concerned about the volume of the water that is going to come when they develop the property with streets, sidewalks, driveways and rooftops. He stated it was kind of refreshing to talk to Mr. Nagai because he gave him a little bit of a different perspective. He stated Mr. Nagai said that there is going to be some more water but the primary thing that you need to be worried about if you are sitting down stream from it is how fast is that water going to come. He stated the standard that we have is this 100-year rain can't get away any faster than the 10-year undeveloped. He stated Mr. Bengel has said in his testimony that in a couple of hours this thing will be drained out. He stated this is exactly the problem. He stated we have a system now of hard surfaces and drainage systems to dump the water to the pond and it is going to come out real quick as far as the storms we encounter every day, the one year storm, the five year storm etc. He stated it is going to be much quicker onto his clients property and what Mr.


Nagai suggested as he looked over the plans was first of all there needed to be some more engineering as to exactly how the pond was going to work and who was going to be responsible for long term maintenance. He stated the property owners suggested that the lot owner at that location would be responsible because Mr. Nagai said that it was critical for the thing to work and this is what concerns the Gesse's. He stated what Mr. Nagai is suggesting as he understands it that really what ought to happen is that the engineering be looked at very carefully and perhaps the pond be increased 15% or so in size and actually the pipe out of it downsized further. He stated Mr. Bengel did downsize the original plan to try to match where it goes under the road pass to the Gesse property because the water backs up on the Gesse's property now when there is a storm. He stated Mr. Nagai suggested that the engineering needs to be developed a little more fully and they need to do something about volume and the speed of delivery of these other storms that are going to impact his clients in a way that they haven't been impacted before. He stated as the one-year storm fell on the property eventually ran away it kind of defused between the properties. He stated now we are going to concentrate it in one place very quickly and dump it on his client's property. He stated this is the essence of what he got out of his conversations with Mr. Nagai. He stated they need more work on developing. Mr. Heistand stated as Mr. Nagai pointed out that there is no regulated drain that this is dumping into. He stated it is just being dumped on his clients property. He stated they reiterated in previous meetings their concern that you really can't bottle up your water and dump it on one spot onto your neighbor's property and tell them to deal with it. He stated the Gesse's don't want to deal with. He stated they want the drainage to be at least no worse than what it is now. He stated it certainly is not a perfect situation now but they are talking about an accelerated drainage of an increased volume of water onto their property over a very short period of time and they think that the engineering ought to be such to avoid that result. He stated this is the essence of what they are here tonight about and appreciate the opportunity to speak to the Commission. He stated he is sorry he didn't get the material to the Commission sooner.

Mr. Breitzke stated to Mr. Heistand that there is a major question here. He stated we have to have findings to turn this down. He asked what specifically in the county's ordinance in Section 16.16.020 e and e (2) (a) through (l) does this subdivision not meet.

Mr. Heistand stated he is very sorry but he wasn't told that the Commission needed findings.


Mr. Breitzke stated to Mr. Heistand that he did not submit this until tonight.

Mr. Heistand stated the essence of the problem here is that this violates the common law to his understanding with regards to water the common enemy. He stated you can't just funnel it out and put it in a spout and dump it on your neighbor's property.

Mr. Breitzke stated in our case it has to violate our ordinance. He stated the civil issue is between you and them. He stated we are dealing with the ordinance as it is.

Mr. Sheetz stated this has been through TAC and approved three times.

Mr. Breitzke stated yes.

Mr. Sheetz asked if those members that sit on TAC are our "experts" on that.

Mr. Breitzke stated yes that is true.

Mr. Sheetz asked if the ground that is there right now is just dirt.

Mr. Ferngren stated that this is correct. He stated it is farm field.

Commissioner Harper stated to Mr. Heistand that he has this letter dated April 14 from your engineer and he assumes that you are submitting this to be part of the record.

Mr. Heistand stated that this is correct.

Commissioner Harper stated he would like to see that this letter be part of our record.

Mr. Mahnic asked if the petitioner received a copy of this letter.

Mr. Heistand stated he gave a copy to Mr. Bengel in the absence of Mr. Leeth and Mr. Ferngren so he can look at it and be prepared to discuss it.

Mr. Mahnic stated we started on this case two years ago. He stated it has been back to TAC three times. He stated each time was for a drainage problem. He stated a number of changes were made. He stated Mr. Bengel is also a professional engineer. He stated he puts his engineering know how before us and before


the engineers to consider this at TAC. He stated he had suggested two meetings ago that we should accept this for primary plat approval because it meets all of the requirements of the ordinance that it applies to. He stated he thinks that the engineer and the petitioner have gone beyond what they have to do in trying to collect this water and put it across the property at a slower rate and they do not put more water than goes across there now.

Mr. Detert stated he thinks that we need to have Mr. Bengel respond to this. He stated he thinks that they raised some interesting questions here on the flow of water.

Donald Bengel stated just one thing that they have talked about several times is that they have cut the release rate down in the amount of water that is allowed to fall off on that site more than in half. He stated they have increased the volume of the pond and he thinks that they more than meet the requirements of the ordinance. He stated they have tried to be a good neighbor. He stated he could go through the items on Mr. Nagai's letter. He stated he just received this letter tonight too. He stated Mr. Nagai talks about the responsibility of long-term maintenance of the detention ponds. He stated they would like the Drainage Board to assess this property per lot per year for the long-term maintenance not for construction just for maintenance. He stated if for some reason the Board wouldn't do that there will be a POA that would have that responsibility with assessments and the duties for maintenance. He stated in the letter Mr. Nagai states, "addition of large amounts of impervious areas will certainly increase the peak storm water runoff." He stated you have to compute the runoff back to which they did. He stated with a runoff factor of .4, which is normal for subdivisions. He stated in fact with theirs if you got down to the nitty gritty it could be less than that because the lots are good size. He stated it states, "Typically, designing a storm water management facility to only limit the 100 year, developed storm water rate as opposed to the 10 year rate." He stated that is the ordinance and he doesn't know how to respond to that. He stated they have more than met that ordinance. He stated the legal requirement is for the 100 year developed as opposed to the 10 year undeveloped release rate. He stated it asks how will a "legal drain" be established over an area that does not currently have a defined water way. He stated that is up to the Drainage Board if they want to create a regulated drain all the way to an outlet where they can make the subdivision a regulated drain on its own. He stated Mr. Nagai talks about topographical information presented on the primary plat. He stated beyond the primary plat they went out and did additional topographic work along the natural water way. He stated they don't think that it


travels at a rate of 500 feet. He stated Mr. Nagai says go down to 80 feet. He stated we are certainly not going to increase the problem that may be there now. Mr. Bengel stated again they have been to TAC more than three times and each time it gets approved. He stated he doesn't know what more they can do. He stated he thinks that they have exceeded the ordinance.

Mr. Ferngren stated this has been before the Plan Commission back in the Fall of last year and as recently as January 9, 2004 to TAC. He stated he thinks that there has been more than enough time for Mr. Heistand to present this information and to do so at such a late time in this proceeding is really unjust and unfair. He stated they have complied with all the terms of the ordinance including providing all information regarding their sanitary sewers. He stated they have letters in the file indicating that South Haven is ready, willing and able to serve this property. He stated with respect to the Common Law he respectfully disagrees with Mr. Heistands position or his interpretation of the Common Law of the common enemy doctrine. He stated the simplest explanation that he can give you to apply his logic would be every subdivision that the Commission has approved would violate the common enemy doctrine simply because it is draining water on someone else's property. He stated he hardly thinks that this is the interpretation that the courts would apply in this case or in any other case for any subdivisions especially so when they strictly comply with all terms of the drainage calculations and storm water management provisions in your ordinances.

Commissioner Harper asked to explain the answer to who will be responsible for the long-term maintenance of the detention ponds.

Mr. Bengel stated it will either be the Porter County Drainage Board if they accept this subdivisions drainage system as a regulated drain and then the lots will be assessed on a per year basis to handle the maintenance. He stated if they have to spend money or use up the money that is in the fund then the maintenance assessment would continue. He stated it generally brings $50 to $75 per lot per year.

Commissioner Harper stated the Porter County Drainage Board has a hard time keeping up with all the drainage issues that they are faced with right now. He asked if he is correct in saying this.

Mr. Breitzke stated that we are pursuing a lot more of them. He stated there were a lot of problems that were unattended to for many years, largely due to lack of assessment


or anyway to pay for it. He stated this county has no general drainage tax and no other means for doing most of this work.

Commissioner Harper stated who will be responsible for it depends on how good County Government is operating ten years from now if there is a problem.

Mr. Breitzke stated typically not. He stated he wouldn't be too overly concerned about it because we contract that maintenance out. He stated most of the maintenance would be at the outlet and we would be looking toward rebuilding the structures or the berms along the top of the structure.

Commissioner Harper asked Mr. Breitzke to explain to him how this would happen.

Mr. Breitzke stated they would go to the Drainage Board and they would create an assessment that would build up to say theoretically $6000. He stated we would suspend the assessment and when those monies were spent then the assessment would start up again.

Commissioner Harper asked if you typically do this with all detention ponds.

Mr. Breitzke stated yes. He stated we had a problem many years ago, before he got here, with POA's that were not incorporate. He stated they had no taxing power. He stated one of the things as a Plan Commission we have been enforcing the issue. He stated either you have the Drainage Board take care of the ponds or you incorporate your POA so you have the means of collecting and maintaining.

Commissioner Harper stated concerning the second point which states, "the addition of large amounts of roofs, drives etc. will increase peak storm water runoff flow rate." He asked Mr. Bengel if he is saying this is incorrect.

Mr. Bengel stated he is not saying that this is incorrect at all. He stated Mr. Nagai is just making a statement.

Commissioner Harper asked Mr. Bengel if this is a true statement that additional large amounts of roofs, drives and everything will increase the peak storm water runoff flow rates.

Mr. Bengel stated if you don't detain it and if there is no pond at all and there is farm field today it runs off…although farm field alone runs off a lot of water. He stated a corn field can have a release rate of .4 or .5 and they used a .4 for factorizing for the subdivision.

Commissioner Harper asked why would additional roofs, drives etc. increase peaks storm water runoff rate if you don't have detention pond.

Mr. Bengel stated if you are increasing impervious area the water is not going to soak in as much so it will run off.

Mr. Breitzke stated first of all as engineers we look at this 100-year developed rate of runoff to 10-year undeveloped. He stated if we take any parcel out there prior to subdivision we are almost condemned to do some kind of detention or water control.

Commissioner Harper stated that if he heard Mr. Bengel's answer right that is what he was saying. He stated he understands that we are talking about not having a detention pond. He asked Mr. Bengel if he agrees with the statement that because of the roofs, drives and everything it will increase peak storm water runoff rate if there wasn't a detention pond.

Mr. Bengel stated certainly. He stated they figured that in a normal rain today off of that field the runoff is at least equal to .4 or 40%. He stated the reason that they still have .4 after development is because we have a lot of grass as well as pavement and roofs.

Commissioner Harper stated he guesses Mr. Bengel doesn't agree with this statement.

Mr. Bengel stated he guesses the statement is incomplete because it doesn't talk about the pervious areas. He stated they are not going to flow more water off of the site with the number of houses that they have.

Commissioner Harper stated the other question he has is concerning the statement that says, "How will a "legal drain" be established over an area that does not currently have a defined water way?"

Mr. Bengel stated when they go to the Drainage Board they will ask the Board to make the subdivision a regulated drain. He stated all the parts of the storm sewer, in the subdivision, make that a regulated drain. He stated the board has the option of deciding maybe they want the regulated drain to extend across the Gesse's and down to a stream.

Mr. Breitzke stated the Drainage Board doesn't have the option if the other owners are not willing. He stated we need a willing developer but the bottom line is it is not unusual to do


something regulated up to a point. He stated one day the next property will be developed and it might be 50 years from now.

Mr. Poparad asked do we want to ask Mr. Nagai to explain this.

Mr. Breitzke stated he doesn't think that this is appropriate.

Mr. Ferngren stated the point that Mr. Bengel is making is that there is a certain amount of water that does fall onto the property whether it is developed or not. He stated the same amount of water is going to fall onto that property. He stated that water will be released at no faster rate than it has ever been released.

Mr. Poparad stated you are changing the shape of this parcel and collecting the water.

Mr. Ferngren stated the storm water management practices and designs will control that so that no more water will enter…

Mr. Poparad stated about half of this parcel drains the other way if he remembers what we went through months ago. He stated now we are going to take all of this parcel and concentrate it in one direction.

Mr. Bengel stated he disagrees. He stated most of the water a great majority of the water flows toward the Gesse's. He stated they have a smaller pond that goes south. He stated they are not changing the drainage areas. He stated most of it goes that way.

Mr. Mahnic moved to approve Case 03-P-17 for primary plat with a recommendation to TAC that all these issues on the letter we have received tonight be considered and answered properly before final plat is approved. Mr. Bucko seconded the motion.

Discussion:

Commissioner Harper stated he thinks it is ashamed when we are here representing the citizens that are here. He stated he thinks that we should be very careful when our ordinances are rewritten that it be very clear that we start talking about that if you are going to develop a piece of property you are going to have to develop in such a way that it does not increase water onto your neighbors property. He stated not that it does not increase water to a certain flow or this or that or the other. He stated these people are farmers. He stated farmers have


fields and anyone who knows the dollar value of farm fields knows that if you put a field in corn and you have a place that washes out and if that is increased then they have lost money. He stated he can't see that we should ever be put in a position because our ordinance is flawed or at any point where we take such steps as it hurts our neighbors property and the people who are already here.

Mr. Detert stated he doesn't feel that the answer to the letter is clear at this point. He stated he has to agree with Bob and we don't have a right to dump a lot of water on Gesse's property. He stated here is another engineer that says we are bouncing up and down on the pipe size. He stated he is not sure if we really have the pipe size down where everybody is going to be happy.

Mr. Biddinger stated he feels much the same way as the other two gentlemen who spoke. He stated he doesn't think that this is a good solution. He stated he thinks that there are some other things that we can look at. He stated unfortunately he really feels our hands are tied with the ordinances that we currently have. He stated good or bad that is what we have to work with. He stated he encourages everyone to keep this in mind as we rewrite the ordinances in the future.

Motion carried on the following ballot vote:

Biddinger - Yes Bucko - Yes Detert - No
Harper - No Mahnic - Yes Poparad - No
Sheetz - Yes Breitzke - Yes

Case 04-FP-2. Petition of Komark Ltd., 131 Ridge Road, Munster, Indiana seeking a replat of Ravinia Subdivision, to be located on the East side of SR 149, between U.S. Hwy 6 and Midway Drive in Liberty Township, Porter County, Indiana. (To contain 13 lots on 3.25 acres. Zoned RR.)

Chris Kovich stated he is from Komark Limited. He stated what they are proposing to do is eliminate a couple of lots of phase 2 of the development and increasing the size. He stated on this plat here where they have eight lots there will now be seven lots and in this area here where there was six lots now there will be five. He stated the lots are going from 65 feet wide to about 79 feet.

Commissioner Harper stated right now this area is approved for how many lots.

Mr. Kovich stated right now there are 15 and they will be down to 13 lots.

Commissioner Harper asked how long ago were these lots approved.

Mr. Kovich stated a couple of years ago.

Commissioner Harper asked what size are the lots now.

Mr. Kovich stated the depth didn't change. He stated the widths are going from approximately 65 and 71 to now 79 and 80.

Mr. Bucko moved to approve Case 04-FP-2. Mr. Poparad seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Case 04-FP-3. Petition of Mark Peracki, 518 E. 375 N., Valparaiso, Indiana seeking secondary plat approval for a replat of Lot 25 in Moreland Estates Subdivision to be located on the south side of 318 N., between CR 475 E. and CR 320 W. in Union Township, Porter County, Indiana.

Don Bengel stated he is here representing Mark Peracki. He stated we were here a few months ago to get primary plat. He stated Mr. Peracki has a 15 acre parcel in Moreland Estates Addition and he owns most of the pond that is out there. He stated he wants to cut off 2.86 acres so he can build a house for his folks right next to him. He stated the parents have some health problems and Mr. Peracki wants to be able to take care of them.

Mr. Mahnic asked if the private drive went all the way down.

Mr. Bengel stated yes.

Mr. Mahnic asked if this was built to any particular specs.

Mr. Bengel stated at the time there were no requirements but he thinks that road does well.

Mr. Poparad moved to approve Case 04-FP-3. Mr. Mahnic seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Public Hearing:

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

Case 04-Z-3. Petition of Bernie Madej, 5583 Paw Paw Road, Coloma, MI, for a proposed amendment to the Master Plan to rezone a parcel of land from RR, Rural Residential to R-1, Single Family Residential to be located on the Southwest corner of CR 200 W.


and U.S. Hwy 6 between CR 200 W. and SR 149 in Liberty Township, Porter County, Indiana. (con't from March 10, 2004 meeting.)

William Ferngren stated he is here tonight in behalf of the petitioner, Bernard Madej. He stated the request tonight is to rezone approximately 60 acres of property from RR, Rural Residential to R-1, Single Family Residential district. He stated the property is 60 acres in size located on south side of U.S. Hwy 6 and CR 200 W. in this location. He stated the property has some rolling terrain. He stated there are three detention basins proposed on the property. He stated as he mentioned the property is currently zoned RR under the county's ordinance. He stated the adjacent properties to the north across Rt. 6 is zoned RR and used as a single-family residential subdivision. He stated to the south it is zoned RR and it is an undeveloped parcel of property. He stated to the east of the parcel it is multi-family. He stated across CR 200 W. and in this area here there is a mix of commercial and single family residential. He stated the proposed development on the 60-acres is 114 lots single-family development consisting of three outlots and a variety of different green space areas. He stated of the 60-acres approximately 6 to 7 acres is green open area. He stated the proposal is to bring sanitary sewer down Rt. 6 and this is the reason for the zone change to the R-1 to allow a lower size lot with the provision of sanitary sewer and water. He stated the proposal shows that approximately 1.9 units per acre as shown with 114 units on the 60 acres. He stated two entrances both located on CR 200 W. and as you see this drawing with the exception of zoning all terms and conditions of the subdivision control ordinance with respect to lot size and drainage and all those sorts of things will be met here. He stated all of these lots sizes for R-1 are in excess of the minimum requirement for the RR designation. At this time, Mr. Ferngren submitted to the Commission a copy from the Land Use and Thoroughfare plan. He stated this property is located within the classification of Conservation Development Area One. He stated he has highlighted a portion of that section for the Commission. He stated this proposal as you see it tonight is located within the Conservation Development Area. He stated one of the purposes is to encourage sanitary sewer and domestic water services. He stated this is exactly what they are hoping to do here. He stated the Damon Run Conservancy District has been established and it is in place and this property would become part of the Damon Run Conservancy District, which would provide the sanitary sewer service to this property. He stated again pointing out the recommended density is this particular land use area recommended density if utilities are provided are between one unit per acre to two units per acre. He stated they are at 1.9 units per acre


right in that recommended density with sanitary sewer and water
service. He stated what this reduced lot size will provide is allow for more open space in the development. He stated it is very important that we will permit financially and justify the extension of sanitary sewers down U.S. 6, which would service other properties along the way and this has been a long sought after item in this particular area. He stated one of the policy recommendations in the Land Use Plan is to encourage aside from recognizing that your conservation development areas encouraging developments to use domestic water and sanitary sewer service just as what they are proposing to the Commission tonight. He stated for a marketing standpoint realtors will be the first to tell you that one of the things that most people want when they are looking for a home is whether it has sanitary sewer and water. He stated this is exactly what they are trying to provide in this area.

Mr. Mahnic asked if Mr. Ferngren go show SR 149.

At this time, Mr. Ferngren pointed to the drawing and located SR 149 for Mr. Mahnic.

Mr. Ferngren stated the proposal for R-1 zoning will not adversely affect the adjoining parcels. He stated as he has indicated it is a single-family use with lots that exceed all of the R-1 requirements and there is single-family use across the street. He stated a similar density is in the Ravinia area. He stated there is commercial property adjoining and there is also a higher density multi-family in this location. He stated obviously the use is a consistent one with the area and the surrounding parcels. He stated the last thing that he has for the Commission is a written commitment that the property owner is willing to enter into, although the sanitary sewer is going to be provided. He stated what they are willing to do is to commit to say that in the event that for some reason this isn't provided they would develop the lots to be at least one acre in size, which then would be consistent with the septic fields and private wells. He stated we have talked a lot about the specifics of this particular project but he thinks it is important to focus on what is the proper focus and that is what is the best use for this property and what is an appropriate zoning use for this property. He stated given the surrounding area and given the public policy concerns of lets extend sewer and water service and that is the right thing to do. He stated he believes that the proposed rezoning fits very neatly within the Land Use Plan and it is an appropriate use of the property.

No one spoke in favor of this petition.



Phyllis Meyers stated she lives at 207 A West U.S. Hwy 6. She stated she lives right across the street from this property.
She asked if there was any limit on the size or kind of housing that will be in this area. She asked if they will be stick built or manufactured homes. She asked what can you do to a resident on Hwy 6 that lets their home run down.

Mr. Breitzke stated to Mrs. Meyers that she will have to call the Plan Commission office and speak to a staff member concerning this.

Dennis Hain stated he lives at 49 Tower Road. He stated first thing he would like to bring up is that he wasn't notified of this meeting. He stated the parcel that he owns is on the southwest corner and is adjacent to that property. He stated his big concern right now is the drainage. He stated they have addressed the sanitary sewer and the water but nothing has been mentioned about the drainage. He stated there is flooding in this area right now.

Steve Freeman stated he lives at 772 N. 200 W. He stated he owns the property to the south of this. He stated his major concern is the density. He stated also with two access roads coming off of CR 200 W. and the condition of CR 200 W. He stated also there is no light at that intersection. He stated it is congested right now with the high density of townhouses in the northeast corner. He stated along his northern property line they get flooding in different areas from this farmland. He stated his property is rolling hills that dump into a basic ditch. He stated that same ditch is being used for septic affluent from the townhouses. He stated his concern is that if they don't get a public utility will they put their own septic plant in. He stated also what type of construction is going to go into this density. He asked if they will have covenants. He stated his concerns are the congestion. He stated the people in this area have larger lots.

Mike Bolinger stated he lives 783 N. 200 W. He stated he owns the 1.4 acre lot east of this proposed development. He stated he would like to say that we have several subdivisions off of CR 200 W. He stated he is worried about the density. He stated they just chip and tarred CR 200 W. last year. He stated there are 18-wheelers going down that road going 65 mph. He stated if this did happen there would have to be turning lanes onto CR 200 W. and a traffic light on CR 200 W. and Rt. 6. He stated you can't hardly get out of there now.

Jeff Jirtle stated he lives at 252 W. U.S. 6. He stated there is a drainage problem existing right now. He stated the


concern is the north side where the south side of this subdivision is going to drain down west to Rt. 6 towards Salt Creek where it gets caught between Arbor View Animal Hospital and his property. He stated he has 12 acres adjoining Mr. Dennis Hain and Arbor View Animal Hospital. He stated he would like to submit photos of the problem that they are having. He stated he is getting property damage every time it rains. He stated they cannot get the sewers and the water like they are claiming. He stated one acre is not enough for a septic system. He stated he is an installer of septic systems and they fail from the day they put them in. He stated somewhere down the line someone is going to have to pay another $10000 to move that system and one acre is not enough to move it. He stated it should stay rural residential and these lots should be at least two acres. He stated if there is a proposed plan for their own sewer system he would like to enter these and hoping this isn't going to be the eyesore that we see. At this time, Mr. Jirtle submitted pictures of Mallards Point to the Commission. He stated if these septics do fail in these small lots the water will come at them. He stated they have seven homes now that drain off onto them and if you can see from those pictures that culvert is not really a culvert. He stated this use to be a cattle crossing. He stated the cattle used to cross under Rt. 6 and the water is escaping off onto them. He stated this water is five foot deep when it rains.

Mr. Ferngren stated the homes will all be stick built homes and not modular homes. He stated to Mr. Hain that this is the first meeting and they did notify everyone. He stated this is the first discussion on this case. He stated on drainage all of the drainage concerns that you folks are discussing will be addressed through TAC. He stated the developer and their engineer will be required to fully engineer and design this project and comply with all of the subdivision control ordinance requirements. He stated all the things that were discussed in the earlier cases will be satisfied and all the terms of the ordinance will be met. He stated he believes this is an appropriate density in this location. He stated the property is located in a conservation development area #1. He stated he handed this out to the Commission earlier and highlighted the area in blue that said that the appropriate or recommended density is one to two units per acre. He stated they have 1.9 so they are right in the recommended density is. He stated concerning the road condition the staff report indicates that CR 200 W. is in fair condition and won't have any adverse affect on that road any more than any other development would. He stated covenants will be in place to ensure that the property is properly maintained. He stated as far as how the homes will look he doesn't know but they will be built right on site. He stated to the gentleman who installs septic systems this explains to him


exactly why this would be the time to extend sanitary sewer to this property and why it makes sense to do this. He stated that is why in the Land Use Plan it says, "encourage and recommend sanitary sewer use." He stated the sanitary sewer system that they are going to be utilizing will be coming from another municipality. He stated the terms of that have not been finalized but that means that there will not be any sewer plant on this location and it will look like any other subdivision. He stated there will not be any waste water sewer treatment plant on this property whatsoever.

Mr. Hain stated you mentioned that you will address the storm drainage situation later on. He stated he has developed a number of parcels of land in Porter and Lake County. He stated they have also done a number of subdivisions. He stated they have also thought about where the water was going before they even got off of square one. He stated they must have discussed this with someone else as to what direction this water is going to go.

Mr. Jirtle stated he doesn't think Mr. Ferngren addressed the problem that is coming down west on Rt. 6 for the drainage. He stated this does have to be correct.

Mr. Freeman stated he has heard the promises from other developers and an example is Mallards Landing. He stated he believes they are now gone. He stated this what scares him and if the county gives the go ahead to change this he is looking at another scenario of seeing septic tanks floating down the creek that goes through his property. He stated this is what really has him scared. He stated this is a beautiful area here and they fought the Federal Government to keep it from being a State Park. He stated they know eventually this is going to be developed but he would hate to see the urban sprawl that we see in South Haven not to put that area down. He stated he would hate to have that as his neighbor. He stated he wants to see beautiful homes built on spacious lots.

Mr. Bolinger stated he thinks that this whole issue on density is relative to how close it is to your backyard. He stated he is not quite sure what .9 a family is. He stated he knows that he is a whole family. He stated if this does get approved the county is going to have to put a light in and they are going to raise taxes to pay for that. He stated these two entrances off of CR 200 W. there is going to have to be some turning lane or traffic control and he doesn't think that this was properly addressed.

Mr. Breitzke asked Mr. Ferngren if he answered Mrs. Meyers


about U.S. 6 and meeting width on improving Rt. 6.

Mr. Ferngren stated he has not spoken to anyone about that.

Wes Van Hoort stated he lives at 226 Southwind Dr. He stated he is concerned about the traffic and the density. He asked what are the square footage of homes that will be built in there.

Mr. Jirtle stated he does think the outcome of this should wait on soil tests to see if the sewer doesn't come. He stated one acre is not going to be enough for the septics.

Mr. Bolinger stated he just had to get soil tests done on his place and one thing that he did notice was that the Health Department did rate the soil as poor for septic in that area. He stated if it does turn out where these are going to have to be one acre lots and they are going to have to be well and septic he wants it to be noted that even the Health Department says that the area is poor for septic.

Mr. Ferngren stated obviously the proposal is for sanitary sewer and if that sewer were not to come they would have to build on lots not smaller than one acre in size. He stated they still need to comply with the County's soil test requirements to see if the soils are suitable for development. He stated at that time it may well be that the lots are a different size and a little bit larger than one acre. He stated all of those soil tests will be done. He stated TAC will review those and the Health Department will also review those and will not improve a lot that is on the poor soil. He stated this constitutes good planning within the Land Use Plan. He stated he will raise it up to 2 units per acre if it is easier for you to understand that. He stated they are still within the guidelines of the recommended density of one to two units per acre. He stated this is going to be a good project. He stated the homes will be in the estimated range of $200,000. He stated this is certainly not a cheap home. He stated there has been some discussion about semi traffic on CR 200 W. He stated this project and this use certainly will not increase any semi traffic on that road whatsoever. He stated this is a residential development and not a commercial development. He stated with respect to drainage. He stated there has been some preliminary drainage studies done and this has not been ignored. He stated the Duneland Group has done this. He stated he is going to ask Mike Duffy from the Duneland Group to explain their drainage proposal at this time.

Mike Duffy stated as far as the water that goes down to the Arbor View Hospital they were aware of that very early on in


this. He stated it has already been designed in the subdivision to pick up basically all the water heading towards the corner of
their subdivision and bring it in and detain it within their detention system. He stated also the preliminary designs have the detention system is oversized to provide more storage than it is actually required so that they can release it at a slower rate. He stated they have looked at the issues and they don't want to create more problems for anyone out there and their objective is to solve as much of it as they can.

The public hearing was then closed.

Commissioner Harper asked if we would rezone it and sewer and water wouldn't come and you decided to build how could you build. He asked what size lots would there be.

Mr. Thompson stated if an R-1 zoning was done and the sewer and water didn't come by code they could go to 30,000 square feet with a lot with 100 foot frontage and this is with septic systems and if the soils were considered good by the Health Department.

Mr. Breitzke stated also there would be 100 foot frontage down from 160 foot frontage with narrower lots.

Commissioner Harper asked Attorney Schaefer what happens with this man who said he didn't receive notice.

Attorney Schaefer stated she doesn't know what the file shows.

Commissioner Harper stated to look at what the file shows. He asked if he was an adjoining property owner that didn't receive notice.

Mr. Thompson stated he did go through the notification that they submitted to us and he didn't see the gentleman's name.

Mr. Breitzke stated Larry Steele would approach that issue if you are present you are here by notice.

Commissioner Harper stated we look at these pictures and see that there is a drainage problem. He stated we just got done with a discussion that he thinks ended up with a conclusion that really there is very limited things that we can do with drainage problems because we are saddled by an ordinance that doesn't let us do a lot about drainage problems. He stated it lets us do some but it doesn't let us completely solve them. He stated he thinks that it is our duty if we are going to allow building to solve those problems. He stated if we pass this on we are going


to be back here some day having the same people tell us that we can't take action because they have met the minimum requirements
of drainage that our ordinance calls for. He stated the water in the subdivision across the street and the way that subdivision across the street looks is terrible and it is our responsibility that it looks that way. He stated when we do things have way we end up with half way results. He stated we have a chance here to say "No, wait a minute, we are not going to do this because these questions haven't been answered." He stated in truth these gentlemen sat through our hearing on drainage a few minutes ago. He stated they know that we are limited as to what we can do about it. He stated different people live in this county and when situations like this are created we can yell about builders and developers and everything else but we are not doing our job or we are napping. He stated we are not doting the "i's" and crossing the "t's" to stop that kind of thing from happening. He stated apparently there are some drainage problems here and he can't imagine why we would take any action on this at this time knowing that they are going to come back here with a drainage ordinance that he feels ties our hands if we want to completely solve the problem. He stated let's wait until we get some of these things solved and take another look at this.

Mr. Breitzke stated we can improve the drainage. He stated we can solve a lot of problems along the way. He stated we don't have those rights when it is private property, when it is field or agricultural use, when it is all in this exclusive use. He stated water passes on and in this case they are attempting to address some of the drainage problems throughout the area. He stated that is the one consideration when they first came and spoke to him. He stated number one was to get sewers out there and water for fire protection. He stated the drainage along Rt. 6 and to work with the people who are engineering the new U.S. Hwy 6 at this time and also to protect the people to the west as it flows that way better than what they are getting right now. He stated most of that water is coming across that field.

Commissioner Harper asked if we had a drainage ordinance that would stop them from putting more water on these peoples property than they are already getting on their property now.

Mr. Breitzke stated it stops the rate of flow.

Commissioner Harper asked Mr. Breitzke if we had a drainage ordinance that would allow us to stop these people from putting more water on their property than they are getting right now.

Mr. Breitzke stated yes.



Mr. Poparad asked what is the plan, assuming this all gets permission, for the water to be taken down Rt. 6 to the west.

Mr. Duffy stated at this point preliminarily it is designed where all of the water along Rt.6 and these ponds are going to be joined together.

Mr. Poparad asked if there was a legal drain somewhere in that area.

Mr. Duffy stated there is a low lying ravine down here and release the rate slowly off the back of this area in here.

Mr. Poparad asked if they are taking it south.

Mr. Duffy stated they are taking it south and eliminating the water that is currently traveling to the west along Rt. 6.

Mr. Poparad stated he is trying to find out who owns what piece. He asked where are the sewers coming from.

Mr. Ferngren stated at this time they are in negotiations with Portage and this is who they have been dealing with most recently.

Mr. Poparad asked who is the service agreement area. He asked if this was South Havens area.

Mr. Ferngren stated it is actually Damon Run Conservancy District.

Mr. Thompson stated if you go by the old NIRPC study that they did back in the late '70's Portage goes all the way along U.S. 6 almost to north Calumet and the 49 ByPass.

Mr. Poparad asked if this was unincorporated.

Mr. Thompson stated yes.

Mr. Poparad stated he has to echo what Bob says. He stated until they get they their ducks in order.

Mr. Breitzke stated tonight we will be making a recommendation to the County Commissioners.

Mr. Mahnic stated he has problems because he didn't get a drawing even a sketch and we are considering a subdivision and we haven't even rezoned this. He stated he certainly would like to see some type of a drawing that shows where some of the


subdivisions around there are located and where this is being developed. He stated we have to remember this is a zoning request and not a subdivision approval plan. He stated water is
this area is a big issue. He stated he remembers when we approved Mallards Landing. He stated he remembers how good that was going to be and he does know when he goes by there water runs across the road and it still runs across the road. He stated when water comes we have a lot of water and nobody takes care of it. He stated the people at Mallards Landing are very upset with the county. He stated these are private roads and they have their own problems. He stated he thinks that the best thing to do with rezonings is to see that this Commission gets drawings sufficient to explain what is going on and along with what was handed out tonight so that the Commission can read and digest it and to see what is in the package. He stated when we rezoned Mallard Point the developer didn't do what he was suppose to do.

Mr. Detert stated what bothers him is that you say that you are getting sewers but it is obvious that you don't know that for sure. He stated if we rezone this to R-1 and you are willing to develop this with one acre lots but looking at the pictures and seeing the water in there obviously if you didn't have septics it would be better off with more surface to absorb the water in an area that has a lot of water already. He stated he doesn't know how he could vote on this and rezone it to R-1 and end up with septics.

Mr. Bucko stated he is looking at a description on a proposal and how it does match our Master Plan and he thinks that it is appropriate for that but there are several things that are in question here. He stated he does realize that we are considering a rezoning to R-1 and if in fact the lot sizes have a minimum requirement but obviously you take those lot sizes and you develop them based on usable land in relationship to septic systems and everything else that has to be incorporated on each lot. He stated they may in fact have to be larger than one acre. He stated he doesn't think that this Commission has always required that when someone is coming for a rezone from RR to R-1 that early on in the process that drawings and everything are required. He asked if this is a standard requirement that the petitioner come in here with drawings.

Mr. Breitzke stated typically no.

Mr. Bucko stated it might have been better in this case with some potential problems there. He stated it sounds to him that the petitioner is aware of the potential for problems. He stated it looks like through the process that is normally taken with the primary plat approval and the secondary plat approval


that all of these things are pretty much chewed up and determined
as the process evolves in relationship to drainage and those issues. He stated this may very well be a situation where some additional consideration may be required. He stated he likes the idea with the fact that there is multi-family dwellings on one side and single-family dwellings on the other. He stated there is business commercial and it kind of does fit along with our comprehensive land use plan. He stated he feels that they have enough to come in here and ask for a rezone because we can handle everything in the next steps. He stated if they don't get their wastewater treatment then they are coming to us with a whole different plan. He stated then we digest it in a whole different manner. He stated as far as R-1 he doesn't have a problem going to R-1.

Mr. Ferngren stated the subdivision that you are looking at is engineered to the point where they can submit this to TAC for their review of the drainage.

Charlie Ray stated they already have all the engineering done for this project. He stated the reason they did it is because of the drainage problem. He stated they wanted to make sure that they could take care of the problems on Rt. 6 and some other problems that Kevin made us aware of. He stated what they would be willing to do is to put all of the drawings together and pass them on to TAC and let them review it and then come back and say whether it looks good or bad or whatever. He stated then you can make a decision based on that. He stated by that time we should have an agreement with one of the municipalities.

Mr. Bucko asked what are the circles on the plat. He stated they look like they could be ponds or green space.

Mr. Ferngren stated these are ponds here, here and here.

Mr. Bucko asked where was the green space.

Mr. Ferngren stated it is the green area around the ponds.

Mr. Sheetz stated he just wants to clarify that if it goes to R-1 then the minimum lot size is 30,000 square feet that they can get a septic on.

Mr. Thompson stated yes.

Mr. Breitzke stated if the soils qualify.

Mr. Thompson stated providing municipal services with curb and gutter they can go down to 11,000 square feet. He stated if


they don't have municipal services and they go to septics R-1 will allow it to go to 30,000 square feet if the Health Department decides that those are good soils out there.

Mr. Sheetz asked how can we proceed to give an R-1 zoning if we don't know that answer.

Mr. Ferngren stated what would come of it is that the soil sample would be done at that time and the lots would be layed out accordingly and what we are committing to is the minimum of at least one acre when it could be that the lots could be 30,000 square feet if the soils where in fact condition to that.

Mr. Breitzke stated also with R-1 your frontages are affected. He stated you could have 100 feet but if you have either sanitary sewer or water supply, such as Indiana American Water, they could reduce the lot frontages down to 80 feet. He stated this doesn't include the amount of area that may be required for septic depending on the suitability of the soils.

Mr. Sheetz asked if they are saying that if it goes to R-1 you are agreeing the minimum lot size would be one acre.

Mr. Ferngren stated that is correct if they don't get sanitary sewers.

Mr. Ray stated they would even be willing to commit to the 114 lots which they could go smaller with this water and sewer but they would be willing to address the density problem by staying at 114 or they could go smaller even more densely.

Commissioner Harper stated once we do this we aren't going to be able to revisit this. He stated then they are going to be here telling us your hands are tied on this your hands are tied on that. He stated by not doing this right now is not saying that it is not going to get done. He stated it is not an anti-growth thing. He stated it is a thing that we should make sure that things that go in are proper and that they are good and don't affect neighbors and so forth. He stated Mr. Ray has made a suggestion on coming in and start working on the drainage and he thinks that they should do this before we make a decision on this.

Mr. Biddinger stated if you had sanitary sewer he would have no qualms at all about rezoning this. He stated this is his one hesitation in not knowing in what he sees before him is what is actually going to happen. He stated the requirement on the sanitary sewer is going to make all the difference in the world at what this development is going to look like.


Mr. Breitzke asked if they would like to continue this.

Mr. Ferngren stated they would like to continue this and go to TAC and present to them the drawings.

Mr. Detert moved to table Case 04-Z-3 and recommending that they present their plans to TAC and it be brought back before the Commission at a later time after TAC has reviewed this. Mr. Mahnic seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Breitzke stated that the public hearing will be closed on this case.

Mr. Thompson stated the April 28, 2004 meeting has been canceled so the next meeting will be May 12, 2004.

Case 04-P-4. Petition of Pat & Brenda Kleihege, 10 Washington St., Valparaiso, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Troon Subdivision, to be located on the north side of CR 700 N., between Meridian Road and Calumet Avenue in Liberty Township, Porter County, Indiana. (To contain 29 lots on 50± acres. Property is zoned R-1. con't from March 24, 2004 mtg.)

Todd Etzler stated he is here this evening with the engineer John Hannon. He stated he will give the Commission a quick view of where they were on this from the first hearing. He stated this is a 50-acre parcel on CR 700 N. between Meridian Road and SR 49. He stated they are seeking primary plat approval. He stated this is a single-family residential subdivision. He stated all of the lots are over one acre. He stated they will have septic and well and this subdivision meets all the technical requirements of the subdivision ordinance. He stated there are 29 lots on the parcel. He stated concerning the storm water drainage there are 6 detention ponds on the parcel that well exceeds the needed capacity to handle the storm water on this property. He stated the access is provided by CR 700 N. and as they discussed last month they have the ability for site line purposes to handle traffic. He stated the posted speed limit is 35 mph and they have the visual capacity between 40 and 50 mph for this. He stated the site lines on this entrance well exceed any of the requirements of INDOT and national standards for site lines. He stated if you recall they had a continuance because there were some pictures submitted by one of the remonstrators. He stated they introduced pictures to show that they were having water problems on their property. He stated none of the pictures that were submitted showed any water problems but they did show some refuse on the property including some corrugated pipes, tires, farm equipment type metal. He


stated they asked for copies of those pictures and they were supplied with nine pictures that staff indicated was the problem pictures. He stated they took a brief recess at that time. He stated they then came back and at that time indicated that the garbage that was shown in those pictures was on the property. He
stated his clients purchased the property approximately ten years ago and there was a lot of farm equipment, refuse all around the property. He stated they indicated at that time since that time the Kleihege's had attempted to clean up and had done some excavation in there and were moving around soil. He stated everything they moved soil they found more of this garbage. He stated what he is showing in this next set of pictures, this property sets next to the Porter County Park, and there is a common ravine that runs between both of them. He stated what you will see here is pictures taken from their west boundary line that is adjacent to the park. He stated what you see in each of those pictures are almost identical to the pictures that you saw last time. He stated what you will find is farm implements, corrugated pipes and you will find tires. He stated what they had in the pictures that were given last time was farm implements, corrugated pipe, tires and other stuff that gets dumped in ravines. He stated this is what has occurred on this property over the past ten years and his clients have been cleaning this up. He stated they asked for a continuance show they can show evidence of this and staff had asked to have an inspection of the property. He stated they met with staff the next week at the site and did a complete walk or drive around the entire site. He stated what was found is that none of the garbage that is shown on these nine pictures existed. He stated there were some other pictures that he didn't get copies of which had some steel on them. He stated the pictures that he is submitting to the Commission now are pictures of the property as it stands today and as it was the day before the public hearing and the day before that and the day before that. He stated these are not pictures of the property after we cleaned it up but as it stood at that time. He stated that the staff report did find a metal "I" beam out there on the property and some exposed rebar and mostly agricultural metal. He stated staff said that this stuff has to be removed. He stated since that time Mr. Kleihege has been out there and removed that material. He stated they also indicated when they asked for a continuance that during the time that this excavation and fill in was going on on the property the County and other government officials had been called out to the site periodically over the last ten years. He stated he requested that they get copies of all of the incident reports from all of the agencies that did these inspections. He stated Mr. Thompson was helpful enough to do checking for them. He stated Mr. Thompson checked the zoning records the Highway records and the Building Department records. He stated there


were no records out there. He stated when he spoke with some of the staff members they said they remember going there. He stated he will let Mr. Thompson tell you what he said. He stated essentially there was not a problem. He stated there was also an indication that there was a fuel tank on the property. He stated
there was and Mr. Kleihege used that for fueling his equipment. He stated that did fall over and was vandalized at one time. He stated IDEM was called out at that time and IDEM asked him to clean it up and he cleaned it up. He stated there is no report filed and Mr. Thompson checked that out personally and he can tell you what his discussions were with IDEM. He stated IDEM keeps very good records. He stated if there was a problem as to what was happening IDEM will have a report of that problem. He stated he thinks you probably received a copy of Mr. Thompson's report to the Plan Commission from March 24 indicating his site visit and what he saw out there. He stated his recommendation was to them to get this metal cleaned up. He stated there is only one item that he wants to talk about in the report is that Mr. Kleihege did fill the property but it was filled with clean fill. He stated you are permitted to fill your property with clean fill. He stated as stated in the report clean fill is uncontaminated rocks, brick, concrete, road demolition waste materials and dirt. He stated you will see in some of the pictures that he will now give you that there is concrete in there and there is road demolition materials. He stated road demolition materials is a defined term under Indiana Administrative Code and those road demolition materials include things that you tear out of roads and highways and the structures around them. He stated it not only includes concrete but concrete with rebar and without rebar. He stated if you see rebar in some of that stuff that is all considered clean fill. He stated Mr. Thompson asked that this be cleaned up and Mr. Kleihege was out there the later part of last week and cleaned up that stuff that was not considered clean fill or road demolition materials. He stated even some of the road demolition materials and there were a lot of rebar and concrete he took out. He stated he gave Mr. Thompson pictures of what they took out and removed from the site. He stated what he will show you now are four pictures of the site, excavation, where he went in and took the stuff out. He stated you will see that the stuff that is left is concrete but you will see that the land was disturbed and those things were removed. He stated they have a recommendation after this inspection that there is not a problem out here. He stated the stuff in the nine pictures that were provided did not exist on the parcel. He stated some of the pictures that showed the "I" beam the "I" beam did exist and have been removed. He stated there was a question whether there should be an enforcement action whether there was illegal fill going on. He stated there hasn't been illegal filling but there has been


filling going on. He stated it was with the proper materials. He stated the items that were identified in the report have been removed. He stated in summary the Kleihege's have purchased the property and it had a lot of refuse on it. He stated they have been cleaning it up over the past ten years. He stated the things that accumulate over the last fifty and sixty years in ravines have been removed. He stated the property has been approved because there is now a berm in between the neighbors. He stated there have been special inspections by the staff to date and there has been no discovery of the garbage in the pictures that were shown. He stated the requirements of the subdivision ordinance in terms of platting have all been complied with. He stated that he recommends and requests that the Plan Commission takes the recommendation of Mr. Thompson and his report that the primary plat be approved and that the staff continue to inspect the property between now and the final plat period. He stated before the final plat gets approved that staff give another report that the property is clean and then if there is a continuing problem at that time the final plat can then be continued or refuse to be approved until those materials are cleaned up.

Vickie Sowards stated she lives at 57 E. 700 N. She stated she will concur that metal that was in the hill behind her house has been cleaned out along with a ditch that is being dug between her parcel and the hill. She stated that the far end by Mr. and Mrs. Dillingham's house the ditch goes down to about 9 feet deep. She stated she is concerned about safety. She asked around the detention ponds will it be safe and who will maintain them. She stated she is also concerned about the mosquito problem.

April Dillingham stated she lives at 53 E. 700 N. She stated with all due respect to everything that was just said that was rolling farm land and there were no…in the very back hill there was some problems but where the hill is that you see was nothing but hay fields until the Kleihege's decided to build the dirt wall. She stated she watched the dump trucks come in and watched the concrete. She stated that was a junk pile that they created and then covered up with pretty dirt. She stated she is concerned with what you don't see in the pictures. She stated she can tell you that directly behind her house nothing has been dug up which is where all this stuff is. She stated it lies deeper than you can see.

Mr. Etzler stated that the metal that was excavated and left out there so that you can see it was taken out. He stated they will take that off the site but it was taken out of the berm. He stated yes there was a ditch being dug on the south side of that berm and because there was a comment made that water


was causing problems on their property. He stated the purpose of that was to stop that water if there was water. He stated as far as the retention ponds being safe they will be nicely excavated and put together like retention ponds throughout the county. He stated as for mosquitoes it is unlikely that detention ponds are
going to cause mosquitoes. He stated as for the berm the Kleihege's are more than willing to clean and fill over the concrete fill on the south side of that berm so they don't have to look at the fill material. He stated as long as the neighbors will permit them to work around in that area they will bring clean fill in there to cover over that with top soil and make it look just like the other side.

Brian Sowards stated he lives at 57 E. 700 N. He stated he would like to know the depth of the ditch and will it stay at this depth. He asked if it was going to be filled with drainage tile. He stated as far as the ponds that are going to be there the mosquitoes will be increased.

Mr. Etzler stated he thinks that the engineers will do whatever you recommend to the ditch on that side.

The public hearing was then closed.

Mr. Bucko stated his concern is the fill that is being used. He asked if he could have a verbal report to the affect as to what was found there to date and how our staff feels in relationship to what has transpired to date.

Mr. Thompson stated he was out there with Mr. Breitzke and they road through the whole subdivision. He stated he walked the berm that was built up that is in the southwest corner of that and he did see an "I" beam sticking out a lot of concrete and some concrete with some rebar. He stated he is going to disagree with Mr. Etzler. He stated if there is rebar sticking out of concrete it needs to be cut and removed. He stated we did call down to Indianapolis concerning that and they said that their recommendation is that rebar sticking out past the concrete should be removed. He stated as far as complaints he did go down and spoke with Russell Shirley director of HAZ MAT at division. He stated Russell did call Bill Burns, IDEM, in the Gary section and asked if there was a report filed with this. He stated there was no official report made. He stated Mr. Burns did remember going out to the parcel and he did see the oil spill out and told the Kleihege to clean it up and that is all. He stated he knows that other departments have been out there. He stated HAZ MAT has been out there twice and the reports he got from them were just the complaint intake forms that they never followed up with a full report. He stated while walking through the property


there were a couple spots around retention ponds where they did also notice where fill was brought in and the only thing that really caught his eye was rebar sticking out of the ground. He stated they asked the Kleihege's to remove all the metal, the plastics that were seen. He stated some of the pictures that were shown where they showed numerous tires and corrugated metal of pipes he couldn't find. He stated he doesn't know if it has been removed or if it has been buried. He stated all he can tell you from his visual inspection of the sight he did not see it. He stated they were all over it. He stated the only place they found fill is around the retention ponds that are proposed and the berm that was built in the southwest corner of the parcel.

Mr. Bucko stated he would like to make one statement about some of the things that the other pictures showed. He stated it is an absolute fact that farmers fill the ravines with left over old equipment, junk, tin cans and garbage for that matter of fact.

Mr. Sheetz asked if these three pictures were taken on the property.

Mr. Etzler stated yes.

Mr. Sheetz asked if and when this subdivision goes in is the berm going to be beautified.

Mr. Etzler stated if the adjacent landowners will let them come over on that side.

Mr. Sheetz stated he would like to comment on the mosquito situation. He stated typically mosquitoes are not found in a pond. He stated they are going to be found in a tin can or in puddles and there shouldn't be a mosquito problem.

Mr. Breitzke stated the biggest concern are tires and funeral urns.

Mr. Biddinger stated he wants to echo that on the mosquitoes. He stated generally speaking a well dug pond with any depth to it is not going to be a haven for mosquitoes. He stated if you along the plantings along the edges you could find larvae in very small areas but that is common in any body of water whether it be a Lake Michigan or a tire out in the parking lot.

Mr. Mahnic stated he has a problem with this because he has gone by there many, many times in the last thirty years and he


always looked at it as a dumping ground. He stated he just can't see someone building over what is underneath that clean soil. He stated he has a problem with someone building over a dump.

Attorney Schaefer stated she doesn't think that there is any evidence that this is a dump and she doesn't think that we are talking the same kind of waste.

Mr. Mahnic stated there is nothing that tells him that there is toxic here. He stated before he can vote for approval on this he would like to see some substantiation that this was done on a formal piece of paper.

Attorney Schaefer stated you may be asking them to prove a negative.

Mr. Thompson stated when he was out there and he was on the gravel road he did not see an oil spill at all.

Mr. Poparad asked April Dillingham where she is located on the map.

Mrs. Dillingham stated she is located right there.

Commissioner Harper asked if this is on park land.

Mr. Breitzke stated part of their discussion was that they offered to remove some of that debris for us but he needs permission from the County to do that.

Commissioner Harper stated we have the park over here and if there is one thing that he thinks…someone said earlier tonight that property is going to be developed. He stated his way of thinking is this is the type of development that we want with larger lots. He stated he thinks that it is good for the tax base and he doesn't think that it is going to be financially feasible to build homes on this land that are shallowly built. He stated if he understands what Todd and Bob are saying that the kind of fill that is used is allowable fill. He asked if this is what they are saying and the State allows you to use highway fill but they are saying for safety purposes that rebar should be cut out.

Mr. Thompson stated this is correct.


Commissioner Harper stated he knows this area and the Catholic Church has their park no too far from this. He stated as long as everyone has been out there and they are satisfied he can't see how this isn't going to be an improvement.


Mr. Breitzke stated if we should find some fill in the event of an excavation of a foundation how do you want the Plan Commission or the Building Department to proceed.

Commissioner Harper stated he thinks that this is more of a protocol for the Building Department.

Attorney Schaefer stated she would think so too because she thinks that they would go out and issue a stop work order.

Mr. Poparad asked if everyone was on the same page with the pipeline people. He asked if this would be part of someone's lot or will that be a common area.

Mr. Etzler stated the pipeline rights right through here. He stated basically there is the property line that sets over and there is an easement associated with the pipeline.

Mr. Poparad stated he is assuming that the property owners will be notified that there is a pipeline on their property. He asked how is their mechanism for that.

Mr. Etzler stated it will show on their title work. He stated the plat will have the pipelineshown on there also.

Mr. Poparad asked how much coverage is over it.

John Hannon stated it varies now from the shallowest of one foot to maybe three or four feet. He stated they have worked with the pipeline company and they know what the specifications are.

Mr. Detert moved to approve Case 04-P-4 for primary plat. Mr. Poparad seconded the motion.

Mr. Breitzke asked if Mr. Detert agrees to the conditions to the "findings of fact."

Motion carried on the following ballot vote:

Biddinger - Yes Bucko - Yes Detert - Yes
Harper - Yes Mahnic - No Poparad - Yes
Sheetz - Yes Breitzke - Yes


At this time, Mr. Thompson passed down to Mr. Mahnic a very rough draft of the open space/green space ordinance. He stated he passed this out at the last meeting and asked the members to get comments to him.



Mr. Thompson stated to remind the Commission that on May 5 and May 6 we will be interviewing six consultants to redo the Master Plan. He stated he has been asking for the submittal of questions for the consultants.

There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.


PORTER COUNTY
PLAN COMMISSION


/Kevin Breitzke, President

Attest: Robert W. Thompson Jr. AICP, Executive Director/County Planner