PORTER COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION

Regular Meeting
March 9, 2005

M I N U T E S

The regular meeting of the Porter County Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, March 9, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. in the County Administrative Center, 155 Indiana Ave., Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Those members present were Eric Biddinger, Rick Burns, Commission Harper, Elizabeth Marshall, Herb Read, Dan Whitten and Kevin Breitzke, President. Those members absent were Robert Detert. Staff members present were Robert W. Thompson Jr., Patricia S. Gibson, Fred Siminski and Attorney Linda Pendleton.

Commissioner Harper moved to waive the reading of the January 12, 2005 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Read seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Commissioner Harper moved to waive the reading of the February 9, 2005 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Ms. Marshall seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Commissioner Harper moved to continue the reading for the February 23, 2005 minutes. Mr. Whitten seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Pending Business:

Case 04-P-16. Petition of William Rensberger, 1105 N. 100 E., Chesterton, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Glendale Valley Subdivision to be located on the South side of CR 250 S., between CR 675 W., and CR 600 W. in Porter Township, Porter County, Indiana. (Con’t from February 9, 2005 mtg. The public hearing is closed.)

At this time, Mr. Thompson read a letter Attorney Todd A. Leeth requesting to withdraw the petition for Case 04-P-16.

Case 05-Z-2. Petition of Moser Enterprises, Inc., 300 East 5th Ave., Suite 430, Naperville, Illinois 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 allow for a residential subdivision to be located on CR 1050 N. between CR 250 E. and CR 300 E. in Jackson Township, Porter County, Indiana. (Con’t from 2-23-05 meeting. The Public Hearing is closed.)


Commissioner Harper moved to forward Case 05-Z-2 to the County Commissioners with no recommendation.

Commissioner Harper stated the reason I am making that motion is because there is not a majority to vote here tonight and we are two members short. He stated then the public is going to have to come back here again and the petitioner will have to come back here again. He stated there is not a public hearing tonight on this therefore it seems to me that we are just going to rehash and rehash and rehash and the final decision is going to be made at the Commissioners.

Mr. Thompson stated we did receive petitions from a number of people who have signed it and it will be made part of the file for this case.

Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Biddinger - Yes Burns - Yes Harper - Yes
Marshall - Yes Read - Yes Whitten - No
Breitzke - Yes

This case will be heard by the County Commissioner’s on April 19, 2005 at 6:00 p.m.

Case 05-FP-3. Petition of Bosky Developments, LLC, 141 Westchester Lane, Valparaiso, Indiana seeking secondary plat approval for Shorewood Forest Subdivision, Section 29, to be located on the East end of Surrey Hill Lane between Shorewood Dr. and Dorchester Blvd. in Union Township, Porter County, Indiana. (To contain 10 lots on 16.82 acres.)

Eric Banschbach stated I am from Emil Beeg Land Surveying, Inc. and with me is Lee Nagai from Nagai Professional Engineering Services. He stated we are representing Bosky Development, LLC in this petition and we are seeking final plat approval tonight. He stated to give you a little background for those who have not seen this before. He stated this is a proposed 10-lot subdivision of a 16.82-acre parcel previously part of a 27.8-acre parcel owned by the Shorewood Forest Property Owners Association. He stated my client purchased the 16.82-acre parcel


conditionally from the Shorewood Forest POA to develop the parcel as part of the Shorewood Forest development and in fact this is going to be Section 29 of Shorewood Forest. He stated it has no more than 10 lots and would utilize the existing access from Surrey Hill Lane and the POA would retain the 100-foot strips along the north and the east sides of the original parcel. He stated the development received a variance from the BZA for block length on August 18, 2004. He stated we have been before the Porter County Drainage Board on October 12, 2004 and received primary plat approval from this Commission on October 27, 2004 with a vote of 7-1. He stated since that time we have satisfied the remaining technical requirements of the subdivision ordinance and were forwarded to this Board by TAC with only minor changes to the original primary plat. He stated the bond estimate has been submitted and approval tonight would be contingent upon the submittal of the letter of credit for that bond estimate, which my client has prepared to provide. He stated the only other change you have not seen is an amendment to the existing covenants and restrictions of Shorewood Forest, which this development will also adopt. He stated the changes are very minor stipulating minimum living space area, exterior finish requirements and requiring lot owners to install and maintain sidewalks on their individual lots. He stated the amendment document will be recorded with the final plat and I do have copies. He stated the development is not subject to the recently passed open space ordinance due to the application submittal date. He stated however, the area retained by the POA is planned as a buffer zone and access to the lake and would have been nearly 40% of the original parcel. He stated the spirit of that ordinance will still be met although not required. He stated to wrap up this development, as well as Edgewood, to the north has been a culmination of years of cooperation between the POA and the surrounding residents the County Boards and Commissioners and the developers. He stated this plan is the result of that cooperation and we feel is the best representation of the desires of the residence and the requirements of the county.

Mr. Read stated I could not tell from what was mailed to me whether sewer and water was included in here.

Mr. Banschbach stated yes it is included.


Mr. Read stated I took a look at the area and it has a very beautiful ridge. He stated I personally think that the whole ridge area should be a local park but that is beyond my purview here.

Ms. Marshall asked who is Bosky Developments, LLC?

Mr. Banschbach stated the principles are Tom Galouzis, Jeanie Galouzis and Dimitri Yallourakis. He stated all of those names who are represented by Bosky Developments are on page two of the plat.

Ms. Marshall asked is this going to be limited to certain builders or is there a POA that reviews the building?

Mr. Banschbach stated it won’t be limited to certain builders but it will be subject to Shorewood Forest POA.

Ms. Marshall stated I think it is a good addition and it is contiguous to what is already happening there.

Mr. Burns asked if there is any bonding required?

Mr. Thompson stated they submitted a final review for the Engineering Department to review and submit to the County Commissioners for final review. He stated they have an estimate of $425,150.

Ms. Marshall asked is this going to be in the packaged plant sewer that they have?

Mr. Banschbach stated the sewers will be treated by Shorewood.

Mr. Breitzke stated I would like to recognize Chris Anderson.

Chris Anderson stated a study was done two or three years ago where we had adequate capacity for both Edgewood and for Section 29 and actually we had adequate capacity for additional properties which would include that part of Shorewood where there is well and septic in one area. He stated we could accommodate them if at some time they would want to hook up to our sewer system as well as a number of


other properties. He stated the sewer system right now is
adequate and the sewer plant is actually undergoing in the next year or two some expansion programs so they will improve and better able to serve the community.

Ms. Marshall asked the development that is to the east of there, the commercial development, is it served by that sewer plant?

Mr. Anderson stated no.

Ms. Marshall asked is that served by Valparaiso?

Mr. Anderson stated no that is well and septic.

Mr. Burns moved to approve Case 05-FP-3 for secondary plat approval contingent on the bond of $425,150. Mr. Whitten seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Breitzke stated I appreciate the fact the Shorewood POA were engaged by the developer in this case. He stated they really went to extra lengths. He stated the water is now Indiana American Water and you have a very fine utility there.

Public Hearing:

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

Case 05-P-2. Petition of Valpo-Sturdy Road, LLC, c/o Todd A. Leeth, Hoeppner, Wagner & Evans, LLP, 103 E. Lincolnway, Valparaiso, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Prairie Ridge Subdivision to be located on the Northeast corner of CR 150 E. and Division Road, in Center Township, Porter County, Indiana. (To contain 70 lots on 30 acres. Property is zoned R-1.)

Todd Leeth stated I am here on behalf of your petitioner, Valpo-Sturdy Road, LLC and its principle party, Rick Hornat who joins me this evening along with Don Bengel the project engineer. He stated the property in question is a 30-acre parcel and I have provided on the board this evening a copy of the plat. He stated Sturdy Road is the western boundary of the property, Division Road is on the south and there is approximately a 12-acre parcel owned by Dr. Pathadia that is our southern boundary. He stated on the north we have a residential minor subdivision of four lots along the north. He stated on the west on the northern portion is Meadow Glen Subdivision, which is an R-1 subdivision. He stated Dr. Pathadia’s property on the south is zoned Agricultural. He stated you may recall he was in earlier, perhaps a year or so ago, seeking a commercial zone change for that. He stated I believe the final action on that he withdrew that petition before final action was given. He stated on the east side abutting us to the east is the Aldi Warehouse, which is an industrially zoned parcel and use. He stated the proposal as we are showing it on the board and as was distributed to you is an R-1 subdivision. He stated this property was rezoned in 1003 to the R-1 classification to be consistent with the west side of Sturdy Road and in anticipation of the extension of utilities. He stated there are no wetlands or other environmental streams or creeks on the property or any close proximity that we need be concerned about. Mr. Leeth stated the proposal has 70 lots within the four corners of the subdivision. He stated as I have indicated the land was rezoned in anticipation of utilities being extended and that is exactly what the petitioner proposes to do. He stated both the Valparaiso Sanitary Sewer and its municipal drinking water is immediately to the east at Aldi and the proposal is to extend both utilities westerly along Division Road and then northerly along the property line to service the subdivision. He stated that has all been worked out with the Valparaiso City Engineers Office and their utility director, John Hardwick. He stated because of that and because this land is not contiguous with the existing cooperate boundary’s of the city annexation is not possible to take this property into the city. He stated, as you know the county and the city has in the past used a cooperative review process of subdivisions and that is in fact the case. He stated not unlike Hawthorne Subdivision. He stated Mr. Hornat and his group have been in contact and appeared before the Valparaiso site review committee and have agreed to adhere to the strictest of standards, whether it be a county standard or a city standard. He stated so that has been the direction as we have gone through the Technical Advisory Committee process and then of course with the city and their review for utilities as well. He stated the storm water drainage is a particular concern particularly in this area. He stated if you are familiar at the intersection of Division Road and Sturdy Road has historically been a problem area with storm drainage. He stated Dr. Pathadia’s land in the southwest corner typically ponds. He stated there is very little agricultural benefit there due to the seasonal high water. He stated that is caused by the existing conditions, which is agricultural on both Dr. Pathadia’s 10 or 12-acres and our 30-acres and others in other portions of the watershed. He stated today in its current state there is kind of a continental divide where approximately half of our 30-acres along with Dr. Pathadia’s property drains to the south and to this low area and a culvert underneath Division Road. He stated the other half of the property drains to the north and to the east into a swale that Aldi has created and it goes north to one property north of this. He stated this is the minor subdivision and one property north of that is a large undeveloped parcel with a barrow pit from the Highway 49 construction. He stated that property owner is looking to have storm water into that pond and the northeast portion of the property drains there today. He stated the storm water management system that has been designed now will capture virtually all. He stated the backyards will continue to go south. He stated the northern portion of the southern tier of lots along with the balance of the subdivision will be captured and taken to a large over two acre parcel in the northeast corner, which will be a large but shallow dry bottom detention pond. He stated that pond will, as you know, hold back the storm water release it at a controlled rate and all of the water then will go to the north and that will alleviate some of the flooding issues historically that have been observed that go to the south. He stated generally it is not a good thing to change the flow and course of water. He stated generally we appear before you and we simply hold back the water and release it in its predevelopment rate but in the same direction. He stated given the fact that we have a historical flooding problem the Technical Advisory Committee was trying to avoid any furtherance of that by redirecting at least 15-acres of the water shed to the north to a property owner that we know wants that water. He stated that is what has been designed for the subdivision and we think to the betterment of the southern property owners. He stated the Porter County Drainage Board has reviewed and accepted the storm water management system as a regulated drain under Indiana Law. He stated the streets within the subdivision will be public streets. He stated Sturdy Road will be improved and widened. He stated there are two entrances into the subdivision, one on the north and one on the south, which will provide alternative means of access in the event of a blockage and the need for emergency response as well as the alleviation of any traffic congestion. He stated the plat complies with the Subdivision Control Ordinance in every way and there are no variances required.

No one spoke in favor of this petition.

No one spoke in opposition to this petition.

The public hearing was then closed.

Mr. Burns asked is this prior to our green space ordinance?

Mr. Thompson stated this application was originally received back in 2003 as well and septic but then they changed it over to and updated the application in August of 2004. He stated this was before the open space ordinance.

Mr. Whitten asked concerning the entrances and exits, you may have covered this, but do you anticipate traffic control devices there?

Mr. Leeth stated there will be stop signs as you exit the subdivision but we would not anticipate any on Sturdy Road.

Mr. Biddinger stated I have no questions.

Mr. Read stated I did go out and take a look at this as I promise every petitioner. He asked on the water drainage part the north part going to a barrow pit does that barrow pit have an overflow?

Mr. Leeth stated I don’t believe so but it is my understanding that it is very large.



Mr. Read asked the runoff that you would have from this would not overwhelm the capacity of the barrow pit to the north?

Mr. Leeth stated I am not the engineer but my understanding is that there is simply no way that would happen. He stated the barrow pit is several acres in size and is frankly hurting for water and the property owner is very much desirous of receiving that water.

Don Bengel stated when the water leaves the subdivision property it goes directly into Aldi’s. He stated when Aldi’s did their last improvement they extended their pond to the north along their west line and has a gutter to help direct the water north and at the end of that gutter there is a pipe that flows north towards the Puschel property.

Mr. Read stated my question was would the capacity of the barrow pit be enough to absorb the runoff?

Mr. Bengel stated there is more than enough capacity.

Mr. Breitzke stated with conversations with Mr. Puschel he has been looking for water because it is very low and very dry. He stated it is sandy and even if a portion of that pond ends up getting sealed off with time it is still very deep from the top to the depth of the barrow itself. He stated I don’t anticipate any problems at all with that site.

Mr. Read stated I am fine with this now and I have no problem. He stated I am wondering what if this owner of this property who now wants the water wants to develop it for something later on or he sells the property. He asked what happens to the water?

Mr. Breitzke stated he has lots and lots of capacity. He stated he won’t develop the pond. He stated that is an amenity.

Mr. Read stated that is what I was leading up to. He could develop this as an amenity type of pond. He asked what happens to the stuff that goes to the south?


Mr. Leeth stated that will be essentially backyards so there is little or no increased runoff that will go to the south, especially in the light of the fact that we are taking the balance of the 15 acres and taking the water to the north. He stated the marginal water that will continue to go to the south is simply a fraction of what went there before. He stated remember the current condition is row crops and the future use will be turf grass. He stated as far as the backyard runoff coefficients that the engineers tell us about that will more than manage the rate of flow of any of the backyard water that would leave the property off to the south as it would in its predeveloped rate.

Mr. Read stated bare in mind that in the future they are talking about commercial development there, which means a lot of pavement and roofs.

Mr. Leeth stated that is something that Dr. Pathadia has to manage.

Mr. Read stated Division Road is a very scenic road but a very dangerous road with the hills and everything in it. He asked did you say something about improvements to one of these roads.

Mr. Leeth stated Sturdy Road, which is the only road that we front on as a subdivision will be improved.

Mr. Read asked by making it wider?

Mr. Leeth stated by widening it and the installation of the entrance plans at the two roadways. He stated tapers or decel lanes or whatever is required by the Highway Department.

Ms. Marshall stated I find it interesting that you have this doctor’s property included in this plat that you are presenting. She asked could the Board tell me what the doctor had proposed as far as commercial?

Mr. Thompson stated I can’t remember the exact zoning classification. He stated I can’t remember if it was a C-2 or if it was a C-4. He stated this Commission recommended written commitments to try to tie down the uses that were allowed there. He stated they did not really want to


commit to that. He stated I think one of the things that was a sticking point was probably the service station/mini-mart type use that the Commission did not want and they wanted to leave in as a potential use there. He stated for that this Commission gave a recommendation of denial to the County Commissioners and then when it went to the County Commissioners the petitioner through his attorney withdrew the case.

Ms. Marshall asked we don’t know if this is proposed or not?

Mr. Thompson stated it is done. He stated they could’ve come back with another petition if they wanted to because it has been greater than three months. He stated it is still zoned agricultural at this time. He stated I have not seen another petition since that time for this parcel.

Ms. Marshall stated this subdivision certainly doesn’t have any features in it. She stated it is just square.

Commissioner Harper asked do you have any plans where that subdivision abuts Aldi?

Mr. Leeth stated this is the detention area here.

Commissioner Harper stated no between the backyards of these homes and the Aldi parking.

Mr. Leeth stated we have four homes that back up to Aldi. He stated we have done about as much as we can do. He stated this is a long narrow piece for the detention. He stated this will be open space and there will be no homes backing up here. He stated we have our open space that is required by the City of Valparaiso’s zoning code for another 217 feet. He stated as I indicated we will have four homes that actually back out here.

Commissioner Harper asked do they have big lights at Aldi’s?

Mr. Leeth stated the southern portion of the building that these homes are going to see is the office wing of the warehouse. He stated therefore it will have some windows


and some appeal rather than further north where there is just a solid wall of the warehouse building. He stated also remember that Aldi has created somewhat of a berming or buffering affect on their own property with some evergreen plantings as well.

Commissioner Harper stated that is something that we need to think about with these guys that are writing our zoning ordinance and if they can do something. He stated I realize we don’t have it now but some buffering should be required in places like this. He stated the next thing you know we are getting calls because the people can’t get to sleep at night because there is light coming in a bedroom window.

Mr. Leeth stated it is already in your ordinance. He stated buffering between residential, commercial and industrial.

Mr. Thompson stated when industrial or commercial comes in and butts up against residential then they must buffer and they must put in the screening. He stated in this situation Aldi came in and had the IX zoning because of the 49 By Pass and this was zoned agricultural so there was not the requirement.

Mr. Leeth stated my point is you currently require industrial and commercial developments to buffer against residential uses.

Mr. Read stated I have also talked to Bob about additional greenbelt requirements between adjacent uses.

Mr. Biddinger stated I agree it is unimaginative and it is cookie cutter but when you start getting into a block development like this it is the most efficient way to deal with traffic. He stated traffic flow through a subdivision like this will be more efficient than a cul-de-sac type development.


Mr. Biddinger moved to approve Case 05-P-2 for primary plat. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Biddinger - Yes Burns - Yes Harper - Yes
Marshall - Yes Read - Yes Whitten - Yes
Breitzke - Yes

There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.

PORTER COUNTY
PLAN COMMISSION


S/Kevin Breitzke, President

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