PORTER COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION

Regular Meeting
June 14, 2006

M I N U T E S

The regular meeting of the Porter County Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 at 6:30 p.m. in the County Administrative Center, 155 Indiana Ave., Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Those members present were Rick Burns, Tim Cole, Robert Detert, Commissioner Bob Harper, Elizabeth Marshall and Kevin D. Breitzke, President. Those members absent were Jim Burge, Todd Hutson and Herb Read. Staff members present were Robert W. Thompson Jr., Attorney Ken Elwood and Patricia S. Gibson.

Mr. Detert moved to waive the reading of the April 12, 2006 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Detert moved to waive the reading of the April 26, 2006 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Burns moved to continue the reading of the May 10 and May 24, 2006 minutes. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Old Business:

Case 05-P-21. Findings of Fact for The Preserves.

Attorney Karen Tallian stated as you know there is a litigated case. She stated it is Redfish or The Preserves versus the Porter County Plan Commission. She stated the court held a hearing on that matter and sent out an order that basically said that it found that the Findings of Fact by the Plan Commission were insufficient to either uphold the petitioner’s request to vacate your decision or to uphold the decision and send the matter back to this Board for proceedings in accordance with that. She stated after some discussion it was felt that what the court order was requiring was that the Findings of Fact be revised or resubmitted. She stated we have prepared that; my office has prepared that new Findings of Fact and they have been sent out to the Board. She stated I believe they have also been sent out to the Attorney for the petitioner and these are in front of you today to either accept or reject.

Commissioner Harper stated I have reviewed these and I think everyone has had a chance to review them.

Commissioner Harper moved that we accept and find these as our Findings of Fact in this matter. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which carried on the following roll call vote:

Burns - Yes Cole - Yes Detert - Yes
Harper - Yes Marshall - Yes Breitzke - Yes

Case 06-FP-9. Petition of Prairie Landings of Porter LLC, c/o Todd Leeth, Hoeppner, Wagner & Evans, 103 E. Lincolnway, Valparaiso, Indiana seeking secondary plat approval for Prairie Landings Subdivision, Phase 2, to be located southwest of the intersection of CR 100 S. and CR 500 W., Valparaiso, Indiana. (To contain 136 lots on 96.415 acres. Property is zoned R-1.)

At this time, Mr. Thompson read a letter from Todd Leeth asking for a continuance to the June 28, 2006 meeting.

Commissioner Harper moved to continue Case 06-FP-9 to the June 28, 2006 meeting. Mr. Cole seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

New Business:

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

Case 06-P-11. Petition of SW Developer LLC, 2602 Beech St., Valparaiso, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Tower Meadows Subdivision to be located at 531 N. 250 W., in Center Township, Porter County, Indiana. (To contain 125 lots on 54.655 acres. Property is zoned R-1.)

Todd Leeth stated I am here on behalf of the petitioner, SW Developers. He stated we are here seeking primary plat approval for Tower Meadows Subdivision. He stated the subdivision is located in the southeast corner of CR 250 W. and CR 550 N. in Center Township and is currently zoned R-1. He stated the layout overall plan has been posted for public display at tonight’s hearing. He stated CR 250 forms the western boundary and CR 550 N. is our northern boundary. He stated Hampton Manor Subdivision lies in this area and currently under development is Hampton Manor. He stated platted but not under development is Devonshire development here. He stated Fox Burrow Subdivision lies north and there is a series of single family homes or frontage sell offs on the north side of CR 550 N. He stated the plat as you see it before you contains 124 lots, which includes two existing homes that are located on the 55 acres in question. He stated as I indicated it is zoned R-1 and we are providing for all three utilities, storm sewers, drinking water and sanitary sewer. He


stated sanitary sewer will be provided by South Haven Sewer Works. He stated as you know they are under a consent decree from the United States Environmental Protection Agency. He stated a letter has been submitted by the developer and their representatives to the Technical Advisory Committee indicating that this project has been released from that consent decree for 130 units, six units over the number of lots that we are requesting for approval. He stated drinking water will be provided by Indiana American Water Company. He stated the roads within the subdivision will be public roads. He stated we have two direct entrances to existing county roads both to the perimeter roads, CR 250 and CR 550. He stated we also have two other entrances to indirect access to CR 550 N. through the Hampton Manor Subdivision. He stated when Hampton Manor was platted in the two instances or locations here and in this location there were stub streets to the property line under your subdivision ordinance requiring connectivity to adjoining properties. He stated those were provided and this plan incorporates and connects to those. He stated with regards to open space this property contains no environmental features so that triggers specific issues with regards to your open space and only requires a minimum in that instance of 10% open space. He stated this plan shows open space at 15.4%. He stated this is over 15% open space, which is approximately 8½ acres is size. He stated in three general areas the northeast corner has an open space, which is the largest area. He stated that is approximately 5¼ acres in size and contains one of the two storm water management detention ponds for the subdivision. He stated that open space that 5¼ acres is a little larger than what was originally submitted to the Technical Advisory Committee. He stated the second area is on the west side of the road, the interior road, and also contains the second pond or Pond B in the storm water management system. He stated that is approximately 3 acres in size and then on the opposite side of the road from that is a small quarter acre parcel of open space as well. He stated those three combined equal approximately 8½ acres of open space and as I indicated it is over 15% of the acreage in the overall project. He stated the two ponds within those open spaces, Open Space A and Open Space B will be wet bottom ponds and 25% of the pond area will be eight feet or more in depth and that is important under your open space ordinance for qualification as open space as well. He stated in addition to address some concerns from the staff review we have added some recreational features. He stated in Open Space A namely a basketball court, gazebo and some picnic tables to make that area, rather than just simply open space and aesthetically pleasing, but also to provide for the opportunity to draw the residents in for some active recreation as well. He stated storm water drainage is important with any subdivision. He stated as I indicated both ponds will


be wet bottom ponds and the drainage system, which has been designed by Bonar Group and Rich Hudson, Dave Croft from that organization join me tonight to answer any questions that you might have with regards to the storm water management system. He stated the system as been reviewed by staff and the engineers that serve on that. He stated we believe it complies with the storm water control ordinance. He stated the outlets for those ponds, Pond A outlets to the north and Pond B to the west. He stated both of those outlets have been reviewed by Mr. Thompson and Mr. Breitzke and were on site with representatives of Bonar Group and it is our understanding that both of those individuals have concluded that the outlets comply with the storm water control ordinance. He stated the drainage system has been submitted to the Porter County Drainage Board and on April 10 they accepted the system as a regulated drain with no assessments at this time. He stated that concludes the description of the public improvements with regard to the subdivision. He stated we believe that it complys with the subdivision control ordinance, the subdivision storm water control ordinance and the open space ordinance. He stated no variances are required.

J. F. Schrader, 978 Meridian Road. He stated this lighted green spot in there looks like it might be wetlands. He stated I wonder if that has been delineated with the Army Corp of Engineers. He stated then I am looking at your sewage system by South Haven. He stated it probably is typical of all sewers they put in now and it is three feet deep and do not completely drain the basement of the house. He stated like years ago when they put in sewers nine feet deep and then the entire house could drain. He stated but now they only go three feet deep and you have to have a sump pump. He stated that water has to be pumped out and it goes into your property and into your storm water system. He stated the next thing is if you do not have complete drainage that is sewage that drains the basements you have to have a sump. He stated does that mean that your basement is too wet or the soils are too wet and in order to protect the soils in the footings you have to have these perimeter drains around the footings and sump pumps to pump it out. He stated where does that water go. He stated it goes into your storm water ponds. He stated drainage outflow on that…has that been approved by the IDEM.

Mr. Mammarella, 237 W. 500 N. He stated my wife and I are the developers of Hampton Manor. He stated our subdivision designed to be a family community type of subdivision. He stated one of my main concerns is the fact that I am looking at the traffic pattern there and it seems to me that there would be an awful lot of traffic coming in off of Hampton Manor Drive, which would eventually feed into the subdivision and then another


outlet. He stated my question is why is there not another entrance on CR 250 and another entrance on CR 550, which might make it a little easier for traffic. He stated as we have families down in through there I would see that the amount of traffic and we are going from 35 homes going through there to approximately 160 homes with us and with the proposed subdivision I feel that it is an awful lot of traffic for our main drive to be handling. He stated we have sidewalks in there and we have tree lined streets and we are trying to make it a very nice subdivision. He stated it just seems like we have an awful lot of density coming in here. He stated my question is can we not have better access in through the other subdivision so they don’t have to have as much going through Hampton Manor.

Dale Froberg, 484 N. Froberg Rd. He stated Bryan Siewen is developing the rest of Windsor Park and just recently he straightened the ditch out along Ransom Road and did an excellent job of improving a situation that has been bad for a long time. He stated he landscaped it and I think that if he continues on this project like he has in Windsor Park it will look beautiful.

Jay Cruz, 243 E. 550 N. He stated that is just north of the subdivision that is going in. He asked where is that storm water going to runoff in here.

Margaret Froberg, 484 N. Froberg Road. She stated I would like to say that my background is Planning from V.U. She stated this design is very nice. She stated the park for children that is very appealing for people coming into this area to make their home. She stated I think to have a minimum access to county roads so you don’t have multiple ingress and egress approaches to the thing. She stated having one on each road I think would be sufficient. She stated to have too many of them on the county road would tend to be a confusing thing. She stated I have driven past that property for years and I think that it is a wonderful use for it. She stated they do a wonderful job in developing. She stated they keep things clean and straight and I think it is a great addition to the neighborhood.

Walter Williams, 514 N. 250 W. He stated the concern I have is similar to what Jay’s is. He stated there are three ponds in there. He stated one happens to be by his place and the other happens to be by mine. He stated I would like to know where these ponds drain. He stated I am also concerned on the increase in traffic.

Mr. Leeth stated Mr. Schrader first inquired about wetlands. He stated the National Wetlands Map has been submitted to the county during the site review process. He stated it shows


a few wetlands in the vicinity but none within the boundaries of this development. He stated the wetlands are on the west side of CR 250 and on the north side of CR 550 as well. He stated but the most important part is none of them fall within the boundaries of this property. He stated Mr. Schrader was concerned with regard to sanitary sewers and the depth of the sanitary sewers and how that was going to play with regard to the discharge of sump pumps and storm water from homes. He stated those two systems are completely separate and distinct. He stated there is no interconnection or interplay between those two systems. He stated in other words the sump pumps do not discharge to the sanitary sewer. He stated that is illegal today. He stated so I am not quite sure what the concern was there. He stated the sanitary sewers exclusively carry effluent from the homes through the collection system and ultimately to the treatment plant. He stated the sump pump design is standard practice in 100% of homes today have sump pumps, certainly in Porter County. He stated that does not raise a particular concern with regard to ground water or any adverse site conditions to suggest that there would be sump pumps on homes. He stated Mr. Mammarella was concerned with regard to the connectivity issues with regard to his development of Hampton Manor. He stated again we were simply asked and required to connect to those stubs streets that were provided when that subdivision was platted and that is a requirement of your ordinance but was not a design feature that was of concern to our client or your petitioner in this matter. He stated Mr. Froberg stated that Mr. Sewin did an excellent job in Windsor Park. He stated we concur. He stated Mr. Cruz was concerned with storm water and where it drained to the north. He stated the existing pond, obviously collects the storm water through the storm water system in our subdivision and is held back and detained and then outletted in a metered rate to the north and into an existing wetland that does show up on the wetlands map. He stated that water does flow then to the spot that it goes today in its natural flow but held back and detained on site pursuant to your storm water control ordinance. He stated Margaret Froberg indicated that she thought that this was a good addition to the neighborhood. He stated we concur again. He stated Mr. Williams inquired us to the outlet, I think now of the second pond. He stated similarly this pond drains off site through to the west under CR 250 W. to an existing wetland in that area as well. He stated Mr. Williams was also concerned with regards to traffic issues. He stated we believe that all of the roads in this area are in pretty good condition. He stated they certainly can accommodate the traffic generated by this development. He stated I think his concern was not necessarily specifically with regards to this development but more so with an accumulative affect of the other developments. He stated I guess I don’t know how to respond to that other than to indicate


to you that I think the roads are in as good of shape as county roads are in this county and certainly can manage and handle the traffic that is generated by this development, which is the only thing that we can control. He stated I have tried to answer each of the questions and I know that you will direct me if I have failed in that endeavor.

Mr. Schrader stated according to him there are no soil problems yet they need sump pumps. He stated if there are no water problems with the foundation areas do they need sump pumps. He stated they don’t need it if they don’t have a water problem. He stated I don’t consider a sump pump to be a storm water.

Mr. Cruz stated I have two acres of natural wetlands designated by the State. He stated how will this change the two acres of my property with this subdivision going in and now with all this drain off water now it will be headed towards CR 250 W. and heading north from my property. He stated is that two acres of wetlands now going to become four acres of wetlands.

Mr. Williams stated that pond that is to the south there is actually a ditch there that runs across my property. He stated there are not wetlands on my property so I am not sure what is going to be running through there.

Mr. Leeth stated I don’t know what to say with regards to Mr. Schrader’s comments with regards to sump pumps being an indicator of soil problems. He stated I conferred with Mr. Siewen who indicates that he has been building homes for ten years and has built over 200 homes and he has never built a home that didn’t have a sump pump. He stated as I indicated in my original testimony it is just standard practice. He stated that sump pump keeps the foundation dry and the basement dry. He stated that is the purpose of that. He stated it is to keep the naturally occurring ground water away from the foundation and outside of the basement in the modern home today. He stated if at one point in time it may very well have been an indicator of high ground water but today it is standard practice. He stated with regard to the question concerning the wetland to the north and what will happen with this subdivision. He stated as I indicated Pond A will collect and hold the storm water that is generated by this subdivision. He stated it will outlet to the north. He stated what will happen is that water will continue to go there in a metered rate for a longer period of time. He stated in other words it will feed that wetland but it won’t flood that wetland. He stated I think that is exactly one of the purposes of your storm water control ordinance is to make sure that this happens and that water goes to where it suppose to go to and not into a field or yard but into a defined waterway or


wetland. He stated that is exactly what is occurring there. He stated Mr. Williams indicated he didn’t that he didn’t believe that there were wetlands on his property and now we are talking about Pond D in the west side of CR 250. He stated I am not exactly sure where Mr. Williams property is but it appears to me that there are three separate and distinct stair step wetlands west of CR 250 W. in this location. He stated they appear to be if not on Mr. Williams property certainly in close proximity to it. He stated that is where the water in that instance is going. He stated Mr. Williams testified that there is a ditch on his property. He stated that ditch my suspicion is lines up exactly with the pipe underneath CR 250 and that is where the water is going. He stated this is where it goes today in that existing pipe and then flows through that ditch as Mr. Williams testified to those three wetlands locate on the west side of CR 250.

Mrs. Cruz asked will the ponds have fences for safety.

Mr. Schrader asked are the ponds designated wetlands.

Mr. Leeth stated the ponds will not be fenced to keep out cars or children. He stated we want to invite into the open space area the recreational aspects of that. He stated with regards to Mr. Schrader’s question concerning our ponds on our property. He stated as I indicated earlier there are no jurisdictional wetlands on the 55 acres in question tonight that is the subject of Tower Meadows Subdivision. He stated absolutely no wetlands within the four boundaries of this subdivision.

Mr. William stated those are heavily traveled roads and there should be fences at least on the two sides of CR 250 and CR 550.

Mr. Leeth stated we are not proposing to fence the ponds.

At this time, the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Burns asked Todd can you have someone explain the way the runoff is prior to development and after development.

Mr. Hudson stated just to start out we have complied with your storm water ordinance. He stated your storm water ordinance requires us to contain or detain control however you want to put it in a predeveloped runoff. He stated with the outlet structures that were required by the storm water ordinance to place and use we are allowing the water to release over a longer period of time. He stated prior to the storm water ordinance it is probably about half the time. He stated we are releasing now the predeveloped volume over a longer period of time so you don’t


have the rush of discharge.

Mr. Burns stated so what you are saying the rate is slower after development than it is now.

Mr. Hudson stated it is over a longer period of time so that it is not going out as a fast of a rate as it used to be designed.

Mr. Burns stated so the neighbors should not get flooded.

Mr. Hudson stated we feel that we have designed it to allow that to be true. He stated we have also with these two ponds outletting into wetlands the question before we are going to continue to nourish the wetlands that are there with the same volume of water that is coming through there. He stated we shouldn’t be taking anything away from or adding any large volumes to them under the present design based on the storm water ordinance.

Mr. Detert stated as you said it will run at a longer period of time, therefore you will have water going to those areas for a longer period of time.

Mr. Hudson stated it will be a slower rate over a longer period of time.

Mr. Detert stated on the sump pumps I haven’t seen very many houses without a sump pump. He stated there are houses without sump pumps if they are high enough up and your drainage is down a hill somewhere you don’t need them. He stated I have a sump pump in my house and it has never been on because I am high enough up and it drains to the lake. He stated I would say that 90% of the homes do have sump pumps and that is not an indication that you have water problems.

Mr. Cole stated I really don’t have very much at this point. He stated I have to realize and concur with the gentleman in the back the traffic in that area has got to be increasing. He stated I think this is the third or fourth subdivision on this road within a mile of SR 149. He stated there is nothing we can do about it, I guess. He stated it is a concern. He asked how wide is CR 550 N.

Mr. Hudson stated I think the pavement width is somewhere between 18 feet to 20 feet.

Mrs. Marshall stated you are creating two water areas on your property.


Mr. Hudson stated correct. He stated two wet bottom ponds.

Mrs. Marshall stated so you are going to gather water from your subdivision and then you are going to outlet it into what you say is two wetland areas. She stated you are going to increase the water on that adjoining property. She stated it is going to be wet longer always.

Mr. Leeth stated in a wetland, yes.

Mrs. Marshall stated it is going to be wet longer and more water.

Mr. Leeth stated in a wetland, yes.

Mrs. Marshall stated you can control it. She stated you can funnel it in and you can use whatever devise you are going to use but you are still going to put water onto these two properties.

Mr. Leeth stated that is true. He stated every subdivision does but that is true.

Mr. Hudson stated when you put the water onto those subdivisions at the rate it is going now as an undeveloped.

Mrs. Marshall stated there is no gathering of water to…those two blue areas are not there now.

Mr. Hudson stated maybe I am misunderstanding. He stated the surface water that is there now could be a hard bottom pond. He stated we are choosing to make it a wet bottom pond for recreational purposes. He stated the water that is there is not the water that is going to build up. He stated it is the water that comes off the subdivision that comes above it that would be there with the subdivision. He stated we are making improvements collecting water and turning everything that is not roads and homes into grassed areas where now they are farm fields. He stated we are not letting any more water go off than goes there now.

Mrs. Marshall stated you are going to have the road system and the road system always is a drainage area. She stated that water is going to an area to go across the street or across the fence to somebody else’s property.

Mr. Hudson stated we are detaining it. He stated we are allowing it to build up to a designed depth based on the standards before it goes out and it is going to be released at


the existing rate.

Mrs. Marshall stated how did you get that, in this design that you should think about 8-foot depth. She stated someone could drive a car in there and drown. She stated there are going to be kids in this subdivision.

Mr. Hudson stated we hope they will use the ponds for recreation, for fishing.

Mr. Leeth stated that is why the 8-feet is important because your ordinance encourages the ponds to sustain aquatic life for the fishing and recreation. He stated that is an encouragement from your own ordinance.

Mrs. Marshall stated when you say recreation what else are you talking about. She stated fishing and what else. She asked do you think they are going to have a rowboat out there.

Mr. Hudson stated someone could.

Mrs. Marshall stated is this pond going to be taken by the Property Owners.

Mr. Hudson stated yes, correct. He stated there will be a Property Owners Association that will be established and is written into our covenants.

Mrs. Marshall stated they are going to maintain it.

Mr. Hudson stated yes.

Mrs. Marshall stated eventually this water ends up in Pepper Creek and then into Salt Creek. She asked is that what I am understanding.

Mr. Hudson stated correct, which is where it goes now.

Mrs. Marshall asked where will the kids go to school.

Mr. Hudson stated Cooks Corner, Ben Franklin and then the High School.

Mrs. Marshall stated drainage is an issue. She stated I think you are creating an issue.

Commissioner Harper stated let me see if I understand this correctly. He stated the drainage on the north end is going to be directed further north, how.


Mr. Hudson stated right now there is at the southeast corner and actually it goes diagonal. He stated if I were to say this pipe was there it goes from southeast to northwest. He stated it is not a straight shot north out of this corner. He stated there is an existing culvert there now and we are going to utilize that existing culvert to take it down through the existing wetlands.

Commissioner Harper asked how long is that culvert.

Mr. Hudson stated it goes beyond the pavement so I am guessing it is 30 to 35 feet.

Commissioner Harper stated so there is a 30 to 35 feet culvert that dumps on the neighbor’s property and that is how you are going to handle the drainage.

Mr. Hudson stated that is how the outlet…we are going to detain the water and we are going to let the water go the way it goes now.

Commissioner Harper stated on the south piece of property…the south pond the water is going to go to the west.

Mr. Hudson stated right.

Commissioner Harper stated how will you direct it to the west.

Mr. Hudson stated through an outlet structure into an existing culvert under the road that I would say is probably 30 feet long. He stated the water comes out of Hampton Manor through our parcel, our little open space parcel, gets into our pond and will continue where it goes now through that culvert and then through the existing water course. He stated then eventually through those wetlands.

Commissioner Harper stated we have a problem here among ourselves. He stated we disagree on the interpretation of the drainage ordinance. He stated I think tonight brings that problem to a real head. He stated I am very angry because we are right back where we started from eight months ago talking about how fast water was going to go onto somebody else’s property. He stated I thought was the whole idea of this ordinance not to get into that problem again. He stated I suggest you ask for a continuance tonight and work some more on that drainage problem. He stated I think the spirit of our ordinance is that this water…and we are not going to spend the next ten years here talking about more water or less water and so forth. He stated


it was my understanding at least.

Mr. Breitzke stated the issue I have with this is there are existing cross pipes. He stated I think that they need to be replaced with concrete by the developer. He stated the developer and I disagree on that. He stated if they are going to have them in likewise, I agree that there should be some kind of guardrail structure at the intersection just in case we get somebody slipping or sliding. He stated we need some kind of protection to make sure we don’t loose a vehicle off into the pond. He stated the bottom line is they have a two-year release rate. He stated it is substantially more under the existing rate. He stated when the water comes off the fields it is going into that 12-inch under pressure and it inundates the wetland. He stated the philosophy here was to slow down the water significantly. He stated it gives it a chance to evaporate, infiltrate and a lot of things happen with the water but at the same time I just get a little nervous because as we have water down stream we need to be aware that we still need to supply water into these stream bodies, into these water courses that do exists including the wetlands. He stated we can literally dehydrate areas if we don’t keep the water moving. He stated we can deny some of the agricultural community sources for irrigation. He stated this isn’t as significant up in this area as it is down south but I do have quite a bit of irrigation happening down south.

Mr. Hudson stated since we met out on site and since we were holding our feet to the ground against replacing those culverts we decided that it would be in our best interest to do exactly what it is that was suggested out there by you and Mr. Schelling. He stated so we are willing to do that as part of our development.

Mr. Breitzke stated let me make it clear. He stated these wouldn’t be any larger they wouldn’t be sloped more. He stated they may be installed just a little bit deeper to protect the road. He stated the water comes out of the pond through an outlet into the roadside ditch. He stated we do not allow them to connect into these roadside culverts.

Commissioner Harper stated let me be clear. He stated my goal was from the beginning and it still is to not allow development to adversely affect directly properties around it. He stated we can’t argue Mr. Williams argument back there because there is nothing here to stop it. He stated but I thought that we tried to write that ordinance in the spirit that we were not going to put water on neighbors’ property without getting an easement or we were going to contain that water put it in a defined waterway or regulated ditch. He stated in my way of


thinking a 30-foot culvert…if that is a defined waterway then you can just start building 30-foot culverts and get rid of water anywhere you want to and I don’t think that this meets the spirit of what I intended and hoped that we would reach in drafting that ordinance. He stated let me point out another thing to you. He stated we have passed in the last two months, I believe, seven subdivisions on preliminary plat. He stated one of the reasons I think that happened is because I think the people that brought those subdivisions in were working in the spirit of the new ordinance and had worked out things with neighbors or were going to be dumping that on neighbors and we weren’t in those debates in those subdivisions. He stated I truly believe that if that ordinance was enforced that this process would be a lot speeder for a lot of developers that want to get approval. He stated the push back on a lot of the approvals is people around there that feel that they are going to be adversely affected. He stated Kevin nobody in the world in going to convince me that Mr. Cruz’s land is not going to be affected by this and he should have some say.

Mr. Breitzke stated the 30-foot culvert is ours. He stated we are responsible for that. He stated secondly the other cases did not have natural watercourses adjoining or within proximity to them. He stated that is why they got the easements. He stated they actually had to go over land. He stated that was defused water that had to be channeled in other ways.

Mr. Leeth stated I am not here tonight to argue your point with regard to the spirit of the ordinance. He stated I am not here to suggest that other developers and other circumstances did something different for the same that we did. He stated I am here to suggest to you that the plan that Mr. Sewin has put together designed by Bonar Group I believe meets your ordinance in every respect. He stated we are holding back the storm water releasing it in a metered rate. He stated this is standard operating procedure for every subdivision. He stated I think you agree with that. He stated I think your quibble is with where it goes. He stated in this instance it is going in that metered rate to where it has always gone. He stated in each instance is into a culvert or a ditch that is there today where the water goes today in that same rate of flow. He stated admittedly for a longer period of time but at the same rate of flow. He stated at the other end of that pipe both in the north and on the west it goes to a wetland. He stated where the water frankly out to go. He stated the purpose of wetlands as I understand the echo system is to accept the storm water, filter it, becomes ground water, goes down stream as surface water and what have you. He stated and that is where in a public policy point we ought to be putting



our water, our surface water, is into those systems. He stated I think that is the spirit and the letter of your ordinance and I think that is the system that we are proposing to you tonight.

Mrs. Marshall stated when you create this how are you going to control the rate of flow.

Mr. Hudson stated there is a detail on page 25 of 27. He stated it is the third sheet back. He stated there is a structure with a series of holes that allow only a certain amount of water to go in it as the water builds up. He stated that is a design that allows us to achieve what your ordinance calls for as far as the release rate.

Mrs. Marshall stated I agree with what Mr. Harper is saying. She stated in the past I know that in Porter County we have created wetlands for people that never had them before. She stated it is nice to maintain a wetland at the rate that it is now but you can’t increase the wetlands on these people. She stated I think that is what he is saying. She stated we have dumped water on people in the past.

Mr. Hudson stated I don’t know that I would disagree with you.

Mrs. Marshall stated thank you.

Mr. Hudson stated I can also say that we have designed our outlet and the volume of our ponds such that we are not letting more water go. He stated in fact we might even be letting less water by your ordinance because of the release rate and stretching that out so that it is not all at one time, either. He stated you are not getting that big concentrated flow out of there. He stated we are taking less water over a longer period of time. He stated that is being detained in our ponds and that is being regulated that outlet based on the details that we have of the outlet structure.

Mrs. Marshall asked how many acre-feet is that pond.

Mr. Hudson stated it is going to be excavated.

Mrs. Marshall stated if it is going to be so big don’t you have to get permission of this size.

Mr. Breitzke stated no, it is surface area.

Mr. Detert stated in all the years that I have been here it always bothered me that we had drainage metered and it goes to


somebody else’s property but it stays there at a longer time. He stated I am not sure if that is so pertinent here because we have some wetlands. He stated we have had some situation that it went into the farmer’s field and the farmer’s property is wet for a long period of time.

Commissioner Harper stated I think the past seven subdivisions that we passed were under or new drainage ordinance. He stated I think I was pretty well satisfied that they were meeting it. He stated apparently it won’t stop development if you meet it.

Mr. Detert stated I am not as concerned here with the wetlands because we are not really hurting anybody. He stated the water is there so it is going to be there a little longer and it is going to dissipate and nature is going to take care of it. He stated this subdivision doesn’t bother me that much. He stated I do think we need to look at that drainage ordinance.

Mrs. Marshall asked did this go to the Drainage Board and did they review this subdivision.

Mr. Breitzke stated yes.

Mrs. Marshall stated the Drainage Board seems only to be interested in the regulated drain.

Mr. Breitzke stated correct. He stated the Drainage Boards job has always been as a maintenance body pursuant to the Statutes. He stated unfortunately, when they looked at a regulated drain many times they didn’t look at how they could assess or historically maintain.

Mrs. Marshall stated so the Drainage Board doesn’t take this new ordinance that we have…as long as it gets the water off the subdivision then it is okay.

Mr. Breitzke stated I didn’t say that Liz. He stated what I am saying is they are looking for connectivity through regulated drains. He stated they are creating the easements. He stated this is a precursor to our own ordinance where we created easements where not exited before. He stated so as a condition for a lot of development we created a lot of drainage easements and swales for the protection for the upland neighbors. He stated that way there was less drainage imperiled.

Mr. Hudson stated Pond B is 1.2-acre feet and Pond A is 5.2-acre feet.



Mr. Burns stated I have a question about the neighbor’s wetland. He stated as I understand it he has two acres of wetland and his concern is enlarging his wetland by increase water from this subdivision. He asked did we check elevations.

Mr. Hudson stated to flood it we have to put more water on it. He stated we are mandated to not do that.

Mr. Burns stated also he must have an outlet. He stated if we have a hundred-year rain what happens to that neighbor’s property.

Mr. Hudson stated the maps that we see would indicate that this continues on into Pepper Creek based on the elevations of the USGS map.

Mr. Burns stated so his wetlands cannot get that much water from you if there is an outlet.

Mr. Hudson stated correct.

Mr. Burns stated if it is metered from your subdivision and he has an outlet it can’t get larger.

Mr. Breitzke stated it gets to a natural level it overflows and a…

Mr. Burns stated if it is regulated from your subdivision and it has a natural outlet it can’t get larger.

Mr. Hudson stated it is going to do exactly what it does today or now.

Mr. Detert stated I don’t see a problem with this.

Mr. Detert moved to approve Case 06-P-11. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which failed due to a lack of a majority vote:

Burns - Yes Cole - Yes Detert - Yes
Harper - No Marshall - No Breitzke - Yes

This case is continued to the June 28, 2006 meeting.

Drainage concerns on Timberland Subdivision.

Mr. Ray stated you are concerned about the Gator property. He stated I have an aerial photo here. He stated as you can see the water problem and we know we have to address this. He stated


what happened was we had originally planned on running the storm sewer from this point down to a wetland adjacent to Mr. Duzur’s property. He stated the problem is when we talked to Mr. Duzur about it he said he was afraid it might flood his property. He stated so we said okay but we didn’t think it would. He stated we looked at another option. He stated what we would do is purchase the property from Mrs. Gator. He stated we offered to purchase it last month and she wanted substantially more money. He stated what we have done now is we are proposing to putting in a catch basin at this corner up here running down to this wetland over here. He stated there is plenty of fall that runs over the railroad.

Mr. Breitzke stated you are proposing to run it along the right-of-way of CR 900 N. to the west to a wetland and that is where the water will go.

Mrs. Marshall asked who owns that wetland.

Mr. Ray stated part of it is owned by John Sanders and another part by a person over here. He stated there is a pipe right under the road. He stated all of the water from over here and over here…this is Duzur’s property and it runs down here and under the road down here.

Mrs. Marshall stated so you are going to come down the side of the road here in the road right-of-way.

Mr. Ray stated right.

Mrs. Marshall stated so you are going to get permission from the county.

Mr. Ray stated so I will have to put an inlet over here so this water will all run into that. He stated this road has a hump in it so it looks like this and it goes down and comes back up again. He stated the pipe will come down and it will daylight here and then it will go and pick up again so the water flow off here into there and there is a dip in this area right here and then it will run on down to here.

Mrs. Marshall stated this is going to be a pipe and not a ditch.

Mr. Ray stated it will be a pipe and then there will be a section of it that will be an open area because we have to allow water from a dip to get in and run out.

Mrs. Marshall stated what do you do put something on the


end of the pipe so that…

Mr. Ray stated yes. He stated we will put a flared end on it.

Mrs. Marshall asked how big is that pipe going to be.

Mr. Ray stated we are looking at 10 to 12-inch.

Mrs. Marshall asked at whose expense is this being done.

Mr. Ray stated it is the developer who will pay for that.

Mrs. Marshall stated the main purpose of this is to drain that corner.

Mr. Ray stated exactly. He stated it will just drain that corner and that is it.

Mr. Breitzke stated we got a commitment from Bernie Madje the developer to drain that property across the street from the development. He stated he volunteered to fix the problem. He stated it wasn’t his and it is not part of his development. He stated apparently he just couldn’t come to an agreement on the sale price and you made a pretty good offer from what I saw but it wasn’t accepted.

Mr. Ray stated we are committed to do it and we are going to do it. He stated it’s just that what we tried to do last month it just didn’t work so we had to come up with another way to do this.

Mr. Breitzke stated Mr. Duzur has apparently been contacted by others too because someone asked me about the property. He asked is that up for sale or not.

Mr. Ray stated from what I understand it was up for sale but the parties have backed out.

Mr. Breitzke stated how soon will you be finished with some kind of proposal.

Mr. Ray stated we hope to have the water lines and sewer lines to Timberland completed by the end of this month and hopefully this will be started within the first couple of weeks of July. He stated it shouldn’t take too long because this is pretty much unobstructed.

Mr. Schrader asked how are you going to drain Outlot B.


Mr. Ray stated it is the one adjacent to Mr. Duzur. He stated this is where we originally considered putting this water into but Mr. Duzur said that he didn’t want it here and that there was a farm tile that brings this to the creek, which is Damon Run, however, he was afraid that the water would come up too fast and flood his property. He stated that is when they decided to buy into property. He stated there is a farm tile that runs from that wetland over to the creek according to Mr. Duzur.

Mr. Breitzke stated we need to consider this. He stated we need to approve this and it is kind of news to me how you are going to solve this. He stated the last I heard was a pump solution.

Mrs. Marshall stated when it gets down here to the wetlands where does it go.

Mr. Ray stated it runs under here and there is a creek that runs up. He stated there is a big lake over here, which is part of Barnie Michaels property and then it runs over to a creek then runs out. He stated it a defined creek.

Mrs. Marshall stated what if that property over there gets developed can they drain into that pipe too.

Mr. Ray stated it is only a ten-inch pipe or twelve-inch pipe so they may have to look at some other means.

Mike Duffy stated I am from Duneland Group.

Attorney Elwood stated 60 days ago, I believe, Mr. Harper mentioned that he did not believe that the…he basically asked me to define a defined waterway and to meet with Tim Cole and Herb Read and I have done that. He stated I reported back about 30 days ago that it was a pretty broad definition. He stated a waterway means a permanent or an intermittent stream, channel or other body of water either natural or manmade, which gathers or carries surface water. He stated it is a pretty broad definition. He stated since the time 30 days ago I was asked by the Plan Commission to draft some additional language to better define intermittent stream or channel. He stated in trying to do so I’ve met with Bob Thompson and Kevin Breitzke and I have intentions of talking with Mr. Cole and Mr. Read and anybody else that would like to provide me with information. He stated I think the best way to resolve this is to meet at a workshop and resolve that and decide what the intent of the storm water ordinance was and if in fact the current language meets the intent. He stated



if the majority wants to change it then that is what needs to occur. He stated I would like to schedule that maybe before our next meeting.

Mr. Thompson stated our next meeting is June 28.

The workshop is scheduled for June 28, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. prior to our next Plan Commission meeting.

Mr. Thompson stated I sent out a staff report concerning an independent engineer of storm water. He stated if you want more time to look at it that is fine. He stated if not then I would like to know the direction the Commission would like to take on that. He stated do we want to have an independent engineer reviewing these plans.

Commissioner Harper stated I think it might be helpful and obviously we would want to do it at the next meeting for someone like DLZ give us a 30-minute presentation. He stated they will review these drainage plans. He stated maybe we could have them come here not the next meeting but the one after that and give us a presentation of what they do and how much they charge.

DLZ will give a presentation to the Plan Commission on July 12, 2006 at 5:30 p.m.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.

PORTER COUNTY
PLAN COMMISSION


S/Kevin D. Breitzke, President

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