PORTER COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION

Regular Meeting
June 28, 2006

M I N U T E S

The regular meeting of the Porter County Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 at 6:30 p.m. in the Porter County Administrative Center, 155 Indiana Avenue, Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

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

Mr. Burns moved to waive the reading of the May 10, 2006 meeting and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

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

Mr. Burns moved to continue the reading of the June 14, 2006 meeting. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Old Business:

Case 06-FP-9. Petition of Prairie Landings of Porter LLC, c/o Todd A. 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. Con’t from 6-14-06 mtg.)

William Ferngren stated I would like to ask for a continuance on this case.

Mr. Detert moved to continue Case 06-FP-9 until the July 12, 2006 meeting. Mr. Burns seconded the motion.

Discussion:

Mr. Read stated I haven’t received any drawings on this.

Mr. Ferngren stated I just learned a few moments ago that the engineer did not submit drawings.

Mr. Thompson stated could you also send a copy of the primary plat along with it so some of the members could see the whole concept of it.

Motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Case 06-P-11. Petition of SW Developers 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. Con’t from 6-14-06 mtg.)

William Ferngren stated I have with me tonight Bryan Siewen from SW Developers and David Croft from the Bonar Group who is our engineer. He stated this was continued from June 14 two weeks ago. He stated there were a few of you who weren’t here for that meeting. He stated there was a motion to approve this subdivision and the vote was four to two to approve it. He stated the rules require five members to act accordingly. He stated we did not have enough to take formal action. He stated for those of you who were not here the project is Tower Meadows. He stated it is located at the southeast corner of CR 250 W. and CR 550 N. He stated the property is zoned R-1 under your standards and zoning ordinance. He stated the proposal is a single-family residential subdivision to contain 124 lots. He stated no variances are requested of any kind and all the lots meet or exceed your minimum requirements. He stated South Haven is providing the sewer to this project and Indiana American Water is providing water service and a letter has been provided previously indicating that those are available. He stated all of the roads are public streets in this development and we have provided connectivity to Hampton Manor Subdivision as requested by the Highway Department. He stated drainage was discussed at the last meeting. He stated we have two outlet points. He stated there are two ponds that are shown in blue on the


drawing. He stated Pond A is on the top of the drawing. He stated this outlets into a wetland and then Pond B outlets through outlets through a 15-inch culvert to the west of the property. He stated I have a few photos’ to pass out to you. He stated the first photo is a picture that Mr. Thompson took that depicts the wetland and the later drawings show the culvert that runs under CR 250 W. and then into the ditch. He stated you can see there is water flowing into that ditch and it is quite deep. He stated that heads off into a westerly direction. He stated Mr. Thompson and Mr. Breitzke were at the site and felt that we were in compliance with your storm water drainage ordinance. He stated open space is provided on the parcel. He stated there are no significant environmental features. He stated 10% is what is required and we provided about 15.8% open space including ponds that will be wet and they will be the appropriate depths to support the fish life in compliance with your open space ordinance. He stated in addition to that there are some recreational areas shown on the drawing as well. He stated this area here providing for a basketball court. He stated there are series of picnic tables and also a gazebo in that area. He stated that will provide for both passive aesthetic component as well as the opportunity for the residents to participate in active recreation on the site.

Mr. Burge stated I have no problems with this development.

Mr. Burns stated I have no new questions.

Mr. Detert stated no.

Mr. Hutson stated no.

Mr. Cole stated none.

Mr. Read stated I think you misspoke slightly on the matter of open space. He stated if you are counting your ponds as I recall isn’t the requirement 15% not 10%.

Mr. Ferngren stated we have 15.8%.

Mr. Read stated yes you do have it but you did make the statement that the requirement is 10%. He stated no,


your requirement is 15% if you count the ponds. He stated I want that straight for the record. He stated I wasn’t here when this first came up and I understand that there was a question regarding the water going off site from the two ponds. He stated one to the north and one to the west. He stated that question was does that water go into a defined waterway under our ordinance. He stated in going out there everything was so leafy I couldn’t see what was on the other side of the road. He stated I couldn’t see if there was a valley or hilly. He stated are you taking the position that as it leaves the property it is going to a defined waterway.

Mr. Ferngren stated yes and that is consistent with…Mr. Thompson and Mr. Breitzke were there and we were there early in Spring before the growth became thick. He stated if you look at the photographs provided it is very obvious not only the culvert but also the free flowing water through this ditch.

Mr. Read stated you are maintaining that the property owners to the north and to the west it does not trigger that portion of our ordinance which requires sign off by the property owners.

Mr. Ferngren stated that is correct.

Mr. Read stated if the adjoining property owners here tonight I would like to recognize them.

Walter Williams, 514 N. 250 W.

Mr. Read asked are you on the north or the West Side.

Mr. Williams stated I am on the West Side. He stated with the smaller pond the ditch there runs through my property. He stated a couple of things flow. He stated there are no wetlands on my property so I really don’t know where it goes from my property to the property on beyond you. He stated how it affects them I have no idea. He stated as dry as it has been there is still water running to this day running through that ditch and it runs constantly. He stated you may even find a spring in there that is feeding that ditch.



Mr. Read stated do you dispute anything that has been said with regards to a define waterway. He stated the petitioner is permitted to discharge offsite into a defined waterway.

Mr. Williams stated right but the waterway on my property just passes through. He stated there is no wetland or anything that it accumulates into. He stated it is just a ditch that passes through my property.

Mr. Read stated so you understand the situation.

Mr. Williams stated yes.

Mr. Read stated is the other property owner here.

Mr. Breitzke stated I don’t see Mr. Cruz.

Mrs. Marshall stated we are going to talk about the outlets to the ponds. She stated first of all Mr. Williams where you outlet onto his property he says that it goes through a small stream. She stated Mr. Williams where does it eventually go after it leaves your property.

Mr. Williams stated I don’t know. He stated my neighbor on the other side of me.

Mrs. Marshall stated so it is a waterway that finally goes to a…

Mr. Ferngren stated Pepper Creek.

Mrs. Marshall stated the one on the north by Mr. Cruz does it also go to Pepper Creek.

Mr. Ferngren stated no. He stated it ends up in Salt Creek.

Mrs. Marshall stated is this developer committed to replacing the tube under the road that goes into Mr. Cruz’s property because eventually that is not going to be able to take care of the water that comes off of your pond.

Mr. Ferngren stated I guess we believe it is designed that the size of that pipe can accommodate that water.


Mr. Breitzke stated my concern was just the condition of the tube. He stated you can put in the same size but a concrete tube so you protect the road, the tube, the outlet all of those conditions. He asked are you agreeing to both of those tubes being replaced with concrete and the same size.

Mr. Ferngren stated I don’t know the condition of that pipe. He stated I know we discussed that at the DAC not the pipe across 550 N. but the one across 250 W. He stated in looking at those pipes we felt they were adequate.

Mr. Breitzke stated I know how you felt and I know how I felt. He stated I think the question that Liz was asking you is if you plan to replace them.

Mr. Ferngren stated in the event that the pipe would fail Mr. Sewin is committed…

Mr. Breitzke stated no I meant during construction.

Mr. Ferngren stated he will replace those pipes.

David Croft stated I am from Bonar Group. He stated I guess we would like to work with your office as far as the elevation.

Mr. Williams stated I would just like to mention that the pipe was cleaned out about six or seven years ago.

Mrs. Marshall stated when you construct these ponds are you going to bank on the road and down on the side to the adjoining property.

Mr. Croft stated yes. He stated there will be an embankment at the corner of CR 250 W. and CR 550 N. He stated there will be an embankment around there to create the pond and there will also be an embankment along CR 250 W. on the southern pond.

Mrs. Marshall asked how high will that embankment going to be. She asked is that going to be a feature of the subdivision or are you going to put plantings on it.




Mr. Croft stated the plan is to plant grass on it and maintain it. He stated it has a four to one slope so it is mowable.

Commissioner Harper stated don’t you have to build that up quite a bit on that corner for that pond. He stated that corner is really low. He stated the corner of CR 250 and CR 550.

Mr. Croft stated it will probably be five feet to the top of the berm.

Commissioner Harper asked how deep will the pond be.

Mr. Croft stated the storage area will be about three feet.

Commissioner Harper stated that pipe is already caving in. He stated you are committing to changing both of those pipes.

Mr. Frengren stated yes that is correct.

Commissioner Harper stated when that goes over to that property to the north…that first picture is the property to the north. He asked is that correct.

Mr. Ferngren stated that is correct.

Commissioner Harper asked how much does that fellow own to the north. He asked is his whole parcel swampy.

Mr. Ferngren stated I don’t know what the extent of his ownership is by I can tell you that we were out there and it is wet.

Commissioner Harper stated I am wondering what that water will do to his property.

Mr. Ferngren stated we don’t think that it will have any adverse affect at all. He stated all of this is designed in accordance with your appropriate release rate. He stated he will not be adversely affected whatsoever by this water.



Commissioner Harper stated when this water leaves this wetland how does it leave the wetland.

Mr. Ferngren stated it channels through a series of ditches into Salt Creek. He stated there is a very large conduit that has to be about five to six feet.

Mr. Thompson stated under CR 250 W. probably about a quarter of a mile north there is probably a five foot culvert that is going underneath 250 W.

Commissioner Harper asked Bob have you been out there and have you seen that there is a defined waterway that takes this water off of this wetland to some place.

Mr. Thompson stated yes because when I was at the north end I was walking in ankle deep water.

Commissioner Harper asked the property where the wetland is.

Mr. Thompson stated yes. He stated I was noticing it was flowing towards that stream. He stated when you get back further on CR 250 W. after you pass Glenwood Hills you can actually see where there is a channel or ravine where it is coming from that wetland area and going towards Salt Creek.

Commissioner Harper asked is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak about this.

Richard Johann, 296 W. 550N. at the southeast corner of CR 550 N. and SR 149. He stated I am about one half mile from the subdivision. He stated I am concerned somewhat about the drainage and the traffic. He stated I have seen something that sort of defined where the water went west across 250 up to where it goes into Pepper Creek. He stated I am on Pepper Creek myself but I don’t think I am directly downstream of that water flow there. He stated I know there is Mystic Springs that is being constructed out there to the west and they have a wetland issue there when they were developing. He stated I guess this water running west would go into there. He stated I am just concerned that they have a defined waterway. He stated if you gentlemen went out there and believe it to be true then


fine then there won’t be any problem. He stated those two corrugated metal pipes don’t look to good a shape. He stated I would be concerned with the wetland to the north there if it has adequate drainage. He stated except for the traffic that is all I want to say about it right now. He stated just for the record I would like to say I am a retired civil engineer.

Mrs. Marshall stated this bank that you are going to put around the north waterway, you said it was going to be five feet high.

Mr. Croft stated that is correct.

Mrs. Marshall asked is that going to cause any kind of a traffic situation because some of those grow up and you can’t see around the corner. She asked how wide is that berm going to be.

Mr. Croft stated it will start out at existing ground at the right-of-way and slope up at a four to one embankment and it will have about a ten-foot top. He stated the entire width of the embankment will be fairly wide. He stated you will still have eyesight going up to the stop sign and looking east and west.

Mrs. Marshall stated we don’t want to create a vision problem there.

Mr. Breitzke stated we have a lot of concerns with safety at the intersections and what is going to stop cars from going to stop cars from going into the ponds. He stated that brings me to the other thing of alternatives as far as guardrails at that intersection. He stated we want to make sure that somebody doesn’t slide into that pond.

Mrs. Marshall asked are you going to have a guardrail.

Mr. Ferngren stated if the Highway Department goes out and looks at this and says that they think one needs to be there.

Mr. Breitzke stated we are at preliminary stage right now but it is something you want to think about real hard before you come back for final.


Mr. Ferngren asked where exactly are you talking.

Mr. Breitzke stated at the northwest corner from both directions.

Mr. Read stated I just wanted to say on your open space are you going to own and manage it through a POA.

Mr. Ferngren stated yes.

Mr. Read stated prior to your secondary be sure that you submit to the Boards attorney the wording of the POA and the responsibility for financing and maintaining the open space including the pond.

Mr. Ferngren stated okay.

Mr. Burge moved to approve Case 06-P-11. Mr. Burns seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:

Burge - Yes Burns - Yes Cole - Yes
Detert - Yes Harper - Yes Hutson - Yes
Marshall - Yes Read - Yes Breitzke - Yes

New Business:

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

Case 06-P-13. Petition of Stephen L. and Diane L. Davis, 698 East Burrell Dr., Crown Point, Indiana seeking primary plat approval for Davis Subdivision to contain 2 lots on 13.87 acres and to be located on the West side of CR 325 W., South of CR 100 N., in Union Township, Porter County, Indiana.

Eric Banschbach stated I am from Emil Beeg Land Surveying Inc. representing Stephen and Diane Davis. He stated we are seeking primary plat approval. He stated to give you a little background. He stated the subject tract is a 13.87-acre parcel purchased by my clients from the Estate of Nicholas Hoemagy in 2004. He stated my client’s daughter and son-in-law live in the existing home, which is located on what would be lot 2. He stated lot 1 would be


the proposed building site where my clients are planning to build there new home, which is shown as proposed basically in the middle of lot 1 on the southerly side. He stated there is an existing gravel drive going back to the proposed home site. He stated there is also an existing pond and outlet structure, which appeared to have been constructed in 1977 by the then owners of the property in cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service. He stated the existing pond and outlet structure is sufficient to handle the calculated detention required for this subdivision and the proposed building site, which again is only one single building site. He stated the plat was presented for review to the DAC and the County Drainage Board. He stated their recommendation for additional easements along the south and west lines of the property and increasing the width of the easement between Rolling Meadows and the south edge of the pond were added to the plat. He stated the Drainage Board recommended regulating the portion of the drainage from the outlet from Rolling Meadows on our south line and the pond and the outlet structure with no assessments at this time and requiring the lot owners to provide responsibility for maintenance. He stated those issues are addressed on the Drainage Board certificate that is on the plat. He stated to meet the requirements of the open space ordinance we have established a conservation easement basically on the north portion of lot 1, which encompasses 5.4 acres, which equates to 40% of the area of the lots.

No one spoke in opposition to this petition.

Stephen Davis, 698 W. Burrell Dr. in Crown Point. He stated I am the proud owner of this piece of property. He stated my wife has been teaching at the High School for almost twenty years and we thought it would be a little more convenient if we could get a little closer to Valpo where actually most of our friends are now.

The public hearing was then closed.

Mr. Burge stated I have no questions.

Mr. Burns stated will you need any variances.

Mr. Banschbach stated no.


Mr. Detert stated I have no questions.

Mr. Hutson stated no.

Mr. Cole stated I know it is only one family using that north drive but I am really concerned about the line of sight issue from both directions.

Mr. Thompson stated generally the County Engineer will ask for clearing of brush and trees within the right-of-way along the entrance of the drive so that there is a clear vision.

Mr. Banschbach stated relatively speaking for in terms of the other driveways that are in that same area this is basically the clearest of all of them.

Mr. Cole stated I am just voicing my concern.

Mr. Read stated what I can see of the property from the roadway it seems that it is a very beautiful piece of property and an ideal place for a house. He stated I see that the defined waterway kind of winds around and does go off site a little ways. He stated I don’t think that creates a legal problem. He asked does the fact that these gullies run in and off of the property present any legal problems for the adjoining property owners.

Attorney Elwood stated as long as they are within our definition of defined waterway.

Mr. Read stated again I would ask you to run the details of the conservation easement past our attorney. He stated bear in mind that this is supposed in perpetuity. He stated you are not supposed to be able to subdivide it. He stated run the wording of this past our Board attorney before you come back for any further action.

Mrs. Marshall stated I go past this property at least twice a day and I know it is a beautiful piece of property. She stated my question is are you going to use one driveway for the two houses.

Mr. Banschbach stated there are two existing driveways. He stated on lot 2 it shows a garage on the


north portion. He stated there is an existing driveway that comes off of that that they use to access the house. He stated there is also an existing driveway that kind of meanders across just north of lot 2. He stated that is shown on the drawing.

Mrs. Marshall stated I don’t think anything is forever. She stated I know that this family will never forever own this. She stated it is like having two saleable lots is what we are creating here. She stated I would like you to take the water…you say that it is in a branch of Clark Ditch. She asked how does the water get to Clark Ditch.

Mr. Banschbach stated from the topography it kind of meanders basically along the north line of the east portion of lot 1. He stated eventually it goes a little bit farther north till it crosses 325 W.

Mrs. Marshall stated is that Mitros’s property there.

Mr. Banschbach stated I am not sure who that is.

Mrs. Marshall stated okay then it goes to that property. She stated then how does it get to Clark Ditch.

Mr. Banschbach stated this is our site right here. He stated as you can see by the green line it kind of meanders around. He stated it actually crosses 325 south of 100 and then it continues to meander and eventually gets up to Clark Ditch.

Mr. Breitzke stated this is an existing pond and the overflow goes to the north and to the east out of it. He stated it is one lot and it is taking water out of Rolling Meadows Subdivision to some degree.

Mrs. Marshall stated is this in Union Township.

Mr. Banschbach stated yes.

Commissioner Harper stated I have no questions.

Mr. Detert moved to approve Case 06-P-13. Mr. Cole seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot


vote:

Burge - Yes Burns - Yes Cole - Yes
Detert - Yes Harper - Yes Hutson - Yes
Marshall - Yes Read - Yes Breitzke – Yes

Mr. Thompson stated I would like to mention one thing quickly. He stated I did speak with an engineering company DLZ as requested at the last meeting to set up another little workshop prior to our next Plan Commission meeting to come in and talk to us about storm water. He stated DLZ did agree to show up at our July 12 meeting at 5:30 p.m. and we will do it again from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. He stated I will make sure that Pat makes up another workshop notice and we will notify members prior to that.

Mr. Detert stated I just have one comment and I brought it up before. He stated with more and more drainage and more and more open space and more and more subdivisions I still feel that we ought to insist that the covenants have some clause in it where it holds the County harmless from financial involvement if the property owners fail to keep up the property.

Attorney Elwood stated State Law allows for enforcement of ordinance and assessment of the cost with or without that language.

Mr. Breitzke stated one of the keys is that we are getting the Property Owners Associations to incorporate so that there is at least a physical body.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.

PORTER COUNTY
PLAN COMMISSION

S/Kevin D. Breitzke, President

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