VANDERBURGH COUNTY

DRAINAGE BOARD

FEBRUARY 22, 2005

The Vanderburgh County Drainage Board met in session this 22^nd day of February, 2005 in room 301 of the Civic Center Complex with President Cheryl Musgrave presiding.

President Musgrave: Call to order the February 22^nd Vanderburgh County Drainage Board.

President Musgrave: May I have the approval of the minutes of the previous meeting?

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we approve.

Commissioner Crouch: I’ll second.

President Musgrave: All in favor say aye.

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: That is approved.

President Musgrave: We move now to the William Hirsch Subdivision, final drainage plan.

Bill Jeffers: Did everyone get a copy of the agenda packet with the comments attached and the photographs? William S. Hirsch Subdivision is a preliminary drainage plan, the site is located east and adjacent of Burkhardt Road, north of Sam’s Club. A general description of the site is four and a half acres of flat farm ground that was recently rezoned C-4 for the development of a one lot subdivision. It’s at the southwest corner of 45 acre tract that was rezoned with minimal site planning, and currently covered only by a commitment to build necessary street and drainage infrastructure on a piecemeal basis as the project expands through the 45 acre rezoned parcel. Specific concerns that the County Surveyor has with this four and a half acre drainage plan is the lack of a comprehensive plan to develop the entire 45 acre tract and provide common infrastructure, results in this site’s inability to completely satisfy code requirements regarding detention and controlled release of post construction storm water run off. The drainage plan was revised Friday to show a 3.3 inch orifice in the outfalling structure to control the run off, that’s what would be required to control the run off, but that falls below our minimum eight inch diameter, or eight inch square orifice. The reason we have that minimum requirement is because the small orifices would clog up with the least little bit of trash. What this developer is asking to do is to waive the code requirement for total detention, and for the board to release that requirement and allow them to put an eight inch orifice in the discharge. This is substantially, this would restrict it to substantially more than the minimum required outflow, and, however, if you’ll look down here under remedies, I’m saying that the drainage code allows the board to exercise it’s discretionary power on a site by site basis, but that your action in this regard might set a precedent that the developer would seek to repeat if piecemeal development continues through the 45 acre parcel. What I’m saying there is I’m not so concerned about this one four and a half acre parcel. I think that the other 45 acres will allow the opportunity for compensation for this excess run off. It’s not an extreme amount of water that’s going to run off, it’s just that I don’t want to set a precedent that if this developer continues to develop piecemeal, four acres at a time, rather than have a community wide plan for the entire 45 acres, we’ll end up with way too much water discharging into our pipe along Burkhardt Road. So, I ask that they consider entering into a legally binding agreement that accomplishes a remedial solution in the next phase of development by committing to compensate for the insufficient detention and controlled discharge at this first site. That commitment would have to be made in a recordable affidavit supplied by the applicant and approved by the board. Mr. James Morley would like to reply to that second point.

Jim Morley, Jr. : At this time my client chooses, or would prefer that you guys grant a variance for the discharge. The discharge, for a site like that, for a site like this, an eight inch orifice, which we’re talking about an eight inch hole that all this drains through, or actually drain more than this entire site would on it’s own to begin with. So, there’s no feasible way in which we can have anything, have an eight inch orifice and not increase discharge, because the site discharges so little. It’s a common problem with anything on the east side. It’s flat ground that’s farmed, and not a whole lot rolls off of it. Most of what falls on it soaks in. We looked at going with, as Bill had said a couple different options. We looked at using a smaller orifice, at that point we would have to get a variance from you to use a smaller orifice, and smaller orifices are prone to plugging and clogging. A Big Gulp cup would put you out of business. Therefore, at this time, we request that a partial waiver be granted to allow for, to use an eight inch orifice. What we’re talking about is two CFS, two cubic feet per second, more leaving this site than what leaves it today. In comparison it dumps to those box culverts along Burkhardt Road. Those box culverts probably carry 600 or 700 cubic feet per second, ball park. I mean, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to what it’s going to. I can appreciate Bill’s concern of not wanting to set a precedent in which we come back in, and as this property is developed, it’s developed in one lot at a time. I can appreciate that concern. At this time, this is the only buyer they have though. The owners of the property don’t want to commit to something that encumbers the rest of their property, in case they would get a totally different type of user to come in, you know, and they would be limited in what they could do, because of where they had placed a community retention basin, or something along that lines. So, at this time we’re requesting a waiver just to allow an extra two cubic feet per second, which is minimal in the grand scope of things, to be allowed.

President Musgrave: Well, I’m new at running these meetings, do I ask for remonstrators at this time?

Bill Jeffers: If you’re satisfied with the plan as presented, and them asking for a waiver of detention, yes, you could ask for remonstrators.

Commissioner Nix: I guess, the problem I have is that we do this once, someone else comes along, or you come back to us six months from now, and you’ve got another one just to the north of this one that’s here now, will you ask for this again? Where are we going to be in six months, I guess?

Jim Morley, Jr. : Hopefully, from my standpoint, hopefully, we’ve got a great big, big box user that wants Morley and Associates to design 100 acres for them. But, I don’t know. I can’t tell you the answer to that. I can tell you that you reserve the right every time we come in front of you to say no. You reserve the right today to say no, or, if you decide today we’ll say yes, but, put me on notice saying, Jim, next time we probably won’t, or we won’t. Then the next time, I mean, just because you say yes today does not automatically make it that you have to say yes the next time. You know, if you’re concerned about a precedent being set, you can verbally state, it goes into the minutes of this meeting that says, you know, this is a one time only deal, you know, and the owner of the property should know the next time this won’t be accepted.

Commissioner Crouch: What’s your title?

President Musgrave: I think I’m President.

Commissioner Nix: President.

Commissioner Crouch: President, Madam President, the County Engineer is here in the audience. Do you have any comment on this, Mr. Stoll?

John Stoll: I would have the same concerns that Bill Jeffers does in regard to the piecemeal development, because if that continues then, who knows, at some future point the box culvert capacity might be exceeded. It’s not just this vacant property around this one lot that we’re looking at here. We already have Sam’s and Wal-Mart and Target and all these other developments draining into this box. The county spent probably ten million dollars upgrading Burkhardt Road, and I wouldn’t want to see actions being taken as a precedent that would turn around and cause problems with the capacity of that box. Another problem if it is piecemealed would be too many pipe connections to the box culvert. Basically, right now this one site does have some existing area drains that are already tied into the box culvert along Burkhardt that they can tie into, but if we keep having that property cut up into smaller and smaller pieces, they won’t have anyway to get their drainage into that Burkhardt Road box culvert without knocking new holes in the side of the box culvert. As you know, that will be the first point that the system will fail, and, like I said, the county has had a significant investment in that, and I wouldn’t want to see it get all messed up by virtue of not having a comprehensive plan for the development of that property.

President Musgrave: Of the two remedies that have been suggested, which one would you prefer?

John Stoll: The second one was the binding agreement?

President Musgrave: Legally binding agreement.

John Stoll: I’m sorry, what was the first one again?

President Musgrave: Waive or relax the requirement for detention and controlled release of post construction run off.

John Stoll: I would think an agreement would need to be entered into.

Commissioner Crouch: What exactly, can you restate your recommendation, Mr. Jeffers?

Bill Jeffers: Okay, if I can soapbox for one minute.

Commissioner Crouch: One minute. I’ll start the clock.

Bill Jeffers: Ms. Crouch will remember this from Area Plan Commission, we’ve asked this developer to pursue a comprehensive plan for this project. Not this specific four acre project, but for the entire four point five acre rezoning, 45 acre rezoning.

Commissioner Nix: How long back was this asked for?

Bill Jeffers: Several months.

Commissioner Nix: Okay.

Bill Jeffers: But, to get off the soapbox and be fair about this, the entire focus on this project has been at this four point five acres in the southwest corner by a development client who wants to put a lending institution there. It’s very important to that client to get this done. So, I’ve tried to offer remedies, and you can, and I would recommend that you grant a waiver, so long as there is a firm understanding, whether by a legally binding agreement, or by someone’s statement, preferably in writing, that the piecemeal development of this 45 acres will not continue without accomplishing adequate detention and control of post development run off in that one and half million dollar pipe that we put along Burkhardt Road for the purpose of draining all this square mile, not just this four acres.

Commissioner Crouch: Mr. Ziemer, is it, would that be agreeable to get a legally binding document? Could that be drawn up?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Sure it could be, but what I would need is for the County Surveyor to, I don’t know anything about drainage, to develop the language for me that you want included pursuant to your recommendations, and then I can prepare a binding agreement. But, I will need the information.

Bill Jeffers: I had asked the applicant to do that and bring it to the meeting, but if you wish to move forward and get this project under construction, which I think would be a great idea, if they would somehow commit at this time that they will work towards that agreement–

Commissioner Nix: And that’s for the future development?

Bill Jeffers: For the future development.

Commissioner Nix: Okay.

Bill Jeffers: To accomplish detention in accordance with the code.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Well, I’m going to say that I’m always reluctant as an attorney to approve something subject to somebody signing something later, which they later decide not to sign.

Bill Jeffers: Right.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: I’m not questioning in anyway the integrity of the developer or Mr. Morley or anybody, I just, I think it would be better if we had the signed document in hand. But, I don’t want to stand in the way–

Bill Jeffers: I’d hoped we would have had that today.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Yeah.

President Musgrave: What is the reason that we do not have that document today?

Jim Morley, Jr. : An agreement as far as tying, as reducing that amount out of the next phase, is that what you’re talking about?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, sir.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Because it was our request that you waive that part instead of....there was two remedies, our request is that you would approve the first remedy. If you will not approve the first remedy, then we would seek the second remedy, if the owner of the property would be willing to legally enter into that contract. If they won’t, then, you know, I guess, it puts us back here again asking for the variance a second time, I guess. There is, short of increasing the size of the property that they are buying, a considerable amount, there is no way for us to not get a variance of some kind. Either we have to get a variance for the size of the orifice, or we have to get a variance for the amount of water it discharges. One way or the other we have to have a variance, because the site in itself discharges less than what an eight inch orifice will discharge. So, we, I guess, we could go with an eight inch orifice, which is, I guess, a temporary variance of one that gets paid back later coming out of another basin. But, the reason you don’t have the second one today is because we would like for you to approve the first one.

President Musgrave: Alright, then, in that case, in order to give you direction, I will ask for a motion approving option number one.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Can I ask a question? If option one is not approved, does that automatically deny approval of this? Or does it then become tabled pending option two being brought back before you?

President Musgrave: Well, hang on. Do I have a motion for the approval of option number one as outlined in the Surveyor’s documents? I hear no motion, sir. So, I would suggest to you that this legally binding agreement might be the option that the Commissioners would prefer. Now, Mr. Ziemer has already said that making a motion to adopt some language that hasn’t been written or agreed to would be faulty. So, I would ask the board whether we wanted to do that?

Commissioner Nix: But, I guess, there’s another way of looking at it too, is this project could proceed, but no other development could be put on that, or nothing else could be developed there until an agreement is reached.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: If that provides you with the protections that you’re looking for, that would be satisfactory, but–

President Musgrave: Does it?

Bill Jeffers: Well, I was confused, because when I got the plan it was submitted by Mr. Morley on behalf of the Hirsch Trust. That’s who I thought we were dealing with, Jim, and now you’re saying that these developers don’t want to go outside this boundary with their commitments. But, I thought that the Hirsch’s, the Hirsch Trust was the developer of record for the entire 45 acres, including this four and a half acre tract.

Jim Morley, Jr. : That is correct, the Hirsch Trust.

Bill Jeffers: Well, they could make this commitment. Couldn’t they?

Jim Morley, Jr. : They can, if they choose to make this commitment.

Bill Jeffers: Oh, but I was under the impression you said in this letter that someone else doesn’t want to make the commitment.

Jim Morley, Jr. : I have two entities in which I am dealing with, but you are correct, it is the Hirsch Trust that has to decide whether or not they are willing to make, to commit to that agreement.

Bill Jeffers: Okay, well, that makes it easy for me, because I think the Hirsch Trust is capable of making the commitment. I was operating on behalf of someone, of thinking someone else was wanting to power this one through for the four and a half acres that doesn’t have the ability to make the commitment for the rest of the 45 acres.

Jim Morley, Jr. : The downside of it is only for the Hirsch Trust. Whoever uses this property, it had no negative effect on them. The negative impact comes upon the Hirsch Trust. So, it’s their decision whether or not they are willing to enter into that legal contract. To address your issue as to whether this project moves forward or not, this project cannot move forward until it has final drainage approval, because the plat cannot be recorded until it has final drainage approval.

Bill Jeffers: That is correct. You have to have this final drainage approval this month, or on March 22^nd before they can record a plat.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Because the plat–

Bill Jeffers: They can’t pull a permit until they record a plat.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Because the plat can’t be recorded, the property can’t be sold, therefore, a permit cannot be pulled.

President Musgrave: But, in the absence of the agreeable language, we have nothing to vote on.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Unless you refer to what Commissioner Nix had said, where you have an informal agreement–

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: But, I’m not sure after hearing what the County Surveyor has said that that’s a plan that we can implement. I think, Mr. Surveyor, we need you to recommend to us what you, you put two options, and the first option the Commissioners are not willing to do. We don’t want to hold up progress, but, if we need a written document to establish what people are going to do in the future, then we ought to have that document in place before we start doing things.

Commissioner Nix: Let me ask a question, what other options would they have when they start developing in this?

Bill Jeffers: Well, actually, it’s my option. I’ll tell you right now I’m not going to recommend another one. I’m not going to recommend another little postage stamp piecemeal parcel without full detention, Jim. You know–

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Do I understand then that–

Bill Jeffers: If you want a recommendation on this one, I think it should move forward, regardless, but I’m not going to recommend anymore for this 45 acre parcel that doesn’t accomplish detention in accordance with the code.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Excuse me, then, so, I would understand, would that mean that you would expect the Hirsch Trust to come in and enter into a binding agreement that satisfies you and me before there could be any further development of this acreage?

Bill Jeffers: Outside of this four and a half acres, is that what you’re asking?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Yes.

Bill Jeffers: Yes, sir. Either that or a full blown plan for the rest of the 45 acres, showing a common detention basin that everything can drain into and stop all this piecemeal development.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: It is perfectly clear that nobody connected with the Hirsch Trust could come in and try to develop the remaining portion, after deducting the four acres, the remaining portion of the 45 acres, without this Commission’s approval.

Bill Jeffers: That’s correct, sir.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: And we wouldn’t give it if we didn’t have the written, or the Commissioners wouldn’t give it if they didn’t have the written document in place.

Bill Jeffers: Or an alternate plan.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Yeah.

Bill Jeffers: Correct.

President Musgrave: Do you have power of attorney for the Hirsch Trust?

Jim Morley, Jr. : I personally do not, no.

Bill Jeffers: So, if you want me to make a recommendation to approve the plan, I’ll make that recommendation, but it will require your waiver of the –

Commissioner Nix: Back to number one.

Bill Jeffers: Yeah, back to number one.

Commissioner Crouch: How often have we done that?

Bill Jeffers: Very seldom.

President Musgrave: Can you think of a time?

Bill Jeffers: We’ve done it whenever a parcel is so close to a major receiving stream that the discharge, you know, the undetained discharge would be a benefit. To get that water out into the stream before other water comes down on top of it. We’ve done it in those cases. Across the street here, Joe Ream developed the same type of thing across the street, he made a commitment that he set aside a lot, I think it was lot number eight, that there would be a lake built on lot number eight, and that it would be enlarged to accommodate any loss or shortage of detention that was, that occurred throughout his 80 acres of development. He said, I will enlarge that lake to compensate for it.

Commissioner Nix: The detention?

Bill Jeffers: He said it up front.

Commissioner Nix: A retention lake?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, sir. As we work our way back through that development right directly across the street, we try to keep track of any lost detention. That’s really hard to keep track of it. It’s really not the best way to go.

President Musgrave: So, board members, do you have a motion?

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we request the board waive or relax a requirement for detention, knowing what I know now.

President Musgrave: Is there a second? I think that motion dies for lack of a second. Is there another motion? Including a motion to table until the next meeting?

Bill Jeffers: I’ll try to bring it back to you next month, cut and dried.

President Musgrave: In which case, would you like to table this until our next meeting?

Commissioner Crouch: You know, haven’t we, I remember recalling one time when we did just, instead of adjourning the meeting, we recessed it, is that correct?

Bill Jeffers: Your state statute allows you to recess the meeting so long as you specify a date certain to reconvene for the continuation of unfinished business.

President Musgrave: How long would it take?

Bill Jeffers: A week? Two weeks?

Jim Morley, Jr. : I mean, assuming that we could get something to your attorney for approval. I mean, I don’t know what kind of time line you have.

Bill Jeffers: Or you can come through our office.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Oh, if you get it to me, we’ll get it back, we’ll get it turned around quickly.

Jim Morley, Jr. : I assume you want the same kind of agreement that Joe Ream has?

Bill Jeffers: I would prefer just a flat statement that any shortage of detention accomplished on this lot will be compensated for or remediated in the next phase of development.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Okay, just something that simple?

Bill Jeffers: Something that simple. As long as it’s legally binding and recordable.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Right, recordable.

Jim Morley, Jr. : I don’t know legalese, but I could probably write something.

Bill Jeffers: I don’t either, that’s why I’m asking for help.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Well, if you give me the substance, I do know legalese.

President Musgrave: Well, how about we recess it for a week? if it’s not ready in a week, we recess it for another week.

Commissioner Crouch: Recess the meeting, and then at the end of our Commission meeting next week we would reconvene this meeting in order to take action on that particular item?

Bill Jeffers: That’s specific unfinished business, right.

Commissioner Crouch: Because I don’t want to delay the development.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Sure, the only thing that I would ask the Surveyor and Mr. Morley is let’s get with it immediately and get it to me so I can look at it early.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Sure.

Bill Jeffers: Yes, sir.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Do you want me, Bill, to send it to you first for review and comment?

Bill Jeffers: Sure.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Then–

Bill Jeffers: That would be great, and I’ll forward it to Mr. Ziemer.

President Musgrave: So, do I hear a motion to recess the matter of the William S. Hirsch Subdivision preliminary drainage plan to March 1^st immediately following the Commission meeting adjournment?

Commissioner Nix: I’ll make that motion.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Thank you for your time.

President Musgrave: Motion carries. Thank you. We move now to Cross Pointe Subdivision, Section Seven, it says final drainage plan.

Bill Jeffers: Right, I apologize for, on the first page I had put preliminary plan at the top, even though I mentioned on the agenda that it’s final plan. It should have said final plan at the top of your previous page. I also will try to bring these to you cut and dried. I know you don’t like to hammer these things out in a meeting. They should be cut and dried when they come to you, and the rest of them are. So, we’ll proceed. Although, I will say your drainage code allows a petitioner to come before

you regardless of the, in fairness, that’s the way it reads.

Bill Jeffers: Cross Pointe Subdivision, Section Seven is a final drainage plan. It’s located north of Virginia, east of Burkhardt, west of Cross Pointe Boulevard. It’s part of a continuing development by Regency Land Corporation, comprised of 21 3/4 acres zoned C-4 for immediate commercial development. There are no specific concerns regarding this. The plan meets all requirements of the drainage code. The County Surveyor recommends approval of the plan to allow the development, and that will allow the developer to record the plat and obtain building permits for individual lots.

President Musgrave: Does the petitioner have any comments? Are there any remonstrators? Is there a motion?

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we approve it.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries. Thank you.

Bill Jeffers: The next one is Creekside Meadows Subdivision, it’s a preliminary drainage plan, residential, very large. It’s north of Earle, west of Daylight, north of Schlensker Creek on the east side of Princeton Road. Excuse me, Petersburg Road. It’s also west of State Road 57 and Green River Road. Hornby Lane bisects this development. It’s 124 acres of rolling cropland that drains to Schlensker Creek. It’s a preliminary plan that substantially comports with the county drainage code. It’s, as a preliminary plan, it’s subject to detailed revisions and additions to qualify for a future submittal as a final drainage plan. The major concern with this would be, it will require in the future plan approval and permits from the Department of Natural Resources, and possibly the Corp of Engineers for construction in a floodway of some drainage facilities. There is a dedicated, there will be a dedication of an off-site drainage easement for construction and maintenance of the drainage facilities. So, there will have to be a legally binding agreement in the future brought to us, capable of being recorded that assigns rights and responsibilities to the off-site property owners, as well as possibly the homeowners association, to do that maintenance. I will be asking for grassy strips along the periphery of the subdivision to return down spout drainage to sheet flow before it flows off onto adjacent agricultural and residential property that’s already been developed. A detailed erosion control plan must accompany the final drainage plan to satisfy Rule Five. The County Surveyor recommends approval of the preliminary plan. Approval would allow the primary plat to move forward to Area Plan Commission. I have a date correction, that’s now being, those meetings have been changed to a second Thursday of the month at 4:00 p.m. So, it will go to Area Plan Commission, if approved here, on March 10^th at 4:00 p.m. The developer’s representative, Mike Zehner, is here, as well as the consulting engineer from Morley and Associates, Ron London, if there are any questions.

President Musgrave: I may have misidentified our last vote as being for Creekside. I was reading off my papers and not off the agenda. I just want to make sure that the record shows that was for Cross Pointe Sub. So, we are now on Creekside. Are there any comments by the petitioner, or anyone else?

Bill Jeffers: There may be some remonstrators on this one. It’s pretty large.

Ron London: My name is Ron London, and I’m with Morley and Associates. I’m just here to answer any questions you might have on the development. But, as Bill said, I think we meet the requirements for the preliminary drainage plan, so.

President Musgrave: Are there any remonstrators? When you come to the microphone, be sure and state your name and address.

Bill Jeffers: Now, as the remonstrators approach, I would like to remind everyone that this is a preliminary plan. There is ample opportunity between now and the submittal of a final plan to incorporate any remedies or any finished details required to address any legitimate drainage concerns that may come up, either in this meeting or from the field. It also gives ample opportunity for the consulting engineer for the developer to meet with the remonstrators, if there is something that we’ve overlooked out in the field that is a legitimate drainage concern.

President Musgrave: Your name?

John Pfender: My name is John Pfender. I live right across the street. I live at 13710 Petersburg Road, which is directly across the street from this development. My main concern on this drain is the sewage drain, the waste, not the run off water from your down spouts, but I’m talking about your waste water to sewers. I was wondering if this is going to be extended to the west side of Petersburg Road where people, existing homes there will be able to tap into this? That’s the only thing as far as I’m concerned. The road condition is another meeting.

President Musgrave: Is the County Engineer here, or anyone who can address that point?

Bill Jeffers: I think Mr. London can address that. It’s a sanitary sewer issue, it’s not a storm water drainage issue, is that correct, sir?

John Pfender: Yes, sir, that’s what I’m speaking of.

Bill Jeffers: As to where the location of the sanitary sewers will be, and if they will be available to tap in by adjacent neighbors.

Ron London: The sanitary sewer will be extended throughout the site with a gravity sewer, so, there won’t be any field beds on site. As far as the sewer being extended, right now we’re just in the preliminary stages of working on the sanitary sewer plan, so, I can’t answer that at this time. That’s something that I have to talk with the developer and the Evansville Water and Sewer Utility, who would approve any plans that we would submit before them, along with the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.

President Musgrave: When would that information be available for him? At what point?

Ron London: I would say sanitary sewer plans would be available in the next month, month and a half.

President Musgrave: Should he contact you?

Ron London: He can contact myself, that’s probably the best remedy, and I can give him my card, and I can let him contact me whenever we get to that point.

President Musgrave: Is there anyone else to speak to this matter?

John Pfender: John Pfender again. My concern on this is that my neighbor next door to me has said he has seen a plan, he told me this two or three years ago that there was a plan to run a sewer line up the back side of my property, and to connect all of our people up and down Petersburg Road onto a sanitary system, to do away with field beds, and one thing or another. That’s the part that I’m wondering if the city or the county was going to pursue that in anyway? Or are we going to be able to tie in? That’s my question, is whether we’re going to be able to tie in?

Commissioner Nix: I would think that would be a question you would need to take up with Evansville Water and Sewer. The county, I don’t think the county would have any involvement with that at all.

John Pfender: Okay. Well, like I say, my neighbor said he thinks it’s going to be there one of these days, but I–

Commissioner Nix: Yeah, if you call down tomorrow and ask for engineering, I think they’re over on Allen’s Lane, they could probably help you over there.

John Pfender: Alright, thank you very much.

Commissioner Nix: You’re welcome.

President Musgrave: Thank you.

Bill Jeffers: Mr. Pfender, you can pick up a business card from Ron London.

John Pfender: I already got one.

Bill Jeffers: Okay, good.

John Pfender: Thank you very much.

Bill Jeffers: Thank you, sir.

President Musgrave: Is there a motion on this?

Commissioner Crouch: I’ll make a motion that we approve the preliminary plan for Creekside Meadows Subdivision.

Commissioner Nix: I second that.

President Musgrave: Any discussion? All those in favor say aye?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries.

President Musgrave: Next, and I’ll read from the agenda, is McCutchan Estates, Section Three, preliminary drainage plan.

Bill Jeffers: Okay, Commissioners, this is another preliminary drainage plan for McCutchan Estates, it’s located east of Baumgart Road, north of Heinlein, west of Old Petersburg. It’s in McCutchanville proper. It’s north and west of Ashmore Estates, twelve acres of rolling land that drains to Little Pigeon Creek. This is a preliminary plan that involves, evolves from a previous plan that was approved in 1987, when we had a less restrictive drainage code. This plan is a substantial upgrade of the previous plan, and comports with the newer drainage code. Again, a preliminary plan is always subject to detailed revisions and additions for later qualification as a final drainage plan. Any concerns that we may run across regarding specific issues can be resolved in the final submittal. We do find that some erosion, sediment and flow characteristic control measures are going to have to be added to the final submittal to satisfy Rule Five. That, of course, will be done. The County Surveyor recommends approval of the preliminary plan for Creekside, oops, another typo, for McCutchan Estates, Section Three. Your approval will allow the primary plat to move forward to Area Plan Commission on March 10, 2005.

President Musgrave: Are there any comments made by the petitioner for this? McCutchan Estates? I see none. Is there a motion?

Commissioner Crouch: Remonstrators?

President Musgrave: Are there any remonstrators?

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we approve Section Three, McCutchan Estates preliminary drainage plan.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries.

President Musgrave: We move now to Heritage Park Sub, Phase II, preliminary drainage plan.

Bill Jeffers: Heritage Park, Phase II is a preliminary drainage plan. It’s located south and adjacent to Lynch Road, east of Green River. It’s across from the Evansville Day School. It’s north of and immediately adjacent to the Schnuck’s Market Plaza. It’s an extension of Heritage Park Subdivision, Phase I, which is planned to house Black Buggy Restaurant. Phase II plans to house Cinergy Communication, on lot seven. It’s 25 acres of flat farm ground, zoned for commercial use. The developer has already excavated a long, narrow borrow pit on the south boundary to acquire fill. The entire area, or some of the area drains northeasterly into Crawford Brandeis Ditch. Most of the area, after development, will drain into this borrow pit. It’s a preliminary plan subject to revisions to qualify for a final plan. I want to point out that there’s been some indication from the developer’s side that there is a rush forward in this development to try and accomplish things very quickly. I want them to notice, I want the developer to notice that a preliminary plan approval is not to be considered as a go ahead. This plan is not a construction drawing from which to estimate costs, order materials, or complete excavation, grading, and installation of the storm sewer system. This is simply a preliminary plan. I want the developer to firmly understand that. He will have to come back with a final plan before he gets a building permit and moves forward. The recommendation by the County Surveyor is to approve the preliminary plan for Heritage Park, Phase II. The approval will allow the primary plat to move forward to subdivision review committee on March 8^th. Then to Area Plan Commission on April 14^th as a primary plat. Then it can come back to us as a final drainage plan in the April drainage board meeting with all the finished details that would qualify it to go forward as a construction plan.

President Musgrave: Does the petitioner have any remarks? Is there a motion?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Remonstrators?

President Musgrave: I’m sorry. Are there any remonstrators here for Heritage Park? I didn’t think I saw any.

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we approve Heritage Park, Phase II, preliminary drainage plan.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor say aye.

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: And the motion carries.

Madelyn Grayson: May we make a tape change please?

President Musgrave: Yes.

(Tape change)

President Musgrave: We move now to EMC: Campground to Volkman water line extension.

Bill Jeffers: This is a city water line extension that runs from Campground Road, up there at the top of, by Old State Road, a brand new water line runs all the way out 41 to Volkman Road serving the industrial corridor. They’ve already started the water line extension, and in the county jurisdiction it runs along the west side of U.S. 41 north from Petersburg Road. The drainage board’s specific areas of concern are when it crosses Pond Flat Lateral A, about a quarter mile north of Baseline. Then it will cross Pond Flat Main about one mile north of Baseline. Then it will cross Pond Flat Lateral D about one and a half miles north of Baseline, just south of Ameriqual. The drainage statute requires the drainage board to grant written permission to make a utility crossing of a regulated drain. The crossing must be installed in accordance with the Surveyor’s specifications. The County Surveyor has received details that are sufficient to establish that the plan comports with the Surveyor’s specifications. I have the plan here, it covers everything that was requested. The County Surveyor recommends approval of the plan shown on sheets 33, 36, 37, and 42 of a plan entitled “City of Evansville, Indiana Waterworks Improvements, Part B, Campground to Volkman Road Water Main”. The plan was submitted by Jason A. Davis of Reynolds, Incorporated, who is the contractor to install the water line.

President Musgrave: Is the petitioner here to comment on EMC: Campground?

Bill Jeffers: I told them that it wouldn’t be necessary. Everything was in order.

President Musgrave: That would be why there’s no one here. I will ask for remonstrators, and I see none of those either. Is there a motion?

Commissioner Crouch: I’ll move approval of EMC: Campground to Volkman water line extension.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: Motion carries.

President Musgrave: Now we move to receive the Surveyor’s annual report on regulated drains.

Bill Jeffers: I believe I distributed a copy of that to each of you. It’s a report that’s required by statute. It details the conditions of the regulated drains that the board administers. It recommends specific maintenance and repair activities on a drain by drain basis.

President Musgrave: Then, do we need to–

Bill Jeffers: I’m simply asking you to receive it, and consider it my annual report.

President Musgrave: So received. I’m not sure we need to have a motion on that.

President Musgrave: Now you are going to ask us to approve specifications for drain repair and maintenance?

Bill Jeffers: That’s correct. Here are the annual specifications. There should be enough copies for everyone at the table.

President Musgrave: Do we have to read it at this present meeting.

Bill Jeffers: No, Ma’am. I don’t think that that would be advisable, unless you have some No Doze available. It’s a set of general specifications. They are short and sweet. It has special provisions that accompany the Surveyor’s annual report. Together they address repair and maintenance needs called out in the report. The special provisions include individual bid schedules that are tailored on a ditch by ditch basis. Those bid forms had been approved by the State Board of Accounts, and can be used, and have been used for several years by the county. What they do, the bidders just fill those out, notarize their signatures, attach them to their official bids forms. The County Surveyor recommends the board approve these general specifications and special provisions for use in seeking bids, letting contracts, and completing the repair and maintenance of all of our drains in 2005.

Commissioner Nix: I’ll make a motion that we approve.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries.

Bill Jeffers: Okay, to authorize advertisements for invitation to bid. By this time, you’ve probably picked up that what, my typical mode of operation is to take previous documents and update them year to year, etcetera.

President Musgrave: Okay.

Bill Jeffers: So, the bid form that you find at the back of my package I just handed you has a typo in it. It still says March 22, 2004 on the notice to bidders. I’m distributing a fresh copy of a notice to bidders.

Commissioner Nix: The one I’ve got says March 22, 2005, Mr. Jeffers.

Bill Jeffers: Wow, I can’t believe it! The one we put on line had 2004 and had to be corrected.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay, so we don’t need this, do we?

Bill Jeffers: Well, anyway those are originals that your secretary should have one, and one needs to be signed. This is a notice to bidders that should be advertised later this week, and again next week, allowing sufficient time for bidders to bring their bids to Ms. Grayson in room 208, the Auditor’s office. Normal procedure requires, I’ll sign this one and pass it on down, it requires all of our signatures, plus Mr. Fluty’s.

Commissioner Crouch: Do you need a motion to authorize advertisement for invitation to bid?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, please.

Commissioner Crouch: So moved.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries.

President Musgrave: We now receive the Surveyor’s recommended language for code amendments.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, we have to set the date for the bid opening.

Bill Jeffers: Oh, I’m sorry.

President Musgrave: Sorry.

Bill Jeffers: Yes, the bid opening would be March 22, 2005.

Commissioner Crouch: So moved.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: That carries.

Bill Jeffers: The County Engineer is still here. He’s a dedicated fellow to have to sit through this. This is the proposed language for amendments to the drainage ordinance. There’s several copies here. There’s a copy in your package. I presented a preliminary report last month. I presented one to the previous Commissioners last year at the end of they year. Here are some pictures of damaged and deflected pipes. The first three pictures are in Vanderburgh County. The following 14 or so pictures are from other localities in Indiana, Indianapolis, etcetera, just showing what can happen to flexible pipe, if it’s not installed properly it gets squashed down or deflected, or it cracks, etcetera. When we wrote the drainage ordinance in 1994, this was a new product. I don’t know if they want to see those or not.

President Musgrave: It looks like a sonogram from here.

Bill Jeffers: Yeah, it looks kind of like an ultrasound.

Commissioner Nix: I’ve seen enough of them.

Bill Jeffers: I’ve seen all those I hope I ever see in my life. The language we are proposing here is taken from a variety of sources within the state of Indiana, other municipalities that have encountered the same problems, and have come up with these, this language to insert into their code to address it. What do I propose here?

Commissioner Crouch: That we accept it?

Bill Jeffers: That you take this as suggested code revisions, forwarded them to the County Engineer for his comments, suggestions and additions or deletions. Then have some proposed amendments, phrased legally by your County Attorney, and introduced to the Commissioners, Board of Commissioners, where, that’s the only place you can do code revisions, through required hearings, public comment period, and, hopefully, an eventual incorporation into the county drainage code.

Commissioner Crouch: We’ll move that all that happens.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

Commissioner Nix: Bill, on this, just real quick, 30 seconds or less. The mandrel test, is this something that you, not you, but your department will do? Or is this something that you’ll have certain people that are certified go out and do?

Bill Jeffers: That would be certified laboratories that are qualified to do it.

Commissioner Nix: Okay.

Bill Jeffers: Would do it at the cost of the developer in the presence of the County Engineer or his authorized inspector.

Commissioner Nix: Thank you.

President Musgrave: Alright, where are we now? Is there anyone else here wishing to address the board? No one is moving toward the microphone.

President Musgrave: Are there claims to pay?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, Ma’am.

President Musgrave: And we can just have a motion to approve the claims?

Commissioner Crouch: So moved.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor say aye.

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: Are there any petitions and encroachment agreements? I don’t think we have any petitions and encroachment agreements. Is that correct, Mr. Jeffers?

Bill Jeffers: That is correct, Madam Chairlady.

President Musgrave: Are there any comments, correspondence, reports and other pending business?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, Ma’am. Mr. Andy Easley called this morning and reported two trees have fallen down in the channel of Pigeon Creek just downstream on the west side of the Green River Road bridge, and says that these trees are already collecting debris and will likely form a log jam this spring under the bridge over Pigeon Creek–

President Musgrave: What action do we need to request?

Bill Jeffers: –if they are not removed. I would forward this to the bridge department, would you say, John?

President Musgrave: The County Highway?

Bill Jeffers: The County Highway Bridge Department, see if there’s any money available to remove these trees.

Commissioner Crouch: So moved.

President Musgrave: I’ll second it, if there’s no other second.

Commissioner Nix: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor say aye.

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: Motion carries. Will you do that, Mr. Jeffers? Contact the Highway Department?

Bill Jeffers: Yes, Ma’am.

President Musgrave: Thank you, sir. Is there no other business?

Bill Jeffers: I have one other thing.

Commissioner Crouch: Just like the Eveready bunny.

President Musgrave: And that thing might be what?

Bill Jeffers: Ad infinum or nauseum, take your choice.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: You’re lucky the Sheriff’s gone.

Bill Jeffers: Oh, brother. Okay, simply put, J.H. Rudolph wants to proceed with a plan, they’ve got their permit from the Department of Natural Resources, but they have not come through you to establish a crossing of a regulated drain and stock piling of material, possibly within the 75' right-of-entry. I’ve prepared this letter, I’ve already sent it to them, it doesn’t require your action until they come to you with a plan.

President Musgrave: Do you want to table this until next week at our next meeting?

Bill Jeffers: I’m just informing you that I’ve sent this, in case you all have got anybody that calls you, you’ll be–

President Musgrave: Okay, in which case, it appears to me that we’ve completed the business.

Commissioner Crouch: Exhausted the agenda.

President Musgrave: Is there a motion to adjourn?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: No.

President Musgrave: No, recess until next Tuesday after the Commission meeting.

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion we recess until next Tuesday after the Commissioners meeting.

Commissioner Crouch: And I’ll second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: We are recessed.

(The meeting was recessed at 5:15 p.m.)

VANDERBURGH COUNTY DRAINAGE BOARD

MARCH 1, 2005

The Vanderburgh County Drainage Board meeting recessed on February 22, 2005 was reconvened on March 1, 2005 at 4:02 p.m. in room 301 of the Civic Center Complex with President Cheryl Musgrave presiding.

Commissioner Crouch: Mr. Jeffers? This is just like home, no one pays any attention.

Commissioner Nix: He’s coming.

Commissioner Crouch: Vanderburgh County Board of Commissioners is reconvening their drainage board meeting of last week, which was February 22^nd. At this point in time I will ask that the County Surveyor, Mr. Jeffers, apprise the board as to where we are with the action that we have before us.

Bill Jeffers: Okay. The sole matter of business before you is to finish unfinished business regarding William S. Hirsch Subdivision, final drainage plan, which required an agreement between the applicant and the drainage board with regard to accounting for the undetained storm water discharge from that subdivision as planned, as presented to you in the plan. Mr. Ted Ziemer and myself discussed this this morning before noon, trying to address the most appropriate wording to coincide with the intent of the drainage ordinance that’s codified in section 13.04 of the County Code, to accomplish what the intent, as expressed by the County Surveyor and the board at last week’s meeting. Mr. Ziemer came up with a covenant and agreement proposed to be entered into between David Hirsch, general partner of the Hirsch Family Limited Partnership and the Vanderburgh County Drainage Board. Do you have that in front of you at this time?

President Musgrave: I do.

Bill Jeffers: The County Surveyor agrees totally with the intent of this covenant and agreement, and recommends that the board offer to enter into this covenant and agreement with the Hirsch Family Limited Partnership in order to accomplish the lawful and appropriate resolution of the matter.

President Musgrave: Do the petitioners have any remarks?

Jim Morley, Jr. : No.

Don Fuchs: Don Fuchs on behalf of the Hirsch Family Limited Partnership. We’ve reviewed this document as Mr. Ziemer has prepared. We were provided this this afternoon. Our client is in agreement with this and will sign this, if it’s acceptable to you.

President Musgrave: I checked with the County Engineer and he finds it to be agreeable, so, I will make a motion to accept the covenant by the Hirsch Family Limited Partnership.

Commissioner Nix: I second that.

Commissioner Crouch: All in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

Commissioner Crouch: So ordered.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: If I may, I just want to comment. We were provided with a draft of the covenant proposed, originally, by the Hirsch Family Limited Partnership the middle afternoon Friday, after I had already left for a meeting, from which I was not going to get back to the office. So, yesterday and today are the first opportunity that we had to get it to you. We’re sorry that we got it as late as it was, but to get this done this afternoon, that was the best we could do.

Don Fuchs: No, and, Mr. Ziemer, we appreciate your work on this in getting this done, and moving this project forward.

Commissioner Crouch: Thank you.

Jim Morley, Jr. : Does the acceptance of that covenant therefore stand as approval of the plans? Or is that a separate motion?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: No, the Commissioners will now have to vote to grant the variance requested.

President Musgrave: Is there any discussion on the variance itself? Hearing none, I’ll ask for a motion.

Commissioner Nix: I make a motion that we grant the variance.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: All those in favor?

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Musgrave: The motion carries. Is there any further business to come before the drainage board?

Bill Jeffers: Just on behalf of the drainage board and the County Surveyor, we wish you and your client speedy completion of your project, and build out of all the projects associated with that 46 acres. Thank you for your cooperation.

Don Fuchs: Thank you for your help.

Madelyn Grayson: I did have one question, will the county be recording that document? Doesn’t it have to be recorded? Or would the Hirsch Family Trust be recording that?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Actually, I don’t think the document needs to be recorded. What will happen, as they proceed with development, they’re going to have to come before the County Drainage Board for approval of their plans, and the covenant is to the County Drainage Board, and nothing will happen unless it meets the terms of the covenant.

President Musgrave: I assume that you will have this in your file, Mr. Jeffers?

Bill Jeffers: I do at this time. I’ll get a copy of the signed document from your secretary, and also put that in my file, thank you.

President Musgrave: Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn?

Commissioner Nix: Motion to adjourn.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Musgrave: We are adjourned.

(The meeting was adjourned at 4:06 p.m.)

         Those in Attendance:

         Cheryl Musgrave                      Bill Nix                            Suzanne Crouch

         Bill Jeffers                                 Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.          Madelyn Grayson

         Jim Morley, Jr.                          Ron London                    John Pfender

         Don Fuchs                                Others Unidentified         Members of Media

VANDERBURGH COUNTY

DRAINAGE BOARD

Cheryl A.W. Musgrave, President

Bill Nix, Vice President

Suzanne M. Crouch, Member

Recorded and transcribed by Madelyn Grayson.