Tech Committee - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Of the tack together 10 o'clock on July 9th. Why don't we start with roll call?

Auditor here. All right. Purdue Extension here. County surveyor here.

Here.

County planning. Here. Health Department here. County engineer here. Auditor's office here.

All right Everybody had a chance to look at the minutes from the last month. Oh Entertain a motion make a motion to accept the minutes from last month Second we have a motion second any discussion on motion all those in favor aye aye All right, first item on our list, Jeremy Keister, Corps. Chris, you want to start? Anything you want to tell us special about this or? Anything special you want to tell us about this one, or are you just good with comments to start away?

I mean, yeah, it's just a three-lot minor subdivision on a little over 17 acres on County Road 850 East. No, yeah, we can go through the comment sheets.

Purdue has no comments.

Okay.

Planning just had one, and I've been in contact with Mr. Kister, so I know there's some back and forth. Consent of landowner or updated deed prior to plat.

Yep. So he closed on Monday. So I'm just waiting for the new deed to get in the system so I can get it. And I'll get that to you guys as soon as I can. And update the plot.

My way. Highway Department, I guess Chad has a concern with ditching or running the tile, and Gary's okay with it as long as it daylights before the ditch.

Sure, yeah, and I had a meeting with Gary yesterday. Okay. Yeah, I'd say it was kind of, I didn't know as far as, because I assume if it, if, If it is going to daylight, it needs to go through a Grange board.

No, if it's going to daylight into an open ditch or channel, in a verified channel, then we're okay with it. Okay. But since it's in the road right-of-way, I just need a letter from Gary that says it's okay.

Well, he wants it to daylight before it reaches the right-of-way. Correct.

So then yes, then you'll have to go to drainage.

Okay. Well, and I didn't know if it needed to go to drainage board through this phase or when individual site plans come for these lots. Yeah, that's fine.

When you do the site plans for the lots, that's fine. Okay. I can sign off on your plat, so that way it'll get to there. The biggest thing is just making sure it's in place by the time we record, so that way, because you're going to have to put the pipe in before it gets recorded anyways. Okay.

Well, that's what I mean. I have no idea. I mean, these lots might not sell for 10 years and there might not be a site plan produced on a lot that wants to daylight into the ditch. So it's kind of...

Yeah, it's chicken and the egg, isn't it?

Yes, I don't know. Can they approve that without even knowing who's going to own and build on that lot, or does it follow the lot?

Yeah, they can approve it from the drainage board to know that that lot will have that caveat with it. Sure, okay. Yeah, I'm okay with that. So we'll just get with my office, and we'll put you on for the next drainage board to get that taken care of. And then mine are just simple things there as you walk down through those on your plat.

Health Department has another one.

No comments. No comments.

All right.

I'll entertain a motion.

I move we accept this plan as written with comments based on planning, highway, and surveyor.

Okay.

I have a motion. And a second. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor? Aye. All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Yep. Next, Ambrose property, Project Brickyard. I think I saw the guys just walk in from their construction point. If one of you guys want to hop up here, there's the comments we'll put up front for you here, and then we'll let you guys give a little bit of an overview there on the project.

I have comments. Hold on just a moment. I think I'm missing a folder.

Our assigned project manager is...

No, I was wondering if that was, I was wondering, she was close, so I was wondering.

My name is not Kylie, my name is Tyler. This is Zach Maddox. So we were picking up the existing development that was master planned at 300 north and 400 west. We will be doing, our proposed facility covers about half the lot essentially. It is a 253,000 square foot facility with some future expansion, roughly 250,000 square feet that the detention and drainage has been master planned for. You'll notice on our plans and in the existing topo that pond was constructed under the previous job, was master planned to accommodate the full build out. We'll be rerouting the legal drain there. That hits the east property line, basically navigating it south and then west across our property frontage. and then to our ultimate drainage outlet, which was also master planned, but we will be making modifications to that outlet structure. Okay. That is the gist of it. Thank you very much. We've engaged all the necessary parties as far as water main extensions, sanitary sewer extensions.

Okay. Okay.

Lace?

Purdue has no comment.

He has a few. Okay. All right. So first up, this doesn't need to go through the platting process, but you will need to combine the meets and bounds survey parcels and work with highway and auditor to figure out the best way to transfer right-of-way to the county. So that will likely involve recording a survey and a deed. This will need to be done prior to the building permit being issued. So I'll refer you to the Highway Department or Mike's office and also Heather to have that done. The right-of-way to be dedicated should be 70 feet off the center line of 300 North rather than the 65 feet that's shown.

What off the 300 North to the South? Yeah, I got that, but I didn't catch the road that she said that. 300 North.

300 North.

And also. Four West. Four West.

Same.

65 feet.

Oh, is it? Okay.

Yes, and it's listed as 50.

Oh, okay. 65 feet for then 400 West? Yes. Okay.

70 on our South frontage? Yep. Yes. Okay.

Show a trail along the side of 300 north per the trails plan work with highway department on the specs for that That will then have a pedestrian connection and with the roundabout that's going to go in I'll let highway talk any more about that I Need to know the total impervious area so that we can calculate that the total lot coverage is 75% or less which I know it will be because you have future phases also, but that'll be helpful and If you could please provide building elevation drawings to determine compliance with the non-residential architectural standards, which I imagine this will be a tilt-up building, so it'll probably be fine. Water tank and pump house need to be located behind the facade of the main building. So have BSLs of at least 142.3 feet because they're accessory structures and be screened. One of the things we hear from people around these developments is kind of needless lighting, so especially on that north side of the building, consider removing the wall lights. I understand the stoop lights over each concrete stoop, but removing the wall packs that are ultimately going to be taken down anyway. There's nothing but cornfields to the north there. Or putting it on a motion sensor so that they're only on as needed. And then the landscape plan was missing.

For the lighting, was there any consideration for the berm that we have there on the north property line?

Was that on the landscape plan?

I mean, it's in our proposed grading plan.

Okay, I didn't look at that sheet real closely, to be honest. So, and then I have a note, oh, addressing, never mind, that's really more internal. Okay, that's it.

And then, sorry, real quick on the pump house. It needs to be screened by the building facade?

No. It needs to be pushed back to at least the same setback as the building, but then it also needs to be screened by landscaping, fencing, or wall.

Okay. And then for the east side, well, for screening purposes of the, so we also have a berm on the east side. I think that was a commitment. Would that provide proper screening for that east frontage?

For the east side, or do you mean the west side, toward Indianapolis?

Yeah, well, so if the pump house sits here, will we need to screen it with a wall or anything? If this, you know, we have like a 10-foot berm over here.

Okay, I think it's just screened from the public right-of-way.

Okay, yep.

Awesome, thank you. Highway Department, we already covered the first one, and then County Engineer would like the right-of-way pavement to be two inches SMA, and then two and a half binder and six and a half base. That's all I have.

Miners will just, they'll run into that when you modernize the legal for there, and it's out at Jerry's Review right now. So you'll get more of my comments once those things start working through.

Oh, I'm sorry. I did have a quick plat question. We do need to, so there's three existing parcels here. We'll need to vacate and just basically combine them into one, but we won't need to go to, we don't have to submit a plat or anything for that?

Correct. Those are three meets and bounds parcels. Mm-hmm. So they'll just need to be given a modern legal description, and then the right-of-way will need to be deeded off of that. And I totally defer to the auditor on how to do that.

I can't give you the specific type of deed because that's a legal question. But basically, a combination I can do with just an in-house combination form if it's meets and bounds and everything's contiguous and everything's in the same section. You can just fill that out and submit it to me and I can combine it. The split part, you will have to record a survey of what you're splitting off and also submit a deed transferring that acreage to the county.

Right, for the right-of-way dedication?

Whatever type of deed your legal department says is appropriate.

Okay.

And that's just regular policy on how to combine and split.

Okay. Thank you very much.

All right. Health Department has nothing.

I don't have any.

All right. For mutual aid, we'd like you to move the FDC connection and the fire department connection on the comment sheet here. Sorry. We'd like to move it to the island that is just west of your eastern. It's all three north. So if you look on page C404. Do you have a stack right there by that entrance where the fire hydrant is? If we could put it directly across from that fire hydrant, that would be great. Yeah. And then I also put the contact information for the fire department for you on that. Okay. Thank you very much.

All right, can I entertain a motion?

I move we accept this review based on the comments from planning, highway, surveyor, and auditor, and mutual aid. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor?

Aye. Opposed?

All right. Thank you.

Yep, thank you.

All right, next, Advi Estates. Mike?

Mr. Gibson?

Bum, bum, bum. Uh-oh.

You have comments. You have comments. That's a three-changer. Just kidding. Is that the first one? I didn't get it.

Good morning. Everybody's probably seen this one before, maybe a couple times through primary plat phase. So it's a 22 lot subdivision just south of Country Mill and State Road 9. So I'd be happy to review and fix all of these. Nice.

Purdue has no comments.

OK. OK. Let's see. I'm just going to try to go over the really substantial I'd like a title sheet that just shows kind of a nice big key map and how the match lines all come together on this.

So the cover sheet does not do that?

This is the cover sheet I have.

Oh, so you didn't, did you not get construction plan?

I did, but I'd like it for the plat as well.

Oh, for the plat, okay. Yes. Okay, yeah, we can do that.

Okay, easements, if you could more clearly identify or label those, as well as the right-of-way and the right-of-way information, like the street name, the acres to be dedicated, and all of that.

Okay.

The covenants on page six needed a little bit of work, and I have pasted the commitments that were made at the plan commission in there.

Thank you, yeah.

Okay, so that was basically it for the plat. As far as the construction plans go, let's see.

I just noticed that that cover sheet wouldn't do you a lot of good.

Show more detail about the connection to the existing country mill drive. That would be great. The emphasis, and this is kind of just readability, but emphasis of like the old drain is kind of cluttering up these sheets, but I would defer to survey, of course, on how much needs to be shown there. Let's see. I was a little concerned that the sidewalks aren't, and once again, the size of these lots makes it look a little different than looking at like a D.R. Horton or Arbor subdivision. But I just wanted to make sure that the sidewalks were located one foot inside the right of way, leaving, I think, room for some grass between the sidewalk and street.

Yes.

I think that calculation would be like a, so if you have a 26 foot street, 50 foot right away, that gives you 12 on either side. So you have about a seven foot strip of grass between the curb and the sidewalk. Yeah.

And then please show mounds on the property to the west if they were a commitment with a note like landscape mounds to be provided by developer or something like that. Okay. Because I noticed they were shown somewhere in one of these sets.

Okay.

And also be a note from the plan commission was to be very clear on the secondary plat about who is responsible for installing future streets.

Very good. Yep.

That's it.

Highway Department, at the end of your dead-end streets, have either the nine-button delinear sign or the actually barricades. Just keep people from—keep them on the road. And put stop signs at your intersections for Country Mill and Edvia. So that way people are running into each other, driving through. And then a 25-mile-an-hour speed limit sign.

Because that sign there is going to keep them from running into each other. I'm joking.

I'm just trying to help them.

I understand.

I'm just trying to help them. Take that liability off of the county and not, yeah, I got you. Right. Okay. Yep. And the 25 mile or 20 mile an hour speed limit. Okay.

Great. You need to have drainage board approval to move that. And so the next meeting is actually on, let's see what it's, 7th, 4th, 21st of July. Okay. So you might want to get on there if that's what you want to do. Send an email. Yep. Yep. To do that for relocation reduction. Reconstruction as it goes through there a number of things with the plat Just calls and different things and then I talked to Carrie at our conference here yesterday or two days ago So it's currently under review. So you have some comments coming back.

So some things to work on Need an ember elevation on each lot

Lots that are split by the section line. I'd like acreage on either side. Okay, so I can get that correct when I split it Taxes need to be current before it's recorded and same with Kayla.

I'd like to see the right-of-way acreage All right Do anything maybe is if it's possible I can do it if something on the other end if possible, but it's not everything so really like that If we can if not or it's okay there If I'm a little bit closer, yeah There you go

One other thing, and it didn't make it on my sheet, but you guys call for a section corner. They're all on that south line of stone there. I just need a tie sheet for that. Okay. Because we don't have that, so we just need to verify it. I'll entertain a motion.

I move we accept the secondary plat based on the comments from planning, highway, surveyor, health, auditor, and mutual aid.

All aboard. All right. Second? I'll second. We're first and a second. All right. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

All right. Don't know. Yeah. My understanding is this doesn't have to go back to planning commission for the secondary plaza.

That's correct. Okay. So just back to my office.

Very good.

Thank you.

You might as well stay there. Yeah. There you go.

All right. Next.

Next up. All of his comments were on your sheet, right? Yeah. Okay. Got it.

Up next, Wilson, minor sub replat. You got any?

Wilson, you said? Yep. Okay, just one.

Anything you want to say about this one, Mike, or are you just good with us to start with comments?

Tim Wilson owns three lots just north of the railroad tracks and off of State Road 67. It's an old, old subdivision with some sort of easement right-of-way that goes to these three lots. He wants to build a barn for his vintage cars. But so lot two, he wants to build it on the southern lot, which can't build a garage or a barn. So that's why we're here replatting into two lots instead of three.

Purdue just has a question. I didn't put it in comments, but does it need an owner's certificate or no?

It should have... Should have that on there, yes.

Thank you. Thank you. So you'll put that in your comments maybe?

Yes. Thank you. Do you want to add it to yours? Main comment from me in addition to the extension to add the surveyors, or sorry, the owner's certificate is to change the names of the lots. If we're gonna do lot one, if we're combining the three lots into just two, let's make it 1A and 2A, just to differentiate from the original lot names. This is a major subdivision replat, so this, once again, just comes back to our office.

No planning, okay, very good.

Oh, yes, no comments.

First comment, just a thing for the point of commencement to put on the plat. My question is on the original, there is nothing there that shows how lot two has drainage. So do you want to create kind of an easement along that west line there so that way they have access to the ditch if they need to have access to the ditch? Okay, will do. There was no easements on the plat. Right. I know it's that, but we can add that. I just figured we might as well correct that mistake while we have it.

Health Department has nothing.

I know it's minor and it's silly, but all three lots are deeded slightly different with the middle initials. They need to be the same so I can combine them. Okay. I know that they're the same people, but middle names matter in these situations.

Okay.

Thank you.

The only thing I have is on the title. You have Brandywine Township. Okay. All right.

I'll entertain a motion.

I move we accept this replat based on the comments from planning, surveyor, auditor, and mutual aid. Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right. Moves along.

All right.

Next on the list, is that Bussey or Busey?

Bussey.

Bussey, minor sub.

Anything on this you want to talk about, Mike? No, not really. It's pretty simple. It's a one-lot minor sub cutout of a larger tract. Mr. Bussey is actually selling this lot and then going to build a bigger home on the remainder. Yep.

Purdue has no comments.

Planning has just a couple. We understand that the lot is... that you kind of cut the remainder a little bit for the sake of fitting it all on one page. But on the supplementary sheet, in the vicinity map to the north, Could you show that lot one correctly positioned within the remainder as it actually, you see that vicinity map that you kind of have up to the north?

Next to your soils map. It shows lot one and the remainder?

Yeah. I think based on the drawings you're showing us on the supplementary sheet and the plaque, it's actually located in the middle of the remainder.

No, it's just a property that's to the south. That's just an adjoiner.

Yeah, and I think the reason you think that or see that is that's a section line that's on that.

Okay.

So I'd have to put cut lines and dash lines if you need on that, but it's in that northwest corner.

Okay, in that case, it would be really helpful to see more information about where the parcel is that it's being cut from. Okay.

I could expand on the aerial map that is by the soils map that shows the remaining acreage.

That would be fine too. But yeah, something that shows where this is truly situated in the remainder. And yeah, how many acres are left in the remainder.

I can revamp that map a little bit.

I think the plat probably should show then like the, if it is on the north boundary line, like show the north parcel line extending. If that's an adjoiner. Just to kind of give some context.

Okay.

That's it.

Just some simple plat stuff and then need a signed off-site easement. You're going to take your drainage north, so I'll need a signed off-site easement and then either the tile installed or bonded before recording.

I did have a question. So the drain, the main drain is going north? Okay, that's because I know the woods to the south is a swamp. Along the right-of-way there.

Recently installed by Rick Lawrence, so he's going to do this work for them. I met the guy out there. No comments.

All right. Have a motion?

I move that we accept this minor subdivision plat based on the comments of planning, surveyor, and health.

I'll second.

Second. We have a motion and a second and a third. Any discussion on the motion? All right. Those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right, so next we have Sing Retail Center, commercial community, 10 lot primary plat. And then, do we wanna take these together or do we wanna take these separate? Take these separate?

Separate. Oh, my, I got a copy of the, serves with both of them, it might be helpful.

Good morning again. I'm kind of tag teaming here with Rusty Spires, the engineer on this project, and probably he will take the lead on most of these questions unless it's specifically plat related or survey related. But if you have, it's located at the southeast corner of Carroll Road and US 52, just north of that. The south line is adjacent to the existing subdivision that is there. I guess we'll just answer questions at this point, and then the second phase, Rusty will talk about the development itself.

Purdue has no comments.

Has a few. Show more adjoiner information, plot lines of adjoiners, owner info, neighboring easements. Show the zoning of this parcel and the adjoiners. I'd note that this particular site is zoned CN, not CC. Show contours at two foot intervals. I needed to see the existing utility pipes, and I see they're on some of the pages, but it wasn't ones that I had kind of incorporated with the plat itself. So I wasn't sure if it was just like a number of page issue or what. Let's see, square footage of the lots in addition to the acreage. I'd appreciate it if we could get will serve letters from the utilities mentioned in the feasibility report. That way they know as well that this is the expectation that the plan commission is reviewing this based on. We've had some issues where they're available and then the developer chooses not to connect okay, so and there wasn't that communication So it yeah, it's kind of strange later So a lot and right-of-way table math showing the right-of-way dedication and the net lot sizes the private street needs to be labeled as such and named for addressing purposes and Make sure that there's at least 50 feet off the center line as dedicated along the entire length of 800 West along the subdivision. I know some of it does have it. I just wanted to make sure we went the whole way with it. Building setback lines for all lots. Remembering that corner lots have two fronts and that we also needed to see BSLs off the private street lots. which I calculated at 20 foot plus a five foot buffer being 25 foot off the private street easement. Shared driveway easement needs to be labeled. Page three, replace the plat chair info with plan commission president. The covenants need to be specific to this development and for a major subdivision. And I'm sure more of that might be laid out at the plan commission. And some of this, I realize, too, this is the primary plat, so we can work through some of this for the secondary plat. Sure, yeah.

Well, I think we've also attached the secondary, so we can... But the secondary will have to be... Later. Later, right? Yeah.

Staff recommend... Okay, oh, and phasing. Phase one, prior to that C-store construction... Let's make sure it includes the construction of the private drive to the east boundary line of lot two, including sidewalks. Side paths shall also be constructed along 800 West from C-Store connecting to the neighborhood to the south where their path lets off along 800 West at the time of C-Store construction. So we can kind of tie that all together. Could you say that again, please? So, yeah, and I'm kind of combining things in a little bit here, so I'm sorry about that. But phase one, let's construct that street as part of the plat, including the sidewalks from 800 West through to the east side of Lot 2, including sidewalks. And then the side path along 800 West, we'll connect that from the C-Store all the way down to... the fields of Sugar Creek at the time that that permit is pulled. So I want it to be shown on that site plan. Like I said, that probably goes on the other side. Yes. When this goes to plan commission, my staff recommendation is going to include requirements that the landscape buffer along the south side of lot six through 10 be placed in a landscape easement or a common area and installed as part of each phase prior to recording that plat. And those are all my comments. I am a little bit worried. Am I not looking at the right set of plans here? Or a lot of my original, the first set of comments, those are some pretty basic things. So initially reviewing this, I was thinking this might have to be a continuance to get all of this in order for the plan commission, just so you know.

But the primary plot was taken from the development. Plans that Mr Spires created. So yeah, if if you know, we'll see what we can get completed and that's based on Rusty's ability and ours to kind of coexist and putting these plans together and also the comments for the construction plans themselves. But we don't want to continue. It's obviously. But there's a lot here to digest, so I understand.

Do you have time now to ask a question about extending the road?

Mm-hmm.

And that would be great to do. That part of the road drains, would drain elsewhere, that lot. So everything drains to the north, takes a lot to be detained. So if we extend to that road, that's to build our drainage system for that. Pick up that extra strip of paper.

Are we looking at recording this? How many phases?

This is phase one right now. The retail building a little further east is just shown actually.

My concern I guess is that worst case scenario we just end up with a C-store on the corner and then nothing ever happens with the rest of this. And so I feel like if we get this drive connected through further, it does give a little bit more of that signal that this is a commercial development, not just a C-store that got plopped on the corner, welcome to Hancock County. So that's my concern, and I want to show this, and I'm sure Mr. Singh does as well, and I know that there's probably some financial things in the way too of all of this, but I want to make sure that we are developing this as a development, not just a C-store on the corner.

It doesn't tend to go straight into the retail.

And I can refer that comment to the plan commission to make that decision as well They covered the first one comment from the highway department with the second I need dimensions for the acceleration deceleration and the tapers on 800 West and You have them on for US 52, but I didn't see any on. That's all I have.

I guess my comment is kind of a concern from a standpoint of I understand, as we'll talk here in a minute about lot one for the gas station on the corner, that we've done the drainage for that. But right now there's one outlet for this entire group of 10 lots. So are we building at least the infrastructure so those other lots can tie into it and be able to get out? Or is this just for the lot one and then everybody else just has to figure it out? So we're putting a big enough pipe that's going out that'll meet whatever pipe it's coming into so that way it'll work.

Yes, the pipe that goes along State Road 52, the size to carry water off of State Road, all of the detained water coming out, the ultimate.

Okay. All right. That's what I want to know. And then we will need, obviously, a letter from the state that they're okay with you in there right away for where they need to be. And we'll go from there. And it's under drainage review right now, so we're good from that standpoint.

For the whole subdivision?

For what?

The primary plot with all 10 lots is in drainage review?

The review is just for the lot one right now. No, it's not. Well, they have a master plan for their drainage.

I sent it to you this morning.

Yes, they came this morning. Yes, so that is what's going out. So that way we can make sure that the pipe he's putting in along the road is big enough to handle everything else that is there.

So pending approval of that.

Yeah. Okay.

Health Department has nothing.

I just need the taxes to be current and right away on the flat That's prior to it being recorded correct yep, yes All right the only thing I have the entrance and exit from eight or us 52 We need that 20 foot wide instead of 17 I

So this is for the comments just on the plat that we're dealing with here, not really lot one yet. So any other comments from anyone? I will entertain a motion.

I move we accept the primary plat based on the comments from Planning, Highway, Surveyor, Auditor, Mutual Aid. Second.

Okay, we have a motion to second. Any discussion on the motion? Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Okay. There you go. So next thing up is lot one of the Singh Retail Center. The gas station on the corner.

These are my comments.

Those will be yours. Yep. We'll put them up front for you there. Yep. And Rusty, if you want to give us a little overview of if everybody's on the same page of what's going in there, and then we'll give you what our comments are from that standpoint, I guess.

Yeah, I created this one.

I have comments.

So phase one is a convenience store. And Mr. Singh owns, I think, 20-something. He does a nice job of maintaining those. So convenience store on the corner. And the drive that we're working with NDOT on for US-52 would be shared drive, right in, right out. And we've talked about putting a second one further down as development continues to the east. And in the drive off of Carroll Road, we've been working with DPW in Indianapolis about that. And still that's still in process. There's a lot of moving parts, a lot of agencies with this. We got NDOT, we got City of Indianapolis, we got Doe Creek Sewer, we got Citizens, we got ATS. It just kind of keeps going and keeps going. And also the county surveyor. But the overall drain, as you know, goes into Doe Creek and the the county tile headed down south, eventually into Doe Creek. It is, we do intend to, Mr. Singh does intend to build it out according to the current zoning. I think the only exception was for, was it for canopies, I believe, at the corner. You've probably seen the plans. That's just the general description of where we are now at the store lot one and build the infrastructure. We have to talk about the extending the road. We're fine with extending the road. We just got to figure out what to do with the drainage on that little strip of concrete there. But as it stands now, lot one would kind of stand alone, but it would receive water from lot 10 coming from the south. Everything's got to drain north up to the state highway. And we've already talked to the end out about that and laying a new pipe in there and there. Conceptually on board with that. We just haven't submitted plans. I'll probably go to them later this week So lot 10 would drain into a lot one and they have two ponds and police rate from those 1.3 Sewer we've already got pretty close to plan approval from doe Creek submitted them twice and they're happy with with the layout We're extending sewer to serve lots further north and That's kind of the particulars of it.

Okay. Lace? Purdue has no comments. Okay.

As part of this development, how far have you discussed extending sewer into the subdivision? Like is it all the way to the cul-de-sac that you've got the plans for it?

For our whole subdivision, yes.

Okay. All right.

And it'll go through, they secure an easement for us.

doe creek did working with two property owners there at the subdivision on the south and to tie in one of their manholes so pretty much good on that all right i've got a few comments and i think some of this might change depending on how the primary plat ends up laying out so i just listed some sections in the ordinance that i want to make sure we're reviewing and have compliance with One area of concern is that dumpster facing US 52 for the C Store. Those gates never end up getting closed. So if we could find some other way to orient that, position that, so that it's not visible from the public or private street is how our code reads.

Got three streets there.

A lot of streets.

Yeah. I'm just trying to think how that might work. We can put it

locations it's got to be able to get pavement to it in the truck maybe turned 90 degrees I'm not sure access wise but if it was facing the retail center if there was a way that it could be accessed from that direction that would comply see and of course the BZA approval letter refers back to the documents that were presented at the BZA hearing with the exception that anything that this body would change or modify is all right, but Eventually we will like to of course refer back to those and make sure this is still keeping up with that Let's see here you need building facade renderings, which I'm sure we'll get see extending the side path all the way to the connection for the side path to the south and And then in addition, and I forgot to put this on here, we need to make sure there's cross-connection across the site as we're developing the retail center. We need to look at how are pedestrians, say, going to get from the C store over to the retail center, which in this case might easily be accomplished through striping across the boulevard median or something like that to the sidewalk system around the retail center, which I know is conceptual at this point. But just something to keep in mind as we're developing this stuff out. Once again, I felt like this one might, I'd feel more comfortable if this was continued until after the primary plat is passed by the plan commission. Come back next month again. Let's make sure that this reflects anything, any commitments from the plan commission on the plat. But those are my comments.

Highway Department has no comments.

Mine are basically the same. You know the. Making sure it's under review right now, but also getting the letter from the state. Health Department has nothing.

Have no new comments.

I have no new comments.

Purdue has a point of order. Yep. What do we want to vote on this?

I mean, do you want to make a recommendation that we table it?

I just, I don't understand the process. I want to know the process because it sounds like this needs to have planning commission approval before or?

The primary plot will go to the plan commission. And my concern is that that might change some of the layout of the site. Right. And like on a development plan, things like how is that dumpster going to be oriented? I know it seems minor, but it'll be shown differently on the ultimate plan. And to my knowledge, if it is not shown on this plan, it doesn't get done.

How do we vote on it?

What motion would be appropriate? We can make a motion. You could make a motion to continue this part till next month. So after the planning commission and the comments that are there, and then it would just come back next month for where it's at.

If that's what we decide. Okay, great.

But we need a motion for something.

Okay.

Yeah, for where we're at. So it doesn't matter.

I move that we continue this to next month based on the comments of everybody today and also the plan commission.

Okay. We have a motion. Second. Any discussion on the motion? Okay, we'll vote. All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Okay, so we're going to continue lot one until the primary is, the commitments of the primary are hashed out. Yeah, yeah, which it'll make things more clean in the long run. So absolutely. Okay, I'll keep with you just clarification on those things. And then our last thing is an other business. For Mr. Henson, down off of 50 West, a variance to reduce the 125-foot road frontage to 50 feet for a minor sub.

So this is here today as other business, because it is on the BZA's agenda, but... For things like this, it helps us a lot to come through this board, too, and make sure there's nothing technical that is going to either make this variance impossible for some other reason or some other concern that would make this layout better, stuff like that. So just first glance, what are our thoughts on the proposed layout? So I guess comment forms weren't required, but they're probably helpful to Mike.

I'll pass that on to him.

Give you a little bit of background on the property itself. Mr. Anderson came to us maybe a month or so ago. Matlock Farms owns several, several acres south of the ditch and also north of the ditch. They have accurate land surveying. They did a survey that divided. It really didn't divide. They still own it. but there's two tracks that are 13.78 acres that were for sale that kind of run around the north side of the track we're proposing. So in the colored rendition you have magenta line that we have the furthest north one is our thirteen point seven eight acres there's another tract that's thirteen point seven eight acres that runs north and to the east of this so the southern thirteen point seven eight acres has a hundred ninety two foot of road frontage that is being proposed to be sold Okay, so ground hasn't been sold yet. Mr. Henson will like to... They live in Muncie. They love Hancock County area. Trying to get his family together, at least one son. So that's the proposal that we've shown is two different lots. And to do that, we need some sort of variance for road frontage because 192 doesn't get us the 250. We did... ask the owner to sell 250 feet so that 13 point that other 13.78 acres going to be in the same same situation as far as not having enough road frontage if they'd want to split that our splits would create that 13.78 acres to the north and east as now just a it wouldn't be able to be split again as a minor it'd be a major subdivision which relies on rezoning, so on and so forth. So what we're looking at is that 13.78 acres to the south in a two-lot minor sub. The lot configuration that we have shown is not necessarily set in stone. It was just a, here's what we want to do, trying to decide where the houses are going to be built, the septic system, so on and so forth. But I suggested a 50-foot block. minimum road frontage for one of the lots, although it's going to be a shared driveway, a common driveway. Mr. Henson's talked to the county surveyor about where that road could be put. A lot of water that comes from the north to the south, so probably a couple culverts that would have to go underneath that driveway. But only one driveway in our situation, and there would only be one driveway, if allowed, on the other 13.78 acres. That's not our worry right now. We're discussing our tract. So that's what I know about it. It's what we've been asked to represent and to try to sell. So that's where we're at.

Purdue has no comments.

I think I can imagine my comments. It needs to go to the BZA. That's where we're at.

Um, county engineer's not in favor of your current layout. He doesn't care. He doesn't like that lot one is encompassed by lot two. I think that not always going to be family living next to family. So that's his opinion.

That's a, that's a good opinion. Cause family. Yeah. I mean, we've talked about that prior to the meeting. It's not always going to be as it is. So.

So I met on site with Mr. Hansen and we had a really good discussion and talk about the property and the land and things that are there. My suggestion, which I mean it takes a little more work and from where it's at, was maybe looking at and talking to Matlocks about creating a drive along the north line and bringing it in off of Meridian Road. all the way through, back through that way, so that way they get out of the floodplain, they get out of the things. Now, that doesn't change the issue that we have for, you know, road frontage and all that other aspect of it, but as we sat and looked at it for what's there, there's a lot of different hoops he's going to have to walk through when he puts that driveway in there with the floodplain, with all the water that runs through there, and all that fun stuff that's there. So, I'm not opposed to the layout as it sits. I think there are other things that can be done, but that also depends on how Matlock's want to look at it and how they want to sell it and what they want to do and all that other aspect that goes along with that, which we don't have control over and I understand that. So for what's in front of us, I'm not opposed to it. I know it's going to be some work for him to get it done.

Can you talk about that a little more? What would the process be? Say the BZA approves this. Mm-hmm.

So there's three things that he has to deal with here. One is the regulatory thing of the regulated drain. So he's going to be putting his driveway within the regulated drain easement. So now the difference is right now that regulated drain is a regulated drain, but it's not on assessment, which means that it is maintained by the landowners that are there. It's not maintained by the county. Now, we're trying to clean all those up of whether they're going to go to county or not go to county, but... But there's a liability of that driveway within the easement for maintenance that needs to go there. Second of all, it's in a floodplain. So depending on what he's going to be doing, It'll be interesting because that ditch does go to about a mile upstream. So the question, he may have to delineate floodway that's there. And so by doing that, he may have to stay out of the floodway, whatever the floodway is in that area, which would change where the location of that is. So there's... There's a question that goes to that. Third is there's surface drainage. So on the north side here, you can see on the drawing here at the top about where this comes off, there is a big swale, there's a waterway to the north, and then there's a manhole and a pipe, and there is water that runs. In a good rain, it runs like a river down through there. And then the question is going to be, okay, putting something in there big enough that it maintains... that you don't have a hump as you're driving over it in wintertime or different things as you're getting through there, but it also conveys the water through there so it doesn't wash it out and they can get there, that if there's a heart attack or something there or a fire, that those people can get back there and they're not cut off in an emergency. So there are some stipulations that are... It's a tricky spot, right? It's a beautiful spot. Don't get me wrong. I mean, it's a nice spot to build a house and for where it's at. But that's why my suggestion is we looked at it and looking at the whole property. It would be really nice if they could come off of 50 West and come up here to the north and stay close to that line. They're out of everything. They're where they're at. But... That's a different animal, and matlocks are still going to farm that ground.

It does raise the question if matlocks could get involved here, and we create a three-lot minor subdivision with a common drive along the north side, and all of those properties are accessed off of that private drive. Correct.

Absolutely.

Something similar to highway estates, although you have that common drive along the north line of those lots, and they are accessed off of it.

So that was just my comments from there, because I even know that driveway sits in the bottom, that little holler there as it goes down that hill, right? And so, you know. I've been down 50 West a number of times. People do not go 25 miles an hour down that road.

I think coming off Meridian is an issue because there's only an access easement right now. They don't have road frontage off of 50. You're still running the same issue, but I think it might help things a little bit in the long run. Am I right in saying that the remaining 13.78 acres could not be divided again without being a major subdivision?

So currently it's actually broken down between two parent parcels. So I would have to figure out how exactly that falls.

I've looked at it and it's like how, you know, because the cell, yes, exactly. So there's 26, maybe 27 acres remaining right now that's been divided here and there. So if we take 13.78 and divide it, that's two splits. And then the remaining 13, that'd be three. So I... I've come up with an idea as I'm sitting here talking is I think we have to get the Matlocks involved so they understand the ramifications. Because if they think that they can sell it to somebody else and they divide it, probably not the case.

I think we're getting there. Yeah, or like we just talked about, something that has an I'm kind of speaking out of turn here, but possibly an off-site drainage or a driveway easement that involves not just these two parcels that Mr. Henson owns, but yeah, the Matlock family's remainder as well.

Yeah, right now you'd have two people, you know, 35, 40 years down the road arguing over one drive. And if you add another one, that's three. But, you know, the covenants that we put in there and show it, it kind of protects those people. I mean, you can't help with... What your neighbor is going to need.

And Matlock's other remainder, no matter what it is, will have to get an exemption because they'll be landlocked on that side. They'll have to come from Meridian Road for that other one.

No, they have room. They have a road front of John 50, all right, 50 West. For the other acreage on this side over here? Oh, okay, for that area there. Yeah, but, you know, to piece a highway department, being able to re- Three driveways right there on that side of that hill. Yeah. Only one farther up the hill, and like you mentioned, along the north side. We're going to go toward BCA. Obviously, we have to get that exception, but depending on the conversations I have with the client now, we'll see.

I'll look at the number of splits that would be permitted, including the rest of that. On my map, what it shows is the 22.51 acres and see how many are allowed on that piece and how this all factors out.

That'd be great. Thank you. Okay. Those would be my comments from that. Anybody else down the list here?

I did wonder why you didn't just bring that on lot one. You just didn't bring a line down.

Well, dad only wants to give. Yes, son so much. There's so many scenarios you look at, right? Yeah. I mean, what if son and daughter or daughter-in-law split? Right. Now I'm giving up more acreage to an uneasy situation. So yeah, just an acre and a half. I don't think he wants to give that, but yeah.

No comment. I didn't have a comment sheet, but the only thing I would be concerned about is for us to be able to get a fire truck back there.

Do you have any comments that you'd like to submit to the BZA about that?

They just need to work out how they want to lay it out, but Make sure with that long of a drive. Some sort of turnaround? Yeah, some sort of turnaround.

How wide would you guys like to see driveways in the future? Fire lane should be 20 foot. 20 foot. So, yeah. It's a little bit more costly, but it's obviously worth it if you need it.

It's important, very important. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay, thank you.

And our ladder truck is 80,000 pounds, so.

She's a big, big thing.

She's a little heavy. She's going to die. All right. Any other? There's no action for this, correct?

No, just comments. Okay.

Any public comment that we have? If it's in the floodway, they will. Yes. So that's why they'll have to delineate that. All right. Anything good for the order that we have here? All right. I'll entertain a motion. Make a motion to... Okay, do we have a motion? Second. And a second?