Development Review Committee - Regular Meeting

Is that it?

Can you hear me? All right. Good morning, everybody. This is the May 21st Development Review Committee meeting. It's now 9.02 a.m. We'll get started. We have one case before us today. That is case, it's multiple case numbers, DB2026-25. UV 2026-26 and SE 2026-22. Those are design variances, use variance and special exception uses for the applicant NextEra Energy Transmission Mid-Atlantic. The project location is northwest corner of County Road 125 West and County Road 1050 North, Chesterton, Indiana, Liberty Township. Current zoning is I-1, Light Industrial District. Total is 15 acres. They are here today to seek an informal review to construct a 6,000 square foot warehouse with office space to vary as follows. for the development standards variances. Section of the UDO, section 7.25, pedestrian network standards, which is sidewalks. UDO section 518, fence and walls, increase the maximum front yard height. Code maximum is four foot. Their request is eight foot. Section 525 of the UDO, landscaping, buffer yards. The use variance is UDO section 5.32 for outdoor storage. This is to allow outdoor storage of electric transmission equipment owned and operated by NextEra Energy Transmission Mid-Atlantic. We're also referring to that as NEETMA, N-E-E-T-M-A. And then special exception use, section of the UDO 5.62 sewer and water. And this would be to allow them to develop an insectic for this type of operation. I see before us we have a team of people. If you could introduce all yourselves and your addresses and make a presentation of your case. Is there a button there?

Yeah. Sean Shortell from XTERRA Energy Transmission Mid-Atlantic. My business address is 13 Executive Park Drive, Clifton Park, New York, 12065.

Dan Yerkes with Whiteman. Our office is at 2303 Pipestone in Benton Harbor.

And you have a third gentleman.

Can you hear me? Matt Newman. I'm a counsel with Denton's, and I've got to read my address because I don't even know it. 2700 Market Tower, 10 West Market Street, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46204.

Thank you, gentlemen. Can you address the reason for you being here today?

Sean Shortell Sure. I'd love to give a quick overview of what we're proposing here in Porter County. So, as I said, my name is Sean Shortell. I'm the Director of Development for Nextera Energy Transmission Mid-Atlantic, or NETMA. NETMA is a subsidiary of Nextera Energy Transmission, which owns and operates over 3,000 miles of transmission lines and dozens of substations throughout the country and Canada. What we're proposing in Porter County is not a new transmission line or substation. We have an existing transmission line that runs through Lake and Porter County, and we're proposing to build a warehouse and storage facility in Porter County to support emergency response and maintenance needs on that existing transmission asset. This would not be a daily operation site. Activity would be intermittent as the operations and emergency response needs necessitate. The variances that we are requesting are practical and limited in nature. The first, the use variance for outdoor storage. This is essential for our operations, as NEPMA has a mandate from the North American Electric Reliability Council to have spares on site in the event of an equipment failure. The spares that we'd be storing at this proposed facility would be away from residential areas and screened to provide a buffer. We also have the development standards variance, which requests, excuse me, the development standards application, which requests a sidewalk variance due to the fact that there are no connecting sidewalks nearby this site at this time. Building a sidewalk now would possibly create a public safety issue rather than providing a public benefit. However, we will preserve space for connectivity in the future should there be development needs that necessitate a sidewalk at this site. Also, within the development standards application, we have the eight-foot fence request. This is a standard security measure for utility infrastructure, and it will be paired with landscaping to minimize the visual impact. Finally, we have a special exception application due to the fact that there are no public utilities serving this site, and we are proposing to have permitted well and septic systems that will be designed to all applicable local and state standards. Appreciate the county's support as we've put these applications together. Overall, this is a low-impact site, and it will be a well-efforted storage facility with minimal operational traffic. I'd be happy to discuss any of these applications in greater detail, and thanks for your time this morning.

Okay.

Maybe before we go to the panel, maybe we can discuss. Our office has received some inquiries on this, and I know you're going to have a BZA meeting next week to address a lot of these variances. You mentioned in your presentation, this is not because you're installing solar or any new equipment in the area. It's simply to maintain what you already have. Does that extend beyond Porter County or using this as the base to go work adjacent counties and communities?

This would be providing support for the transmission asset that we own, the 20-mile 345KV line that runs through Lincoln-Porter County.

And then could you describe... to the panel, what kind of equipment you plan to store outside?

Primarily outside, it would be the structures, the poles. So the new transmission line that was installed in 2023 has monopole structures, and they usually come in about three different sections. And when we have the spares, they're laid end-to-end, so they cannot be stored inside a building.

We have other things that you'd be putting outside as well?

primarily reels of conduit that would be about it that we can foresee at this time so it's going to be for outside reels of conduit and the three pieces of the monopole structure and then what kind of size air you need at full capacity what are you talking footprint wise for that Dan, do you have that for the lay-down yard out of 15 acres?

The entire space that's developed is 360 feet by 360 foot. So a portion of that, about 200 by 110, is taken up by pavement and the building.

So that's roughly how many acres?

So what's 360 by 360? Now you're going to make me do math.

I didn't bring my calculator.

All right. This is what our... Because you got 15 acres. Our teachers... You're not using at all. No, no, not at all. 360 by 360. Zero.

Oops.

Hold on. We are using... three acres of it.

So you're using one-fifth of your property. Correct. Okay. Yep. And then what kind of activity do you see coming and going? Is someone going to be based there as an office or you only come when you need something?

There will be an office there, but it will not have a daily employee presence.

So there will be a daily employee presence?

There will not be. There is an office in the warehouse, but there will not be a daily employee presence.

So they only come when they need something from the yard?

Correct.

If something breaks on a

or if there's routine maintenance.

I'll have more questions at the end, but we'll start. Oh, I do want to read for the record the county surveyor couldn't make it today. He says he doesn't have a problem with the fence height or outdoor storage. However, considering the community thinks vegetative screening would be appropriate. He also has included some drawings, which I'll give you after the meeting, showing an adjacent or former developer's proposal, including potential drainage outlet along Pearson Road that he partnered with Porter County and the Old Brassy Golf Course, which is to the north of you, to place a new drain in the golf course that helped him and the local road drainage. This might be of use. So he will provide that information to your engineer if that's helpful. Having read Kevin's statements in, David, we'll start with you.

Yes, thank you. Our office received initial application from this project on January 28th, 2026, to which we responded with engineering review number one on February 2nd, 2026. Resubmittal was received on March 3rd. The second response letter was sent out. Conformance has not been found. That second letter was on March 10th, 2026. Since then, the applicant has submitted an informal review just for a spot check on the computer. And I have requested from you all in email this basic, almost like just a response letter, like point me in that package to where I can look for the answers to the five comments I have to make sure that they're all addressed. I did give it an initial glance yesterday or the day before. And some of the answers were very apparent, which you had done to revise them. Some of them were not as easy to see on the screen. So if you all could just kind of send me a little cover email saying, hey, this is what we did. And I can... I can give that a review to see if we get to engineering performance. But I know we're here to discuss the standards variances and the special exception, but I did just want to state into the record that this project has not yet received engineering conformance, albeit very close to having done so. And in my role as well, I have been receiving questions from the public regarding the plans that are on this particular site. When they get an explanation as to what it is, that seems to allay the concerns that we receive, but we have been hearing from the public on this project. That, unless you guys have specific questions about the comments from the March 10th letter, that's all that I have at this time.

Any questions?

We will. I thought you had everything you needed, so we will go back and make sure we direct you to those specific items. Yep.

Point me right there. Okay.

Thanks, Dave.

Just a quick question for you, David. If we're able to point you in that direction, do you think we can wrap up that review in about a week's time so that assuming we go through the BZA, we can move into the subdivision approval process?

What day are you meeting in the BZA? A week from today. A week from today? I think that would be fine. Again, you're not terribly far off, but again, with it being an informal submittal, it doesn't typically rise to the very very top of the list so if you guys can just give me those like hey look at this page it'll help me make this a faster review to check these last little outstanding items great a week a week would be fine if you guys can get that to me today great thank you appreciate it if you have just trying to inventory it sounds like there were five issues three two or three closed out um Our letter had five comments. I don't want to make it sound, because the initial one had three, so it might kind of seem like we're going backwards. We're really not. Let's see, the nature of the first issue, there was an extra note on the detail for the stone being used to keep the road clear. The note, if memory serves correctly, the note said, hey, you can either use A, B, or C, and we didn't think that C would be uh you know a good use for that so we wanted to tighten down that detail um we had questions about confirming that the culvert uh the driveway culvert was not necessary based on the topography that was shown in that area we wanted to see the driveway the section design for the driveway uh the long-term one um the extents of how much of the farm area was to be converted to typical grassland, which supports the CN calculations for the stormwater. And the fifth one was actually just a suggestion to start engaging with Matt Phillips regarding your driveway permit so that when the time comes, you guys are ready to go there. So again, five comments, not necessarily five problems per se, but just five things to button up here. Thanks.

Yeah. Any other questions for Dave? Thank you, Dave.

Dan? So this is, there were soil borings done on the property of December 18th of 25, and there was a submittal to the state Indiana Department of Health for specs for a septic system. Specs were provided, but A drain outlet for a septic system is kind of not able... I'm not seeing here in the design, there wasn't really a place, so what they're proposing is a permanent holding tank for their wastewater disposal. It would be sized... Three times they're designed to inflow. We have a design that was submitted and we've looked it over. They have to have an alarm inside the tank. When the alarm goes off, they have to pump it. They have to have a contract with a licensed wastewater hauler on file with us, which we do. We have gift septic services is what they provided with us with the drawing. And every time the tank gets pumped out, they have to submit the... pumping receipts to us and we have to scan them in and just keep track that they're regularly pumping that tank. So because they can't get a field in, because there's no drain outlet, they're proposing this permanent holding tank for their wastewater disposal, which is now allowed from legislation passed in 2023 for residential and commercial. So, but I mean, I have everything that I've, they've submitted everything. So, and I believe you guys have already applied for the permit and everything, so.

Anything else? That's it. Any questions for Dan? Okay. Thank you, Dan. Martin?

I'd like to just echo Kevin Bryski's comment about the drainage connection to the Brassica North that was previously established. So I'd just like to see further coordination happen regarding that. He said that it does service the roadway. I just want a deeper dive into that when you do your final site plan.

Okay. And you mentioned he's going to provide us with that information about what's out there.

We'll definitely provide you what we have, but it might be coordination with the owner to the north as well. Okay. That might be required. So we'll look out and see what we can find and let you know in order to continue the conversation about it. The golf course. Correct. Gotcha.

Right. There's another parcel between us.

I know. I'm not sure. I'm not sure the extent. Mr. Bryski just kind of gave a vague notion that there's some drainage concerns that were previously there. and might be connected to this with previous improvements to the area. So I just want to make sure that we do coordinate, know where those are, and see if they're going to be affected by the work that you're doing.

Yeah, we'll have to understand how far, whatever those previous improvements were, how far did those extend. Gotcha.

Yeah, I don't know what they are.

Right. So I'm just saying that we're all on the same page on that one.

What routes are going to be taken to deliver your mass pull sections to your site?

We have not considered that at this time. Certainly take input from the county and work with your public safety department on the best route into the site and out of the site.

So I'd imagine your best route would be coming from 149 on the west side of you, 10 feet north, straight over. That'd be the most logical for me. Transport of these sections have caused damage to our roadways in the past. So if this is going to be an ongoing use for storage, maybe having a road agreement, in place between us so that we have future maintenance to be coordinated if needed for any damage to the roadway from the delivery operations.

I drove by again yesterday and I had the same thought. Should we be, again, I don't want to stay definitively, but coming from the west, it seemed to be the right path and coming from the north and then making a 90 degree turn and then another 90 degree turn into the site would not be anything we would be trying to do. So I would agree that that would be a path we could take.

Martin, if the BZA or any future boards pass on, would you want to suggest that a road agreement be done as a condition of their approvals? Yeah, absolutely.

In the same way that we have any large industry coming in that we anticipate future damages, having an ongoing agreement would be my recommendation. Regarding the variance for the sidewalk exemption, You noted safety concerns with having a sidewalk. Could you elaborate on that? What are the safety concerns?

Yeah, I mean, there's not existing connectivity to that site right now. So if you were to build a sidewalk and somebody were to use it, they would then end up at the end of a sidewalk and then be walking on a roadway. So it's...

So your concern is someone pulling onto your site, parking, and walking on the sidewalk?

Not necessarily that.

Could be someone that was already walking on the roadway, then would be able to walk in the sidewalk for a portion, then would have to continue walking on the roadway. That sounds safer to me than not having it. Okay. In my opinion.

Yeah. Martin, would you consider that Chesterton eventually is going to do something with the veracity? They've been talking a lot of residential lately. and this is in the county, but Chesterton has Crocker, which is to the west, which is also residential.

Absolutely.

This would be a link, would it not?

I would say so, and all the way up to the high school as well. That parcel at the northwest corner of Meridian, 1050, also had sidewalk put in it as well. So I think the anticipation is we're going to see more development out here, and this would be a connection in between the west And then up 125 west as well as to the east towards Meridian as well is what I would see happening in the future.

So it's your recommendation that the sidewalk be installed? Yes, it is. Okay. Thank you.

Could that be something that would be? You mentioned that there's obviously space on the site that would be reserved for that. Is that something that the county would put in as a future development as other sidewalk gets installed or would that need to be installed?

My recommendation would be that you guys install it with your plan because otherwise who's going to fund it in the future? It would be honest to do it. And with all these developments, it normally is on the developer to put the sidewalk in.

Yeah, we'd be open to some type of agreement for future installation, too, though, if that's something you'd contemplate or have done on previous projects.

I think holding a surety for that long would be kind of a feat. I'm not familiar with it. Escalation, what do you do? Yeah, I mean, we don't know what year that's going to happen. Would we be holding a surety or a bond until that happens? I'm not familiar with it, so I'm asking you what you're thinking. Whatever you'd be open to.

Okay.

That's something we could discuss. So if you could find a solution to ensure the cost of the sidewalk or cover, we would look at it. I can't say without seeing it, though.

I would also point out that the properties in this area, we do have folks that reach out to the development office fairly regularly to inquire about doing development in the future for those areas. So I think that's probably not in the terribly distant future that someone's going to bite.

Martin, if they travel, going back to this road agreement, our stretch of road only goes so far that it becomes Chesterton Road from 149. Correct, yeah.

Should we be engaging them? Absolutely.

So that's something else we should think about

Good point. I believe that is all the comments that I have.

Thank you, Martin. Rick, are you happy?

I wasn't going to say anything, but I'm a sidewalk person. I have to live in rural areas that become very residential. We don't have sidewalks now because of that. You can come to our area.

Anything else, Rich? Thanks for your comment. Susan? Okay. I know you don't have a magic ball or crystal ball, but you got 15 acres. You probably got it. strategically at all, and you're using a portion of it, do you have any intentions for development for the rest of the site?

No.

So you don't see yourself expanding in any kind of way?

No, we have a similar facility that's just wrapping up construction in western New York right now, and it is on 10 acres. And we are not using all of that site either. And now that we're in construction, we can clearly see how much space we need. And this is definitely the footprint that we're proposing. It's what we expect to keep and do not need to expand.

Okay. Anybody else on the panel have any final questions or comments?

Go ahead. Can you answer?

Well, I would like to see right-of-way dedication. I think we talked about that at the pre-gap meeting, didn't we?

Yeah.

At a minimum.

Yeah. It's been an interesting situation because of what was done in the past to split this property, but apparently didn't go through all the right processes.

Didn't go through subdivision control.

Yeah. So that's been ongoing, and I believe that the additional right-of-way is actually included on this slide.

There'll be a, at a minimum, there's going to be a dedication, but did, now that you mention that, I remember early meetings, was it going to be a, and maybe Susan, you can help, was it going to be a one-lot or two-lot minor sub? They would work with the guy to the north that originally split? A one-lot minor is just .

I thought it was longer ago than that, but I don't want to go on the record for that.

Right. My reason for that question is just

And Susan, at what level does this development plan, will it have to go to plan commission or is that done administratively? Very. But isn't there, I don't know if it applies here, it does other, but there's building size or acreage. It's either or. Is there? Thank you for clarifying and bringing it to the record. Do you have any more questions for us?

Just considering the timeline and assuming that the sidewalk seems to be something that the Board of Zoning Appeals have an interest in next Thursday, what would be the process for getting some sort of concept agreement in place? Nothing that we're nailing down, but just at least a concept in place between us and the county prior to next Thursday or shortly thereafter so that we can say that we're making some progress on this issue at the BZA meeting.

if you can get a draft to us before the BZA for review. Not to say it'll be accepted, but I think Mark raises points, and I think the other staff raised points. It's one or two agreements, if you can get a draft to us so we can start looking at it. It won't be approved by next Thursday.

Totally understand that. Yeah, I just want to make sure that there's some forward progress before we meet.

Because I'd be hesitant even if it was for approval and I can't approve it. I'd like the BCA and then, of course, when you go through subdivision review. You know, that may change things, but at least we got a base we can work with. Yes.

So is it possible to get the approvals in place we're hoping for next week in the BZA subject to, you know, kind of conditionally set up those approvals? So they're subject to, you know, we could try to come up with something that's commercially workable where we say, all right, these are approved subject to the following conditions. The following conditions might be a solution for the sidewalks. It could be a solution for road use. And then, you know, before we break ground or before there's a site.

You can certainly make those recommendations to the board you appear. Yes, they can consider those.

I'm just trying to think.

Yeah, I think you should come prepared to the BCA based on comments from technical staff here. Yeah. Address those concerns because those will get repeated at the meeting for them to consider.

Yeah. And on the road agreement, Should we have... Oh, we have previous examples. Yeah. Do you want to have us take a look at what you've done previously?

Sure. Yeah, with NextEra, we had a road agreement for development of those transmission lines. Okay. So I think that would probably be a good starting point.

Okay.

And there's likely to be probably a difference in intensity.

Yeah.

Right? I mean, I would assume the... The anticipated damage, if any, is gonna be scaled down a lot. To support that, I would expect, I don't know what's in the, but I assume there's more intensive construction.

Yeah, I mean, you're talking about 20 miles of monopole structures, and we're talking about spare, you know, handful of deliveries. And once they're there, they're there. It's not like a constant flow of traffic to a construction site again and again on a daily basis.

No, but there could be an emergency situation in which this would have to be utilized more. Correct. Right. So I think we need to plan the road to be able to reflect any anticipated use of this property.

Okay. Any other questions? Anybody else? Okay. So I know this looks like there's people from the public here. This is not a public hearing atmosphere. It's simply an informal review by technical staff meeting with petitioner. There will be a Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on Thursday, May 28th. That's a week from today. Starts at 5.30 p.m. There will be a public hearing on all these matters that they talked about us today. So if anyone from the public wishes to come speak at that time, there will be a public hearing where your comments will be heard and considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals. So good luck to you at your meeting on the 28th. Any other things?

Dan? Do we need to, I know we're not voting, but do we need to conclude this with some type of panel recommendation, yay or nay, on these individual items to be considered by?

I wrote every one of your comments down. That's what goes forward. Okay.

Does that take the form of something resembling

I'll give a verbal staff report to them before the meeting. And then the zoning administrator, she will also have her report. But as far as this meeting goes, all the comments made by staff will be presented to the board. So you're hearing the same thing.

You'll be there.

Just to summarize, use variants are some questions, but primarily there's not a whole lot of concern with outdoor storage, correct?

I've heard comments, just so you know, and Kevin Brightskier, county surveyor, made a comment. He said he understands why you need eight foot high fence on the front. But due to the nature of some of the surrounding properties and all and as it develops and all that, that might be unsightly.

He's recommending that maybe you guys soften that up with some natural vegetation.

Yeah. So that's a bridge you're going to have to cross there.

That's understood, and I think our draft site plan does show.

And does the fence extend in front of the front face of the building facing the road? Yes. Four sides. Around the side. That's another factor to be considered, too.

Yeah, right now it's 50 foot back from the... The fence is at the 50 foot front setback, and we propose some...

And the front of the building is front. And how far is the front of the building face the building off the road?

Yeah, the building is an additional, whatever that is, 30 foot back.

Okay. It's not that it's a technical thing. It's a front fence is a front fence. Yep. The appearance of it and what it looks like.

Understood. Okay. For whatever it's worth, I would also like to state then for the comments going forward that in my opinion, the concept of having a future agreement for sidewalks is something I'd rather avoid. I'd like to either say, and I do believe that sidewalks here are an appropriate fit. I would rather the decision just be sidewalks yes or sidewalks no. I would not personally want us to go down that path of having to negotiate all these concepts and things for something that I think we all know this area is going to see development. And I think that something needs to come first and, you know, may as well be here.

And that's consistent with what Martin brought up over near Meridian. Although that's the town of Chesterton, they had a large chunk of property for that.

And it was a recent annexation as well. Any last?

Third and final call. All right. Good luck next week.

Thank you. Appreciate your time this morning.

Thank you.

Anybody in the panel got anything else for the good of the order? All right. We're adjourned.