Storm Water Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

You guys need our attorney. We need that, too. Hi, Paul. Greetings from afar.

Can we at least start the pledge?

Yeah, we don't have Chelsea for a roll call.

Where'd she go?

Upstairs. We have to grab something. One momento.

Here she comes.

Thanks for bringing me a blanket. Oh, I know.

I walked down here and I was like... It's still over.

It looks like it's still over on the airplane.

Yeah. no hey clay can you hear us and see us okay uh to order these prizes you're able to join us

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Amen. Chalcedon, call the roll, please.

Yes. Commissioner Recknance?

Yes.

Ed Smith? Present. Paul Hegan? Bill Laird? Here. Paul Nelson? Here. Scott Severson? Councilman Vazquez, Councilwoman Harris. You have a quorum.

Thank you.

And I would like to note that Attorney Clay Patton is joining us via video conference.

Okay, great.

You're good.

Will we be able to see him on anything or just on your left?

I have him on Zoom here. I am unmuted and my video is on and then he has his video and microphone enabled as well.

Okay. First on the agenda, we have our consent agenda. Approval of minutes from March 9th, April 20th, May 11th, and June 8th.

Move to approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries. New business. Docket number SM260014, Victory Christian Academy, 360 North, 225 East Valparaiso. Another request is to install a detention basin outlet storm sewer to the drainage easement associated with Whispering Hill subdivision. Mr. McMahon? Sorry. Mr. Koros, how are you?

Here with me is Miss Baker. She is a... for chair of Victory Christian Academy, as well as Mr. Kevin Keegan, who is also the co-founder and chair. Yeah, just help. We're here to talk to you guys about the improvements on this existing Victory Christian Academy school located on 325 that has already an existing structure, pot, storm, sanitary, water, all improvements, all on site. We were already in front of the PZA to get approval for said utilities. They need to have that. So that has been done. It also has been reviewed on the stormwater and planning side, of which we have a significant performance letter from planning. I had a couple of just last-minute items and a non-fully performing letter from Mr. Champion on the stormwater side, of which we are ongoing this as part of that. However, it has been reviewed and resubmitted. since our initial letter. This school is in the middle of uh finalizing a construction of an addition on the back side that would be the west side of the existing building uh within the existing parking lot area itself of which comes some uh additional necessity uh construction items mainly which is the drive-through parking lot addition that has to happen because the way that they run their parking lot they go straight now is through both of the aisle areas of the parking lot. So because this new building and its improvements will take up one of those two drive aisles, they need a secondary aisle to handle that additional pickup. They have one pickup for K through one for middle school and then the rest from the, wherever that middle school to the, to the senior lines. Because we have improvements out here, stormwater ordinance comes into effect. We have mitigated that with our solution of a pond that will accept water from a catchment area that is already flowing to this existing ditch. So this will capture some of that water that's already flowing and our proposed plan is to release that to the existing ditch directly to the north. So because of that, we are here to ask you guys the allowance to drain that pond into this ditch. The current pond on site already drains into this ditch. It's important to note that. That's on the far east side. If you guys have maps up in front of you, you'll be able to see that. So at that point, I will let Ms. Barton go to the tap.

Chelsea, would you read the staff report?

Yeah. So as Kevin summarized nicely, they are planning to install their detention basin outlet storm sewer. The reason why they're in front of you today is because Whispering Hills subdivision to the north is a regulated subdivision. The swale that they're proposing to discharge to is within a drainage easement that is controlled by the Drainage Board through and the Stormwater Advisory Board. So they are proposing to do this outlet storm sewer with a level spreader, which would help promote infiltration, which Kevin mentioned, by promoting infiltration, reducing erosion at the outlet point. And so you can see on your screen here, you have the light gray shaded area that's the proposed additional concrete pavement area. And that storm sewer is outletting to that north ditch there. So staff conducted a site visit on June 25th to review the condition of the swale that is maintained by Porter County. I noted the presence of standing water near and downstream of the proposed discharge location. Melissa, if you can go to the next slide, please. So this is a picture of the swale at the approximate discharge location, maybe a little bit downstream of this discharge location. So, like I mentioned, I observed standing water. It appears that this standing water is recurrent and longstanding because there's a lack of vegetation, especially as you move into these trees. The picture that is on your left, that heavy brush overgrowth, there's quite a bit of standing water. There's no vegetation growing in the bottom of the swale, indicating that this water is longstanding and recurrent. And then as you, the picture on the right, you can see there's some overgrowth of trees there, which may be because of lack of maintenance. But there's also some additional standing water there. And this swale seems to have a pretty minimal bottom slope. So I don't think that this swale has really has the, not necessarily the capacity, but my concern is adding an additional point discharge This far upstream of the ultimate discharge point of this swale could exacerbate the existing drainage concerns within this swale. And then when I was on site, I spoke with one of the residents who mentioned that this property owner, whose property I'm currently standing on, has had several concerns with the condition of the swale and the amount of standing water that is within the swale, to the point of getting into some arguments with his neighbors about them discharging water onto his property. which is supposed to happen, right? He's the downstream receiving neighbor. But my concern is having this additional point discharge to the soil will make those conditions that are upsetting current property owners worse. And then also, as Kevin mentioned, there is another discharge point on the property that has been identified as that second detention basin that is at the entrance to the school. So with that, my recommendation is that this case be denied due to the existing poor condition of the swale that may be exacerbated by the installation of this outlet storm sewer. And because I did identify an alternate route for the discharge to of this proposed attention basin.

So are you aware of her concern and you have a plan for addressing that?

be a time i can go ahead and go through that um so i i did speak with miss gordon and and he did uh talk about that her recommendation would be for denial on the property uh i completely understand and uh know where she's coming from i have been on this sites since day one with these guys i surveyed personally myself i put together the plan myself and i was instrumental in the drainage calculations myself so uh indeed uh there is uh what i guess you would say is quote-unquote standing water standing water is a very I feel loose term in this situation. There is a wetness to the bottom, but there was no visual standing water in my work hearing me from December through the snows and into the spring. Our outlet rate for the pond is, I know this is probably great to a lot of you, but we calculated at 0.025 cubic feet per second per acre. That's a very, very very minimal amount of water and and this board is absolutely correct uh we had talked about we've worked also the big champion to come up with a secondary solution to tie this into the existing out but i don't know if you guys want to go back to that plan So there in the kind of northeast corner, you can see a line that goes from where you can probably visually see where the pond is, northeast to drain into the ditch. That drain is less than half a foot higher than the bottom of the ditch. Our new drain to level spreader would be proposed at roughly a foot and a half, slightly higher to the bottom of the ditch. So we are comparatively much higher. And while I understand that fiscal obligations are not a hardship, it does not make a whole lot of sense to install almost 600 feet of radial pipe with three or four additional drainage structures for a 0.025 cubic feet per second for acre output. It's very, very minimal. That pipeline will be drying most of all the time. It's kind of an over design in our case. We did run calculations on the existing pond itself. That pond outlet structure. So if you guys have been out there, Chelsea, I know you have. In that pond, there is a standpipe. In that standpipe, there is an outlet pipe that goes in there. That standpipe has multiple one-inch holes drilled into it. That's what allows the water to only see. instead of just over barreling and then when it gets high enough it pours in over the top and then it hits that outflow pipe and heads out into the ditch. So the alternative plan would be to run 600 feet of pipe along the entire north line of this property from where that closed pond is that we're showing to tie into the outlet structure. of that existing pot. We did calculate against that pipe. It does flow correctly to Porter County standards of the 0.13 cubic feet per acre. The pond itself does not hold the water that it was originally supposed to hold. It does hold a barrel. So another reason that we would prefer to outlet directly north is that we don't want to inundate that area on top of all of this with water as little as it may be. In our minds, that's all the existing infrastructure networking. I wanted to keep it that way, keep this separate. It's a much easier way to keep control of the water and keep things clean and tidy, so to speak, especially when it comes to field maintenance, you know, in each of those silos. I do want to note as well, too, Ms. Gordon did state that even though we would be draining into the stitch. The stitch does exist on whispering. was it was spring hills second edition but the ditch is a legal drain so we do have rights a lot of this property does go there already so we would actually be meeting and exceeding the code here we could be improving the drainage situation of what water is going into that ditch by having this pond and the outlet here again very minimal grades

Kevin, what's the area of the watershed that drains to this new basin?

I calculated it at roughly 3.4 acres. So you can't tell without the full picture here. But there's kind of the northwest quadrant kind of runs this way. So right here on this picture, you can see the top of the swim, the top left corner. That's the pond of Whispering Hills. So you can see the top of the banks will be to the south. So their water sheds off onto us and eventually makes it to the creek anyway. And then a good portion of our northwest quadrant kind of runs that way.

What percentage of that three acres of change currently drains to that ditch?

The current percentage is 100%. It all does. It all goes into there, and with this pond, it will be less. I think the watershed that we're proposing for this was .2 acres worth, so that covers the pond, part of the parking lot area, and I think just a small sliver of greenery area that's to the west of the drive.

Okay. I have a question for you. You said you've been there during the winter. Mm-hmm. obviously winter events and spring heavy rainfall events. And it is that the swale works fine, but yet I don't understand then why the landowner mentioned that there's concerns and frustrations with longstanding water. So I'm hearing two different stories here.

I can tell you that since I've been there a long time, probably four or five different physical locations there has never been more water than what was in the storage pictures uh ever while i was there i don't doubt that there probably has been some waters we all know this has been a very very wet season for us probably the I get all that, but I'm still focused on the term long-standing water problem. Long-standing, not

You know, that once-in-a-hundred-year event, once-in-a-fifty-year event, et cetera. And maybe it's just coincidence that that's the day Chelsea was out there and saw that. But once again, I'm still going back to why are the local property owners complaining of a longstanding event, and now we're going to add to that, correct? I mean, we're proposing to add some percentage of water to that.

Correct. Yeah, to answer that question, I don't know, because obviously I haven't been there over the course of years. We're talking the course of a couple seasons. However, again, I will note that no matter what this water is going to that creek whether we do it here or whether we go through and do an alternative solution that adds 600 feet of maintenance and structures and all sorts of issues and put it into the outlet structure of the existing pond which we can do rightfully you know get that approved on the county engineering side you know that was the solution uh chelsea dave and i had talked about you know as part of that that water is going to get

So in terms of what those downstream neighbors are experiencing right now, they're going to continue to experience it. That won't change.

Correct. If it's there, this won't change it. In fact, again, I'm going to make the statement that we're making this land slightly better by actually putting additional water that was going into the creek back.

So it could be slightly better.

Absolutely.

But it's not going to be worse.

Okay, so here's my other angle to this, okay? You're talking one in 50-year, one in 100-year events, one in 500-year events. Those maps are changing.

They are.

Considerably.

Absolutely.

Okay. So what may have been a once in 100-year event is probably maybe now a once in a 40-year event.

All I can say is that we adhere to the ordinance. You know, that is ultimately the bottom line. The ordinance allows for a release rate of 1.3 to 50% per year.

I get that, but also part of our job is to look to the future.

I get that too, 100%. But like I said, one way or another, that water can get into that, and we are making it a better environment.

So what do we need to do here, Chelsea? Obviously, you understand what he's proposing, right? Does he need to work with you and come back with different drawings? Or what do we need to do here?

I think the board needs to make a decision on if they would like to go with staff's recommendation of denying the case or make a recommendation of approval to discharge the pipe at this location. I think just one thing I want to know, I understand that, yes, this pipe is discharging to this swale, either at this location or at the location of the existing detention basin outlet. My concern is the minimal channel bottom slope in this swale that is resulting in that long standing water that you're seeing in the channel bottom. That is the concern of the residents within Whispering Hills subdivision. And while the water is currently flowing to this point, that's flowing via overland flow. So you're getting some infiltration as it's making its way to the swale, but adding a point discharge, I personally feel, in my professional opinion, that you will see those longstanding water conditions a little bit worse. Even though it's the same watershed area that's going to this point, once you do a point discharge at this location, it's not able to move through that swale as quickly as you would anticipate. So you're going to see those long standing water along the channel bottom as it currently is, if not a little bit worse. So that was why my staff recommendation was to deny and rather have this discharged to the existing detention base and outlet structure by counter O325 East. so um the short answer to your question is the board needs to make a decision on either deny their request for staff recommendation or to approve the applicant's request to discharge the storm sewer at the location shown on the plans submitted with the application okay so i got one question based upon that can that swell be modified to satisfy staff

Or is it literally got to be piped?

Yeah, so this whale is serving as the outlet conveyance for the detention pond. So if you look on your screen just to the left of where the applicant is proposing to discharge their storm sewer, You have the subdivision's detention basin outlet stormwater discharging to the swill, and that is for the subdivision construction plans and the drainage board approval back when the subdivision was platted. So you have those two controlling points of the pipe coming in and then the pipe going out. That's why you see, that's why the swale can't be modified unless if it's enclosed and that would be a significant cost to the county to incur.

So regarding the swale and the condition of the swale, like improving the drain, improving those vegetative areas, if that were removed and there's nothing that could be done to the bottom of the swale or or filled in or something so it could better drain?

No.

There's just no elevation to work with?

I don't think that there's... Filling in the bottom of the swale, you won't see meaningful improvement. Right.

So Kevin, let me ask you. So Chelsea has outlined her preference. How does that compare and contrast to what you're proposing? And are you seeing that she has wisdom in her recommendation?

in this industry I mean I know Chelsea relatively well and I know her judgment as well and you know we're a whole engineering firm that does this professionally I've been doing this for 20 years so professionally I don't I just asked my owner here, too, if there is something that might actually help this situation. I think there can be some work that maybe we work with the county as far as some betterment and improvement of the ditch itself. So you were mentioning about, you know, well, could there be something where we you know, modify the ditch. No, I agree. No, but I think there can also be some work on the Christian side, but maybe we can work on some sort of, I think you guys know the term, SWIFT or these best management practices where, you know, they can do, you know, constant checks of the outlet, make sure that no erosioning is happening, making sure that, you know, no major overflowing is happening from the outlet on the other side, maybe some sort of conditional approval that if this is being seen by the board as problematic in the next couple years, that maybe we then can look at the alternative position of the outlet to tie in in a way that we don't need the board's approval to do that. I mean, that might be a situation that you know there's no adverse infection to the small motor discharge again i 100 agree with chelsea you know While my argument is that water is getting into the ditch, it is getting into the ditch in a place that's reserved down the stream. Again, at 0.025 cubic feet per second grade ground.

So are you wanting to come back with a different approach, is that you're suggesting?

No, we have a different approach in place in which we would need the board's approval for. What I'm saying is that we can agree or the owner can agree to some sort of BMP.

I can know what that may be.

as it should be.

Chelsea, do we know the approximate slope of the channel bottom? Is it less than 1%?

I don't know. I haven't surveyed it. Okay.

I mean, vegetated swale, less than 1%, really doesn't perform very well. I understand the 0.025 release rate is somewhat over-restrictive, but a very flat channel bottom, less than 1%, has a tendency to hold water. It doesn't convey. And I personally think that's maybe at the heart of what Chelsea's concerns are here.

Yeah. I agree they probably are not at 1%. I can tell you that because I've just surveyed it, so I can't let you know what that is. But I would also bet that it is not at 1%.

So to that point, there's really no way to eliminate this long-standing water? No, no.

No matter what, that water that's there is going to continue to be there. Um, yeah.

Would the capture of this three acres and change into your basin and then hard piped into the existing pond, that would remove overland flow into the ditch, correct?

No, it would not affect the overland flow, which if you're talking about the over discharge of the existing pond, no, that would still...

Well, I'm talking about the water runoff from the watershed on the school's property, which would reduce the amount of water introduced to the channel at the upstream location.

Yeah, correct. So when that pond gets hit with over the requirements of the Porter County UDL, then yes, it would overland flow, just like any pond, into the ditch. So we get those massive rain bursts.

So I think to Paul and Scott's points, if we were to run this to the existing basin, it does reduce the amount of water upstream in the channel, which may help to alleviate some of the adjoining property owners' concerns.

Kevin's shaking his head no.

Yeah, I agree with Chelsea. What you really have here is a longitudinal pond. This isn't a creek or a ditch whispering hills. This was intended and it was not a good design, but the engineer who put this together for detention had put in there. My bigger concern would be the outlet to the east side of 325 and how that travels from there. You could start addressing and doing amenities from there, but that's kind of an unknown at this point. Right now, I wouldn't touch that detention ditch, swale, whatever. It's definitely not a creek, Kevin, but it's part of the amenities of Whispering Hill when that was created back 40 years ago.

Well, I think we have two hard control points that we can't change that swale at all.

Well, you might be able to on 325 through cooperation with the landowner on the east side and with Porter County.

I can for sure tell you that that outlet on the east side of 325 is your problem point. I mean, the bottom of the ditch is what it is. I believe in finding it.

It was buried, and it's in a hole, and it doesn't... And it's going to get worse if it's not addressed. And going back to how are we going to address this problem and what's going on else, we need to be looking at the big picture beyond this. We should always be looking downstream.

And that's, you know, again, pond bottom is pond bottom. But you're not going to change that without changing the volume of the creek itself. Again, our water is very inconsequential to the amount of water that's already going in. That problem child applies with the east culvert end underneath 3.5.

So if you fix that east culvert end, would that alleviate the longstanding water?

Yeah, I don't have the information to answer that.

So the water that is longstanding that we saw on that picture, where is that water coming from?

Yeah, so it's coming from the surrounding watershed area. The detention basin, existing detention basin in Whispering Hills subdivision from the overland flow from Whispering Hills subdivision and then the small amount of overland flow that's coming from Victory Christian on the south.

So it's not their fault that that long-standing water exists?

No, and my intention was never to make it sound like it was their fault. Again, my concern is just making it worse by having a point discharge to a channel bottom that is not adequately sloped to convey water.

So as the applicant, do you think it will be worse, the long-standing water?

I think in bottom line, we're holding back water that's currently going to that area. Again, I understand what Chelsea's saying 100%, but no, I don't think it'll be worse at all. And I understand the point discharge, but that point discharge will be spread out over a 20-foot level spreader as well, which I know this really can be the point of the water entering the system. And then, so Chelsea, you think it will be worse? Looking at it and thinking about it from my perspective, that is my concern.

Is it worth...

Evaluate doing a little more evaluation than you to talk and see if you can figure out if it's worse or not and then come back Okay, so you understand without some type of guarantee that

We really don't have much choice here.

You said you think it will, okay. I'm an engineer as well. Think and guaranteeing are two different things. What happens in these instances where we agree to this and then down the line we pay the penalty because we agreed to it when we didn't accept the staff recommendation. Okay.

And that's why I threw out the condition that maybe the placating part of this might be maybe we can work with some sort of... work on a visual system, make sure that everything operates as it's supposed to be to no adverse detriment. And if so, then maybe the alternative drainage system can be installed at that time.

Chelsea, would you be satisfied with that? And obviously we'd have to run it through Clay, our attorney.

Yeah, we'd have to work with our attorney. But it's assuming that we did.

I mean, I think that would be a good way to kind of please all people involved. There would be some BCA involvement to make sure that things stay correct, that they're not over-draining. And if they are, then you guys make that call to the board, and then they put in the alternative drainage solutions.

Okay, so with SW3P, or SWIFT as you say, shouldn't it be a trained stormwater person that would be doing those inspections?

Yeah, just like it is with any SWIFT, with any project where you're disturbing land with more than one acre and you have an individual on site who is your designated person that is filling out your BMP inspection checklist, submitting them to the department on a monthly basis, whatever, you know, you guys as a county require. I don't know what the top end, I think it's every month. Then at that point, if the drainage board ever decides that this has become a problem area, then the approved alternative can be installed, which again, be the same amount of water just downstream to the existing outlet.

So we have a staff recommendation. What are you asking us?

I'm asking that if you guys are going to do a negative... approval on the negative review from Chelsea that we work together to instead approve this on the basis of some sort of agreement clause with BC

Can I suggest that we table this and then meet with Clay and Chelsea, see what you can come up with that Chelsea's happy with, then we bring that back.

You're suggesting they just continue this until they can get some, and that's what I would suggest you do too. Yeah.

And this isn't that we don't trust you, it's just that we have to make sure that we're going with recommendations from staff because we've seen so many Well, then I move that we continue this discussion until the next meeting and in the meantime that you have conversation with our attorney and staff and that you can come back with something that you can feel comfortable with a positive recommendation.

I strongly recommend that you follow the water, go to the east side of 325, figure out what your outlet is, where it is, so you can improve that outlet. I know. I know.

So one thing I'll say to that is I'll have to confirm with the owner. We'll have to. That's great. It's up to them because they're on the timeline now if they want to. At that point, we would figure out if they want to perform with that or we would just end up letting you guys know that we will.

Yeah, that's fair enough. I think our point is just don't put us in a position where we have to, unless you make a really good argument, don't put us in a position asking us not to go as staff recommends.

We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. All opposed? All right. Thank you, guys.

Thank you for coming.

Thanks, Kevin. All right, next item, docket SM260015, Porter County Municipal Airport Authority at 4207 River Hill Road. Request is to construct new wildlife exclusion fence on airport property boundary and to make improvements to hotter drain. Good afternoon. Chelsea, do you want to read your staff report, please?

Yeah. Melissa, if you want to go to the next slide, please. So we are here at the Porter County Airport along the northern boundary of the airport outside of State Road 2. So the applicant is proposing to replace and upgrade an existing fence with regulated drainage easement associated with hotter drain. I would like to note that both the north-south regulated drain and then the east-west regulated drain are both considered hotter drain. The north-south is the open portion and then the east-west is a storm sewer closed portion of hotter drain. proposed fence is a 10 foot tall chain link fence with a 36 inch wildlife skirt below grade multiple new fence posts will be installed within the regulated drainage easement within the regulated drainage easement as well as crossing hotter drain they are proposing to excavate each fence post location to a depth of 54 and a diameter of 12 inches per the provided plan. The applicant is proposing a 14-foot manual cantilever gate 450 feet east of the drainage easement. The fence will cross hotter drain at the western property line. Melissa, if you go to the next slide, please. So the circle on the left side of the screen, That is the location of the closed portion of Hodder Drain. The construction plans do state to protect the storm line and the contractors to verify the location and that's prior to construction. The fence will cross Hodder Drain on the south side of LaForte Avenue or State Road 2, which is the circle to the right, and that is the open portion of Hodder Drain. I have lost our attorney online. If I could please give him a call on my cell phone, I'm so sorry, too.

No problem.

This is an aside.

It has really nothing to do with the bench.

Have you contacted and staked out the right-of-way for their requirement? We have to clean up.

Can you make sure you're not disturbing?

Oops. Yeah, there we go. Yes, we've contacted and done actually a property boundary survey for that, for the alignment of the fence. And we're located two feet within the airport property.

And you are?

I apologize. I am Curtis Brown with Wolpert. We are the airport consultant airport engineer here on behalf of the Porter County Airport Authority.

And for those of you who don't know me, my name is Kyle Kubler. I'm the airport director.

But back to the right-of-way, there's varying right-of-way throughout this area. That's why I suggest as strongly you get an agreement, make sure you guys are on the same page.

Yes.

But it has nothing to do with us here.

No. Good counsel, and yes, we're very sensitive to right-of-way issues.

They help us in the long run.

Hey, Clay, this is Chelsea. I Yeah. All right. We'll just finish it with you on my phone if that is okay.

All right.

Okay. All right, not a problem. Thank you. I'll put you on speaker. All right, you're now on speakerphone. I'm, again, so sorry. Sorry. So moving on. So the applicant is then also proposing to enclose the open drain portion of Potter Drain to accommodate the installation of the fence. Melissa, if you go to the next slide, please. So I guess this is the open portion of Hotter Drain. The picture on your left-hand side with the metal culvert and then the slip lining of the black pipe, this is the culvert that is carrying State Road 2 over Hotter Drain. And the picture on the bottom right, that is looking towards the west where all the white frothy water That is coming from the culvert under State Road 2. And then the culvert that we're looking on directly, that is the Storms River portion of Hodder Drain. So just to give you guys a visual representation of what we're looking at. And then next slide, please. So they are proposing to enclose this open portion of hotter drain by extending that 24-inch HDPE that goes underneath State Road 2, extending that 30-inch CMP storm sewer that is the closed portion of hotter drain or storm sewer of hotter drain, installing a six-foot diameter manhole, and then installing, per the plans, a 36-inch CMP or corrugated metal pipe out of that that will serve as the outlet for the manhole. At the downstream end of that 36-inch CMP, there will be a graded box in section. And then they are also proposing to do some channel improvements to the open portion of hotter drain from this new storm sewer outfall to the access road crossing, which is like the lightly pink hashed area that you see on your screen there. I did have a conversation with Curtis. Part of my staff report was calling out if the riprap on the plans is for that entire channel. He did verify that it will be a rock apron installed at the downstream end and adjacent to that box end section, which staff would recommend in this situation anyways.

So can I just ask, Kyle, what was the genesis for you wanting to do this? What is going on over there that prompted this?

When the north-south runway was built in 1996, the only fence that was around the airport at that time was four-foot farm field fence that exists there today that we're replacing. After September 11th, we were able to complete the two-thirds remaining perimeter of the airport with six-foot security free water. So right now we have on the north part of the airport, animals can enter anytime they want to, leave anytime they want to, even domestic animals entering the airport. So the idea with the FAA, which is the driving force behind this to give us better wildlife protection is to replace that four foot farm field fence on that northern third with this full wildlife fence program. And then future programs do the rest of the perimeter south. At some other time I it's going to be a lot easier to maintain wildlife control for deer coyotes in, as I said, domestic animals that just can walk through the fence the squares about that big right now, and if they can't jump over it, they can walk through it.

You're trying to keep up big and small critters. Yes. Just like raccoons or something. Like a deer, too.

I call them the usual suspects in that coyote and deer.

This is something Kyle has brought up for commissioners. I think you've been dealing with this for at least 30 years. But the animals crossing the roadway once they get to the airport. And that's the inherent danger. Is anybody coming in for a landing? Suddenly you've got a pack of dogs or deer. crossing and it's bad enough. I dealt with it with peace.

Well, that's the other area of the equation. The fences are going to help that, but our other methods, pyrotechnics and just vehicle harassment helps control the birds.

So then I kind of coming back to the work within the regulated drain. If you look at the blue hatch section on your screen, you can see that there's about 165 feet of the existing hotter drain storm sewer that is experiencing severe head cutting erosion and sinkholes due to the apparent failure of the joints within that existing storm sewer. The department is going to complete a project to reconstruct this portion of hotter drain with 30 inch RCP or reinforced concrete pipe. And the department's reconstruction project will connect to the applicant's proposed manhole. For the construction plans, this area of erosion will be backfilled with sand to accommodate the installation of the fence. Staff recommends that this backfill still be completed as to not hinder the applicant's construction timeline for the fence installation, even though the department is going to come through and do the reconstruction project. The staff does request the following design revisions to the pipe washout and repair along State Road 2. Cast in place watertight loop connectors shall be utilized for the connections of non-concrete pipe to the manhole. 36 inch CMP is not an acceptable material to use for the outlet storm sewer per Porter County's construction standards. Storm sewer less than 39 inch shall be HDPE pipe. And then bedding and backfill shall be in accordance with Porter County's construction standards. Please design the manhole to accommodate the department's connection of a 30-inch RCP to the proposed manhole, and then revise the restoration of the channel regrading work. That note in my staff report I don't think is no longer relevant since they are not doing a full rip-rap line channel. Just a few items of note. The fence may need to be removed in the event of repair, maintenance, construction, or reconstruction work that needs to be performed within the regulated drainage easement. That fence removal will be at the property owner's cost. The standard terms and conditions shall apply, including the execution of a hold harmless agreement, and staff also recommend or request the following special provisions be applied to the project of inviting the department to the pre-construction conference to be held prior to the start of work of those portions identified on the pipe washout repair along State Road 2 and contact the department at least 72 hours prior to the start of work within the regulated training achievement. So that concludes my staff report.

Thank you, Chelsea. Do you have anything additional to add to that? Any questions?

I do have one question on that. For the east-west portion, the pipe portion of hotter drain, our fence alignment is approximately 25 feet away from the center line of that pipe. The back filling and filling over that pipe is not necessary for the actual physical construction of the fence. But it was necessary to prevent that fence from falling in the future with the department's proposed improvements coming in a relatively short timeline. I guess we just ask if it would be beneficial for us to leave it at its current condition until those repairs are done or if you do want us to go ahead and grade and fill over that damaged pipe.

If it's not necessary for the installation of the fence, then no, it doesn't need to be done. Okay. My interpretation of it in talking with Kyle, I thought that that needed to be done to allow for the fence installation.

Yeah. For the north-south portion and probably 20 to 30 feet on either side of that, we'll definitely have to do some grading and fill. But the remaining 130 feet or so, we'll leave as is. Yeah.

That sounds good. Okay.

So you don't have any, do we have a staff recommendation, and you don't have any concerns with the additional proposed revisions to the construction plans?

No, none. I'm just changing the pipe material and the functions there, so no concerns.

Josie, when are we planning on our portion of this?

We have to have a new manhole cast so that I would say it's probably like six to eight weeks out for us to work with our manhole supplier and have that cast and then get on our contractor schedule.

Chelsea, you mentioned there wasn't going to be riprap lined in the area at all, or was there going to be just some around the actual?

We'll have an eight-foot long riprap apron at the discharge, and then it'll just be naturally graded. And it's being graded for maintenance purposes, just to allow that to be mowed and taken care of a little better. As you saw in the photos, it's unmaintainable right now.

The depiction you're looking at also is going to be in a way that no migration of animals can go underneath.

Correct.

Yeah. And I'm amazed by the amount of water that comes across State Road 2 from the ditch on the north side to what it is on the airport side. We were talking in the last session about 100, 200, and 500-year rains. I've been there for a couple 100s and a couple 200s. I don't feel like I'm that old. Right. But I've been there for them. That was my point. And if I was going to make an analogy, the airport is almost like a water capacitor for this county drainage. When we do have these large rings, you'll actually see the swale systems adjacent the taxiways and the runways fill up in hold water so it can properly be metered as it crosses US Highway 30 and goes across. That came from improvements not only with the airport, but what the county did south of Murphy Hill Road that used to always flood in the 80s and 90s until we both correct it, not only with the new improvements on the airport side, but what has been done from River Hill Road south and then across US 1.30. Thank the Lord you're not the Thornton Quarry right now.

Yeah. Chicago's, yeah. No more capacity there.

Under one of the aprons, we replaced with concrete and at the south end of the airport.

And then protect that. Recently, too, with the drainage board, you did the south detention area of Washington Highlands subdivision. So this north side will probably make everything right as far as what's on the west side. And then the department had an improvement on the east for Washington Square that we also had a chance to look during the field inspection.

And they were very helpful in allowing us easements to get out of Washington Square because the original developer didn't have an outlet for the pond.

And it seems to all be working well.

Yeah, thank you.

I haven't seen water on the runway and taxiway yet, but it's gotten closer.

Yeah, fingers crossed.

Yep.

Any other questions or discussion? Entertain a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve with staff recommendations.

Second.

I have a motion.

Second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

All right. Motion carries. We thank the board, and I want to thank staff. Both Chelsea and Rob came out understanding our time commitment with the current project and put things together very quickly for us. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you.

And then this, sorry, this case will be presented at tomorrow morning's Stormwater Management Board meeting following their, that board's approval and full harmless agreement will be sent to you. And then the final approval letter will be received, will be sent after we receive the signed full harmless agreement.

Do we have to come back tomorrow?

No, you're welcome to attend, but it's not required.

Yeah, we've got a pre-bid meeting tomorrow. All right, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Bye-bye.

Okay. Docket number SM 26. Oh, one six. Clarence, which are 1199 South 350 East and coats. You can start the presidential driveway, which will include the installation of a culvert petitioner.

Oh, no, that it doesn't seem like there's anyone.

Chelsea reader recommendations.

Well, do we really want to even take the time because we've agreed that unless the petitioner is here, we're not going to entertain the case?

Yeah, my recommendation is to continue anyways because of the lack of information provided. So the board would like to make a recommendation to continue, then that's fine.

Recommendation. Oh, a motion to continue. Continue.

Second. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion carries. All right. Next item is our stormwater program energy report. Chelsea?

Yeah. So just want to provide a quick update on one of our capital improvement projects that is currently under construction, the Rolling Meadows Subdivision Stormwater Management System Improvements Project. Melissa, if you can go to the next slide, please. So the mainline storm sewer is almost completely installed. They are probably going to wrap up midweek this week with that installation. They were hoping to be done at the end of last week. However, we encountered some bad soils. So some undercuts needed to be performed. It was a one foot undercut. So, and that was done with endot number two stone, that's two inch stone.

And what were the bad soils? What was the issue?

Yeah, so the picture on your left, this is the soils that are uncovered. This site, talking to Kevin and then some residents that have lived here since the subdivision was developed, this used to be an old fill area for a contractor who would do dredging and other type of excavating work.

The owner owned a waste disposal company with porta-potties, and this was an applied sludge site for soils.

So a lot of organic sludge. Yes, sludgy. It was clays, clayey soils through this stretch. The water was getting trapped between the asphalt and then the existing geotextile material. So the clay was just very soft. So that's the picture that you see there on the left. And the picture on the right, that is their undercut with the endot number two stone and then their geotextile fabric to burrito wrap. around the undercut. So it's one of those things where usually on our stormwater projects, we don't have to get too involved in different aggregate types and soils and those types of things. So just want to bring this to the board's attention. But as I mentioned, this project is progressing nicely. The substantial completion date is August 15th. They are currently on track to meet that. It could be a little tight if we continue to get the amount of rain that we've had. But overall, things have been progressing well despite the amount of rain that we have had. And as a reminder, this is one where the stormwater fund will be paying for the storm sewer installation, everything that you see here in this picture, and then the placement of the intermediate layer of asphalt. And then the highway department, their annual road paving contract, they'll be coming in and placing down the surface. layer of the asphalt. So trying to find these creative ways where we can work collaboratively with other departments in the county to try to utilize and maximize our stormwater funds to be more for the stormwater side of things and not just for full pavement reconstruction. So excited for that partnership and seeing how things go and hopefully this is something we can apply and continue to do in the future. Otherwise, things have been progressing well within our department. If it would stop raining, that would be great. I think everyone sitting at this table feels the same way.

So Chelsea, what's the expected life of the improvements that you're doing here?

Yeah, so we're using concrete pipe. So I would say the expected lifespan is about 100 years. That's what it's advertised. As far as the asphalt pavement, that infrastructure side of it, probably like 25 years. So yeah, so a huge thank you to the staff in our department for managing, I would say, the close to 70 drainage complaints, 75 plus drainage complaints that we have received since the beginning of June. And as you guys are aware of dealing with the public, sometimes those are not the most pleasant phone calls that you get to receive or make. So a huge thank you to them for dealing with that and then working through and we have been really responsive and pretty much have responded or made contact with almost every single one of those. So our program would not be operating as efficiently as it does without our staff members. So a huge thank you to them.

We appreciate everything you do. Go team go.

Yes. So with that, that's all I've got for my program.

Thank you.

Discussion from any members of the board?

Well, Chelsea, do you just want to give a prognosis for where you see the next five years in your department?

So we have been very fortunate with the ARPA funds that we received. We were able to complete a lot of the projects that we would not have been able to complete with our current budget. But there has been multiple discussions with this board as well as the Stormwater Management Board that we really need to look at increasing our stormwater user fee. So I'm hoping this year we have a proposal from a consultant that we need to do a final review on for a strategic plan on our stormwater program. So those happening at the court, as well as the stormwater management board, those working sessions, as well as the public to identify what are our priorities. And then with those priorities, what does our stormwater user fee need to be? um so that way we can figure out okay we have issues like in whispering hills subdivision it's not a major issue but it is something that's our regulated drainage infrastructure that is not operating as you would want so but our funds don't allow us to go we have to really prioritize the projects that we do so um What I'm saying is what I see it where I see us in five years is increasing the stormwater user fee or working towards that. And then if we don't increase the stormwater user fee, we're really going to have to start tightening the belt. The Rolling Meadows project that I showed you that that bid price was $1,080,000 roughly. Our annual construction budget is $1,050,000. With the ARCA funds that we had, we had a cash surplus. So carrying those forward and being able to do that large capital improvement project. But now that we're out of that cash surplus, I don't think we'll be able to do those large capital improvement projects under government revenue.

Do you have a bond currently?

Yes.

And when does that roll?

Yeah, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cut you off. So we currently do have a bond that was obtained in 2018. That was $20 million, I believe. And there's about $3 million left in it. That bond, all of those funds were used for the improvements in Old South Haven. I do need to read the ordinance to approve that bond to determine if those funds can be used throughout the entire county or if they're specific only for the greater South Haven area. My plan is to utilize those funds for improvements within the greater South Haven area. Old South Haven, New South Haven, Coventry, and Salt Creek Valley Commons that we did our greater South Haven drainage study for that have $40 million plus worth of work that needs to be done within there to reconstruct the stormwater infrastructure. So using those bond funds to do that highest priority project of storm sewer that is going to have significant public safety issues.

It's something to be aware of. The study for South Haven and environs was done in 2010. We wrote the ordinance for the fees in 2014-15. Council and commissioners, I think all of us were there, but we just didn't have the wherewithal to do an escalator clause for the fee itself. So that's why we stand at the same state fee that we charged back in 2015. And of course, we're seeing a price of everything above. Inflation is affecting workmanship as well as materials, in addition to every other facet of this. So bonding may be a way to go. That's the positive thing about having a stormwater management board. We could do that as a great job.

Yeah. Any public discussion? Sorry. Seeing none, next meeting is August 10th at 5 p.m. here. And with that, we are in recess. Thank you for that synopsis.

Thank you. appreciate that thank you