Get Adobe Flash player


July 5, 2005 Tape #013

The White County Drainage Board convened at 10:45 A.M., EST in the Commissioners’ Room of the White County Building, Monticello, Indiana with Board Members Steven Burton, O. D. Ferguson, John C. Heimlich, Attorney George W. Loy, Surveyor Dennis W. Sterrett, Engineer L. Todd Frauhiger and Secretary Romana Kiser in attendance.

Others attending were Charles Mellon, Bill Pyle, Don Pauken, Jeff Ward, Jeff Van Weelden and Attorney Dow Dellinger.

Board Member Heimlich made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 20, 2005 meeting. Board Member Ferguson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Chairman Burton recognized Dow Dellinger for a non-agenda item. Attorney Dellinger stated, “I spoke with Denny on Friday. I’m Dow Dellinger here on behalf of Indiana Waste Systems. In the last meeting you had asked for exact dimensions on where the tile is run through that property. Godlove's have taken an indicator out there and painted a line where the tile runs through. Weaver-Boos has updated a drawing and we wanted to have it here as quick as we could so they wrote in those measurements to within a tenth of a foot (Surveyor Sterrett corrected him saying a hundredth of a foot) for your information. We also gave a drawing that gave the elevations on the ramps so you could see the elevations. ...inaudible ...has that in his material….inaudible...called and said he wanted a drainage plan, which Weaver-Boos had provided a drainage plan for the IDEM permit. We gave a copy of that to Denny and he thought that was satisfactory for the Engineer to review, so I wanted to make sure you have ….inaudible…..I have extras. This was the original drawing that Weaver-Boos had sent us, two faxes actually; the first one showed the proposed building locations and failed to put the location of the existing structures. This drawing has the existing structure….see tape….Weaver-Boos was good enough to fax us the exact location of the tile in relation to the proposed building and the ramps and then the relation of the tile to the existing structures. We have both of those for your review and elevation specs of buildings for your review.”

A lot of discussion followed about how close the proposed buildings and ramps would be from the tile (See Tape). Board Member Heimlich asked if the tile location is painted so we can see it if we go to the site. Attorney Dellinger said yes. Chairman Burton asked if there were any more questions at this time. He said he would like to hold off on making a decision on this until dealing with the BZA appeal. Board Member Heimlich said, “I think we still need to go out and look at it again, it’s marked out there.”

Attorney Dellinger stated, “We’d like to have the decision whenever it is good for you guys, just because the Transfer Station can be built without the rezoning issue resolved.” Board Member Heimlich said, “I understand that, but it just adds another complicating factor in the equation there. I don’t think another couple of weeks will matter. The ramp you are talking about there, how high is that ramp and how long?” For that discussion - see tape. Board Member Heimlich stated, “My question there would be, if you ever had to work on that tile at that point, whether you could dig that up and not affect that ramp.” Engineer Frauhiger said, “We have not started the drainage review on this yet, and that was one of the issues.” Board Member Heimlich said, “Well, we had said that we could put off an answer on that until after the BZA meeting. Our next meeting after that would be our first meeting in August. So we can deal with that later.”

Engineer Frauhiger presented drainage plans for Schmaltz’s Sycamore Drive In. Engineer Frauhiger reported, “We went out and looked at the site. They are requesting an exemption from the Drainage Ordinance to not have to put in a detention pond. Basically what they are doing is, their water will shed off of the developed property out to Washington Street into the existing curb line. It will go down, Washington Street has that ninety degree bend with the pipes under it right there. With the curb line, there’s a curb cut that drops in and goes underneath the pipes into a regional detention pond for this subdivision. We did meet with Doug Roberts (Monticello Street Superintendent) on site as a matter of fact it was raining pretty heavily when we met with him and water was going down Washington Street to the corner. There IS a problem right in the corner with a waterline that had been constructed previously and Washington Street has some underlying problems with the curb cut, it has dropped about four inches. The City is aware of that and they are going to repair that issue. The City has no problems with them discharging out to the curb line and letting it go down to the existing pipes and regional detention pond. We are ready to recommend this one for approval.” Chairman Burton asked, “So they drain onto the street?” Engineer Frauhiger answered, “They drain out onto the street. The water will go right out their driveway, onto the street and just follow the curb line down to the curb cut.” Board Member Ferguson asked what they will put in the building. Todd answered it is an ice cream drive in.

Board Member Heimlich moved to approve the drainage plan for Schmaltz’s Sycamore Drive In and the exemption from constructing a detention pond. Board Member Ferguson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Next on the agenda was drainage review for Ray Bixler Hog Buildings. Surveyor Sterrett stated the site is north of Willie Mote’s about three-quarters of a mile. Engineer Frauhiger said, “We have had a number of re-submittals on this project. This is the latest, came in last Thursday. The existing tile through the site was originally thought to be a fifteen inch tile and we went back to the original construction records and it is actually an eight inch tile. The Drainage Ordinance states that you are allowed to discharge at certain rates unless there is a downstream restriction because of a storm sewer or an open ditch that has a restriction. Then your discharge from the site can be reduced down to what we feel the downstream system can handle. In this particular case, since there is only an eight inch tile going through the property and all this water had to go into it, we reduced the allowable discharge from the site down to something we thought an eight inch tile could handle and not unduly affect the neighbors. If you notice, we have allowed a six inch connection from the two detention areas into the existing tile. There’s one here and one over here. We had a chance to talk to Steve (Paul Couts?) just a little bit, we did get them to, that tile is no longer running through the buildings. They relocated the tile pretty much the way we discussed it, around the building and not between them anymore.” Chairman Burton said originally the landowner wanted to relocate the tile out and around the buildings. Engineer Frauhiger showed the plans originally submitted and the tile was going to go right between the buildings. There were a number of reasons we had problems with that. They can also relocated this way and the tile is seventy-five feet away from the building and there is no reduction in the easement required. That is a County tile.” Chairman Burton said the original plan was to come down between the buildings and it would’ve been within thirty feet.

Engineer Frauhiger said, “If these two six inch tiles, I did the calculations over the weekend, if both of them are flowing with the water ponding in the ponds the way it will be, they will use approximately forty percent of the capacity of the eight inch tile at a hundred year storm. This is an earthen berm around the site so basically what’s going to happen is the area around the buildings …..inaudible.” Board Member Ferguson said,

“He’s going to pay for changing it.” Todd said that is correct. Board Member Ferguson said, “But it has to be reconstruction.” Engineer Frauhiger stated, “They are not changing the grade on it and not changing the size, so I don’t know.” Board Member Heimlich said, “But it’s a different route.” Engineer Frauhiger said, “It’s a different route. I know the easement is defined as seventy-five foot on either side of the center line of the tile. So, when the tile is relocated……..” Board Member Heimlich said, “I understand the easement, but on a County tile can you relocate it without a Hearing?” Attorney Loy stated, “It would be reconstruction. How many people are on the tile?” Surveyor Sterrett said, “There is nobody upstream from him, they are all downstream.” Attorney Loy said by law it is still reconstruction.

Attorney Loy asked, “He’s proposed to build right on top of the existing tile?” Board Member Heimlich said, “He’s changing the location.” Engineer Frauhiger said, “It looks like a portion of the relocation would be within the original easement, a small portion of it would be outside of the existing easement.” Attorney Loy said, “I don’t think the easement is the issue, it’s the relocation, same kind of tile, same……” Engineer Frauhiger said, “Actually he went a size bigger. That’s eight inch and he went with a ten inch.” Attorney Loy said, “All at his cost.”

Surveyor Sterrett stated, “Actually this drain is connected to the Amelia Suits Drain, so all the watershed includes the Suits, too. It is going to be forty people probably.”

Attorney Loy asked, “No way he could re-position his buildings so it (reconstruction) is not necessary? (Discussion followed – see tape) Giving him Consent to Encroach would be a lot simpler than relocation. Was he aware of this drain? (Surveyor answered yes) Technically it is reconstruction, which I think other people in the watershed would have a right to at least express and be heard.” Board Member Heimlich said, “By law we would have to have a Hearing. I can’t see that there would be any objections of any of it.” Property line was discussed – see tape. Attorney Loy said if he moved the buildings further north we could give him Consent to Encroach.

Engineer Frauhiger said, “Hydraulically we will give him two options. It will be reconstruction or move his buildings and reconstruction is going to take longer.” Notification of a Hearing is at least 30 days and less than 40 days. Attorney Loy said that all the costs of the Reconstruction Hearing will be borne by him. Board Member Heimlich said, “We can’t actually approve the drainage plan until, it involves the tile and we can’t move the tile without a Hearing.” Chairman Burton asked if Mr. Bixler had somewhat reflected that he didn’t want to move the proposed location of the buildings. Surveyor Sterrett answered yes. Board Member Heimlich said he figured he didn’t really want to do that, but just so he understands that it will take some time to have a Reconstruction Hearing.

Surveyor Sterrett stated, “The Engineer (Paul Couts) called him (Ray Bixler) after he found out that we really didn’t want the tile between the buildings and talked him into moving it to the south.” Discussion about moving berm if buildings are moved followed – see tape. Attorney Loy asked the name of the tile. It is the Royer Tile Branch of the Amelia Suits Drain and it is assessed with the Suits Drain. There is not a separate watershed for the Royer Branch. Engineer Frauhiger said he thinks it would be simpler if he moved his buildings. He said if you try to go through the reconstruction process the use of the buildings would probably be more of a topic than the tile. Discussion on which direction to move the proposed buildings – see tape. Engineer Frauhiger said all runoff is captured with the berm around the buildings (See tape).

Surveyor Sterrett asked if the Engineer is to be notified. Engineer Frauhiger said yes, he is the applicant, he submitted the work, so he will give Paul Couts a call and tell him it will either have to go through the reconstruction process for moving the tile or move the buildings north. Surveyor Sterrett asked if it would be advisable for him to move the buildings seventy-five foot north of the tile. Chairman Burton asked if he moves it north what are our absolute tolerances. Board Member Heimlich said obviously we could go closer than seventy-five feet, but the farther the better. Engineer Frauhiger said the tile is approximately four foot deep. (Drawing studied – see tape).

Board Member Heimlich said we don’t have a request for a consent to encroach. Attorney Loy asked if the elevations are the same if the buildings are moved. Surveyor Sterrett said the site is pretty flat. It was decided that the Board could not approve the drainage plan until the issue of moving the tile or the buildings is resolved. Chairman Burton asked Engineer Frauhiger to relay the information. Engineer Frauhiger agreed to do so.

Board Member Heimlich reported from the last Cass County Joint Board meeting on Indian Creek project. He said, “They had a request for Judicial Review on findings of the Cass County Joint Board on Indian Creek. The attorney representing the group requesting the Judicial Review is Courtney Justice. He spoke to the Board on a whole list of things. Most of them don’t amount to anything. There are two or three that our attorney says we will have to respond to, so we will see how long that will take. The main thing that they were challenging, the main objection they were arguing was that it should’ve not been a flat rate but a variable rate assessment. That certain landowners weren’t using as much of the ditch. There were 12 or 14 names. They did not specifically say they objected to adding in Little Indian Creek to the project. At least half of the objectors were on that portion of Little Indian Creek in Cass County. But I think there were also a couple of three from Pulaski County and I think there were a couple on there from Fulton County, too. So that’s where that stands right now.”

Board Member Heimlich reported that he did not attend the last Monon Ditch Joint Board meeting. There will be a meeting July 21st and they should be close to setting a Hearing date. The last meeting he went to they agreed to take proposals to spray and the bids came in way above what they had approved so it was back to the drawing board on that.

Chairman Burton adjourned the meeting.