By KEVIN NEVERS

Backyards like lakes. Sump pumps running continuously no matter what the weather. Rich breeding grounds for mosquitoes but no place for kids to play.

That’s what the residents of Westwood Manor immediately north of C.R. 1050N in Crocker say it’s like to live in their subdivision. “Everybody in that area has a problem with water,” Gary Steindler told the Chesterton Town Council at its meeting Monday night. “The detention pond is drier than our yards.”

Adding insult to injury–or perhaps injury to injury, so far as the Westwood Manorites are concerned–is the fact that their developer, Don Coker, is proposing to build a brand-new subdivision on the south side of C.R. 1050, just to the west of Abercrombie Woods, on a 39-acre parcel whose owners, Larry and Christine Wright, have asked the Town Council to annex.

Before Coker develops anything new, Joe Wrigley advised members, he needs to fix the drainage problems at Westwood Manor.

Indeed, Sheila Haines wondered, doesn’t Coker’s desire to develop a new subdivision on land not even annexed give the Town Council some leverage over him?

One after another, the Westwood Manorites recited a litany of water woes. Kristin Davies said that in her nine-foot basement, built into a water table recorded at six feet, her sump pump runs every two minutes. “If my sump pump fails I’m going to be flooded.” Meanwhile, she remarked, it’s “mosquito heaven” in her backyard and with the threat of West Nile virus she’s fearful of letting her kids play there, even liberally dosed with repellant. “If I have any more water coming my way, I don’t know what I’m going to do.”

Mary Franklin told the Town Council that she called the Building Department to advise it of the “lake” in her backyard. Didn’t the developer have to submit plans for final grade? Franklin said that she asked, And who enforces those plans? Franklin was told, she said, that the Building Department can’t “possibly look at every house.”

Town Attorney Chuck Lukmann noted in response that the Town Council will soon be enacting a new requirement which obligates developers to submit an as-built survey.

Scott Miller, a resident of Abercrombie Woods, was dismissive. “I don’t have a warm and fuzzy” being assured that the new development won’t repeat the problems of the old one.

Cassandra Rozycki wanted to know who approved eight- and nine-foot basements with a six-foot water table.

At this point Member Mike Bannon, R-5th, asked department heads to provide the Town Council with a report. “It’s my understanding that the drainage plans met all requirements but that (the builders) didn’t do it the way they were supposed to,” he said.

The Westwood Manorites perked up at Bannon’s comment. What didn’t the builders do? they wanted to know.

“They were supposed to bring in fill and they didn’t do it,” Bannon replied.

For the record Coker flatly denied being responsible for the problem. “We didn’t drop the ball,” he said, after sitting quietly through the complaints. “We didn’t build the homes.” After the meeting, several department heads told the Chesterton Tribune that, at his own expense, Coker subsequently installed backyard drains, which are now a requirement under Town Standards but were not at the time of Westwood Manor’s construction.

Department heads also told the Tribune that the issue of the water table is something of a red herring. Water tables change from season to season and even from week to week. A water table measured at six feet one day could be much deeper the next.

In addition, department heads told the Tribune that ground water pumped from the sumps and discharged into backyards is largely the problem, not any inadequacy in the design of the stormwater drainage system. Residents of Westwood Manor have been advised to discharge their sump pumps into their front yards, allowing the stormwater drainage system to flow it from their property. Few of them have done so, however.

The Town Council urged residents to bring their issues to the next meeting of the Stormwater Management Board, at 6:15 p.m. Monday. “This is the first we’ve heard of this problem,” President Dave Cincoski, R-3rd, told the Westwood Manorites.

Other Comments

Residents of Westwood Manor and Abercrombie Woods had other concerns as well, though. In particular the proposed R-2 and R-3 units perturbed Davis, who voiced the fear that such residential development would adversely impact their property values. “We don’t mind single family,” she said, “so long as its $250,000 and up.”

Bannon observed that the Town Council “can’t demand a certain price point of the developer. We’ve never done that and we’re not going to do that.” In any case, he said, the proposed subdivision would act as a buffer between Abercrombie Woods and Westwood Manor to the east and the industrially zoned district to the west, adjacent to Ind. 149. Nevertheless, Bannon added, as a member of the Advisory Plan Commission he is personally opposed to the development of R-3 in the annexation area.

Isn’t it possible that the developer could say that he planned to do R-1 and then decide to do R-2 and R-3 instead? Michaelene Hanley asked. After all, she ventured, apparently the developer of Abercrombie Woods had planned to develop R-2 but actually built R-1.

That, Bannon promised, will never happen again. It won’t be possible, because the annexation agreement approved by the Town Council later in the evening refers to no potential uses at all and requires the annexation area to be developed as a planned unit development, which gives the Advisory Plan Commission and Town Council extraordinary control over the design of the subdivision.

For his part Dave Benak asked whether anyone has done any traffic studies. As it is, he said, “we can’t handle the traffic volume going through there now.”

The Town Council did not specifically address Benak’s comment, but department heads told the Tribune after the meeting that at the moment there is no traffic problem on C.R. 1050N.

In the end members voted 5-0 to approve a revised annexation agreement with the Wrights and 5-0 to approve a fiscal plan for the subdivision. They also voted 4-1, with Member Sharon Darnell, D-4th, in dissent, to untable the annexation ordinance itself. But they took no action on that annexation ordinance.

Annexation fiscal plan heard

By KEVIN NEVERS

In 2008 it’s projected that the Town of Chesterton would spend $11,421 to provide services to the 39 acres which Larry and Christine Wright have asked the Town Council to annex on C.R. 1050N in Crocker, immediately west of the Abercrombie Woods subdivision.

But in that same year it’s estimated that the annexation area would generate $37,283 in various user fees–chiefly for sanitary sewer service and tap-ons–for a surplus of $25,862.

In 2012, on the other hand, the town would spend $45,558 on services but receive $97,482 in revenues, for a surplus of $51,924.

So projects the fiscal plan prepared at the Wrights’ expense by H.J. Umbaugh & Associates. At its meeting Monday night, the Town Council voted 5-0 to adopt that fiscal plan.

Highlights from the plan:

•Umbaugh noted that it is “undetermined” at this time whether the town would need to hire additional police officers or firefighters.

•Umbaugh estimated the annual cost to the town of street maintenance and brush and snow removal in the annexation area at $3,215 and storm sewer costs at $1,000.

•In 2009 solid waste costs–offset by user fee revenues–would be $972, Umbaugh estimated; in 2013, $31,515.

•In 2009 sewage works costs–offset by user fee revenues–would be $6,2343, Umbaugh estimated; in 2013, $31,515.

•Umbaugh notes in the fiscal plan that the proposed developer, Don Coker, would make a contribution of $60,000 for the purchase of future park lands, and that he would pay $200 per residential unit for the purchase of any equipment needed to serve the development.

Annexation Agreement

Meanwhile, the Town Council voted 5-0 to approve an annexation agreement with the Wrights. But by unanimous votes members first revised that agreement as follows:

•The first change eliminates all language referring to potential uses of the annexation area. The original document had proposed 45 R-1 units, 20 R-2 units, and a six-unit R-3 building. It had also proposed to develop the westmost 15 acres with B-3 uses and allow for a convenience store with gas pumps, drive-through facilities for banks and restaurants, and outside storage on the extreme western edge of the property.

•The second change stipulates clearly that no development shall take place at all except through a planned unit development ordinance to be negotiated by the Advisory Plan Commission and approved by the Town Council.

Members voted for these changes after residents of Abercrombie Woods and Westwood Manor–a subdivision immediately north of Abercrombie Woods–objected in particular to the R-2 and R-3 uses on the grounds that such uses would jeopardize their property values.

For his part Member Mike Bannon, R-5th–who sits on the Advisory Plan Commission–said that he himself objects to R-3 in the annexation area.

The Annexation Ordinance

Members then voted 4-1 to untable the annexation ordinance itself. Member Sharon Darnell, D-4th, voted against the motion. By consensus, however, they took no action on the annexation ordinance to give residents primarily of Westwood Manor concerned about the impact of the proposed subdivision an opportunity to first address the Stormwater Management Board at its next meeting, 6:15 p.m. Monday.

Another Annexation

In other business, the Town Council voted 5-0 to schedule a public hearing for 7 p.m. June 11 on another annexation, this one requested by I-80 Partners LLC for approximately 45 acres of property immediately south of the Indiana Toll Road and east of Ind. 49.

Attorney Cliff Fleming, representing I-80 Partners, has indicated that his clients wish to develop a mixed-use residential and commercial project in the annexation area.

Posted 5/16/2007