Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meadowbrook Encroachment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise downstream flooding concerns as 4 Star seeks encroachment; board continues Meadowbrook hearing
Summary
4 Star Group presented an encroachment and drainage plan for the Meadowbrook/Roberts Pruner area; developer representatives said detention ponds reduce peak flows, but a downstream landowner urged the board to require additional measures. The board continued the item to the next meeting pending town comments.
Developer representatives for a proposed Meadowbrook/Scottsdale subdivision told the Johnson County Drainage Board on Aug. 5 that detention ponds and outlet controls will reduce peak flows to the downstream legal drain, but at least one downstream landowner urged caution and additional study.
Gavin Baker, representing Kimberly Horn and Associates, said the Meadowbrook site contains about 151.3 acres split by State Road 135 and includes Sections 1A and 1B totaling roughly 70 acres with about 140 single‑family lots. "The overall site contains approximately a 151.3 acres with roughly split in the half of State Road 135," Baker said.
During public comment, landowner Larry Vandenberg said runoff from recent rain events already floods his property and that past culverts and the county tile are not adequate. Vandenberg showed photos he said documented overtopping and suggested a 3‑foot reinforced concrete pipe along a fence line to redirect flow.
Cheyenne Hoffa, entitlements manager for 4 Star Group, said the developer has met with Vandenberg and that the firm is not physically impacting a nearby legal drain and has routed most on‑site flow to detention ponds. Gavin Baker said the project model shows reductions in peak flows and that detention basins will drain within about 48 to 72 hours. "Even with that off‑site, you still see a reduction of 50% from the peak hundred year flow," Baker said of the engineered design.
Board members pressed for confirmation from the municipality of Bargersville (transcript spelling varies) and for any outstanding comments from town staff. The board voted to continue the hearing for the Meadowbrook application to the next scheduled meeting after the town provides outstanding comments so the board can consider that input before final action. The hearing was closed to further public comment for the continuance, with the board noting that follow‑up technical questions could be asked of the developer at the next meeting.
The continuation was approved by voice vote. The board asked staff to provide outstanding comments to the developer and to confirm whether renotification of neighbors would be required prior to final action.
