Lebanon council approves road infrastructure deal with Orla LLC (Project Domino/Meta) amid water and environmental concerns

The Lebanon City Council voted to approve Resolution 2026‑02, authorizing an infrastructure agreement between the city and Orla LLC — the developer identified in the meeting record and referred to during discussion as Project Domino or Meta. The resolution approves a broadly scoped set of road projects that Kevin, a city staff presenter, said Orla LLC will fully fund; the agreement addresses construction and reconstruction of several county roads and the design and partial construction of a new County Road 200 West.

Kevin described four principal projects: reconstruction of County Road 200 North (County Road 500 West to 350 West); reconstruction of County Road 350 West (200 North to US 52); reconstruction of County Road 400 North (350 West to US 52); and construction of a new County Road 200 West (State Road 32 to the future Old US 52). He said Orla LLC would reconstruct pavement sections to meet the city’s commercial collector and secondary arterial standards, coordinate any county permits where segments fall under county jurisdiction, and accept responsibility for repairing construction‑related damage to the roads and adjacent transportation systems. For the new 200 West project, Kevin said the agreement covers outer lanes, curbs, trails, lighting and drainage infrastructure; the inner lanes would be left for later buildout pending traffic study results.

Kevin told the council Orla LLC will pay 100% of the listed improvements and that some right‑of‑way for the 200 West project is controlled by the IEDC and expected to be donated. He also said a traffic impact study is underway and that a second memorandum of understanding may follow to define additional improvements required by the study.

Several residents and visitors urged council members to pause or reject the agreement, citing concerns that go beyond roads. Colleen Curtin said, “I think you have a data center problem, and I think I have a water problem,” and warned diesel‑generator emissions and other impacts could affect air quality and wetlands. Dan Boots, a Marion County councilor who said he chairs a parks committee, told the council he was “quite sensitive about taking money out of a sensitive ecological area as Eagle Creek” and warned that the project’s discharge could affect a nationally recognized birding area. Boots and other public speakers cited a figure of 25,000,000 gallons per day as the anticipated treated effluent associated with the LEAP project and urged the city to seek upstream discharge locations and more robust pretreatment.

City officials repeatedly clarified the resolution under consideration was limited to roads and not the utility approvals or wastewater discharge; staff said utility studies and anti‑degradation reports are handled by Lebanon Utilities and IDEM and that utility presentations and reports would be posted when available. Kevin said the city’s system would not be left to bear road repairs because Orla and its contractors would be contractually responsible for repairs and excessive wear during construction, with a seven‑day repair window on written notice before the city or county could step in and invoice for costs.

After public comment and council discussion, a council member moved to approve Resolution 2026‑02; the motion was seconded and passed by voice vote. The record shows the council also scheduled an engineering presentation from the utility/engineering team for a future meeting and said documents would be posted to city and utility portals for public review.

Key factual items from the meeting record: - Orla LLC is listed in the resolution as owning approximately 1,437 acres within the LEAP district (as recited by the staff reader). - Kevin stated Orla LLC will pay 100% of the road improvements described in the agreement. - Public commenters repeatedly raised environmental concerns — especially water sourcing and treated effluent discharge to Eagle Creek Reservoir — and asked for anti‑degradation and environmental analyses to be published and independently reviewed.

The council approved the infrastructure agreement by voice vote and closed public comment; follow‑up presentations from utility and engineering staff were promised for upcoming meetings.