Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Recorded drainage easement forces stormwater review, delays Wheeler development plan
Loading...
Summary
A recorded drainage easement discovered on the Wheeler site means the Development Review Committee will wait for the Stormwater Advisory and Management boards to weigh in before approving a two-building commercial development, staff said. Applicants may pull buildings back, seek an encroachment consent, or request an easement reduction.
The Porter County Development Review Committee on March 5 declined to give final development-plan approval for a proposed two-building commercial project at 625 West Wheeler after staff disclosed a recorded drainage easement that limits buildable area.
Kevin Poros of McMahon Associates, the applicant’s consultant, told the committee that plan checks showed the north building would encroach “roughly 6 feet” into the easement and the southwestern building’s western face would intrude about a foot, information the applicants said they only learned when staff circulated an easement agreement.
The discovery means the project must go to the county’s Stormwater Advisory Board (SWAB) and the Stormwater Management Board, Chelsea (stormwater staff) told the committee. “Submit your application … before April 1,” she said, and the SWAB meets April 13, with the management board scheduled to meet April 21.
County engineers and attorneys explained recorded documents show the easement was entered in 2012–2013, so it appears on title and constrains options without board action. Adam Swarden, representing the owner, asked whether the easement is proposed or recorded; Poros answered, “It’s in existence as of 2012.”
Staff outlined three practical paths the owner could pursue: move the buildings so they no longer intrude on the easement; seek formal consent from the stormwater board to allow the encroachment; or request a narrowing of the easement based on historical drainage data and post‑installation improvements. Poros said the owner would accept whichever remedy the boards permit and would revise plans accordingly.
Committee members also raised related site-utility concerns: the new buildings are expected to tie to the White Oak sanitary system rather than septic because soils are wet, and highway staff reminded the owner that northern entrance approaches currently surfaced with crushed material will need to be hard-surfaced to meet county standards if development proceeds.
Given the easement issue, the DRC agreed it would withhold a recommendation pending the stormwater boards’ decisions. Chelsea said the applicant could return quickly to DRC after the management board acts; members proposed reconvening as soon as two days after that board’s April 21 meeting.
The committee limited its comments to high-level input until the stormwater process concludes and asked the applicant to submit revised drawings that show the recorded easement so reviewers can evaluate options.
Next steps: the applicant will file a stormwater application by April 1, appear before SWAB on April 13 and the Stormwater Management Board on April 21; DRC may reconvene shortly afterward to act on the boards’ determination.
