Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detention Pond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge St John to fix Eastgate detention pond after muskrat deaths, stagnant water
Summary
Two Eastgate residents told the Redevelopment Commission the neighborhood detention pond holds water year-round, drawing muskrats and creating a mosquito and public-health concern; the town said staff will follow up and noted that the HOA and developer involvement complicate enforcement.
Two residents told the St John Redevelopment Commission on Feb. 24 that a detention pond in the Eastgate subdivision has persistently held water since at least May 2024, causing muskrat deaths and creating mosquito-breeding and public-health concerns.
At the meeting, resident Jeff Swarnen, who identified himself as living at 10374 Brian Place, said he has found dead muskrats in his backyard and that a trapper warned any removal would be temporary because “the pond is so big and it doesn't drain.” He said he contacted St. John Animal Control and the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, which referred him to a trapper, and that the HOA and developer have not resolved drainage problems.
Resident Lylvester Denim, 10364 Brian Place, told the commission the pond “should be drained after each rain within 48 hours” but instead remains stagnant, which he said leads to both muskrat foraging into yards and mosquito breeding. Denim said drone footage shows water standing below drain elevations and that the pond “has never been dry” since he moved in.
Commissioners and staff discussed responsibility for maintenance. Speakers said the HOA is controlled by the developer until a specified number of lots sell, and residents reported the HOA has declined to perform engineering work. A commission member noted the Gates Coalition — an organized neighbor group referenced at the meeting — has retained legal counsel; the panel requested communications go through that lawyer and the town attorney. Town staff indicated they would follow up and get back to the residents.
The public comments placed three items on the record for follow-up: (1) a request that the town examine whether the detention pond meets code and whether the developer must correct drainage; (2) an identification of public-health risks tied to stagnant water, muskrats and mosquitoes; and (3) a request for staff to coordinate next steps with the HOA, developer and any retained counsel. The meeting record does not show a formal enforcement action taken at the session.
The commission did not vote on pond-related measures that evening; town staff said they would investigate and respond to the residents’ concerns.
