Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Porter County to seek $21,880 HOA share as it moves to take over Foxchase Farm stormwater system
Summary
After a staff presentation showing $676,220 in preliminary repair needs, the board directed staff to pursue a memorandum of understanding to accept Foxchase Farm's stormwater infrastructure into county inventory and seek a $21,880 cost share from the homeowners association.
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Porter County stormwater staff recommended, and the board agreed, to pursue a memorandum of understanding to bring the Foxchase Farm subdivision’s stormwater infrastructure into the county inventory and seek a $21,880 cost share from the homeowners association to cover repairs outside the public right-of-way.
The recommendation followed a staff presentation detailing the findings of a stormwater infrastructure study for Foxchase Farm, a roughly 100-lot subdivision platted in 1994. “The preliminary cost summary for the identified issues throughout the subdivision … was $676,220,” the Stormwater Program Manager told the board, and staff said $260,880 of that total applied to defects not in the road right-of-way. Staff calculated the subdivision’s 20-year capture rate of the stormwater user fee at $240,000 (100 lots × $120 × 20 years), leaving a difference of $436,220 against the full cost and $21,880 for the portion outside the right-of-way.
The study identified 43 storm sewer segments: 10 could not be inspected (full of debris or water) and were recommended for full replacement; 17 were in poor condition and also recommended for reconstruction; 15 were medium priority, likely candidates for cleaning, point repairs or pipelining; and one segment was in good condition.
Board members debated where responsibility should fall. Several commissioners noted the POA had been collecting the stormwater fee but had been responsible for maintenance under historical practice. Commissioners and staff also said materials and inspection standards in the 1990s differed from current rules and that deferred maintenance likely raised repair costs. One commissioner summarized the dilemma: although the POA had been paying the fee, the county approved the original systems and standards were lower at the time.
After discussion of options — ranging from asking the HOA to cover the $21,880 figure up to seeking a much larger cost share — the board voted to direct staff to work with the Foxchase HOA and legal counsel to draft an MOU to accept the infrastructure into county inventory and to seek the $21,880 contribution for repairs outside the road right-of-way. “I will work with the HOA … and bring this infrastructure into our inventory and then seek a cost share for the $21,880,” staff said when outlining next steps.
Board members said this case highlights a broader policy choice about which subdivisions the county will accept and how the stormwater user fee should be structured. Staff said the county will address those questions during an upcoming strategic planning process and noted any fee adjustment would require outreach to elected officials and the public.
Next steps: staff will draft the proposed MOU with the HOA and legal counsel and return to the board with recommended terms; the board flagged strategic planning and potential stormwater-rate policy changes as follow-up items.

