Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Flooding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges stormwater action after chronic flooding around 1926 Chesterton home
Summary
At a Chesterton Redevelopment Commission meeting, resident Spencer Smith described prolonged flooding at his 4050 Leah Hane Road property, said he pays a stormwater fee but has received little relief, and was told the stormwater board has jurisdiction and downstream drains are at capacity.
Spencer Smith said at the meeting that his property at 4050 Leah Hane Road has been a long‑standing flood problem and that recent rains left about a foot to one and a half feet of water around his house, putting roughly $30,000 of equipment at risk. "My garage is almost flooded now," Smith said, and he told commissioners he has been pumping water from his yard into neighboring subdivision drains that appear to work.
Town and street staff responded that they inspected the site and that the problem predates recent development, noting the drain system downstream is currently beyond capacity. A staff member said, "even if [the drain] were to connect into that drain, it would have nowhere to go" because downstream infrastructure is inundated. The staff response identified the stormwater board as the appropriate jurisdiction for long‑term capacity solutions.
The commission and staff discussed possible short‑term measures: Smith said Mark Odell previously suggested jetting the drain, but staff cautioned that jetting alone would not address the larger capacity constraints. Smith told the panel he has paid a stormwater drainage fee and said, "I'm going to keep showing up," describing stress from repeatedly pumping water and the risk to his home.
The commission advised Smith to continue working with the stormwater board and offered to follow up by phone. The record shows no formal direction to change policies or allocate funds from the redevelopment commission; staff described the issue as regional in scope and tied to both county and town stormwater capacity.
The next procedural step noted at the meeting was continued engagement with the separate stormwater board and additional staff follow‑up; no formal motion or funding commitment by the redevelopment commission was recorded on this item.
Ending
Smith and staff agreed to keep communications open; the staff member who inspected the property said they would provide a phone update and urged Smith to continue coordinating with the stormwater board.
