Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hebron board approves 129‑lot 'Hebron Landing' preliminary plan, with conditions after residents press flooding, wetlands and well concerns

Village of Hebron Board of Planning and Zoning · July 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Planning and Zoning approved a preliminary plan for M/I Homes’ 129‑lot Hebron Landing on May 6, 2024, attaching conditions including a formal wetlands determination, buffers/barriers where lots meet farmland and safety measures for nearby wells. Neighbors raised concerns about wetlands, drainage and driveway access.

The Village of Hebron Planning & Zoning Board voted May 6 to approve a preliminary planned residential development for M/I Homes called Hebron Landing, a 129‑lot, for‑sale single‑family community, but attached conditions requiring a wetlands determination, defined buffers/barriers where new rear lots adjoin farmland and measures addressing safety concerns around existing wells.

Developer Andy Gossner told the Board the proposal is a “129‑lot community with single‑family homes that are all a for sale product,” and emphasized design features, saying, “A few things that are important in the plan that we wanted to highlight are that over 50 percent of this site is comprised of open space.” Gossner and his team described a variety of floor plans and said homes are being designed on slabs because of a high water table.

The proposal drew detailed scrutiny from neighbors and the Board on stormwater, wetlands and access. Resident Mike Painter said he had been told by a farmer that M/I representatives had asked the farmer to till through wet spots and “close to 40, so they wouldn't be stopped from building homes,” a message Painter said raised alarms about wetlands and site preparation. John Slater pressed whether a formal wetland determination had been made: “Has there been a wetland determination been made or is there one being made? Is there a history?”

Developer counsel David Hodge said M/I’s engineering consultant, EMH&T, concluded that the parcel area cited by residents is not a regulated wetland: “EMH&T has studied the property and they have come to the conclusion that that area is not a wetland and that's why it got planned like it is. Now, if the US Army Corp or somebody comes in and says that's a wetland, then you can't do lots there.”

On flood risk and stormwater controls, Village‑contracted engineer Steven (V3) and consultant Steven Kopechek reiterated that post‑development runoff must be controlled to meet state and local standards. Kopechek told the Board the design standard includes the 1‑percent chance (100‑year) event: “We do design up to the 1 percent chance storm, also referred to as the 100‑year storm. So they will have to be able to prove … the release flow rate from their site in the post‑developed condition is no more than what goes in the existing 100‑year scenario.” Hodge added the law “prohibits the off‑site flow of water by a drop,” and said the plan must demonstrate control of all stormwater on the site.

Neighbors also asked for firm assurances about access and property boundaries where the new lots back to farmland. Several raised concerns about stub streets and possible trespass through farm driveways; developer attorney David Hodge said temporary measures such as bollards, split‑rail fencing or landscaping to demarcate property lines would be considered and committed M/I to discuss options. Resident Curt Painter said the presence of oil and gas collection points and a well pad on adjacent land raised safety concerns for children and operations; he urged sustained neighborhood engagement.

After discussion, the board approved the preliminary plan and attached conditions requiring (1) a definitive wetlands determination to be provided with future engineering, (2) clearly identified and agreed barriers/buffers between the new lots and adjacent agricultural properties including protections at the stub road dead‑ends, and (3) steps to identify and mitigate safety concerns associated with nearby wells and tanking/collection equipment prior to final plan approval. Mayor Valerie Mockus and the Board emphasized that detailed engineering, traffic studies and final stormwater plans will be required at the final plan stage.

Next steps: the developer will proceed with engineering and the Board will expect a wetlands determination, finalized stormwater design, and documentation of the barriers and well‑safety measures before a final plat or final site plan returns to the Board for approval.