Town of Cedar Lake
Plan Commission
Public Meeting Minutes

Pledge of Allegiance

Mr. Kiepura called the meeting to order and led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call

Minutes

Minutes of the May 5, 2026 Work Session, May 20, 2026 Public Meeting, June 3, 2026 Work Session, and June 3, 2026 Special Public Meeting were distributed in advance. No corrections were noted.

Motion to approve the May 5, 2026 Work Session, May 20, 2026 Public Meeting, June 3, 2026 Work Session, and June 3, 2026 Special Public Meeting minutes made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Hunley.

Motion carries, 7–0.

Old Business

1. 2023-06 — Centennial Townhomes (Olthof Homes) — PUD Amendment Extension — Approved (7–0)

Kevin Paszko (Olthof Homes, St. John) appeared. He noted that since the application was filed, both parcels have been fully closed and are now owned by Olthof Homes entities (no longer 133 LBM LLC). Land development activity began May 26, 2026. A building permit will not be pulled before the July 2 current expiration date, necessitating the extension. Mr. Paszko indicated he does not anticipate needing the full year; the extension is precautionary.

Motion to approve the one-year extension of the Centennial Townhomes PUD Plan from July 2, 2026 to July 2, 2027 made by Mr. Carnahan; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 7–0.

2. 2025-11 — Nathan D. Vis — Preliminary Plat — Friary Farms — Approved (7–0)

Mr. Vis was unable to attend due to concurrent Lake County meetings. He emailed Mr. Kiepura in advance advising of the conflict and noting the preliminary plat is straightforward, conforming with the existing PUD, and that he had received no negative feedback since the prior presentation.

Scott Filler (12921 Parish Avenue, Cedar Lake) appeared as the property owner and confirmed his understanding of and support for the plat application. Mr. Austgen confirmed the item can proceed with the property owner present; Mr. Vis’s attendance as attorney/petitioner is not required in this circumstance. Mr. Sherry and Mr. Kubiak confirmed no outstanding technical issues. The plat is consistent with the previously approved PUD and prior presentations to the Commission.

Motion to approve the preliminary plat for 2025-11 (Nathan D. Vis / BSC Real Estate LLC) for Friary Farms at 12921 Parish Avenue made by Mr. Becker; seconded by Mr. Parker.

Motion carries, 7–0.

3. 2026-10 — SpaceX — Satellite Earth Station Antennas (SESAs) — Approved (5–2)

Hannah Boris (appearing virtually on behalf of SpaceX), Allison Canter (TEP Engineering, appearing virtually), and Ken Lyons (Wireless Policy Group, appearing virtually) presented. Ms. Boris summarized responses to open questions raised at the June 3 work session:

• Nearest existing facility: Located in Newton County, Indiana (correcting a reference to Jackson County made at the work session). The facility is older and uses chain link fencing; the Cedar Lake proposal uses a solid metal panel fence for superior screening.
• Data center location: The associated data center is located in Chicago, Illinois. No new data center is being constructed in connection with this application. The facility will connect via existing third-party fiber optic infrastructure.
• Knox Box: A Knox Box will be installed for emergency responder access, as shown on updated site plan Sheet C4.1.
• Noise: Conservative sound propagation calculations (all 40 antennas at maximum fan speed simultaneously, without fence attenuation) show noise at the nearest property line to be approximately equivalent to normal conversation level. A post-construction noise study could be required as a condition if the Commission chooses.
• Antenna azimuth directions: Directional arrows on site plan drawings indicate antenna azimuths (pointing direction toward satellites). No significance to public safety or adjacent properties.
• Fence and antenna height: Both the fence and the top of the proposed antennas are 8 feet 2 inches above grade, providing full visual screening.

Mr. Carnahan, attending his first discussion of this item, asked Ms. Boris to summarize the open questions for the record. Mr. Kiepura asked whether the fence would fully screen the antennas given that the side profile appeared taller; Ms. Boris confirmed both are exactly 8 feet 2 inches. No remonstrators appeared. Mr. Kubiak had no building department concerns.

Motion to approve the SpaceX SESA site plan (2026-10) at 13760 Osborne Street as reflected in the amended site plans submitted with the response letter made by Mr. Becker; seconded by Mr. Parker.

Motion carries, 5–2. Site plan APPROVED.

4. 2026-12 — Azucar Ice Cream Shop — Outdoor Seating Area — Deferred to July Public Meeting

No petitioner appeared. Mr. Kiepura noted the item requires coordination with both the BZA (for the use variance, also pending) and completion of newspaper publication and certified mail notification requirements. The matter has been continued at the BZA level to July 9. The Plan Commission defers to the next public meeting following BZA resolution.

Motion to defer 2026-12 (Azucar Ice Cream Shop) to the July 2026 public meeting made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Hunley.

Motion carries, 7–0.

5. 2026-14 — Majesky — Site Plan Waiver — Deferred to July 1, 2026 Work Session

Attorney Roy Dominguez (Merrillville) appeared on behalf of Mr. Majesky. Norman Majesky also appeared to speak to his operations. The site has been in use as a used car dealership and automotive service center for approximately 11 years. Mr. Majesky has been leasing a second building on the property (owned by Henn & Sons) for seven months without yet obtaining a site plan waiver for the expanded use; he wishes to use it for additional vehicle service and display of vintage automobiles.

Discussion was extensive. Key issues identified by the Commission:

• Prior waivers (All Tire expansion): The Commission determined that a prior site plan approval (approximately 2005) for an “All Tire” expansion on the same property granted multiple waivers, including waivers for stormwater improvements, parking lot improvements, and lot dimensions. The Commission does not have that prior approval readily available. All prior waivers remain in effect and must be listed alongside any new waivers in the formal approval. Mr. Kubiak was directed to locate the All Tire expansion documentation.
• Vehicle delivery safety concern: Mr. Parker raised a serious public safety concern: car haulers currently stop on the shoulder of US 41 to unload vehicles, blocking line of sight for drivers exiting the property’s north driveway into the southbound right lane. Mr. Majesky acknowledged the difficulty; he directs drivers to pull in between the two driveways, but broker-assigned drivers do not always comply. The Commission agreed this must be addressed as an enforceable condition. Chief Gruszka was suggested as a resource for discussing enforcement options. Mr. Dominguez agreed to work with his client on a protocol.
• Parking space size waiver: The ordinance requires 10×20-foot parking spaces for customer use. The 60 proposed spaces on the site plan are not all full size — this was acknowledged as a waiver that must be formally listed in the approval. The Commission noted there is no separate ordinance provision for used car inventory spaces; a waiver is required. Spaces must be painted, numbered, and maintained. Mr. Kiepura confirmed the maximum of 60 total vehicle spaces (including dealer inventory, customer, and employee vehicles) as an enforceable cap.
• No engineered site plan: The current submission is a hand-drawn sketch without certified measurements verifying whether 60 vehicles actually fit on the site. The Commission will require a stamped, engineered site plan before approval.
• INDOT US 41 widening: A planned INDOT turn lane project (109th Avenue to 135th Avenue) will affect the property in 2027 or later, potentially reducing the parking footprint significantly. This should be noted as a condition.
• Property owner (Henn) to be invited: Since conditions will also bind the property owner, Mr. Henn or a representative of Henn & Sons should attend the work session.

The Commission reached consensus to defer to the July 1 work session, where staff will have retrieved the prior waivers, Mr. Dominguez will have discussed the car unloading protocol with Chief Gruszka, and an engineered site plan will be in progress.

Motion to defer 2026-14 (Majesky) to the July 1, 2026 Plan Commission work session made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 7–0.

Letters of Credit

1. Cedar Lake Storage — Performance Letter of Credit — Pull Date Set: June 25, 2026

Chris Porter (Cedar Lake Storage, appearing virtually) reported that site preparation for the sidewalk has begun but contractor scheduling delays caused by unfavorable weather have pushed the completion timeline. Mr. Porter stated he has made clear to the contractor that the work must be done by end of June. Given the LOC expires July 1, the Commission set a formal pull date of June 25, 2026, ensuring the Town has time to act if the sidewalk is not complete.

Motion to set a pull date of June 25, 2026 for the Cedar Lake Storage Performance Letter of Credit made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 6–1.

2. Summerwinds Units 1, 2, and 3 — Performance Letters of Credit — Pull Date Set: June 18, 2026

Brad Lambert (8865 Crooked Bend, St. John), 50% development partner, appeared. He reported that approximately 1,600 square feet of sidewalk has been replaced to date, with approximately 1,200 square feet of resurfacing remaining, and that he expected to pour additional concrete the following day. All other non-sidewalk punch list items (drain tile riser, fire hydrant flags) have been completed.

Mr. Lambert stated that, on advice of his attorney (David Buls, Krieg DeVault firm, currently out of the country), he was present only to submit the maintenance letter of credit in the amount of $215,432.18 — and was not in a position to post the additional $50,000 performance bond for sidewalks required by the June 3, 2026 Special Public Meeting vote. He declined to elaborate further on his attorney’s advice.

The Commission’s analysis and deliberation:

• The June 3 Special Public Meeting motion was predicated on Mr. Lambert posting the $50,000 sidewalk performance bond simultaneously with the maintenance LOC. This was an on-the-record condition.
• Mr. Austgen confirmed the verbal agreement made at the June 3 meeting constitutes an enforceable reasonable condition under Indiana planning law. The Board did not simply accept a maintenance LOC without the performance bond — the two were conditioned upon each other.
• If the Commission accepts only the maintenance LOC without the $50,000 bond, there is no separate security for sidewalk completion.
• If the Commission does nothing and the performance LOCs expire (June 20 and June 23), the Town has nothing — no performance security, no maintenance security.
• By setting a pull date for June 18 (the following day), the Town collects the full $538,580.46 in performance LOC proceeds, which will be used to complete all remaining public improvements in the subdivision, including the sidewalks, under the Town Engineer’s direction.
• Mr. Parker noted this is the most serious performance bond situation he has encountered in his tenure on the Commission. He expressed frustration but acknowledged the Town had no other viable option once Lambert refused to post the $50,000.
• Mr. Sherry will coordinate with Lambert Concrete (which has been actively performing work) on completing the remaining concrete work. Mr. Austgen will facilitate the financial transfer.

Motion to set a pull date of June 18, 2026 for the Summerwinds Units 1, 2, and 3 Performance Letters of Credit (combined total $538,580.46), with Mr. Sherry to provide the accurate LOC amounts by email to Mr. Austgen’s office by the following morning, made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 7–0.

Update Items

1 and 2. Beacon Pointe Units 6 and 7 — Performance Letters of Credit

Mr. Sherry reported CBBEL completed a roadway inspection prior to final surface asphalt; the roadway is in good condition. The developer (Diamond Peak for Unit 6; McFarland Homes for Unit 7) plans to place the final surface asphalt within the next two weeks. Mr. Sherry will conduct additional punch list inspections before the July meeting. The intent is to combine both LOCs into a single maintenance LOC at the July public meeting once asphalt is complete.

Mr. Kiepura expressed hesitation about rolling LOCs together given the Summerwinds experience. Mr. Sherry explained the administrative advantage and noted that unlike Summerwinds, these projects are substantially complete and the developers are performing. No action taken.

Status: On track. Developer to place final surface asphalt within two weeks. Combined maintenance LOC to be presented at July public meeting.

3. Birchwood Phases 1–3, 5 — Maintenance Letter of Credit

Mr. Sherry reported the combined punch list from CBBEL and Public Works was sent to Olthof Homes on June 12. There are items on the list but they are mostly minor. With exactly two months until the August 16 expiration, the project is on track.

Status: Punch list distributed. On track. Update at July meeting.

Additional Business — Surf Internet (Agenda Amendment)

Motion to amend the agenda to add the Surf Internet matter made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 7–0.

Surf Internet — Stop Work Order and Withdrawal of Approval

Mr. Parker raised the Surf Internet fiber installation project, noting that Mr. Recupito had asked the Plan Commission to address the matter given serious complaints received about the contractor’s work in Cedar Point Park and other areas of Town.

Mr. Kubiak provided an update: Phase 1 is complete and has been inspected; Phase 2 is currently underway and not yet complete; Phase 3 work has also begun. The contractor is permitted to work on two phases simultaneously. Phase 3 work has not been formally permitted. Mr. Kubiak indicated he met with a Surf Internet representative that week and expressed serious concerns. He has also received photos and reports of the following issues:

• Fiber conduit and equipment placed on private property outside the right-of-way in Cedar Point Park and possibly elsewhere
• Property survey stakes removed by the contractor
• Boring conducted under private homes
• Trench patches and road cuts of inconsistent quality
• In at least one case, a contractor vehicle was used to bring equipment onto private property — a resident (Skip Gasche) confronted the crew and took the vehicle keys, resulting in a police response

Mr. Kubiak noted he is meeting with the Surf Internet representative on June 18 to begin addressing the complaints directly. He stated the Town will not permit Phase 3 until Phase 2 is complete, inspected, and all complaints resolved. Mr. Parker and Mr. Kiepura stated the situation goes beyond ordinary punch list management — the contractor appears to have done zero homework on right-of-way widths and private property boundaries.

Skip Gasche — 7709 W. 134th Place, Cedar Point Park

Mr. Gasche, the resident who confronted the Surf Internet contractor and took the equipment keys, appeared with 28 photographs documenting the following conditions:

• Fiber conduit drilled and placed on private property — five feet inside his property line per his survey magnales in the street
• Cedar Point Park is a subdivision with a 16-foot right-of-way, all of which is pavement — there is no room to work within the right-of-way without impacting private property
• Survey stakes were pulled by the contractor
• Road surfaces were damaged; the contractor has used three different right-of-way measurements (10 feet, 16 feet, and 14 feet from road centerline), all of which appear to be measured incorrectly — the right-of-way runs property line to property line, not from road center
• He estimates more than $75,000 in repair costs in Cedar Point Park alone
• The Town’s permit fee for each phase was $55; he compared this to the $75,000 cash bond and $15,000 in permits required of a homebuilder for comparable ground disturbance
• He contacted the Lake County Storm Water Board regarding MS4 compliance issues with the contractor’s trenching

Mr. Gasche offered his full photo documentation to Mr. Kubiak and Mr. Sherry. The Commission thanked him for his vigilance in protecting his community.

Commission Action

Following the resident’s comments and further discussion, Mr. Parker moved to immediately stop the contractor’s work, withdraw the outstanding approvals, and require Surf Internet to appear before the Commission before any further work may proceed. Mr. Kiepura clarified the motion language with Mr. Austgen.

Motion to issue a stop work order on all active Surf Internet fiber installation phases, withdraw the outstanding plan approvals, direct Mr. Kubiak to issue the stop work order and meet with Surf Internet’s management, assess all damage caused to date, draw on the performance bond as needed for repairs, and require a mandatory appearance by a Surf Internet representative at the July 1, 2026 work session before any further permits are issued, made by Mr. Parker; seconded by Mr. Wilkening.

Motion carries, 7–0.

Tabled Items

• 2023-18 — Bay Bridge
• 2023-19 — Founders Creek
• 2023-20 — Red Cedars

Public Comment

Skip Gasche — 7709 W. 134th Place (Cedar Point Park)

Mr. Gasche asked for clarification on the Summerwinds maintenance LOC matter: given the pull date motion, does the maintenance LOC no longer exist? Mr. Kiepura confirmed: the maintenance LOC was not accepted; the performance LOCs are being pulled instead. There will be no three-year maintenance period following the performance pull. Mr. Parker explained the Town’s two choices were (1) let the LOCs expire and have nothing, or (2) pull them and use the proceeds to complete the subdivision. The Commission chose option 2. Once the Town completes the subdivision using those funds, the streets and infrastructure become Town property and the Town is responsible for ongoing maintenance — consistent with how all subdivisions are ultimately accepted.

Terry Broadhurst — 631 N. State Street, Lockport, IL (Property: 14513 Morse Street)

Mr. Broadhurst offered additional points for the Commission’s consideration on the Majesky site plan, for use in work session preparation:

• Employee parking was not separately addressed in the 60-space discussion; employees must be counted against the total, leaving fewer spaces for customer and inventory use.
• There are two businesses operating on the property; the north driveway’s prior approval status should be verified (Mr. Broadhurst believed the prior Plan Commission approval authorized only the south entrance).
• Emergency vehicle access: if a vehicle must enter the property for an emergency, there is no open staging area if 60 cars fill every available space.
• The site plan is hand-drawn without certified measurements; a stamped, engineered drawing is standard for any comparable approval in Cedar Lake.

Mr. Parker acknowledged these points and confirmed they will be part of the work session discussion. Mr. Broadhurst also noted the Majesky item is the first time he has seen a Plan Commission item considered on a hand-drawn sketch without an engineered plan.

Barbara Orze — 10290 W. 138th Place

Ms. Orze addressed the SpaceX vote. She visited the Newton County facility prior to the meeting — noting that the facility is near Mount Ayr, not in any location called “Jackson, Indiana” as was referenced at the hearing (a correction she made that was consistent with the presenter’s own written correction). She found the facility in the middle of farm country and could not discern any meaningful noise from a similar-sized installation. She offered several suggestions for future reference:

• The Commission should have required the post-construction noise study that SpaceX offered as an optional condition; the Newton County installation is roughly half the size of Cedar Lake’s proposed facility.
• SpaceX’s claim that the antennas will not interfere with existing cell service towers does not align with her independent research; a guarantee should be requested.
• SpaceX should be asked to identify the specific third-party fiber provider(s) they will use.

The Commission noted the item has already been voted on and approved. Mr. Parker explained that the site plan approval is for the configuration fitting within the PUD’s permitted uses; as the use fits the zoning, the Commission’s legal basis for denial would need to be grounded in specific ordinance criteria.

Carol Kerr — 9900 W. 129th Place

Ms. Kerr addressed the SpaceX vote, expressing frustration with the outcome. She questioned why the Commission approved the application given concerns about the petitioner’s identity and broader commercial interests. Mr. Parker explained that the Plan Commission cannot deny a site plan application based on the identity of the applicant; the Commission’s role is to determine whether the proposed use and site plan comply with the applicable zoning and ordinance standards. Mr. Kiepura noted that Mr. Austgen confirmed the property owner (Action Plumbing) could have chosen not to lease the property to SpaceX, but that is the owner’s private decision.

Ms. Kerr also referenced prior discussion about engineering billing practices, consistent with her prior appearance at the Town Council meeting. Mr. Parker clarified for the public record: what residents see in claims are gross CBBEL billings before any developer recapture; the Town recoups a portion of engineering fees from developers. Mr. Austgen confirmed both gross expenditures and developer reimbursements are public records available by FOIA request.

Mr. Kiepura invited Ms. Kerr to continue but noted she was engaging in a back-and-forth exchange rather than making public comment, and requested she direct her remarks as a statement. The exchange concluded.

Jeff Biel — 10124 W. 134th Avenue

Mr. Biel addressed the Summerwinds performance LOC pull decision. He sought clarification on what happens to the $538,580.46 when collected: the funds go to the Town and will be used to complete outstanding public improvements, including the sidewalks. Whatever remains after all improvements are completed does not revert to Lambert. He confirmed his understanding that with the performance LOC being pulled rather than converted to a maintenance LOC, there will be no formal three-year maintenance period — the subdivision’s infrastructure will pass directly to the Town once the work is completed.

Mr. Parker acknowledged this is not the ideal outcome but explained the Town had no other viable option once Lambert refused to post the $50,000 sidewalk performance bond as required. He drew a parallel to the Lynnsway subdivision, where the Town similarly pulled bonds and completed the streets. The Town will finish the subdivision; it just becomes Town responsibility sooner than under a normal maintenance period.

Mr. Biel also raised the broader issue of developers not being billed for engineering costs incurred over years of slow project timelines. Mr. Parker and Mr. Sherry acknowledged this as an issue the Town is actively working to address.

No further public comment was received. Mr. Kiepura closed public comment and adjourned the meeting.

Adjournment

Mr. Kiepura adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:34 p.m.