My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-28-2003 Council Workshop Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
07-28-2003 Council Workshop Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:28:21 PM
Creation date
7/18/2008 3:35:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JULY 28, 2003 <br />o The ditch and pond were sold to the property owners. No <br />one has maintained either area since this occurred. <br />o Frattalone installed the ditch -west and south side of berm. <br />o No maintenance of the ditch has been done in 18 years. <br />o Then after lots sold, the north side of berm was filled in. <br />o The pond was to be two feet lower than 859 elevation that <br />originally existed. That two feet of materials was never <br />removed. <br />Aichinger agreed that things weren't done correctly and the ditch has not <br />been maintained. However, he was unsure what the next step should be. <br />Sculley indicated that land that had been used for 50 years and it is now <br />under water. Access to a portion of his property has been cut off by the <br />water. <br />The City Engineer pointed out problems in comparing past topographical <br />information from various surveys. He noted that they were not based on <br />the same datum. Therefore, one survey may show an elevation at 861 and <br />another may show it at 859 even though no change had occurred. <br />Pogreba felt the problem could be solved very simply. He noted that the <br />construction of the berm stopped the flow of water that used to get to the <br />center of the existing pond. This forced water around the berm. <br />Therefore, removing the berm would solve the problem. <br />LaValle asked what has happened given the Sculley's can no longer <br />access portions of their property that they used to? <br />Aichinger replied that what was wetland is still wetland. There has been <br />more development in the area; therefore, there is a greater volume of <br />water. If land does not dry out, then there is more wetland vegetation. <br />The weather cycle is also a factor, and the area is in a wetter cycle now <br />than 15 years before. <br />The City Administrator explained the potential to divert water that comes <br />from the north back toward the freeway as part of the Unweave the Weave <br />project. <br />Aichinger noted the berm was constructed illegally before the Watershed's <br />existence. Tt was pointed out that at the time the berm was constructed, <br />the Corps of Engineers was the only enforcing authority. Sculley noted <br />that the ditch on their property was constructed without their permission. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.