My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-11-91 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
06-11-91 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:09:01 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:56 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.
/
22
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 />JUNE 11, 1991 <br />The Engineer pointed out that drainage patterns for the <br />area are already established. The Engineer explained <br />that the Watershed had looked at the area and <br />established these patterns. To change these existing <br />patterns at this time would not be cost effective. <br />The City Engineer continued his presentation with the <br />review of ditch #3. It was pointed out that there are <br />some weeds and small trees in ditch #3 north of Allen <br />Avenue, and drainage is not occurring well. South of <br />Allen the ditch is very narrow and the area appears to <br />have been filled in and a trench cut through. The <br />Engineer reported that south of Allen the ditch leaves <br />the easement area to go around a large tree. The <br />Engineer asked the property owners' preference for <br />either leaving the ditch and tree as they are, or <br />moving the ditch within the easement and removing the <br />tree. <br />David Daubenspeck, 2990 Thunder Bay Road, reported that <br />in order to get the ditch south of Allen to flow, the <br />property owners had to dig the trench that is there. <br />Daubenspeck reported that he, too, was told that the <br />property behind his would never be developed. <br />Daubenspeck agreed that the property owners were never <br />given an opportunity to maintain the ditch in the first <br />place. <br />The Engineer reviewed the cross-section of the ditch <br />and pointed out that water is ponding in some areas. <br />The ditch does have a grade of about .78 percent over <br />less than 500 feet, therefore, once improved, the ditch <br />should work pretty well. With drain tile, the ditch <br />would still have a.55% fall. The Engineer again <br />stated that regrading and resodding the ditch would <br />cost approximately $400 to $500 per lot. With the <br />installation of drain tile, the cost increases to about <br />$1,000 per lot. <br />Gene Pugh reported that he has storm sewer behind his <br />house. Pugh asked if he would be assessed for the <br />improvement, stating that if he was, he would like to <br />get his $500 worth. Pugh reported that his house is a <br />walkout and his side yard is the same depth as the <br />ditches. Pugh reported that he has standing water on <br />his property all the time, and he would like the <br />Engineer to look at the situation to see if the <br />improvement will remedy the problem. <br />The City Engineer pointed out that there would be an <br />assessment hearing for the improvement, at which time <br />the Council will consider the issue of assessments. <br />Page 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.