MINUTES

WARRICK COUNTY DRAINAGE BOARD

COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM

107 W. Locust St. Suite 303

Boonville, In 47601

897-6170

October 26, 2005

 

 

The Warrick County Drainage Board met in regular session with President Carl Jay Conner presiding, also in attendance was Phillip H. Baxter, Vice-President; Don Williams, Secretary; Jim Niemeyer, Surveyor and David K. Zengler, Attorney for Board.

Also present was Sean M. Owen, Deputy Surveyor.

 

Minutes recorded by Cheryl D. Embry.

 

Attendance in the audience was Gayle Clark, Pamela Trickey, Bruce Lothamer and Jim Morley, Jr.

 

President Carl Conner called the Warrick County Drainage Board session of October 26, 2005 to order.

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

 

Carl Conner: The first item on the agenda is the approval of minutes of September 28, 2005 and of October 12, 2005, is there any changes, deletions, revisions.

 

Don Williams: I have none.

 

Phil Baxter: No

 

Carl Conner: May I have a motion to approve both sets of minutes as presented?

 

Don Williams:So moved.

 

Carl Conner: Have a motion on the floor to approve the minutes of September 28, 2005 and October 12, 2005 as presented, do I have a second?

 

Phil Baxter: Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams:Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero. Next issue is sealed bid opening.

 

HOWARD-WILLIAMS DITCH-BID OPENING:

 

Jim Niemeyer: Mr. Zengler has the bids.

 

David K. Zengler: I have been handed two, from Bigge Excavating for bid for Howard-Williams and Lockwood Ditches, cost of project 16,000-feet at $2.45 per foot for $39,200.00.

 

Don Williams:Is that the agenda item on the list? Cause Lockwood is not here, is that part of the Howard-Williams that is on ourÖ.I have number 1 under Howard-Williams, you said Lockwood, right?

 

David K. Zengler: It says Howard-Williams and Lockwood.

 

Jim Niemeyer:†† Oh, yeah

 

Don Williams:Okay, so we are talking the same thing, I just wanted to make sure.

 

David K. Zengler:And the next one does have Howard-Williams and Lockwood also.

Bid price $91,125.00.

 

Carl Conner: Who was that from?

 

Don Williams:Jerry Aigner Excavating.

 

Phil Baxter: Those were the only two?

 

David K. Zengler:Those were the two I was handed, yes.

 

Don Williams:Standard question, Mr. Surveyor, were both parties aÖÖ.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, they were both at the pre-bid meeting.

 

Don Williams:Okay, I have nothing else, Mr. President.

 

Carl Conner: Any questions from the Board? What is the desire of the Board?

 

Phil Baxter: I move we aware the work to Bigge Excavating in the amount of $39,200.

 

Carl Conner: I have a motion on the floor to approve Biggeís contract for $39,200.00, do I have a second?

 

Don Williams:Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all those in favor state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams:Aye

 

Phil Baxter:Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero. Next is Drainage Plan Approval and I think your going to address that issue for us, is that correct? Since we donít know you would you state your name?

 

DRAINAGE PLAN APPROVAL:

 

LEXINGTON SUBDIVISION-BARRINGTON DEVELOPMENT:

 

Sherri Rector:I talked to Suzy Delay at DNR today, they have information to try to make a determination on the flood way now, they should beÖ.they are going to try to get me the letter by the November 9th meeting as I told her thatís when everything comes back, so sheís working pretty hard to get that done.

 

Don Williams:Mr. President, I move that we table Lexington Subdivision drainage approval until November 9th.

 

Carl Conner: Have a motion on the floor to table Lexington Subdivision until the November 9th meeting, do I have a second?

 

Phil Baxter: Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams:Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero. Jim, Iím going to let you take care of the requests starting with the Edwards Ditch.

 

EDWARDS DITCH:

 

Jim Niemeyer: This item regarding Edwards Ditch was tabled from the last meeting to allow time for the Commissioners to inspect the ditch for the potential relaxation of the Right-of-Entry.

 

Carl Conner: And this is Mooreís project along Highway 66?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Yes, the ditch goes up Bell Road a little bit, up Libbert Road a little bit and then all the way along 66.

Carl Conner: And heís wanting to go fromÖ..

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: 75 which it is currently at to 25.

 

Carl Conner: To 25. Any other comments?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: At the last meeting you guys said you wanted to go out and take a look at it, I donít know if anybody had a chance to go out and look at it. The 25-feet is allowed by State law and then through conversations with Henry Bigge who does a lot of your ditch work, he said the 25-feet would be ample room for him to do his work.

 

Carl Conner: But the County standard is 75-feet.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: By State Law itís 75-feet, but there is State Law that allows for relaxation of that down to 25.

 

Carl Conner: Any questions from the Board?

 

Don Williams: I have none.

 

Phil Baxter: I have one question for Jim, do you have a problem with relaxing it to 25-feet.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Iím sure it will work, but the only thing I would be concerned is if I had a good contractor in there to do that work, thereís just not much room, but I wouldnít be opposed to it.

 

Don Williams: What is the reasoning for the relaxation, Jim?

 

Jim Morley, Jr. Across that site, they want to put a frontage road in across the front going between Bell and Libbert Road and that 75-feet, the ditch is 100% inside the Right-of-Way of either INDOT or Warrick County, depending on where itís at, but all of the 75-feet of maintenance is on him and as expensive as the ground is, he just wants to recoup as much usable ground as he can.That way he can come up 50-feet and I think I said last time, it ends up being about 6 acres, I think is what I said last time, is that right, Sean? It ends up being about 6 acres that could be unencumbered, if you will and 6 acres of ground at the price that that ground is selling for, or that heís buying it for is a lot of money.

 

Don Williams: Okay, thanks. I donít recall us ever going down to 25-feet in the last 4 Ĺ years, anyway.

 

Carl Conner: Does anybody want to make a motion in regards to the issue or do we not want to put a motion forward? I guess Iím asking for a motion to approve the request? Asking for a motion to approve the request from 75-feet to 25-feet? Hearing none the issue dies. Thank you, Sir.

Jim Morley, Jr.: Is thereÖcan I ask a question? Is there a relaxation that you guys would be comfortable with?

 

Carl Conner: Iíll give you my personal opinion. I will not support any relaxation in regards to the 75-foot, so it would be left up to these other two Drainage Board members.

 

Don Williams: We have gone to 30-feet on Urban Drains, I donít know if this would qualify as an Urban Drain, at least not yet, probably not.

 

David K. Zengler: No, it wouldnít qualify yet, butÖ.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Whatís theÖ.legally whatís the, I guess maybe I was underÖ..

 

Don Williams: Before we went 30 on Urban Drains.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.:But the Urban Drain is just a matter of...correct me if Iím wrong, isnít that just a matter of the Drainage Board just reclassifying the ditch as an Urban Drain?

 

David K. Zengler: Yes, itís a reclassification.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: I mean, so itís a matter of you saying weíll classify it as an Urban Drain and go to 30-feet or whatever.

 

Don Williams: Yeah, if you had come in with 40 or 50 I might reconsider, but Iím not willing to go 25 either, itís just too narrow, you know, cause somebody build something in there and the contractor, you know no matter how good he is, ever once in a while theyíll make a mistake and weíve had some good examples of that over the past years and itís just too much liability to have it that narrow, you know.

 

Phil Baxter: In that area the least I would consider is 50 and Iím not saying I would support it, but thatís the least I would consider in that area.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Okay, I will probably re-submit to you guys then, a lesser relaxation allowing larger.

 

Carl Conner:Any other comment? Hearing none, going to the next item, Jim.

 

MAURICE WEBBER DRAIN:

 

Jim Niemeyer: Thatís the Maurice Webber drainage problem this occurs east of Frame Road and North of the intersection of Frame Road or Lincoln, at last meeting I presented photos showing the extent of flooding in Mr. Webberís back yard and accordingÖ..since that time we have made a drainage calculation for that area and it covers about 8-acres and what we have come up with is an estimate of 18-feet per second. What it comes to is we need to have a 24-inch drain and 24-inch is $14.50 per foot plus installation. I even got an estimate for a 12-inch drain and that was $3.70 just to show the variation.

Don Williams: What was the 24-inch?

 

Jim Niemeyer:$14.50, but as I talked to Mr. Steve Sherwood, he was in our office a couple of days ago, he said the County storm drain along Frame Road will only accepta 15-inch drain. So, if we were to have partaken that weíd have to enlarge that, I suppose, that inlet.

 

Carl Conner: There at Frame?

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, but one thing I think and Iíll go see Mr. Webber that I think we ought to try is just try Roto Router, maybe itís just silted up.

 

Carl Conner: Well, that would be a much cheaper option.

 

Jim Niemeyer: It sure would and I donít know if thereís enough cover there for the 24-inch cause that inlet into that storm sewer wasnít very deep.

 

Don Williams: Well, if weíre talking 24 then going down to 15, you know that could create a problem within itself, I would think, so it would be better to have it the same size if weíre going to couple up with the 15, but I would, since this is just a request go talk to him about the Roto Router you have my consent, certainly to do that.

 

Carl Conner: And my blessings to do that also.

 

Phil Baxter: I agree.

 

Carl Conner: Then come back and see what happens. Okay, Gardner-Webb.

 

GARDNER-WEBB DITCH: MRS. PAM TRICKEY:

 

Jim Niemeyer: The next item is the Gardner-WebbÖ.is for Mrs. Trickey.

 

Pam Trickey: Hello, Pam Trickey, 7640 St. Jordan Circle. The last time we were here the discussion was tabled so that the Commissioners might have a chance to go out and look at the retention pond. I actually brought some drawings too if I might share those in case someone hasnít had a chance to see that if that was appropriate to show those drawings on the fence. This just shows the location of the fence in relationship toÖÖ.

 

Don Williams: I saw the pictures last meeting as I recall, well two weeks ago. Now this is the location of the fence as it presently is.

 

Pam Trickey: Yes, thatís correct and as I stated the last time here, that is the location of the fence it is not going to change, never has been intended to change at all. Morley and Associates reviewed the information as far as the drainage into the area and Mr. Morley could talk about the concerns or lack of concerns on drainage into that area. The other information that I just wanted to share just briefly about my concerns with the property there is that the whole issue is concern for the safety of children of the area and I wanted to read something, if I may just for a moment. This is some information that I had found in doing some research, the last time I was here, I believe the concern prior to the last meeting two weeks ago that there might be concern for liability of not fencing in the pond due to some potential children getting into the area. This is a document that indicates that there was a 2 million dollar settlement in a childís drowning specifically in a retention pond and the issue is that the Navy was responsible for maintaining an area in a residential area and the fencing was recommended by the Navy, but the developer had chosen not to put the fence in and a child died in that situation. I had spoken with via E-mail the mother and she just wanted to reissue her concern that fencing be installed in areas such as retention ponds, so if anyone needed copies of that, I do have that and just to reissue our request to keep the fence installed, number one the request on the table is to extend into the drainage area that just allow us to have extra maintenance ability for that fence and so if thereís concern about the area that the fence is located in. We do want a further review if we had to move the fence back where itís not in the drainage area, so that we could keep that fence installed.

 

Don Williams: The only thing about the fence beingÖ.your talking about being inside the easement of the legal drain there, the only thing is, if it ever had to be cleaned and that fence got in the way, then it would either have to be moved or have to come down, thatís the only issue at hand.

 

Pam Trickey: Yes, sir thatís correct and again weÖ..

 

Don Williams:And if I remember right, there was how many feet between the fence and the ditch?

 

Pam Trickey: There is, I believe 30 feet between the smallest area of that fence and the top of the drain on the Gardner-Webb Ditch, so thereís 30-feet that way and 25 to 30-feet on the inside of that fence.

 

Carl Conner: You have any other questions, Don?

 

Don Williams: No, I donít.

 

Carl Conner: Phil, do you have any questions or comments?

 

Phil Baxter: No, I did look at the fence this past week sometime. I really donít think it would cause any drainage problem, thatís just my opinion, it doesnít look as if it would. So, thatís all I have to say.

 

Carl Conner: Jim, do you have any comments? I went back out there again and I looked at it and I think one of the issues that was raised by the neighbors was the fact that they could not see the retention pond and I could see the retention pond very clearly from where I was. I went over and looked at it, I guess from the North side and it looks like that to me it was bluish green, have you been treating it?

Pam Trickey: Actually I did pursue some pond dye to again make it a little more pleasing from an esthetic standpoint, yes.

 

Carl Conner:And to me, it doesnít appear to be or would the way itís structured to impede any drainage into that retention pond. I really donít understand their concerns unless they felt like maybe the fence didnít fit unto the neighborhood, but it looked like to me that it was a relatively nice fence that was put up there, thatís my only comment.

 

Phil Baxter: Thereís a gentleman back there, I think was wanting to remonstrate.

 

Carl Conner: Sir, were you opposed to the fence? Would you please come up and state youíre name and who you represent.

 

Bruce Lothamer: 7799 Jeremy Lane, there were people here last meeting opposing this as well. I believeÖIím just going to read some statements..ĒI believe that when this variance request was applied for it was problematic and now that the Area Plan Commissioner Director has stated in a previous Drainage Board Meeting the existing fence is what is being considered on the request, the applicant is now stating that this existing fence is what they wanted all along. As I stated in that same Drainage Board Meeting stated to me that this was only a temporary fence and his wife wanted to fence in the entire area. I asked where and he implied to the edge of the ditch directly west and to the north behind the affected homeowners of Jeremy Lane. Again, it was because of this statement from the Area Plan Commission that I believe Mrs. Trickey is stating now that this is where they want the fence contradicting earlier statements made to myself and others. Youíve established a 75-foot Legal Drainage Easement for this ditch for maintenance and as shown on the variance request existing fence is clearly in this area and due to run-off and other concerns entering this ditch will be in need of maintenance from time to time. Presently there is only 48-feet from the fence to top of the West ditch and 12 from the fence to the South ditch, I took those measurements this afternoon. I do understand Mrs. Trickeyís liability concerns should harm come to anyone, but if there is viable concern then all retention basins should be fenced, this is not required, laws and ordinances have been established prohibiting what these homeowners have done and is even stated in the Dedication Certificate on the recorded plat for this subdivision that cannot do this. I believe that if this Board approves this request then you are giving forgiveness for what this homeowner has done and with that said then you are establishing a practice that is easier to get forgiveness than permission and this is the way I feel about that. The recorded deed of Dedication Certificate that I mentioned is for Gourley Place and that it states ďEasements for the installation and maintenance of utilities and Drainage facilities are reserved as shown on the Recorded Plat and over the rear of each lot within these easements no structure, planting or other material shall be placed or permitted to remain with the installation and maintenance of utilities which may change the direction of the flow or drainage channels in the easements or which may obstruct or retard flow of water through the channels to the easements. I never did state that I did not think there was a problem with water flowing into the ditch, I believe that what the homeowners are stating is that we have had to get into that stand pipe to clean that out on numerous occasions. The fence would not interfere with water coming down the natural flow, but when that water begins to rise within that basin, then I believe that if that standpipe is plugged then that is where we are going to have our problems and that is where I stand on this issue. You make mention for maintenance in the areas and I stated it is short on this 75-feet because it is clearly in that area and we do stand behind again that this is what was put up was temporary and now this is what we are going to be stuck with, so some is better than nothing. So thatís where we stand with this.

 

Carl Conner: Let me ask you, are you saying that the standpipe is on the inside of the fenced area?

 

Bruce Lothamer: Yes, sir.

 

Carl Conner: And the big concern of the neighbors is accessibility to that standpipe if the water rises in there and it can drain properly?

 

Bruce Lothamer: Yes, sir

 

Carl Conner: Would that not be, since itís on your property and since you have it fenced in, would that not be your responsibility to take care of that piping in there with the retention pond?

 

Mrs. Trickey:Yes, sir it is on 18 & 19 as far as responsibility for maintenance for that.

 

Carl Conner: And what youíre saying is that you donít feel that they will live up to their obligation?

 

Bruce Lothamer: No, the two years that weíve been there the developer has been called on it from the Surveyorís Office to get this cleaned out, the developer did bring in somebody with a boat to cut down the weeds and things that had grown up in the water and to treat it, then since they have been in the home, they have as presented in the last meeting, the Surveyorís Office sent her a letter stating that they had to get this cleaned out.

 

Carl Conner: Jim, do you have any response?

 

Jim Niemeyer: I did write a letter, but I donít recall what it was.

 

Carl Conner: Did you go out and check it though at that time to see if there was problems?

 

Jim Niemeyer: I was there the day it rained, we had a tremendous storm and everything was flowing well and I wrote Mrs. Trickey a letter and I even advised that you might want to call the, I believe it was the County Extension Office to see if there were any programs available for maintaining a pond and keeping it clean and I believe she did do that.

 

Carl Conner: So, it sounds like to me that, I mean, just going on what Jim has said that they have followed up on their responsibilities to keep it clean, but that doesnít mean that the next people that move in there will do that. I assume that there are no guarantees or any assurances. If that is the issue, then you do not have a problem with the fence as long as that drainage is taken care of, is that correct? Is that my understanding?

 

Bruce Lothamer: No, I myself personally am after this for and this is one of the avenues to amend where the fence is at or have it removed completely.

 

Carl Conner: Oh, so youíre opposed to the fence?

 

Bruce Lothamer: Fence totally, yes, sir. But, because we were not able to voice our concerns two Drainage Board Meetings ago, thatís why we were at the last one and which weíve continued to today.

 

Carl Conner: Okay, any other comments?

 

Bruce Lothamer: I donít believe so, sir.

 

Carl Conner: Thanks, anyone else have any comments? Are you here on this issue? Any other comments or questions from the Board? Hearing none what is the will of the Board? Do I have a motion?

 

Don Williams: Concerning Mrs. Trickeyís request?

 

Carl Conner: Yes

 

Don Williams: I donít like to see the rules so averted???? and Iím not sure even though that is the case that it was necessarily intentional. I donít have a problem personally approving this, providing (1) the resident of lot 18 & 19 are responsible for cleaning and thatís the Trickeyís Iím assuming on both those lots. I understand that fence may well have to come down for ditch maintenance and to with the understanding that it will be their responsibility to keep that cleaned and water flowing as it should. I donít know if we need some kind of written Hold Harmless or something to accomplish that or how, I would defer that to our attorney to know what we need to assure that that happens. Itís already, I think in the plotted that those lots have to maintain that or e covered orÖ..cause this is not the first time that weíve had people put things inÖof course they usually come and ask us first and weíve allowed it. But, with the understanding that it could come down at any point and time due to maintenance requirements, also that the requirement be that that fence not be enlarged. I think an enlargement would be a problem.

 

David K. Zengler: ††Well, I think the approval is just for that fence as it is.

 

Don Williams: As it is.

 

David K. Zengler: And I think the approval could be made subject to whatever conditions you want to put on it.

 

Carl Conner:Okay, any other comments.

 

Don Williams: I donít have any other comments. I would then make a motion that we allow Mrs. Trickeyís request under the conditions (1) the understanding that the fence may come down if maintenance on that ditch is required and itís in the way, at no expense to the County as far as rebuilding it (2) that the fence be not enlarged and (3) that the residents of Lots 18 & 19 per the plat maintain the retention basin, not only the esthetics but also the flow including the pipe.

 

Carl Conner: The primary concern would probably be the flowÖ.

 

Don Williams: The flow and the pipe would be the primary concern.

 

Carl Conner: I have a motion on the floor to basically approve the present location of Mrs. Trickeyís fence based upon them accepting responsibility of taking the fence down if necessary for purposes of allowing the County to do work in there, that the configuration of the fence is not changed in whatever way and it would be continually maintained with the piping being maintained, do I have a second?

 

Phil Baxter: Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams: Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye, passes three to zero. Jim, next item.

 

LAKE RIDGE CROSSING:

 

Jim Niemeyer: The next item is Lake Ridge Crossing, itís a fence request from Mr. Robinson and Iím going to have to defer this to Sean since I was not here at the time.

 

Sean M. Owen: There should be a packet in your folders there. Itís a fence that is already existing when I spoke with the homeownerís wife, they had put it up and then found out that there was a Public Utility and Drainage Easement in the back and on the side of their property. So thatís when they came to the Area Plan Commission and the Surveyorís Office to get permission to have that fence in the easement. This is in Lake Ridge Crossing on Oak Bend Place and itís basically right on the edge of a lake and there are numerous fences and landscaping all over in the same area that their fence is in, in that whole entire across the lake. The fence is a metal fence with fairly small posts with a spacing of 8-inches or so. I believe that you know as a drainage point it doesnít inhibit the drainage whatsoever. The entire lot does not drain left to right, it drains straight down into the lake, so the only possibility of any type of interference would possibly be from the utility standpoint and he stated on his letter on the front that there are a couple of options, either a gate or having the fence to where it could not be fixed to the ground to where it could just be lifted out in order to have it repaired, from what I saw of it already being installed, it is not at that point as a permanent fence right now. But, from a drainage standpoint I donít see any problem with it.

 

Carl Conner: Is there any other comments? Is there anyone here who wants to address this, if so just please come forward and state your name and who you represent.

 

Brian Robinson: Iím the homeowner and everything you stated was perfectly correct. I did erect the fence not realizing I would have to file for the request and basically Iím trying to do everything as I should.

 

Carl Conner: Any other comment?

 

Brian Robinson: No, sir.

 

Don Williams: Iím trying to get the idea where the dotted line is where the current fence is.

 

(Sean explained the plan to Mr. Williams and showed him on the plan exactly where the fence was in relation to the lake.)

Sean Owen: Here is their house right here, the lake is back here and heís got a black metal fence that comes down like this and that a little separate area here, that is actually the neighbors fence right here, so the neighbors fence is the one that is across there, but the only one that he put up is right here and then itís the drainage easement, but the drainage area is straight down like that. Thereís a couple of utility boxes over here, but thereís noÖI mean I donít think those things are going to be in the way unless they want to go through and install new utilities.

 

Don Williams: Is this a legal drain?

 

Sean Owen: No, just a lake in a subdivision.

 

Don Williams:Just a lake in a subdivision, then whatís it doing here?

 

Sean Owen: They are wanting approval to have the fence in the Drainage Easement.

 

Carl Conner: We just did that.

 

David K. Zengler: Yeah, we just did that.

 

Sherri Rector: They are going to file a variance if the Drainage Board determines that it will not affect the drainage on his lot, then heíll file a variance to go before the Board of Zoning Appeals, thatís what itís for.

 

Don Williams: I was going to say, we donít approve this.

 

Sherri Rector: No, your just as the Drainage Board saying it wonít affect the drainage, thatís all.

 

Carl Conner: Right, and we just acted.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, this will be fine.

 

Carl Conner: You got any other questions, Don?

 

Don Williams: No, that takes care of it.

 

Carl Conner: Do I have a motion then to approve the request to put the type the..some type of fencingÖ.

 

Don Williams: Thatís not the request, the request is that we have no objections.

 

Carl Conner: Thatís all right, go ahead, some type of fencing whatever across the drainage and do I have a motion on the floor to approve? Iíll make a motion that we approve the request, do I have a second?

 

Phil Baxter: Iíll second it.

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor state by saying aye.

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye, do we have a no?

 

Don Williams: Iíll abstain, Iím willing to find that it wonít impede the drainage, but Iím not willing to tell them that they can put a fence in there because it doesnít come under the approval of this Board.

 

Sherri Rector: No, that wasnít what I was even going to report, it was that you had no objection to the location.

 

Carl Conner: We have no objection in the Drainage Right-of-Way. Donís been up too late.

 

Don Williams: That is no lie.

 

CLAIMS:

 

Carl Conner: Are there any questions or comments about the claims? Hearing none what is the will of the Board?

 

Phil Baxter: I move we approve the claims in the amount of $6,245.27.

 

Carl Conner: Have a motion on the floor to approve the claim in the amount of $6,245.27, do I have a second?

 

Don Williams: Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor, state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams: Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero. Any other business, Jim?

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, I would like to have Jim Morley, Jr. come back.

 

SPRENGEL DITCH:

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: I submitted to the Surveyorís Office a request for Sprengel Ditch, I think Jim is going to pass some stuff out to you. I had sentÖJim, did you bring the other part of the packet also?

 

Jim Niemeyer: No

 

Don Williams: When did you get this, Jim?

 

Jim Niemeyer: Today

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: He got that today, the other was a week ago.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yeah, I got the request about a week ago.

 

Carl Conner: But, we had no knowledge of it right, until right now.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Thatís correct.

 

Carl Conner: Okay, Just want to make it clean, go ahead, Jim.

 

Jim Morley: Jr.: And my guess is that knowing what the topic is my guess is it would get tabled anyway, butÖ

 

Carl Conner: Right, I can assure you thereís not going to be any action.

Jim Morley Jr.: Thatís fine. This property and the rest of the packet that was submitted isÖ.Iíve got my copy, Jim I donít know if you brought your packet or not?

 

Jim Niemeyer: No

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: My client is developing the 80-acres which to be the Hasgrove Seed Company property on Hwy 66, kind of Northwest cattycorner from the Rabbit Run Subdivision. Rabbit Run is right here and they are developing this 80-acre piece right here. Sprengel Ditch runs down the east property line of this tract and comingÖÖ

 

Don Williams: This is the north side of 66, then right?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Right, north side of 66, Sprengel Ditch runs down the east property line and what this is, is a blow up of this and I talked to Jim about this earlier because itís a little hard to make out and Iíll try to explain it. The Sprengel Ditch is a County regulated drain and the flow line and the top of bank and then itís got a 75-feet Right of-Entry. Inside of that 75-feet Newburgh Sewer has granted a sewer easement of, I think 22-feet wide for the construction of a grabing (?) line down to their master lift station, itís kind of out in the middle of those fields.

 

Carl Conner: No, its there at Vann, right? Vann and Libbert?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Yeah, in that area, but a littleÖ

 

Carl Conner: To the west, there, yeah okay.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: And what we are seeking is theÖcoming down the ditch and the easement donít run parallel so it varies but, what we are seeking is to relax this Right-of-Entry at the south end by 14-feet leaving 61-feet.

 

Don Williams: So the green area is 14-feet all the way through?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Yeah, the green area is 14-feet at the south end and 30 feet at the north end, basically what weíre hoping to do is relax the Right-of-Entry so that it sits on top of the easement line for the sanitary sewer and therefore the Right-of-Entry would vary between 45-feet at the north end of the property and 61-feet at the south end and the Right-of-Entry would sit directly on top of the sanitary sewer easement line.

 

Carl Conner: Okay, is that all you have to say?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Yes.

 

Carl Conner: Anything else, Jim?

 

Jim Niemeyer: I have one more thing item.

 

Carl Conner: Iím sorry I thought you were through.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: I was only going to make the comment if you guys are going to go out and look at this project, I donít know if you are, but Iíll give the 30 seconds here to..I might save you a Öto kill two birds with one stone. I was talking to Sean and I have another project that sits on a legal drain also, I have three difference projects on three different legal drains, Just north of Off The Wall Sports thereís an 18-acre field north of Off the Wall Sports that is bisected in half by Howard-Williams Ditch and if for whatever reason you were going out to look at this, I guess Iím just letting you know Iím going to be bringing in a request that you look at that one also as a relaxation, so if you wanted to look at both of them you could, if not thatís fine too.

 

Don Williams: So, did your clients not know these were legal drains with 75-foot easements when they bought the property?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: Well, they probably did, theyíre just trying to maximize the usable space.

 

Don Williams: I understand.

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: And I had forgotten about the one north of Off the Wall Sports, I just mentioned it in case youÖ

 

Carl Conner: The one north of Off the Wall Sports, is that residential?

 

Jim Morley, Jr.: No, well, itís a vacant field now but itís going to be commercial and I thought I would say that justin cast you guys went out that way, that way I didnít keep sending you out week after week after week and Iíll submit that in a couple of weeks or so.

 

Carl Conner:Okay, thanks, go ahead, Jim.

 

Jim Niemeyer: We have one other item and this lady here is the president of the Ivy Glen Homeowners Association.

 

IVY GLEN SUBDIVISION:

 

Glayla Clark:Actually Iím not the president, Iím the Vice-President, but Iím the only one who could take off and come today, but thanks for letting me talk to you. My name is Gayla Clark and I live in Ivy Glen Subdivision which is located just to the east of the 164 by-pass and on August 26, 2005 we had a major flooding problem in our subdivision. Iíve lived there since 1997 and weíve never seen this happen, Mr. Niemeyer was gracious enough to come out and take a look at it for us the very day it was out there. Whenever we had the rain, what I have done, just so you can kind of get a summary and I didnít know how many of you there would be, I want to give this to you if I may. (She passed out papers to the Board) What Iíve presented to you today is a copy of a letter that we sent certified mail to Sterchi Homes Corporation which is the only name we have for a subdivision that has gone in to the east of our subdivision, we put Schultz, Mike Schultz as owner of the retention pond that is to the south of our subdivision on notice of this problem and of course the Board of Commissioners, Area Plan Commission, Warrick County Surveyor's Office, Warrick County Highway Engineer and then we also added the Water, Soil and Conservation. I come before you today as far as the drain is concerned, if you look on the plat on the south end of our subdivision, there is a retention pond that we understand that is owned by Mike Schultz, that pond, that retention pond completely overflowed its banks. It flooded the entire street that runs to the east and the west and its known as Irish Ivy, it ran around Thorndale, it came down Ivy Glen and ended up on the south side of our subdivision in a cul-de-sac that is English Court, like I said Iíve lived there since 1997 and we have never had a flooding problem. In the past year, and I donít know the exact date or time it went in, but in the southeast corner of that retention pond Sterchi Home Developments which is Mansfield Subdivision has put a drainage culvert into that retention pond. We donít know if that was approved or what the circumstances were, but that retention pond in their subdivision with about 150 homes is what weíre being told is about a fifth of the size of ours and weíve got 31 lots in our subdivision. So, the issues that I would like to see the Drainage Board address or we would like to know if Mike Schultz gave permission for Sterchi to connect to this retention pond cause ultimately our retention pond goes under 164 goes into just right inside the Warrick County line which per Mr. Niemeyer, what he has told me does go into Howard-Williams Ditch which I understand you guys are going to clean out. We would like to know if there was an agreement with the easement between Schultz and Sterchi and then we do ask that their retention pond in the adjacent subdivision be evaluated, we want to know if their retention pond is sufficient to take care of the drainage for the potential number of homes cause like I said we have never had this problem before. We know we had a very large amount of rain that particular day, but back in 1998 or 99 if my memory serves me correct the Lloyd Expressway shut down there was so much rain we never had this problem before that new culvert went in. So those are the issues that we would like for you to look at and possibly let us come back or get back with us on this matter.

 

Carl Conner: My suggestion would be and we will call you, weíll probably have some answers for you on the November 9, 2005 meeting if you can make it back then or send someone else from your Homeowners Association and I would ask the County Surveyor to see if there is any agreement between Sterchi Homes and Mike Schultz relative to using that retention pond and also weíll see..I would ask that Jim look at if there is anything that the County has a responsibility to in regards to that drain, because is it not a legal drain?

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, it is.

 

Don Williams: I thought we had already addressed that and made a decision that we were going to clean that.

 

Carl Conner: We are. We havenít started on that yet, have we.

 

Sean Owen: Thatís what we opened today.

 

Jim Niemeyer: Weíre ready.

 

Gayla Clark: And we do understand that those are the bids that are open but you know itís such a small retention pond, if you go into that subdivision compared to ours, we are just really concerned that theyíve not developed that subdivision properly as we have heard before that Sterchi had some problems with a different County Offices and we wanted to make sure that while they still have room to put another pond in if they need it that that can be done. That is our concern.

 

Carl Conner: We understand and we appreciate your input and weíll be back in contact with you and let you know if weíre going to be dealing with this issue on the 9th which I would assume, Jim thatís going to give you plenty of time, is it not?

 

Jim Niemeyer; It should.

 

Carl Conner: Any questions or concerns, Jim is there anything else?

 

Jim Niemeyer: Yes, I would just like to mention that we have a Drainage Board Meeting scheduled on November 23rd if we could move that up a week to the 16th?

 

Sean Owen: It would be the day before Thanksgiving, is when it is.

 

Carl Conner: I donít have a problem with that, does anybody else have a problem with that?

 

Phil Baxter: No

 

Don Williams: No, do we need a motion that date?

 

Carl Conner: Yes, probably should. Can we have a motion to change the November 23, 2005 date for the Drainage Board Meeting to November 16, 2005?

 

Don Williams: So moved.

 

Carl Conner: Have a motion on the floor, do I have a second?

 

Phil Baxter: Second

 

Carl Conner: Have a second, all in favor state by saying Aye.

 

Don Williams: Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero. 23rd meeting will be November 16th.

 

David K. Zengler: While weíre talking about meetings, I know there is a meeting between Christmas and New Years, we may want to change that, I for one have plans to be out of town during Christmas and New Years.

 

Carl Conner: Weíll take a look at that, too. Don, do you have anything?

 

Don Williams: No, I was just going to move that we adjourn.

 

Phil Baxter: Iíll second that.

 

Carl Conner: Have a motion on the floor to adjourn, have a second all those in favor state by saying aye.

 

Don Williams: Aye

 

Phil Baxter: Aye

 

Carl Conner: Aye passes three to zero meetings adjourned.