Get Adobe Flash player


December 4, 2006 Tape #023

The White County Drainage Board convened at 10:45 A.M., EDT in the Commissioners’ Room of the White County Building, Monticello, Indiana with Board Members Steven Burton, O. D. “Bud” Ferguson and John C. Heimlich, Attorney George W. Loy, Surveyor Dennis W. Sterrett, Engineer L. Todd Frauhiger and Secretary Romana Kiser.

Others attending were David Reiff, Robert G. Smock, Connie Neininger, Thomas Pimmler and Charlie Mellon.

Chairman Burton called the meeting to order. Board Member Ferguson made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 20, 2006 meeting. Board Member Heimlich seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously.

Engineer Frauhiger presented a request for exemption from the White County Drainage Ordinance for David Reiff Hog Facility. Chairman Burton asked if this would be the last building. David Reiff stated, “Probably is, we would have to acquire more land I think to put up another one.” Engineer Frauhiger said, “We have a request for an exemption. I had a chance to go out and look at it. It is a little bit deceiving because the proposed building is about three hundred feet away from the ditch, but the flow does all break the other way. It goes north from the building; the closest regulated drain is a tile drain at least a quarter of a mile away. So, we did receive a secondary amendment from Jim (Surveyor Milligan) confirming what we saw in the field and requesting the exemption. It appears that after this particular building is built there won’t be any additional runoff going to the open ditch three hundred feet away at all.” Surveyor Sterrett stated this is across the road from the one we approved about two years ago. Chairman Burton asked if it is on the east side of the road. Surveyor Sterrett said it is and it is running north and south (the first building runs east and west). He said the road is County Road 1400 East. Engineer Frauhiger stated, “So, I guess that we would agree with Jim and recommend that you grant the exemption.” Chairman Burton stated, “I assume you won’t change the grade to a different direction.” David Reiff stated, “All the water runs north out onto me.”

Board Member Heimlich made a motion to allow the exemption to the Drainage Ordinance to David Reiff Hog Facility. Board Member Ferguson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Next Engineer Frauhiger presented a drainage plan for Robert Smock Hog Facility. Engineer Frauhiger stated, “This one is a little different to the last one, this one is right along the Mertz Ditch and the flow DOES go down to the ditch. There’s a couple of places that are within the three hundred foot allowable limit, by IDEM. I talked to Bob a couple of times on the phone and I talked to Paul Couts (C & S Engineering). This is actually the third submittal from Paul. I got a fax copy of it Friday afternoon and I think it came in the mail this morning (Surveyor Sterrett said 9:45). The original design had the water going to this point here (indicated on plan sheet) and it was going to be discharged into a tile about a hundred and eighty-five feet over to the ditch. Mr. Smock immediately said that wouldn’t meet his three hundred foot requirement with the State, with IDEM. He was right, and also the expense of putting a hundred and eighty-five foot of tile in didn’t make any sense. There was a second submittal done where there was a tile put in here, and then there was a berm extended all the way over to the ditch, which didn’t make any sense either. So, after the second submittal came in, I contacted Paul back and said ‘can’t there just be a traversable swale put in to channel the water with one discharge pipe through the berm around the hog building’? Paul looked at it Friday afternoon, faxed me something late Friday and then transmitted this to us this morning. Basically this is a three hundred and eighty foot swale. It is going to be graded six to one on the side slopes. You can farm right through it. It is three hundred and eighty feet from the discharge point of the berm around the hog building to where it will be directed to the ditch. So it stays outside the three hundred foot limit required by IDEM. We had a chance to talk about it a little bit before the meeting today. It also saved the expense, obviously, of putting a pipe in. The rest of the calculations, there were a couple of questions. Paul got those corrected and the rest all checked out. At this particular point we recommend the approval of the drainage design (for Robert Smock Hog Facility).

Board Member Ferguson made a motion to approve the drainage design for Robert Smock Hog Facility. Board Member Heimlich seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Surveyor Sterrett reported on the Joseph Kellenburger Open Drain two and a half miles north of Highway 24 on County Road 300 East. Surveyor Sterrett stated, “It is a tile that runs into an open ditch. I think it is about a half a mile, it drains to Honey Creek. The tile is set up for reconstruction, but the ditch needs work done on it before I get to the tile. The water is half a foot over the tile. It is an eighteen inch tile and where it outlets into the ditch the water is a half a foot over it. It is less than a thousand feet down to County Road 225, and there are power lines and Comcast cable on the west side of the ditch bank so we can’t dip it from that side. We have to dip it from the road and haul it off. (Board Member Ferguson asked if that is the ditch that has guard rail all along it. That is correct.) At least that is what they did in 1999. We took some grade on it and it has two foot of silt in it, either from that tile breaking down or from across the road, that Nichols Subdivision, when they dug that ditch maybe some silt got in from that ditch, I don’t know”

Chairman Burton asked, “So you’re saying you want to dig out a thousand feet and that’s all?” Surveyor Sterrett stated, “It would bring the water down to the bottom of the tile the way I have it figured. It needs to go probably farther but that’s a lot of hauling. I don’t know how else to do it.” Board Member Ferguson asked, “You couldn’t clean it from the other side?” Surveyor Sterrett said, “There’s a power line over there and it is higher. It is quite a bit higher than the roadside. Allen Howe dipped it before. He must have gone three or four hundred feet past the intersection. He charged $2,459.00 in 1999, but he had to fix the tile outlet and he put twenty foot of eighteen inch smooth core tile in and a bunch of rip rap, tile filter, animal guard.” Board Member Heimlich asked if they hauled that away and that was figured in his bid? Surveyor Sterrett said, “Evidently, I don’t know if the County Highway hauled it away. At the same time they were changing the alignment of the ditch to the north and I think they hauled it up there.” Board Member Heimlich said he thinks that is right. Surveyor Sterrett said, “I had figured how much would have to come out of there. I figured about thirty truck loads, tri axle, if they hold fifteen cubic yards. Charlie Geier said that he would let us put it on him, but not where his addition is, we’d have to haul it to his other farm. I know it is probably going to make a mess of the road there. Right now there is $1,500.00 in the fund (ditch maintenance) and it collects $2,100.00 a year. So, I figured $900.00 to dip it and $1,800.00 to haul it and that would be $2,700.00. It needs something. I could get a contractor out there and see if he THINKS he could get under the power lines or we could turn around and haul it back to the other side of the ditch. It has a filter strip on it so we would have to re-seed it.”

Chairman Burton said, “You said there’s fifteen hundred in there and you will collect twenty-one next year, so it will still be just a little short. And this doesn’t affect, what you were saying what prompted this was the reconstruction of the tile.” Surveyor Sterrett said, “No, what happened was they built a house out there on the three acre lots, this is about a thousand foot from the outlet. Charlie Geier dug down to the tile for me so we could prove the setback. Then he came back after they built the house and he opened up the tile for the perimeter drain and water squirted out of it like a fountain because it was under pressure because the tile had half a foot of water over it at the outlet. So that’s how, he called me up and said the ditch needs dipped out and we went out and took some grade on it and sure enough it did.” Chairman Burton said, “So we won’t be repairing the tile, that’s my question.” Surveyor Sterrett answered, “We’ll be reconstructing the tile. (Chairman Burton said, “But it won’t come out of this money.”) No, it will be reconstruction. Everybody will be assessed for it. Whenever I get to it.”

Surveyor Sterrett said in 1999 Howe charged seventy-five cents a foot for dipping it. He figured a dollar a foot and for the hauling he figured sixty dollars a truckload and that might be high. Secretary Kiser said she thinks Howe charged $40.00 a truckload in 1999. Surveyor Sterrett said that most of our dipping contractors don’t have trucks. Board Member Heimlich said the key will be how far they have to haul it. He said we might check with farmers in the area there to see if any of them want holes filled up. Chairman Burton said there are several questions here. Surveyor Sterrett asked, “Do I try to get some bids on it? It is kind of hard to write specs for what we want done if we don’t know how far we are going to haul it.”

The Board discussed that Nichols Subdivision across the road is basically undeveloped and at one time he had a stockpile of dirt back there. Chairman Burton stated he will check with John Nichols on that to see if he has done anything with that or that might be a possibility. Surveyor Sterrett said, “And if we can find out we can do it there then I can get some quotes on it.”

Surveyor Sterrett reported, “On that same matter, this morning I got a call from Charlie Geier . REMC put a power line down along the road that goes back to the addition. And you can see right here, his septic system is back here, Charlie put a perimeter drain and outletted it to our tile which was right here, and that’s where he stopped digging. If you look on here you can see right there where he stopped digging. They (REMC) came up there and bored a hole to put a pole in and I think they hit our tile. Chairman Burton asked if they went ahead and hung the line on it. Surveyor Sterrett said, “Yes, the line is hung on it and today they were burying from the house to that pole. While we were out there looking at it, REMC came out and said they didn’t know there was a tile there and that they weren’t going to pay for it. So, I called Charlie Geier back and he was going to go out and look at it. He never got back with me. They are either going to have to move the pole or, they said they would hold the pole upright for us while we fixed it.” Board Member Heimlich asked, “So there’s a County tile there? (Yes) That’s what he hooked in to. So did they hit his tile or a County tile?” Surveyor Sterrett said, “We think it is the County tile, we don’t know yet. We all agreed that we should dig it up and see what we hit. I said how can we dig with a pole sticking up there? They’ve got wires hanging on it.” Chairman Burton asked, “Is this a County Road? (Surveyor Sterrett said no.) So they’re out on private property. (Surveyor Sterrett said yes.) I don’t see how we would be liable for it.” Surveyor Sterrett said, “I thought the pole should probably be moved if it IS close to a County tile.” Board Member Heimlich said, “Well, if it is close to a County tile, yes, because what happens if you ever do any work there?” Surveyor Sterrett said, “So I guess nobody knows whether they hit a tile or not but it certainly sucked the dirt away from the pole. And, it was strange that I didn’t see any tile while I was out there because they used an auger. Unless they just nicked the side of it. If they hit the whole tile I would think there would be a gigantic hole there. So, what I was going to do is, I called Charlie to see if he wanted to bring the backhoe out and work on it while REMC was there to hold it.” Board Member Heimlich said, “So you can find out where the tile is and what they have done. I mean, if it is right on top of it……” Surveyor Sterrett said, “The only thing they can do is move the pole back farther toward the County Road which lengthens the buried part of the cable. I told him I think you’re going to have to move the pole, it’s a County tile, and he told the guys that were burying the cable just to bury it up to the trench and stop so that if they had to go farther…..So I should probably get someone out there and find out if it is a County tile or not.”

Surveyor Sterrett presented a petition carried by George Todd Shoop for maintenance on the Oliver Holladay Ditch. He said there is probably enough money in the maintenance fund to do this one under maintenance, about a half mile of ditch starting at the Big Pine needs cleaned out. Surveyor Sterrett indicated from ‘here to here’ on the map accompanying the petition. He stated that the ditch maintenance fund has $3,077.00 in it now. Board Member Heimlich made a motion to accept the petition to do maintenance dredging on the Oliver Holladay Ditch. Board Member Ferguson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Surveyor Sterrett presented a petition for reconstruction on the J.D. Roudebush Drain and the Patrick Mellon Drain. The petition was requested by Charlotte Cain. Surveyor Sterrett stated, “This one would probably be reconstruction because it is quite a lengthy ditch and I think in the past the two drains were done at the same time.” Board Member Heimlich asked if that is two and a half or three miles. Surveyor Sterrett said, “Yes, about three miles. They are separate; they are on their own maintenance. But the last time they reconstructed them both at the same time.” Board Member Heimlich made a motion to accept the petition for the J. D. Roudebush Drain and the Patrick Mellon Drain. Board Member Ferguson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Board Member Heimlich introduced Mr. Tom Pimmler. Board Member Heimlich said, “He is here to discuss the drainage plan on the property for his expansion (Monticello Spring Factory) out there. Maybe you can start with what you were explaining to us this morning and go from there.” Mr. Pimmler addressed the Board, “You both (Surveyor and Engineer) were talking to Paul (Engineer Couts) about this project, about the large ditch that runs between the back side of all those industrial properties and the Airport and feeds that retention pond, and the recommendation that we need to either increase the size of the existing retention pond or we would need to put in a separate retention pond on our property that overflows into the ditch and flows into the existing pond. I approached the current owners of the existing retention pond, Chris Sabo and Susan and we weren’t able to come to a conclusion on, there’s a concern on Chris’s part, he’s concerned about the liability of it.” Mr. Pimmler suggested that if they are not able to combine Plant One and Plant Two into one facility, it limits their options because they would have a fairly small piece of property overall and if they had to add another pond that would really limit their options. He said that the current usage is that all the existing runoff is directed under Freeman Road. He said he came in today because he wants to get their project going. He wants to start building while we work out the issues because they planned to break ground Thursday.

Engineer Frauhiger said he and Paul Couts talked about one other option, of possibility of using the existing detention pond, hoping he had enough storage to handle the new addition. He said that has always been an option, but what the problem is, there are calculations required to determine whether or not the existing pond is big enough to handle it and whether or not the new owner wants it on his property.

Mr. Pimmler said another issue down the road is that ditch falls into that zone of property that the Airport needs to acquire for their expansion. Some other information on the ditch was given. It was built in 1991. Part of the ditch was deeded over to White County. Other companies granted easements to the Pimmlers. The contractor was Ron Coonrod. Engineer Frauhiger said it is a nice sized pond and there is quite an elaborate outlet control structure in there so someone had to design it, but no one knew who did. Board Member Heimlich said from what he was told, he thinks there was a swale there and they deepened it. Engineer Frauhiger said it looks like the pipe has failed in the pond. After studying a survey that Soil and Water had done on it, it is thought that Tom Wagner from Soil and Water designed it. They are the ones that submitted it. See tape for inaudible conversations.

Surveyor Sterrett said that Mr. Sabo called him asking what was going on and he could not give him an answer. He said Mr. Sabo’s concern was the liabilities. Board Member Heimlich asked if the ditch and the pond are right on the back edge of the property (Sabo now). That is correct. A GIS map was studied. Board Member Heimlich pointed out the portion the County owns. He said if he would just deed that (pond) over to the County, they would take the liability. It was decided to see when Mr. Sabo would be available to meet and try to get this resolved.

Mr. Pimmler asked to proceed with their project without the potential to put a retention pound on their property resolved. Engineer Frauhiger said, “My feeling is that pond is probably big enough. What Paul (Couts) indicated, and I agreed with him, that we could re-jockey the outlet control structure, there’s got to be some freeboard in the pond, usually those are designed with two foot of freeboard and in a design storm you have two foot of elevation before you are over the top of the bank. It’s not that big of a building. We can utilize some of that two foot and make the outlet control structure just a little bit smaller. One interesting thing I just noticed, unfortunately, is that a shop fabricated a piece of corrugated metal and it says this portion of pipe shall be shop fabricated in one continuous length. That is the length that goes through the berm and right her at the top is where we have our suck hole. There’s a picture of it, it is a pretty big suck hole. I was hoping that joint failed. Apparently there are no joints in that. So I don’t know if the pipe rusted away, or exactly what happened, but we have a failed piece of pipe. I guess my gut is, you can make it work. I think there should be enough freeboard in that pond for it to work for the additional building expansion.”

Attorney Loy said, “So, then the question is, easement versus ownership. John’s idea of the County taking title to that little strip there makes sense.” Board Member Heimlich said, “That would be the simplest and from what I gather, what his (Sabo) main concern is, he doesn’t want the land, he doesn’t want the liabilities. If he would deed that over to the County, like we’ve got part of the rest of it anyway, and that would work for the plan, it would be set.” See tape – discussion on what the Airport will need for their expansion. Mr. Pimmler said that ditch is going to be right in the zone, but they didn’t have a problem with the ditch being there and they would also need some type of fence to keep deer off the runways. That is a private ditch, not assessed.

Board Member Heimlich said, “I think what we’re hearing is what everybody seemingly would prefer is to use that existing pond and you think it would probably meet the calculations. So the key is to get control of that so we need to meet with Mr. Sabo.” Attorney Loy said, “I think the Board’s preference is the Board take title to it.” Board Member Heimlich said then we would never have to worry about this happening again. He said the next step is to contact Mr. Sabo. Surveyor Sterrett said that Mr. Sabo called him so he does not have his number. Mr. Pimmler said he can give it to him.

Mr. Pimmler asked again, “If we believe that the retention pond is sufficient in size anyway, can we do these two things in parallel? Can we go ahead and move forward on our project and work on the easement thing in parallel?” Attorney Loy stated, “I assume, Tom, you don’t have a building permit yet?” Board Member Heimlich said it is being held up by the approval of the drainage permit. Attorney Loy said, “I can’t tell you that you can go ahead without that, but this is something we ought to be able to resolve fairly soon if we can get on the phone with Mr. Sabo right away. Put it in terms that we are willing to relieve him of his liability and responsibility……inaudible.”

Connie Neininger asked if they could issue just a foundation permit for him so they could get started. Board Member Heimlich stated, “Yes, that is possible, I can talk to Dave (Anderson, building inspector).” Mr. Pimmler said, “For us the concern would be proceeding once we know for sure what the outcome is going to be.” Board Member Heimlich said, “Yes, and that’s always the danger, if we run into trouble with Mr. Sabo. I would at least like to talk to Mr. Sabo before we told Dave (Anderson, building inspector) to go ahead and issue the foundation permit. But, yes, that could be done as soon as we got some indication from Mr. Sabo that we are going to be able to…….” Attorney Loy said he would have to have a legal description of the retention pond so he can prepare a deed. Tom Pimmler said, “As long as there is a positive indication from Chris then we can go ahead and get the building permit issued.” Board Member Heimlich said, “Well, first would be the foundation permit which says you can go ahead and put your foundation in because it is going to take a little while for the deed.” Attorney Loy said if he has the description he can prepare it today. See tape for multiple conversations and discussion of how property is split up and how to get a description.

Board Member Heimlich asked Mr. Pimmler, “Your indication is that he (Sabo) is that you think he is cooperative?” Mr. Pimmler indicated yes and asked, if for some reason Chris is not interested in granting easement, what happens then? Board Member Heimlich said, “I think maybe we misunderstood what you were asking before, under our Ordinance with the amount of impermeable surface construction you are doing triggers the Drainage Ordinance. We need that water retained according to our Ordinance. So you would have to have some retention on your property if you are not using this (off-site pond) to meet the current Ordinance. That’s the problem.” Chairman Burton said whether that pond existed or not, where you are going with that runoff, currently it is running to the side ditch and down. That’s really not being allowed today so you would be asked to upgrade in this process of expanding. Board Member Heimlich said he thinks legally the new owner could not dam up that system, but it could go to court. Attorney Loy said, “Yes, and he (Pimmler) did not reserve a drainage easement to drain his existing property when he sold the other so that could be used.” It was agreed to meet with Chris Sabo as quickly they could get a meeting set up.

Engineer Frauhiger spoke up, “I had brought this up to Paul (Couts) too, there is such a small volume of detention required, the ditch that is on Monticello Spring Corporation property now has more than enough volume to handle that additional amount of storm water detention. What could be done is, right at the end of their property there could be a small check dam put in the bottom of the ditch about two foot tall with a pipe through the bottom of it to make sure that the rest of the ditch stays dry so you don’t have the problem of water standing in the ditch, with the adjoining runway. You could get more than the required detention they were going to put over here; you could get more than that required amount in the ditch. It doesn’t address the easement problem but it would definitely take care of the drainage portion of it. Chairman Burton said that gives you a backup. Mr. Pimmler asked if that would definitely be acceptable. Engineer Frauhiger said, “As long as that pipe went through the bottom of it to keep that ditch dry.” Mr. Pimmler asked if that would be concrete or an earthen dam. Engineer Frauhiger said earthen.

Mr. Pimmler said, “If we submit a drainage plan that way we could probably move quicker then than wait on an easement then, is that correct?” Engineer Frauhiger said, “From a drainage standpoint that is correct but I don’t know what you would do about an easement then. I think eventually then you have to address that somehow.” Board Member Heimlich said, “You are still releasing water here. Can someone legally obstruct that?” Attorney Loy said, “Some of it depends on whether it was a natural water course.” Board Member Heimlich asked Surveyor Sterrett, “You said you thought that it was and it was made deeper?” Surveyor Sterrett said, “Down below it, it IS. There’s a ravine on the Airport side of it, I think, it starts right there at that detention pond, so evidently the water used to run down into that ravine and they diverted it over to the west a little bit and built that pond.”

Engineer Frauhiger asked what about the Airport being right beside it. Attorney Loy said we do need to confirm with the Airport that this pond is consistent with their plan. Board Member Heimlich said he has to call Phil Gutwein on another matter so he will raise that issue. Mr. Pimmler said, “I discussed it with him before and he never raised any concerns about it, but most of that conversation was about if the Airport was going to take over that ditch then they should take over the pond as well. It just makes sense. But, again, from a timing standpoint from our side, to get things moving, if we submitted a plan then based on putting a small check dam in the ditch would that allow us to move forward?” Board Member Heimlich said, “It gets back to, the outlet is still through the part we don’t have the easement on. It is alright as long as Sabo doesn’t dam it up. Which, even if we don’t work anything out with him, I don’t think he is going to dam it up.”

Attorney Loy stated, “The most I can legally tell you is, you can get a foundation permit, you move forward at your own risk. If the Sabos pass away or become unreasonable then there may be a legal issue down the road.” Mr. Pimmler said, “But if we put the check dam in the ditch, which is on our own property, we are in effect doing exactly what the Ordinance requires.” Board Member Heimlich stated, “Well, you are, except that your outlet is this easement that is in question.” Attorney Loy asked if a check dam is like a weir. Engineer Frauhiger said, “Actually it would be an earthen berm about two or two and a half foot high at the flow line of the ditch. Basically you dam water up behind it and it drains out slowly. Board Member Heimlich said it still goes through that same area. Attorney Loy said let’s see what Sabo has to say. How quickly can a legal survey be put together? See tape - It was determined that the description is on the deed that Sabo has. The property is in two parcels, the house being on one parcel and the pond on the other parcel. The surveyor reviewed the deeds with the Board.

Mr. Pimmler said, “Right now what you are saying is, until this issue is resolved no one out here can get a building permit for anything, because they all drain into that detention pond.” Chairman Burton said, “Unless they put their own retention pond on their property."” Mr. Pimmler said, “That’s what I would be doing with the check dam.” Board Member Heimlich and Engineer Frauhiger answered, “But the outlet is the same.” See tape – it was determined they would still have the same issue.

Board Member Heimlich said, “I guess what he (Tom Pimmler) is asking, if they turn in a drainage plan using that ditch as a retention area, could we go ahead and approve that even though you have the same question with the easement. The retention is on his property but the outlet is……..” Chairman Burton asked, “Can we approve the dam theory as a drainage plan?” Attorney Loy asked, “A final drainage plan?” Board Member Heimlich said, “Well, as a plan that would release the building permit.” Mr. Pimmler said, “It eliminates the words ‘at your own risk’ from proceeding.” Attorney Loy said, “Well, let’s assume that Mr. Sabo doesn’t cooperate and he starts filling that in tomorrow. You go to court and expect results maybe some time this summer.” Engineer Frauhiger said he would not be surprised if the Airport has water that drains into it. Board Member Heimlich asked if the Airport was going to take control of property there, too. He said maybe they are going to want that easement anyway.

Attorney Loy explained, “The Drainage Board signing off on a drainage plan is a condition of the building permit, and they consider dozens of them in a year. There were a couple of cases in here this morning that can be exempted out if the project is small enough that it really doesn’t matter, but you’re not in that category. That’s about as quickly as this Board can accomplish anything. I think once we hear a yea or nay from Mr. Sabo and tell him the story from our approach. Your drainage plan is contingent on that detention pond being there indefinitely, regardless of who owns it.”

Pimmler: But if we go back to the approach of putting retention on our own property and using the ditch to do that.

Loy: As a permanent….

Heimlich: Yes, he’s talking; see from an engineering standpoint, he’s saying that’s ok. Except, again, the release is going through this ditch. And if nothing changes it is fine. If he bulldozes it in then you have a problem. Now, I think he’s got a problem legally, too, but, that might take some time to sort out. I guess, from our standpoint, do we go ahead and say ok, we can do that?

Loy: If you guys don’t have a problem with it, I guess I don’t, it’s just……

Heimlich: Because, from what you have told me, I believe in the end we would probably still win out. Sixteen years that’s been used as a drainage system.

Loy: Probably but I can neither assure you…………

Heimlich: Oh I know you can’t.

Loy: And, the time it takes to come to that conclusion is months, maybe a year, depending on circumstances. And then, if somebody else on the same road wants to do something, you are going to have to be consistent in treatment.

Heimlich: Right

Sterrett: Like if Tru Flite wanted to do something?

Heimlich: We have done things like this before, but the circumstances here and the timing are different.

Loy: If you don’t have a problem with it I don’t. You still need to work on…..

Heimlich: We still need to work on that, but if we can at least grant the….

Pimmler: At least then we can proceed without having the risk of putting an actual detention pond on the rest of the property.

Heimlich: Right

Loy: That in effect replaces the detention pond.

Frauhiger: It doesn’t only replace it, it IS the detention pond.

Heimlich: Now, if we work this out with Sabo then you’ve still got the other one.

Loy: Now is this on the portion that the County owns?

Heimlich: No, the portion of the ditch he owns.

Loy: That is better. It is not going to screw anybody up, upstream.

Frauhiger: No, as long, I’ll be very specific with Paul; the discharge pipe has to be at the existing flow line of the ditch.

Loy: My last question is, that would work as a final solution so long as Sabo doesn’t fill in the ditch.

Heimlich: Doesn’t do anything with the current system there.

Frauhiger: I can probably tell you how high that….inaudible….. is going to be. It’s probably going to be eighteen inches with an eight inch pipe in the bottom of it. Covered with stone to keep it in place.

Heimlich: So can we do something here today worded in such a way that….

Loy: Yes, move to, Tom has asked the Board to amend his drainage plan by providing for what, Todd?

Frauhiger: To provide .265 acre-feet of storage within the existing ditch across the back of Monticello Spring’s property, with an outlet constructed of some type of earthen berm with a discharge pipe in the berm at the flow line of the existing ditch so not to impede water on adjoining property owners and some type of erosion control material, probably stone over the top of the berm to keep it in place.

Loy: That’s his modified drainage plan

Frauhiger: I would also say Paul could probably go ahead and draw that for submittal to us.

Burton: I would ask for a motion to such.

Heimlich: We are still trying to get the easement.

Pimmler: The easement needs to happen so we would be clean for the future. But at least this way we would be meeting the drainage requirements for detention on our property. It doesn’t address the fact that the easement wasn’t properly in place.

Burton: If we add on to that……

Heimlich: If we get the property from Sabo, then are we just going to drop this and use the existing pond, do whatever, you said there’s a pipe that needs replaced in that. I want to be clear about that part of it, that we’re not just scuttling that pond.

Frauhiger: Remember I went like this, leave this in because we can go back to our calculations and say we needed .265 acre-feet of storage, we supplied .265 acre-feet of storage, otherwise there would be no calculations to verify.

Pimmler: What I need is the ability to move forward without jeopardy. What would we do, if you could approve a check dam in the current ditch at that volume, if we can resolve the other issues with Chris and Susan, and I have reason to think we can, then our preference would be actually to dig out a little bit more on that existing pond.

Burton: That’s where you stand right now. Everybody’s on the same page…..

Heimlich: We’re just clear then.

Heimlich: I’ll make that motion.

Board Member Heimlich seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Board Member Heimlich stated, “Ok, he has approval now, if he can get the permit.” Surveyor Sterrett stated, “I will write a letter to Area Plan saying…inaudible….”

Chairman Burton adjourned the meeting.