5.1. SR 03-20-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• The County Board finds that the petition was proven by the evidence produced at the hearing. 4. That County Ditch No. 10 was established and in existence prior to the filing of the petition. See, Minn. Stat. 103E.411, sub. 3(b). 5. The following-testimony was presented at the public hearing: The City of Flk River by testimony of Mr. Maurer and Mr. Rohlf established that there is a necessity for the use of the drainage system as an outlet for the municipal drainage system and as an overflow of the existing system. This was not contested. ii. According to Mr. Maurer, the City Engineer, Branch 1 and Branch A of Branch 1 County Ditch No. 10 have sufficient capacity as originally engineered to accommodate the added runoff. There is no current plan for expansion or improvement of the system (as the latter term is defined in Minn. Stat. Chap. 103E). Further, Mr. Maurer stated that there will be no flooding or overflow from the ditch on Mr. Hohlen's land as a result of the purposed use. This information was uncontested. iii. Mr. Rohlf testified that the use of the County Ditch will benefit the public and be of utility and shall promote the public health. Testimony was had that the current municipal system is unable to hold the water runoff on Main Street and on Fifth next to the Barrington Plat. There is back flooding of homes and properties. This was uncontested. iv. That the City of Elk River has agreed that the MPCA and all necessary permit requirements will be met prior to any connection to the ditch system. 6. The County Board, based upon the testimony heard, hereby makes the following findings: The use of the County Ditch shall not adversely effect any adjacent property owners. ii. A necessity exists for the use of Branch 1 and Branch A of Branch 1 of County Ditch No. 10 as an outlet for the municipal drainage projects described in the petition. iii. That use of the drainage system will be a public utility and promote the public health.