3.01 SR 07-27-2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EOty1� ,.,�� Request for Action River To Item Number Mayor and City Council/Sherburne County Board 3.01 Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by joint Meetin July 27, 2016 Cal Portner, City Administrator Item Description Reviewed by County Ditches Steve Taylor, County Administrator, Mike Lindenau, County Ditch Inspector Reviewed by Justin Femrite, City Engineer Action Requested Information update,board/council discussion. Background/Discussion Following the wet winter and spring of 2013-14, a number of Elk River residents experienced flooding or near flooding of their properties. Many of these properties were served by county ditches for storm water control,in particular County Ditch 28. In the cases under the county's purview,residents were encouraged to call the county ditch inspector or their county commissioner. Due to the very rare wet winter and spring and as a recent result of a change to the county/city process of paying for county ditch maintenance through county property tax assessments, the concerns were brought to the attention of Commissioner Bruce Anderson. A meeting between city and county officials was called by city staff to discuss the issue. Commissioner Anderson and County Attorney Heaney were also in attendance. Concerns expressed by the county included: 1) The inundation of calls was a result of a recent policy change and an extremely wet winter. Prior to 2013, the City of Elk River paid all county ditch maintenance costs. At the request of the county,repairs were to be assessed directly to the property owners as in other cities and townships within Sherburne County. 2) City development had increased impervious surface coverage in housing developments did not account for the storm water capacity changes taken on by the ditches. The city engineer, city administrator, county administrator, and the county ditch inspector met to further explore a resolution. From this discussion a few points were agreed upon. 1) The very rare wet season accounted for precipitation levels not seen in this area in generations. 2) The county ditch maintenance program is re-active to ditch problems. 3) While development may have contributed to a flow increase a true determination cannot be made without a professional hydrological study. By law, this study is eligible for assessment back to the property owners. Historically,before any assessment would be done for a system-wide study, a redetermination of benefits is needed for Ditch 28. 4) The city would provide public service announcements regarding the ditch assessment process to inform residents. POWERED 6T AR