Published: July 11, 2009 02:06 am      

Residents struggle with water woes

Drainage work at Sunset Hills subdivision continues to move forward, as it is set to enter its final phase.

The Clark County Drainage Board recently approved the third phase of work regarding drainage improvements at Sunset Hills. But the final stage may be slowed down because the board must wait for approval to construct easements before it can finish repairs.

The final phase of construction adversely affects three or four lots at Sunset Hills and approval must be granted to construct the easements, said Greg Fifer, attorney for the drainage board.

A low bid of $12,800 came from TSI Paving, which completed work on another phase of the project. Construction could begin within two to three weeks if the easements are granted and after the bid is awarded, Fifer said.

“My hope is to have everything done in six weeks,” said Mike Moore, county commissioner and drainage board member.

Sunset Hills has been a long-standing issue with the drainage board. Accusations of improper drainage construction date back to the development of the subdivision.

A series of quarrels and lawsuits ensued with County Surveyor Bob Isgrigg — who originally put in the drainage pipe for Sunset Hills — at odds with the county commissioners and drainage board.

Isgrigg has consistently denied the need for reconstruction, that the county was not fiscally responsible for the repairs and it overpaid to fix the problem.

Because of a lapse in the original bond by the builder of Sunset Hills, the county being unaware of its expiration and the builder going out of business, the drainage board became responsible for fixing the problems.

The first phase of repair began in the fall and was scheduled to be completed in three phases to repair flooding, mitigate standing water and to replace drainage pipes. After the final phase of work is finished, the issues for the residents in the subdivision should be solved.

“The drainage board will be thankfully finished with Sunset Hills,” Fifer said.



FOREST PROBLEMS

While the work at Sunset Hills may finally be near its end, more drainage issues were reported at another local neighborhood, Forest Hill.

An obstruction was allegedly hindering the natural course of water flow. As a response, the drainage board issued an order to remove the obstruction.

The alleged obstruction is a driveway built through a swell that is blocking the flow of drainage or rainwater runoff.

“No pipe is there, so it acts as a dam,” Fifer said.

A 12-inch pipe was in place under the driveway to allow the water to pass through, but it was removed. In addition, a curb was added to the driveway in question. According to a recommendation, a 15-inch pipe should be in place under the driveway to handle stormwater runoff.

The developer of the Forest Hill subdivision previously offered to install the pipe at the property for no expense. Permission to make the repairs was not given.

The property owners who live adjacent to the subdivision, John and Charlotte Nicholson, said they denied the second request from Steve Hines, of Allen Schuler Builders, because the water would run down onto their neighbors’ property.

The Nicholsons said they originally granted access to the property if the drain were built all of the way across the rain-flow area. The builder responded that was too expensive, the Nicholsons said.

The couple filed their own drainage petition with the county. Since Forest Hill was built, they have received substantial water on their property after it rains, as well as having their driveway washed out frequently, they said.

“The discharges overwhelmed the 12-inch culvert and continued to wash out the driveway, even though the Forest Hill drainage calculations indicated that the 12-inch culvert should be adequate,” a report by the county surveyor’s office said.

“In 38 years, we’ve never had that [drainage] problem,” Charlotte Nicholson said.

The report also said if there was more water entering the Nicholson’s property than before the subdivision was built, it would violate Indiana code 36-9-27-69.5 (b)(1).

“This is supposed to be a natural flow of water,” Charlotte Nicholson said. “It is not a natural flow of water.”

Isgrigg likened problems at the Nicholsons’ property to issues associated with the construction of Lewis and Clark subdivision in his report. He placed much of the blame on the drainage board writing, in part: the Clark County drainage ordinance had a number of defects leading to increased stormwater to run onto the property after a normal rainfall; [the ordinance] failed to control the developers design and protect downstream owners; and [it] failed to identify the downstream infrastructure being impacted.

The report on Forest Hill also includes a petition from Alex Burrus and Brittney Roederer. A verbal request had been made to remove the obstruction on the Nicholson’s property, because they said it was causing water to build up in their yard. The request was refused.

“This obstruction in the natural surface water course does significantly impede the flow of water so as to damage the usability and value of the Burrus’ property,” the report said.

The drainage board approved an order to remove the obstruction and install the pipe on the Nicholson’s property.

But according to Isgrigg the problem could have been avoided.

“The Clark County Drainage Board ignored the warning issued to them of this problem 31⁄2 years ago, and a number of times since, and as of this date has refused to correct the problem and adequately protect the citizens of Clark County,” he wrote.

As to who will have to pay for the repairs to be made, “It’s the Nicholson’s responsibility; it’s not the county’s responsibility to fix this problem,” Moore said.

The Nicholson’s are looking into possible legal action because of the drainage issues.