03/27/1997 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. the back. It was clarified the creek is in the back. Mrs. Steiner questioned if Mr. Dunlap is going to drain to the front and the back. Mr. Dunlap pulled out a copy of the topography map and explained the back yard drain will drain to the front. Mrs. Steiner explained that engineering forced her to drain to the back, as too many people were draining out front. She wondered why engineering would permit Mr. Dunlap to drain to the front. Mr. Duvlap advised, if required, he would be willing to drain to tlie back. Mr. Miller advised the creek is about four houses north of the vacant lot and by that time it is already draining to the other street. Mr. Kazak noted the reasou Mr. Duvlap cannot drain to the back is that he would have to drain his water onto someone else's property. Mrs. Steiner explained she had to get an easement to drain to the back. Mrs. Schmidt noted she was also forced to drain to the back. Several years ago, Ms. Schmidt explained, the former owner of the Brunswick property put in tile so that the water would drain to the ditch. The ditch was filled in and now tlus water drains to the vacant lot. She wondered where the water would drain if Mr. Duulap is permitted to build on this vacant lot. Ms. Schmidt did not believe the system would work as it is intended because the water backs up at the street. She stated it would be dishonest to sell this proposed new home when the drainage system is inadequate. Mrs. Hamilton advised her back yard floods every time it rains because the neighbor to the rear installed two new garages. She believed building a home ou the vacant lot next door would impose more water on the city's drainage system. Mrs. Hamilton noted, when the ditch backs up, tlus water will drain to her property because it is the lowest in the area. Two of the neighbors present advised they do have a drain in the back yard. Mr. Burk agreed this would contain the water on the lot if the drainage system worked properly. He asked Mr. Rymarczyk to address the drainage. W. Rymarczyk advised the drainage system is in the jurisdiction of the engineering departinent. Mr. Burk would like the proposal sent back to engineering department for further review. Mr. Kazak agreed sometlung has to be done to benefit the entire neighborhood as the curreut draiuage system is not working. Councilman Nasher explained he has spoken with Service Director Bohlmann about cleaning the ditches. Mr. Kazak noted that will not do much good as many of the ditches are filled. Mrs. Miller advised the ditch used to extend all the way down Midvale, however several people have been filliug the ditches up. She further noted, two years ago the city was supposed to re-pave the streets aud put in storm sewers. When questioned, Mrs. Miller advised the city was filling the ditches up. Mr. Miller noted he does not have a ditch in frout of lus home. Several people were talking at the same time and much of the discussion here was inaudible. Mrs. Miller wondered if the residents cau have a guarantee that they will no longer flood if tlus home is permitted. Mr. Dunlap advised the problem is not on the lot. Mr. Miller did not like to see all the open areas in North Olmsted filled, but agreed people have a right to build on their lot witlun reason. He believed, due to the existing flooding probleins, building a hoine ou tlus lot would be unreasouable as it unposes a burden on the suiroluiding homes. Mr. Miller advised the rain automatically flows to the sewers. The storm and sanitaiy sewers cau only hold so much before they start overIlowing. Mr. Miller believed if the city continues to allow every open area to be built, the drainage systems will have to be improved cousiderably wluch will ultimately meau au increase in taxes. Mr. Dtwlap believed the city should address the fact inany ofthe ditches are filled, making it nearly unpossible to d'u•ect the water. J. Kazak motioned to table tlus, not table it, but refer it back to engiueering. He noted, although engineering approved tlus lot, they will be putting more water in the sti-eet or in the stortn sewer. Mr. Kazak would like to see engineering come up with a plau that will redirect all the water iu the ueighborhood before looking at each lot individually, as the city should look at the whole picture. N1r. Burk confiiYned the board would like to see a layout that successfully removes the water from tlus lot. Mr. Dtuilap argued tlus proposal does remove the water from the lot. Mr. Burk Uelieved tlus reinoval process causes hardslup on surrounding neighUors or the street. T1ie inotion was