|
Drainage Board March 12, 2001
A special meeting of the Vanderburgh
County Drainage Board was called to order at 7:20 p.m. in room 307 of the
Civic Center Complex.
Bill Jeffers: My name is Bill Jeffers, Vanderburgh County Surveyor. This is a special hearing on the petition to remove an obstruction filed by Dan Buck, Manager of Sagamore Creek Development with the Drainage Board on December 18, 2000. The petition required the surveyor to immediately go out and investigate the site of the alleged obstruction and file a report with your Drainage Board. The surveyor filed that report on January 22, 2001. Subsequently mailed certified letters to the petitioner, Dan Buck, Manager of Sagamore Creek Development on behalf of Cambridge Golf Club, LLC and to the respondents, Ray and Bernice Rexing, at 3 West Stacer Road, Vanderburgh County. There are two receipts showing that the notice was received by Ray J. and Bernice M. Rexing at two different addresses that we mailed to because that address on 3 West Stacer is listed in Haubstadt, Indiana and on some tax documents listed as an Evansville address. We mailed it to both addresses and both have the signature of the receiver. Likewise, there's two addresses for Sagamore Creek and we mailed the notice to both of those addresses and received receipts back for those notices. The notice reads that basically the Vanderburgh County Drainage Board in accordance with 36-9-27.4-1 will hold this meeting on Monday, March 12, 2001, at or about 7:00 p.m. in this room and for this purpose. I've given you a little packet and it includes a map of the watercourse that passes through Cambridge Golf Course and two lakes on Cambridge Golf Course and exits onto the land of Ray and Bernice Rexing and into a grassy waterway on that land. It shows the location of the alleged obstruction at or very near the joint property line of the two properties. It shows an area labeled section shown in photos and I have those photographs here. It shows the location of the pipe which drains the lake in Cambridge into the grassy waterway and other information. At this time, I'll show you the pictures of the location of the alleged obstruction. This is standing on the property of the Rexing's and looking east into Cambridge with the property line moved out as a straight line. This is a picture standing on Cambridge's side of the same line and looking west onto Ray and Bernice's property. You can see the grassy waterway and you can see the alleged obstruction. Being a 15 inch corrugated pipe and an amount of dirt. Here's a close up of the water standing on Cambridge. This is another picture showing a little closer view of the alleged obstruction. I'd like those entered into the record. The statute requires the surveyor to make the report and if he finds the obstruction exists at the location alleged by the petitioner to report that to you. I'm reporting, at this time, that the alleged obstruction exists at the location alleged by the petitioner and that it consists of an 18, excuse me, a 15 inch corrugated metal pipe and a quantity of dirt holding that pipe in place all within a natural surface watercourse or a watercourse improved by man, draining lands of the petitioner through lands of the respondent. The quantity of dirt and the pipe itself, being set at a higher grade than it should be set, represents material that either impedes or substantially impedes the flow of water through the watercourse being that the pipe is far too small to carry the anticipated flow calculated to come through this watercourse during a normal rainfall. The fact that the dirt holds the pipe at a significantly higher elevation than it should be thereby causing water to pool back on Cambridge Golf Course, LLC and adversely affecting their drainage system. I'd also declare that the removal of the obstruction would likely cause better drainage of the petitioner's property and that it would not...I'll just leave it at that. I have a subsequent report because the first time I went out there in January...December rather...and I was unable to take any survey information because everything was snow packed in ice. Everything was frozen and I couldn't get any real data. On this page called the subsequent report, I gave elevations using the flared end section of that pipe on Cambridge as a benchmark and showing various elevations of pipes and stuff that I'm confirming represents an obstruction. Also give the names and dates that certain other individuals visited the site with me. Also, see attached a letter from Mike Wathen, Resource Conservation Specialist with the Vanderburgh County SWCD, who was invited to give his opinion and he was invited to give his opinion by the respondent, Mr. Rexing. His opinion from the letter that he sent us, "I agree the pipe crossing that was installed by Rexing Farms is an obstruction based upon my observations and the elevation information that you gave to me." "You" being the county surveyor and "me" being Mr. Mike Wathen. At this time in the interest of brevity, I will simply reiterate that I did find an obstruction to exist at the location alleged by the petitioner and of the material so alleged and that the removal of it will cause better drainage of the petitioner's property. There are representatives here for Rexing Farms and the respondent, Ray Rexing, in the audience and there are representatives here from Cambridge Golf Course, LLC, Mr. Bauer and Jim Williams his engineer. Commissioner Fanello: Okay. At this time, would anyone like to speak? Ray Rexing: I'm Ray Rexing and I live at 3 West Stacer Road, Haubstadt, Indiana and to the best of my knowledge, I do not have an Evansville address at 3 West Stacer Road in Evansville, Indiana. I guess, I need to start at the beginning and I hope you'll bear with me. I attended the Drainage Board meetings when the drainage plan was discussed and I had concerns of low flow water and seepage that would come from lakes that are used for retention areas to slow water up. I think they found my comments, maybe not real amusing but fairly amusing. They figured that I really didn't know where I was coming from, but I've been expose to this before. I don't have a problem with what they're saying that there's an obstruction in the waterway. The reason we put the obstruction in the waterway was because we were combining wheat in the middle of the summer and there was no other way for us to get wheat out; there was no other way for us to get straw out. Going back prior, I met with Mr. Jeffers on the site out there and expressed my concerns. Mr. Bauer was there and two technicians from the Soil Conservation Service, but apparently they didn't figure it was an issue...the low flow water and the seepage. Later on after this event when we couldn't get our straw and wheat out, I asked Mr. Jeffers to come out and he did come out and reiterated to me that what I had said would happen, in essence, was happening. Commissioner Mourdock: May I interrupt you for a second to clarify something? Ray Rexing: Sure. Commissioner Mourdock: When you say the low flow seepage, here's what I picture that to mean and you tell me if this is right. You're saying that prior to the lake being built that slight watercourse pretty well dried up during the summer but now that there is a lake there, it's constantly putting some water out and keeping it wet pretty well all summer long. Is that right? Ray Rexing: Right. It rained last Saturday night and I checked yesterday evening and water was still running out of that lake. That's eight days. I checked some of my other waterways and they were dry. I don't have a problem with what they are wanting to do, all I'm asking for and all I've asked for all along is to take this low flow water at the property line and take it underground in a tile. It can go under our property, that doesn't bother me, but for it to trickle across the top of the ground for days after it's quit raining, you can't farm that way. That's our livelihood; that's all we do is farm. I didn't put the pipe in, the boys, my two sons put it in. I even questioned them and said why in the world didn't you just...we have four wheel drive tractors...why didn't you just drag through the mud? They said they didn't want to drag all that mud out on the road. They were thinking about safety more than I was and I question whether the Drainage Board ever thinks about safety? You know, dragging mud out onto the road and different things like that? Our problem is not taking this obstruction out of this waterway. When I received the letter I would have taken that obstruction out of the waterway - I could have taken it out in 15 minutes, but this is the only way we felt like we can tell our side of the story. What they do on their side of the property line doesn't bother me at all, but when it interferes with our livelihood, then we're naturally concerned. I'll entertain any questions. Can I add one more thing? Commissioner Fanello: Yes. Ray Rexing: I did...there was a gentleman by the name of Chris Wahl that worked for the developer up there and we had made an agreement that he could use my tile in this particular waterway that the obstruction is in and put a collection point to catch the water that comes out of these two 36 inch pipes out of this lake. It was working real well. Then they came through with a sewer line and, I guess, they cut the tile and whether they fixed it or not, I don't know. If they did fix it, it apparently is not functioning now. There was another stream of water coming north of the existing big lake where the two pipes come out of and that's the reason that we didn't have any choice but to put the pipe and dirt in there. After it went in there, it rained real hard a couple days later and took half of the dirt out. We were probably obstructing the volume of water that could go through it but not the grade of water that could go through it. Unidentified: There's also a picture there that will show the subsurface drain. Commissioner Mourdock: You need to state your name. Brian Rexing: I'm Brian Rexing, Ray's son. There's a picture there that will show the subsurface drain full of water and it has a drain top on it that's full of water and you can tell there's no water going through it. There wouldn't be any water pond there if that subsurface drain was working right now because it would take the volume of water that is trickling. Commissioner Mourdock: The subsurface tile that you said initially was working, but it's not now, flows from east to west on your property? Brian Rexing: Yes. I talked to David Blankenberger who installed the...who was working at the time installing it and he was under the understanding, as we were, that they could use our drain to put their subsurface drain to. He agreed that he remembered hooking it up and... Commissioner Mourdock: Where would that tie in? Brian Rexing: That would tie in right there at the crossing. The subsurface drain is on their property. Commissioner Mourdock: The tile that are intersected here. Brian Rexing: If I could show you the picture here. Commissioner Mourdock: No, show me on the map. Brian Rexing: The tile runs down the middle of this grass waterway. Commissioner Mourdock: There is underground tile underneath the waterway? Bill Jeffers: I haven't submitted any information or drawing about the subsurface drain at this time, but I will if you think it's an issue. Brian Rexing: But a few minutes ago you acted like it wasn't worth your while. Bill Jeffers: If the board wishes to see pictures of the subsurface drain and understand its function, I would be happy to incorporate it into this hearing. I was staying on the surface with the hearing at the time. Commissioner Mourdock: I understand. Let me just ask one question though. Brian Rexing: Bill had pictures while ago of the subsurface drain. Commissioner Mourdock: Here's my question. I heard something about a tile that was cut when some other pipe was put in? Brian Rexing: They laid a sewer through there and when they did that it's quite possible that, at that time, it was cut and not fixed again. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, but up until that point, you're saying that through these tile that you didn't get any effect of what you are now seeing? Brian Rexing: Right, right. Like I said, we agreed that they could hook it up to our tile and there was no problem. That was another reason we put the pipe in because dad said we could drag through the mud and get through it. We could, but we did not want to crush that tile. Commissioner Mourdock: Does the tile come all the way under the property line? Brian Rexing: Yes. Al Bauer: Hello. My name is Al Bauer and I'm one of the Managers of Cambridge Golf Club. There's probably more to what we're talking about tonight than drainage although what we really want to talk about is drainage. I sat on the Area Plan Commission for quite a few years and this was the first subdivision that I've ever heard of, whether it was my own or whether is was anybody else's, that discussed the positives of having retention basins which are designed to retain water from escaping a developed site too quickly onto someone else's property. Then the alternate effect discussed by Mr. Rexing earlier as saying that even though we appreciate you retaining water, there are moments when the wind picks up there are waves and water blows off these lakes and therefore keeps our passageways wet and we can't traverse them. We already heard that he could have traversed them with four wheel drive vehicles. In fact, I think another way to accomplished it was to traversed them and then removed them. I'm saying there are other issues involved. They'd like to sell their property and I'll just leave it at that. All I know is that the obstruction that has been sited this evening has created a slough on our property. If there is a subsurface drain that needs to be reattached, we'd be perfectly willing to look at that, but we'd also like to ask why it is on our property to begin with, if it was initially installed by the Rexing's? But that's okay. If it's there, we will try to reattach to it. I guess the bigger question for the Drainage Board would be when it comes to retention for subdivisions are retention basins a good thing? Well, of course, they are a good thing, but do you give up anything by requiring them? If we are simply talking about, in this situation, the lake effect which is blowing of water through a pipe because the wind picks up, I say, how can anyone develop a piece of property where the water flows through it? I guess, the other side of that argument also would be has the agricultural value of the Rexing property been diminished by a golf course being built right adjacent to their property? I would think we are probably the most desired development next to anybody's piece of property. We're willing to...the whole issue was the fact that we've had water standing on our ground; it's created mud and mosquitoes and a very undesirable situation on our site. They were asked to remove it and they didn't. Commissioner Mourdock: Just for the benefit of you two since this is your second meeting here. As the Drainage Board, the only thing we can deal with by the statute that established the Drainage Board are the true drainage issues. Mr. Bauer just alluded to other things that may be out there - that doesn't matter to us. Mr. Rexing suggested that hauling mud out on the road is a safety issue and not that it's not a valid issue but looking at this from the Drainage Board point of view, you can't consider that. That's just the rules of the game. I just want to say that to both sides. There's all those issues out there, whatever they may or may not be, but all we can deal with is the drainage issue itself. Coming back to the one other question I would have regarding the subsurface tile that apparently extends east of the property line. Mr. Bauer, I presume you were not there personally on site when that sewer line was put in that they are suggesting may have cut that line? Al Bauer: That is correct. I would also say that would it would handle the issues of the water problem we currently have? No, it would not because we have an obstruction in the way. No, I was not there to see it, but I would be happy to investigate that. Commissioner Mourdock: I think I heard Mr. Rexing say, and don't let me put words in your mouth, given your comment that you felt that getting this tile reconnected might resolve the problem, I thought I also heard you say that you agreed that this was an obstruction. By saying that, I presume you are saying that you're willing to get that obstruction out of there if, in fact, that tile can be reconnected underneath where that sewer line is now, is that correct? You'll need to come to the microphone. Ray Rexing: We don't have a problem taking the obstruction out. I've been farming long enough to know what an obstruction is and we probably should have taken it out, but I reiterate back to that this was the only way to voice our opinion. Somehow or other, we need to be able to dry up the waterway. Number one, it was put in with cost share money from the U.S. government and has to be maintained for ten years. If the waterway is not allowed to dry out, the grass will die and instead of a waterway, we will have a ditch. Commissioner Mourdock: So you just caused another picture to come in my mind here. That is a true conservation type right-of-way that you put through there? It is a grass strip? Ray Rexing: Yes, it is. It's put in according to their specs. Commissioner Mourdock: So, going back to my question a moment ago. Are you willing to pull out your obstruction if, in fact, Mr. Bauer does what he says and makes an effort to reconnect that tile? Al Bauer: We don't even know, by the way, that it has been disconnected. We don't know that for a fact. Commissioner Mourdock: I understand that. We are dealing on presumption here. I'm hearing you say that you're willing to spend the time and effort and go out there and dig and if it's there...if it was, in fact, disconnected, you're willing to reconnect it? Al Bauer: Sure. Commissioner Mourdock: And with that being the case, Mr. Rexing, are you willing to pull the obstruction out of there that is presently there? Ray Rexing: I think there needs to be...there's something else that entered the picture. There's water coming from around the lake that needs to be picked up next to the property line, but we'll pull the obstruction out. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. Fine. Bill Jeffers: With regards to Mr. Rexing's comments that someone, possibly the county surveyor's employees at the time of the design of this, found his comments amusing with regard to low flow. We found them interesting and we addressed them. At first, it was something we had never heard of and there may have been some nervous chuckles, but we addressed them completely and to say otherwise is misleading and mis-informative. That the obstruction was put in to combine wheat; wheat harvest was in June and this is March. Number three, that for some reason or other we didn't figure that low flow or seepage was an issue. We addressed that. Not only that but like Mr. Bauer said, the first subdivision I've ever worked on since 1981 where we made the developer go to M & W Concrete and fabricate a special end section, shown on the plan that Mr. Mosby has his hand on, at great expense to lessen the velocity at which the water left this property. Made this man, on the golf course, back the pipe up a hundred feet and put a spread apron on the end of that thing with a low trickle flow interceptor that's in the picture that I've just brought to your desk. It shows an expensive drop basin, not some Mickey Mouse drop basin but an expensive inlet. It's the only subdivision I know that we asked them to do that, and they did it voluntarily because it's not in the drainage ordinance..to pick up the low flow. That lake is designed to detain greater than a 100 year storm. That was not the case at the time they designed it. They could have done it to a 25 year storm. It's greater than a 100 year storm. Commissioner Mourdock: Where's this photo? Bill Jeffers: If you'll look at the detail here. There's your apron which is the outflow, at this point, and there's the basin connected to the existing drain tile with the existing riser removed and replaced by a clean out. Commissioner Mourdock: Hold on, you made it too complicated for me. Where is this structure? Bill Jeffers: Just in the very end of the apron leaving the twin pipes on Cambridge's property. Commissioner Mourdock: Clear up at the lake? Bill Jeffers: No. This is the pipe leaving the lake and here's the end of the pipe here. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. Bill Jeffers: And here's the last 100 feet you're looking at in all those pictures. Commissioner Mourdock: So this is right here? Bill Jeffers: This is right there. Commissioner Mourdock: And this then is - Bill Jeffers: - connected over to a pipe that goes off through (inaudible). This is the only structure of its kind in Vanderburgh County. It was put in voluntarily at great expense. We have word from the contractor that put it in...an employee of Blankenberger Brothers, that he did hook it up to the existing drain tile in conformance with the plans in front of you. I suspect that it may have been...it is very likely that it was severed by the sewer being installed and whoever installed the sewer was a different contractor and did not reconnect it. We have word from the conservation officer that the Rexing's have a different tile than this one, but this was the tile that was pointed to at the time. We were told that they could hook up to it and it would drain through the Rexing's property during low flow conditions. If you'll look at that plan there and look at the details of that double flared end section and you can call M & W Concrete and ask them how much it cost, but there's nothing like this in Vanderburgh County except at this one location. It was custom made. That Mr. Rexing also said that I went out there and confirmed that what Ray said would happen, did happen. On that occasion I was about a half a mile north of this location and we were talking about a different lake. One of the Rexing family said that dragging mud out onto the road was an issue. When I was asked by Kent Rexing to come up with a solution, I pointed out that I am not the design engineer for this project, nor is it the county surveyor's responsibility to design something, but I would have put a rock crossing made out of ballast rock. Something smaller than rip rap and something larger than railroad ballast. He could go across that and that's typical construction...I mean rumble strip so to speak for a construction site that will rumble the mud off your tires. That suggestion was made. In fact, without discussing that with Mr. Wathen whatsoever, Mr. Wathen says in his letter that if a rock crossing, excuse me, the pipe crossing should be totally removed and a rock crossing installed one inch in elevation below the Cambridge property line. That's to cross for the combines. If a rock crossing is not acceptable, then a concrete crossing with gabion baskets installed immediately upstream would also work. The rock or concrete crossing would allow Cambridge to utilize their property and would provide a suitable access for the Rexing farm equipment. Kent Rexing an I discussed that and coincidentally Mr. Wathen recommends it in his letter. Commissioner Mourdock: Let me put some finality to this in a motion and see if I can wrap all this up in one motion. This will be a challenge. Bill Jeffers: I'd like to point out that there is a clean out as a part of this subsurface drain system that they can go poking around in and see what's blocking that thing up. That was also recommended by our office and put in at great expense. Commissioner Mourdock: Is that on the Cambridge property? Bill Jeffers: On the Cambridge property. Commissioner Mourdock: I've heard both sides on this and we have not put a date on here so I will include it in the motion. Mr. Rexing you tell me if this in inappropriate and Mr. Bauer. I would move that we consider this particular petition resolved providing that 1) Mr. Rexing removes, within 45 days, the obstruction that is presently located, and if, in fact, there is a crossing needed at that location, to put in some sort of stone crossing or whatever that is not in the future an obstruction. 2) That Mr. Bauer, within 45 days, make the effort to excavate along the sewer line that was placed. If, in fact, the tile was severed, reconnect the tile. President Mosby: I'll second that motion. Commissioner Mourdock: Wait a minute, isn't that what everybody agreed to? Al Bauer: I would certainly agree to that as long as that is a part of what we were originally suppose to do in our drainage plan that we submitted. If that was part of that document or part of that approval process, we will be happy to do that. Commissioner Mourdock: Why would that not be part of it? Al Bauer: I have no idea. Commissioner Mourdock: So you're saying that as long as it doesn't violate the terms of your drainage plan. Al Bauer: I guess, I don't want to go out on a witch hunt and it be said that there is a tile that we should have connected to and didn't and blah, blah, blah. We'd be very happy to do that. Commissioner Mourdock: I was specific to say where that sewer line went in. Al Bauer: We'd be happy to do that. As I pointed out earlier, I think there's no excuse to block the water for the last nine months, but we'd be happy to do that. Commissioner Mourdock: And somebody was shaking your head that what I just said wasn't agreeable? I thought that's what you agreed to a moment ago? Kent Rexing: Kent Rexing. They talked about combining wheat and - Commissioner Mourdock: Stick to the motion here. When I made the motion saying that you all would remove the obstruction and if you want a crossing that you would put stone or something in that would remove the obstruction, is that not agreeable? Kent Rexing: I agree with everything you said up to the point that why should we be penalized to put a crossing in - Commissioner Mourdock: You're not; you don't have to. I'm just saying, if you did. Kent Rexing: How are we suppose to access our property on the other side which is 64 acres of land on the other side of this crossing? Commissioner Mourdock: Well, that's what I'm saying, if you want a crossing, you would...presuming here that you want a crossing there, that whatever you put in would not be an obstruction to cause water to backup on the Cambridge property in the future. Al Bauer: While we're discussing it, I just want to, again, clarify that water always passed through this waterway. In all that we were asked to do - not all - we were asked to do a lot. We were asked to retain it a certain way and then let it out a certain way, and we were more than happy to do that. Commissioner Fanello: Sir, I have a motion on the floor and a second, is that correct? Commissioner Mourdock: Yes, there was a motion. President Mosby: I don't know if they've ever agreed. Commissioner Mourdock: I'm puzzled at the question. I thought I said it correctly. I understand what you're saying, Mr. Rexing, that you may need a crossing there and maybe you don't. I thought the whole purpose of this when the suggestion was made about attaching or reattaching the tile that was there, that everything was going to be working okay at that point. That was the assumption. So if you connect the tile, you're going to have the thing working and if it's working, why would you put in the crossing? I'm simply saying that if, in fact, you want a crossing at some point for whatever reason that it doesn't obstruct the drainage way. That makes sense, I think. Ray Rexing: There are other issues that I'd have to take you to show you but that's fine. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. President Mosby: Okay. Kent Rexing: May I say one thing? Commissioner Mourdock: We have a motion and a second, but you're still free to say what you'd like to say. Kent Rexing: It's been said by a couple people that we put this in temporarily for wheat harvest. I did some figuring today and I figured that throughout the course of a year, on an average, that we'll cross that 50 times to access the 64 acres so it's not a one time deal. Bill Jeffers: How many times have you crossed it since it's washed out? You said it washed out a month after you put it in so how many times have you crossed it since then? Commissioner Mourdock: Just for the record - Bill Jeffers: A rainstorm washed it out a month after you put it in. Kent Rexing: Spring wheat, combine wheat - Bill Jeffers: Since July, how many
times have you crossed it?
Kent Rexing: Ten or fifteen, maybe. A couple days when we put this pipe in we probably crossed it 30 that day or 40. Commissioner Mourdock: The motion and the second was there with both parties given 45 days to get this thing resolved. Commissioner Fanello: So I have a motion and a second. So ordered. Commissioner Mourdock: Motion to adjourn. President Mosby: Second. Philip Hayes: If I could just momentarily, Mrs. Engelbrecht is here and she had remarks concerning a drainage problem and I thought it might be economical to - Jane Laib: This is a special hearing and we can only discuss the advertised issue. Philip Hayes: Good enough. Commissioner Mourdock: It's a special drainage meeting and under special drainage you can only discuss the areas that were discussed. Once we get done here, we'd be glad to talk with you. Motion to adjourn. President Mosby: Second. Commissioner Fanello: So ordered. Meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
Those in Attendance:
Vanderburgh County
____________________________
|
