Agenda - Council - 09/27/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

that the ~rainage system is in need of repair so that it no longer serves its original purpose and the ~st of the repair will not exceed the total benefits determined in the original drainage system ~roceeding. Due to ~e benefit amount ($1781) determined for County Ditch//3, a repair would not be ordered without ~a re-determination of benefits in order to evaluate whether the cost of repair would exceed benefits. ,. Costs associated with a benefit redetermination are significant in an urbanized area. Any redetermin~ion is subject to appeal by any affected person. An appeal further increases the costs associated ~ith the ditch repair. Under tile present law, when viewers are appointed to redetermine benefits for a drainage system which do~S not already have grass strips, it is necessary to acquire 16 and 1/2 feet on each side of the ditch ~on which property grass strips are to be maintained. This further increases the cost of a ditch repair.? A ditch r~pair project can only be done along the original ditch alignment restoring the channel of the driainage system to its original condition. Due to the age and condition of Anoka County ditches, ~e channel in sections of many ditches have deviated significantly from the original alignment of the gitch. These deviations appear to have occurred due to natural circumstances over the course of tim~ or as a result of a farmer at some time in the past choosing to alter the alignment on the farmer's ~operty. If there is any deviation in County Ditch//3 channel, a repair would require restoratioh of the original alignment. Also, ma~Y ditches in Anoka County have areas within the drainage system which are classified as wetlqmds. Permit requirements including environmental impact statements can apply to a repair of a count~ ditch. If applicable, permits must be obtained prior to any repair work on these ditches. Anoka C0, unty must also address the provisions of Minn'.' Stat. §103E.745 when the cost of repair of a drainage system exceeds the benefits determined in the original proceedings for the establishment of the drainage system. Since repair work has not been done on County Ditch//3 since 1889, the reqmre~ents of Minn. Stat. §103E.215 for improvements of drainage systems may apply to a repair of Count~ Ditch//3. To initiat~ an improvement, the petition must be signed by: 1. at[least 26% of the owners of property affected by the proposed improvement; 2. atileast 26% of the owners of the property that the proposed improvement passes o~er; 3. th, owners of at least 26 % of the property area affected by the proposed improvement; or 4. th~ owners of at least 26% of the property area that the proposed improvement passes over. Minn. Stat. §I03~.202, Subd. 2, contains provisions on signatures on a petition. Minn. Stat. § 103E.215, Subd. 14(c) specifies the contents of an improvement petition which includes a statement that the petitionersi agree to pay all costs and expenses that may be incurred if the improvement proceedings are di.~missed. A petitioners' bond must be posted and the bond amount since costs incurred may not qxceed the amount of the petitioners' bond prior to establishment of the project. When an i~provement petition is filed, an engineer is appointed to examine the drainage system and make a~ improvement report. Proceedings for an improvement follow procedures for the