Agenda - Council - 10/10/1978 - Continuation of the 09/25/78 CC Mtg.

Home

Honorable ].'~ayor and City Council Members City of Pamsey .er 30, 1978 RE: Proposed drainage easement, Itasea Heights Subd. Cell. ins Drive and Beatty ~treet Dear Council Members: As owners of the tract of land adjoining Itasca Heights subdivision on the West we hereby go on record as being strenuously opposed to subject project for the following reasons: ].70 NOTJCE OF ],I'.;ETINGS - We understand that t~wo meetin~were held regarding this project. We were given NO NOTICE WK~TSOmV~]R about it. Yet our property is the one which is adversely affected in a very serious way. We contend thr~,t ao:~roval of the project was ~NV.~LID because all interested parties were not given notice of the meetings. We further contend that we should have had the right to be heard and to vote at the meetings. We ¢:~estion the propriety of the project because we contend that each sub- division should be responsible for its own runoff. This project would result in practically all of the runoff from Collins Drive in Itasca Heights subdi- vision being dump~ed onto the property of an adjoining landowner who does not live in Itasca Heights and who never uses Collins Drive. This result is blatantly unfair. The property which would be burdened ~ the runoff is high and dry, well- drained and very desirable. It is NOT flood plain and is NEVER covered by water. If anyo~e has given you the impression that it is nothing but a s~amp they deliberately mislead you. We invite you to come and see for yourselves. Our oresent use of the site is not Compatible wi~h:~audrainage easement and we con- template future use which is also not compatible with it. The site is part of our lawn and the grass is always mowed. Further reasons we object to the drainage easement are that it wo~ld flood an area that we sometimes use for a garden and the easement would make i~ difficult , if not impossible to get to the site and to mow it with our trac tot. ]t is the only part of our property which is quiet and almost completely unaffected by noise from H~ 10 and the railroad. We already have easements on THR~ sides of our property: a riv~rfront easement and two state highway easements, one of which is 50 ft. wide and over 200 ft. long. We don't need an easement on the fourth side. ~eferring to the 9-20-78 feasibility study by Consulting Engineers Div., Inc. Page l, the statement that runoff near Beatty St. causes "minor flooding on the south side of Collings Drive" is misleading. The so-called flooding must be wholly insignificant because NONE of the residents at that part'of Collins~ drive favors the project.