Laserfiche WebLink
Director Keating agreed to bring two examples of the process, one for a small company <br />and one for a large company, back to the Board for review. <br />13. C. O'CONNOR FLOODING <br />(Clerk's Note: This Item and Item 10.B.2. were heard together following Item 12.J.4.) <br />Attorney Polackwich recapped the memorandum of August 4, 2010 regarding Ronald <br />O'Connor's complaint that Richard Rozalsky's (his neighbor) drainage system is causing <br />flooding to his property. After staff reviewed the issue, it was found that there were no code <br />violations, nor conditions on the Rozalsky property that causes flooding to Mr. O'Connor's <br />property. He conveyed that staff had visited the property numerous times and always reached <br />the same conclusion, that Mr. O'Connor's property is a low elevation area and prone to standing <br />water and flooding. Attorney Polackwich suggested fortifying or maintaining the outfall pipe <br />under the street in front of the properties, and since the street and pipes are private property, it is <br />not the County's responsibility. He did not believe the County should move forward with Code <br />Enforcement proceedings. <br />Ronald O'Connor used a PowerPoint Presentation (on file) to show the standing water <br />on his property, and using a diagram, asked staff to confirm calculations, and argued that the <br />inadequate drainage was due to the elevation of the neighboring property. <br />A lengthy discussion ensued regarding standing water, adding an additional culvert pipe <br />to assist in draining the property, pursuing a resolution of the situation through Circuit Court, the <br />fact that the culvert is located on private property, the frontage of the property being in the flood <br />plane, and a suggestion that the landowners join together to repair one of the culverts. <br />44 <br />August 17, 2010 <br />