6/9/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

rp,— JUN 91987 BOOK At the Informal hearing conducted on 2 June 1987, the County Civil En- gineer and the Planner refused to discuss any specifics of the drainage work for 110th Street since they claim no design work will be undertaken until the County (and consequently the residents of 110th street) are committed to proceed with the project. As taxpayers, we are disturbed by the fact that Indian River County has failed in the past to Provide drain maintenance in our. area, yet we are being asked to com- mit to additional cost assessments covering what is essentially drainage maintenance for which we already pay property taxes. Also we are being compelled to fund unnecessary drainage and road paving Improvements without even having the benefit of evaluating a preliminary design plan. After careful thought on these Issues, we believe that there Is no reason to justify undertaking the full scope of the paving and drainage project proposed by the County Planning Office. In addition to being un- necessary, the paving of this street will also Increase the amount of. non-residents traffic and potentially may contribute to an Increase in crime In this area Consequently we request that the County Commis- slon refrain from approving the 110th Street project as it presently Is proposed. Instead we suggest the following alternate actions be taken: a) Reduce the scope of the drainage project to Include only the neces- sary maintenance of swells and the correction of run-off blockage to this swells. This work should only affect the lots where temporary yard flooding occurs and should specifically exclude all higher lots not ex- periencing or contributing to the flooding problem. b) Consider avoiding the paving of 110th street with an Impermeable asphalt surface. This type of surface Is unnecessary for this short dead- end road. Rebuilding the existing marl surface is more desirable ap- proach, since water is allowed to drain through this surface and it produces no oil residues run-off which could find its way to the local potable water wells or the Indian River Lagoon. To reduce main- tenance cost, the County Planner should consider reducing significant- ly the frequency of the grading operations, since during the past year grading has produced net detrimental results. . We hope the commission realize that all parties affected by this project are not In accord with respect to the need for the proposed work. Con- sequently, at least a careful re -consideration of this project following a meaningful meeting with the County Engineer and Planner to discuss their specific design recommendation is necessary. Sincerely, Rolando O. Menendez D C. Menendez 17 8 F'AGE 505 Cl U �Si� ....tel. �., ✓i�.1G_,� - �A