Comment received on November 22nd
This letter does not address the capital cost for road resurfacing; this letter addresses the maintenance cost of a ditch.
It only engages the chronology of petitions, maintenance costs, a typical roadside ditch and a second petition for the roadside trial ditch.
It rebuts the statements:
1 - Sept 5 2009 councilor JH speaks aside to a group of seated residents: ~ the road will be paved
2 - Sept 5 2009 councilor AE speaks aside to same group ~ “we’re not building storm ponds”
With
Please see July 4, 2009 Drain Meeting Minutes Mayor speaks 9: July 4, 2009 Drain Meeting Minutes
3 – Q&A pg. 2 8 months ago writes “however this process was stopped on February 12th 2010 as there was a lack of interest by the majority of residents for any improvements.”
With
February 1, 2010 H-K Minutes item 5.1 states: “DEL recommendation
surveying …. for an accurate determination of the location of the road allowance
to locate the bars so drain does not go on private lands
another public meeting for the drain the last weekend in May
February 12th2010 H-K Minutes item 3.6 states: Based on the excessive cost of the project Council decided to stop the process at this point in time. Staff will prepare a draft letter to be sent to area residents explaining Council’s decision, based on the estimated costs.”
4 - September 5, 2009 Drain Meeting Minutes councilor speaks 18: “There are no ditches to maintain. Maintenance can’t be done.”
With:
September 5, 2009 Drain Meeting Minutes Greg speaks 26: to wrap up meeting and announce - “Next meeting will be last weekend in May. Going to discuss:
• Filters
• Percolation, and
• The geo report.
Also please note:
The geo report was around Sep 2019 the original ditch was found to be sand at (1.16m to 2.48m) depth below the adjacent road surface and forest debris (biomat). Findings in in this Test pit No. 1. were similar in pits 2 to 5 results were similar. Pit 5 was behind Cameron Grove at cottage 136. The results are tabled on pg 25 of the DEL report dated Oct 7, 2019.
This finding indicates a ditch is beside the road. It’s place is farther below the road surface due to placement of gravel on the road surface. The ditch is probably old.
Here Bruce County Map’s places a closed contour line with an elevation 181 m. It encloses an area of 1546 m2. It’s closed shape, position against the hill’s clay toe, and extent into Highland properties 308 to 318 are evidence of this basin’s value. Recognizing and replacing the biomat with sand as connector with elevation 181 m may re-utilize the covered sand.
Also, this letter also points out:
A - July 4, 2009 Drain Meeting Minutes speaker 9:”We are here because cottagers want to have a problem fixed. If cottagers don’t like the solution, than this won’t be done. Some other option is needed (not any time soon).”
B - Sept 5 Drain Meeting Minutes resident speaks 3 asking question: about a maintenance solution to road drainage: Answered by Twolan and then Collins:
The Township is capable in a Maintenance role to restore the ditch by cleaning and regular maintainance
DEL Greg speaks 4: “Geo work will tell”
[ Question 1 ] BB resident- Given the need to excavate and bury drains 1-6 of the 2009 Proposal, the drain of 2009 Concept No. 1 and the gallery of 2019 Concept No. 5, is there a further need beyond the Petition is to excavate wider and reconstruct a full width road bed?
[ Question 2 ] Regardless of its appeal and proximity, is wider excavation and the road bed reconstruction a Capital cost, to be isolated from all our interest in the drainage Petition?
Further evidence of resident interest in carrying on with no beach drain but an infiltration method at the hill.
Preliminary Schedule of Assessment – September 5,2009
After 40 property owners of 43 properties received this schedule, there was a great deal of interest in the project.
The real need is for the Township and its Drainage Engineer to compare and merge the ditch/French drain/swale into the needed official process given to Drain 1-6 of 0946 and Concept 5 of 1856. We see the necessities served by public meetings, preliminary assessments, support for adjacent property owners subject to land for drainage, geo soil testing, land surveying.
We appreciate the 2018 December Trial ditch. We also appreciate the process being carried out a DEL to consider the ditch. Cottage 138 Dave Larsen