Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-81-83CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT R. DUPUIS, P. ENG., DIRECTOR HAMPTON, ONTARIO TEL. (416) 263.2231 LOB 1JO 987 -5039 REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 1983. REPORT NO.: WD -81 -83 SUBJECT: DRAINAGE OUTLET FROM DARLINGTON INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION THROUGH F. HOWARD SMITH PROPERTY, LOT 28, BROKEN FRONT CONCESSION, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON. RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended: 1. That this report be received for information; and, 2. That Mr. F. Howard Smith be provided with a copy of this report and be advised that the Town will not consider constructing an alternate drainage outlet for the Darlington Industrial Subdivision. REPORT The attached report provides background information to this matter. At the time it was considered by the General Purpose and Administration Committee, Mr. Smith appeared as a delegation asking members of the Committee to consider an alternative location for the drainage outlet as depicted on the attached sketch. Committee directed the Works Department to do so) suggesting that contact be made with the developer and that associated costs be reviewed,i I€ ...2� REPORT: Page 2 f As a result, contact has been made with the developer's consultant who indicates that his client would probably be willing to negotiate an easement at a cost of about $20,000 per acre. Such an easement would have dimensions of about 475 feet in length and 30 feet in width and would involve about 1/3 acre. Associated costs would, therefore, be in the order of $7,000. The feasibility of such a drainage outlet was considered and the following factors are pointed out: 1. Examining the elevations on the attached plan, indicates that at the south end of the easement, the ditch elevation is about 334 while at the north end, the ground has an elevation of about 340. To design a ditch with proper slope and sides would therefore require a ditch as much as 8 to 10 feet deep with a total width of about 35 feet in places. 2. Based upon costs experienced in ditching other parts of the subdivision, it is estimated that construction of the ditch requested by Mr. Smith could not be undertaken for less than $5,000. 3. Ongoing maintenance of such a deep ditch would be a continued problem. ...3 Page 3 REPORT: WD -81 -83 4. Maintenance of the existing drainage outlet would have to continue to provide for lot drainage on the south side of Courtice Court. Therefore, all of the drainage would not be directed from Mr. Smith's property. Having considered all of the above, it is staff's opinion that modifying the drainage pattern and outfall in the Darlington Industrial Subdivision would be very difficult and costly. It is, therefore, recommended that Mr. Smith be advised that the Town is not prepared to make such modifications. Respectfully submitted, J i CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAMPTON, ONTARIO LOB 1J0 R. DUPUIS, P. ENG., DIRECTOR TEL. (416) 263.2231 987 -5039 REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 6, 1983. REPORT NO.: WD -75 -83 SUBJECT: DRAINAGE OUTLET FROM DARLINGTON INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION THROUGH F. HOWARD SMITH PROPERTY LOT 28, BROKEN FRONT CONCESSION, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON. RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended: 1. That this report be received for information; and, 2. That a copy of this report be forwarded to Mr. F. Howard Smith, R.R. # 1, Oshawa, Ontario, L1H 7K4. BACKGROUND AND REPORT: -As members of Council may recall, late in 1982, the matter of completion of the works in Darlington Industrial Subdivision was considered, and the Works Department was directed to arrange for the completion of the servicing works, since the developer was not attending to them. As a result, Town forces performed ditching, including an outfall which leads to the boundary with Mr. Smith's property, in accordance with the approved drainage plan for the subdivision. ...2 Page 2 RHIUkT WD -75 -83 The exceptionally wet spring caused considerable runoff from the subdivision which was directed through this ditch with the result that Mr. Smith's property was in a wetter than usual state. Mr. Smith contacted the Public Works Department complaining of the added runoff to his property and the following information was provided to him: "In response to your recent enquiry, we have reviewed the drainage situation noted above. Our investigation reveals that the drainage ditch was originally constructed, and more recently deepened, in accordance with the approved drainage plan for the Darlington Industrial Subdivision. This plan was approved by the Town some five to seven years ago and, therefore, the drainage pattern cannot be changed without some direction from Council. In your letter you mention that you are now being r forced to accept drainage from lands outside the natural drainage area. We have investigated this and found that, in fact, the drainage from the lands in the Darlington Industrial Subdivision has always found its way to your property. The elevation of the land at the east end is higher than that at the boundary with your lands. What has occurred, however, is an increase in the amount of runoff which gets to your lands. The result of paved areas and buildings has reduced the amount of water which seeps into the ground. Also, rather than the drainage following the contours of low lying areas, it has been directed in a ditch to the point where it formerly entered your lands. ..3 Faye 3 RLPORT WD -75 -83 I realize that this does not assist you in resolving ,your problems, however, it does point out the position the Town must take in this matter. As the drainage plan was approved as part of a plan of subdivision, public funds cannot be spent to alter it without Council approval." ( The information which has been provided to Mr. Smith is, in fact, the case. Firstly, the drainage works, including the outlet are in accordance with the drainage plan approved for the subdivision. Secondly, without further negotiations with the developer, and subsequently an amending agreement, the Town is not at liberty to seek an alternate drainage outlet or become involved in construction of same. Mr. Smith should have these facts reaffirmed by copy of this report. Respectfully submitted, R.G. Dupuis, P. Eng., Director of Public Works. t RGD:jco August 22, 1983. h ROAD �1 ^CL 3 \ Cl) W cr a 0q( J�h 34Zo b -7 \ p. 3444 a 346.0 o 33i 340 COURTICE4 ti C URT � Oc 3 '.343 7 h 345 -3 Tvvic.sc 2}sow ; Q - 3 -0 0 0 340.0 .y >'q:� • HC.0 'ey ✓ x+ut \ / 31 roe Gi / T _, \ I1 333 I / zo_ 'fig"--e rtsniT � 3� � ,_ t ; A. I i-Znou•:,EO DRS++ 'lo i M M Nl6i•/W4y No 401 I