11-27-06 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETINGNOVEMBER 27, 2006 minutes and he was only allowed approximately 5 minutes. Chairperson Kuspa, Zoning & Annexation Committee stated at the beginning of the meeting that three people from each side would get to speak, and when they were given their chance, the procedure on time changed. Mr. Weber hoped that he would be given adequate time to speak now. Mr. Weber stated that he is against the rezoning issue, on the 11.2 acres from “R” Single Family Residential County to PUD. Mr. Weber stated that there is a petition on file with the Office of the City Clerk, approximately 267 signatures against this project. The road is a safety issue that everyone is aware of and no one has done a study on the traffic or safety of this concern. The drainage is another issue that is a great concern. The developer has no drainage plan as of today. The plan from the previous development isn’t working and home owners have been flooded, everyone knows about it, Mr. McNamara, the County Surveyor knows it and LLE Real Estate also knows about the problem with drainage and flooding. With all of this information regarding drainage and flooding the developer wants to drain 55.4 more acres of run off into the existing detention pond therefore, causing more severe flooding downstream east and west of Miami into Miami Trails, Miami Meadows and down to Kern and U.S. 31 and west of U.S. 31. They also want the County Drainage Board to reduce the right-of-way on the east and west end of the retention pond so they can create more lots to build on. There is a letter from Mr. McNamara that the Council has received, addressed to Mr. Phipps, stating the problems with this retention basin. Everyone is aware of it, they know that there is a problem, but nobody seems to want to do anything about it. They want to build first and fix later. They talk about being concerned about their neighbors; they need to practice what they preach. Fix the problems first then develop. On July 10, 2000, at a drainage board meeting, Mr. Leszczynski was their representing Southfield Development (the nursing home part of the development), the neighbors were present to address the issue of flooding problems with muddy water running down the middle of Miami Road, all the way down to the drain that goes under Miami Road, running off and flowing west, covering the entire road at times. Mr. Leszczynski stated at that time that the flooding was not the developer’s problem. Mr. Weber stated that he put nine pictures together and showed the Drainage Board where the source of the flooding was coming from. It took more than a year to fix that problem. On July 18, 2006, Mr. Weber stated that he was again in the presence of Mr. Leszczynski, when he had 12 inches of muddy water in his basement. Mr. Weber called Mr. Troyer at home and asked him to come over to look at what was happening. Mr. Troyer stated right away that it was a problem in the County ditch east of Miami Road and the water coming from the farm fields to the west of their property. Today, Mr. Leszczynski stated that they are committed to fixing the drainage. Mr. Weber stated that he had an article about when a commitment was made to the Town of Roseland in 1986, that resulting in a sixteen year lawsuit. Mr. Weber stated that if this development goes forward and he gets flooded, he and anyone else that gets flooded in the neighborhood will file a lawsuit. Mr. Weber stated that in conclusion, this site development plan for this subdivision should not be approved because it will adversely impact the public health and safety due to the road plan where it intersects with Miami Road and existing drainage and flooding problems from Southfield that will only worsen if this development is allowed to proceed as planned. He stated they need to fix the drainage problem first and he urged the Council to take the time to get this right. Councilmember White noted at this time that she and Councilmember Puzzello recognize that time was limited at the 3:00 p.m. Zoning & Annexation Committee Meeting this afternoon and the remonstrators were not allowed adequate time to present their side. Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to allow the remonstrators their full 30 minute presentation and allow discussion to continue until 8:37 p.m. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion, which passed by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Council President Rouse stated that because of the sequence of events that happened in the committee meeting, it was not only implied but promised that the remonstrators would have adequate time tonight to present their issues. Council President Rouse stated that he favored the motion. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney, stated that by having the motion made and approved as was just made, the five minute rule for this bill only would be extended, so 16