Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWorkshop Meeting with GDCEXCERPT FROM TAPE OF JUNE 7, 1978, WORKSHOP MEETING aIS�7 9 MR. ALLEN, MR. CRUMP, AND G.D.C.ENGINEER:PRESENT DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON BOYSCOUT PROPERTY - GDC HAS CONTACTED AND ARE HOPEFUL OF GETTING EASEMENT. MR. ALLEN: DELAY IN PROCEEDING UNDER AGREEMENT HAS BEEN CAUSED BY DEMAND OF CITY ENGINEER THAT GDC FURNISH MYLA14FOR AS- HJILT PLANS, THAT WE CERTIFY AS TO POSITIVE DRAINAGE THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION AND THAT WE ESTABLISH PERMANENT RFFERENCE MONUMENTS. WE FELT THAT THESE DEMANDS WERE NOT IN ORDER, THAT THEY WERE NOT COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT. WE DID OFFER TO PROVIDE THE MYLARS AT COST TO THE CITY. ALL PLATS WHICH WERE SUBMITTED TO CITY, RECORDED AND ACCEPTED, HAVE STATMENT BY SURVEYOR THAT REFERENCE MONUMENTS WERE PUT IN PLACE. WE THINK THIS COMPLIES WITH REQUIREMENTS. DO YOU EXPECT US TO IDENTIFY EACH ONE THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN PUT IN YEARS AGO? MAYOR FLOOD: YOU'RE ASKING US TO TAKE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF ROADS. WE WANT THOSE PERMANENT MARKERS THERE. MR. ALLEN: WE FEEL THAT THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF PRACTICE AND STATE LAW HAVE BEEN MET AND WE THINK THE ADDED EXPENSE IS TOTALLY UNREASONABLE. WE HAVE SPENT SOME $238,000. PUTTING ROADS AND DRAINAGE IN A CONDITION WHERE THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT. CITY SO FAR AS ONLY ACCEPTED 3 UNITS, 2, 3, 4, AND EVEN THOSE THERE IS SOME QUALIFICATION THERE WHICH WE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH. THERE ARE 3 MORE UNITS WE SUBMITTED AND WE FEEL THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF COOPERATION AND DISAGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN APPROACHING THIS WHOLE ISSUE, AND WHEN THESE MAJOR POINTS ARE RAISED AND WE ARE TOLD THAT'S A CONDITION OF THE CITY'S ACCEPTANCE, FRANKLY THAT'S WHY THE ROAD MAINTENANCE PROGRAM WAS STOPPED FOR A WHILE. MAYOR FLOOD: WHEN YOUR PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY YOU AGREED TO OBSERVE, OBEY, ANY ORDINANCE IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME AND ANY FUTURE ORDINANCES. YOU TALK ABOUT GOOD FAITH. DOT STANDARDS SAYS YOU WILL HAVE 1" OF WEARING SURFACE ON THESE ROADS. SOME OF THE ROADS WE HAVE JUST ACCEPTED HAVE LESS THAN 1/8" IN PLACES. MR. ALLEN: WE DO FEEL WE HAVE CONSTRUCTED THESE ROADS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY SPECIFICATIONS AND THE REFERENCE MONUMENTS WERE PUT IN. MAYOR FLOOD: IF 1" OF WEARING SURFACE HAD BEEN PUT ON SCHUMANN DRIVE, FOR INSTANCE, IN 20 YEARS IT WOULD NOT HAVE WORN OUT 1/2". WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT ROADS THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE 1" WEARING SURFACE. THAT'S ONE FACTOR_. WE HAVE 32' DITCHES WITH 12-18" CULVERTS, WHICH YOU ARE ASKING US TO ACCEPT. I DON'T SEE WHY WE HAVE TO SEND OUR ENGINEER OUT TO PROVE THAT IT'S READY TO ACCEPT. THE BURDEN OF PROOF SHOULD BE ON YOU PEOPLE. MR. ALLEN:WE THOUGHT WE HAD WORKED OUT AN AGREEMENT THAT WE COULD ALL OPERATE UNDER . WE'D LIKE TO GO FORWARD AND COMPLETE THAT AGREEMENT. MAYOR FLOOD: BUT YOU AGREED THAT WHAT WE ACCEPTED YOU'D MAINTAIN AND YOU STOPPED MAINTAINING UNITS 3 AND 4 IN AUGUST BECAUSING LJE WERE NOT PROGRESSING ON UNIT 5 AND WE HAD THAT DRAINAGE PROBLEM. YOU SAID YOU WOULD MAINTAIN FOR 3 YEARS. WE GAVE YOU THE REASON WHY WE WOULDN'T ACCEPT UNIT 5 AND YOU STOPPED MAINTENANCE. IS THAT AGREEMENT STILL IN EFFECT? MR.)ALLEN: YOUR ENGINEER MAKING DEMANDS IS NOT PART OF OUR AGREEMENT. WE DON'T WANT TO PROCEED UNTIL WE KNOW WHERE WE STAND. MAYOR FLOOD: BUT MAINTENANCE ON SOMETHING WE HAVE ACCEPTED IS A DIFFERENT THING. THERE'S AN AGREEMENT. WE ACCEPTED 3 AND 4, BUT YOU QUIT MAINTAINING IN AUGUST. MR. ALLEN: WE ARE BACK IN MAINTAINING. MAYOR FLOOD: TO GO BACK TO THE MARKERS, OUR ORDINANCE (1959) SAYS THAT YOU WOULD PUT THEM IN AND IF THEY ARE NOT OUT THERE, YOU ARE NOT COMPLYING WITH OUR ORDINANCE WHICH YOU AGREED TO DO WHEN YOU WERE ANNEXED IN. IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS FROM MR. VOCELLE, MR. CRUMP EXPLAINED JUST WHAT A PERMANENT MARKER IS, HOW IT IS SHOWN ON A PLAT, AND THE PURPOSE THEY SERVE IN ESTABLISHING BOUNDARY LINES OF PROPERTY. THE ONLY PROBLEM TO RE-ESTABLISHING MARKERS IS TIME AND MONEY. MR. CRUMP STATED THAT GDC IS NOT GOING TO RE-ESTABLISH THE MARKERS. MR. ALLEN ADDED THAT THE REQUIRE- MENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES WERE MET AND SATISFIED AT THE TIME THE PROPERTY WAS PLATTED. MR. VOCELLE: THE CITY ENGINEER IS DEMANDING THAT THEY BE PUT THERE, SO WE ARE AT AN IMPASSE. WITH REFERENCE TO MYLARS, MAYOR FLOOD STATED THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT PAY FOR THEM. MR. VOCELLE: WHAT IS A MYLAR, FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS? MAYOR FLOOD: LET ME TELL YOU WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR - FOR AS -BUILDS. WE DON'T LIKE WHAT WE SEE. THERE ARE CULVERTS WHERE THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE, ALSO DITCHES, SOME WITH 12" CULVERTS BUT THE DITCH IS 20' WIDE. WE NEED A PRINT. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A ROAD, OR SUBDIVISION, OR WHATEVER, THAT YOU DIDn'T CHANGE. WHEN YOU MAKE A CHANGE DON'T YOU MARK IT ON A PRINT. MR. CRUMP: YES.,IT IS GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT THERE ARE NO SUCH RECORDS AT THIS TIME AT GDC WHICH SHOWS AS-BUILTS. MAYOR FLOOD: I THINK OUR CITY ENGINEER MADE IT QUITE PLAIN. YOU SIGN THESE PLATS, IF THAT'S THE WAY THE ROADS ARE LAID OUT, AND WE'LL ACCEPT THEM. MR. ALLEN:LET'S ASSUME THAT WE HAVE THESE AS -BUILT PLANS, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE. WE DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND DRAW NEW PLANS FROM SCRATCH. WHAT IS THE CITY GOING TO DO WITH THEM? MR. LLOYD GAVE THE REASON THAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO INSTALL CENTRAL SEWER AND WATER, SOMEDAY. SURELY NO INTELLIGENT ENGINEER IS GOING TO USE 20 YEAR OLD PLANS TO GO BY. SO WHAT IS THE CITY GOING TO DO WITH THESE PLANS THAT ARE SUDDENLY SO IMPORTANT? MAYOR FLOOD: SUPPOSE SOMEONE HAS A CORNER LOT AND THE INTERSECTION HAS BEEN MOVED 201.TO CLOSE UP THAT LOT AND YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BUILD 10 HOUSESBUT CAN ONLY BUILD 9-. WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS THAT? THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO CHECK. MR. VOCELLE: THE CITY ENGINEER HAS REQUESTED THAT GDC MAKE A STATEMENT THAT POSITIVE DRAINAGE EXIST ON ALL THE PROPERTIES. IS THERE A PROBLEM ON THAT? MR. CRUMP: YES. YOU COULDN'T JUST DO IT. YOU'D HAVE TO MAKE A COMPLETE SURVEY. MR. VOCELLE: DON'T YOU THINK THE CITY SHOULD KNOW WHEN THEY ACCEPT THESE STREETS AND ROADS THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE. MR. ALLEN: I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE QUESTION. HE ASKED POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON EACH AND EVERY LOT. FIRST OF ALL WE DIDN'T SELL THE LOTS STATING THAT THEY HAD POSITIVE DRAINAGE. SOME HAD TO BE GRADED, SOME REQUIRED SOME FILL. VICE MAYOR GRAY: WHAT WE ARE ASKING TO BE CERTIFIED IS THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FOR THE ROADWAYS AND STREETS, NOT EACH LOT. MR. VOCELLE: CERTIFICATION OF THE OVER-ALL DRAINAGE. THE ENGINEER FEELS IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE THAT EASEMENT THROUGH THE BOY SCOUT PROPERTY AND INTO THE SEBASTIAN RIVER. MAYOR FLOOD: I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU DID IT, BUT COLLIER CREEK HAS BEEN LOWERED TWO FEET, BUT IF YOU RAISE THAT WATER BACK UP AGAIN AND SEE IF THOSE SWALES WILL DRAIN OR NOT. YOU PROMISED THAT YOU WOULD CHECK INTO LAKE HARDEE AND FIND OUT WHY THE WATER IN COLLIER CREEK WAS DROPPED DOWN. THIS IS PART OF DRAINAGE. . MR. CRUMP: I ASKED FOR AN INVESTIGATION OF THAT, BUT I DON'T HAVE A REPORT ON IT. MR. VOCELLE: HOW ABOUT THIS MATTER OF THE PRESENT PAVING NOT MEETING THE STANDARDS. MR. CRUMP: I CAN ONLY TELL YOU THAT GDC PAID TO HAVE IT PUT IN. MR. VOCELLE: IN OTHER WORDS, YOU SUBCONTRACTED THE PAVING OUT AND IT HAS BEEN CALLED TO YOUR ATTENTION TONIGHT THAT IT DOESN'T MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS. CAN WE HAVE THE ASSURANCE OF GDC THAT THEY ARE GOING BACK TO THE SUBCONTRACTOR TO BRING IT UP TO - MR. CRUMP: NO WAY ARE WE GOING BACK. THAT WAS AT LEAST 20 YEARS AGO. MR. VOCELLE: THIS WAS DONE I UNDERSTAND JUST RECENTLY. MAYOR FLOOD: WHEN WAS UNIT 6 AND ALL THEM PUT IN? THAT HASN'T BEEN 20 -YEARS AGO. ALL OF THOSE ROADS ARE NOT 20 YEARS OLD. SOME WEREN'T PUT IN UNTIL 173. WE HAVE DOCUMENTED A LOT OF AREAS. TAKE A CORE SAMPLE OF SCHUMANN DRIVE ALL THE WAY DOWN, WE'VE ACCEPTED THAT AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT IF IT'S NOT 1" THAT'S TOUGH FOR THE CITY. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? MR. CRUMP: I'M GOING TO GO TAKE A LOOK - 2 - AT IT. LET ME BE HONEST WITH YOU. IF WE CAN'T HAVE SOME KIND OF WORKING ARRANGEMENT WITH YOU PEOPLE, AND YOU SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND ANOTHER $238,000. IN 1978. WE'LL JUST GO TO COURT AND FIGHT IT OUT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS. WE'LL TAKE OUR CHANCES. MR. VOCELLE: WHERE YOU SAY THAT GDC IS NOT GOING TO MAINTAIN PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE CITY HASN'T MET THEIR AGREEMENTS. MR. CRUMP: I NEVER SAID THAT. MAYOR FLOOD: IT WAS SAID THAT THE REASON THEY MAINTAINED THE ONES WE ACCEPTED WAS BECAUSE THE CITY HAD NOT PURSUED IN ACCEPTING ANY MORE UNITS SO THEY QUIT MAINTAINING LAST AUGUST. MR. ALLEN: I THINK I SAID THAT SINCE THEN WE ARE BACK IN MAINTAINING THEM. MR. VOCELLE: NOW ARE WE GOING TO START OVER AGAIN? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU STOPPED AND ARE YOU GOING TO START 3 YEARS FROM THE TIME THAT YOU - MR. CRUMP: WE'LL LOOK AT THEM IN 3 YEARS AND SEE WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE, IF THEY ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE, THEN YOU DON'T ACCEPT THEM. MAYOR FLOOD: THEN WHAT YOU GOING TO DO? MR. CRUMP: I'M GOING TO GET OUT. MAYOR FLOOD: THAT's WHAT I THOUGHT. SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER,WE LIKE IT OR NOT, WERE GOING TO ACCEPT IT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US? MR. CRUMP: NO. IF YOU ACCEPTED ON 3 YEARS'MAINTENANCE, I'M GOING TO GIVE THEM TIL THE END OF 3 YEARS ON THAT SAME COMMITMENT. MR. ALLEN: I THINK THAT'S ALL THE MAINTENANCE PROVISION REQUIRES. MAYOR FLOOD: IT REQUIRES YOU TO KEEP THE GRASS OUT OF THE CRACKS IN THE ROAD. YOU'RE NOT DOING THAT. YOU CAN'T TELL ME YOU'VE EVER DONE THAT. MAINTENANCE MEANS YOU SIGNED IT, YOU SAID YOU WOULD TAKE THE GRASS OUT, NOT WHEN THE 3 YEARS' TIME LIMIT IS UP YOU'LL COME AND PULL THE GRASS OUT. THAT'S NOT MAINTENANCE AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED YOU HAVE NOT KEPT UP WITH THE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. MR. CRUMP: I AGREE WITH YOU. I'M NOT ARGUING THAT POINT. FROM AUGUST UNTIL RECENTLY, THAT'S TRUE. MAYOR FLOOD: ]F YOU STARTED MAINTAINING AGAIN, SAY, BACK IN MAY, IS THAT WHEN THE 3 YEAR PERIOD IS GOING TO START AGAIN? MR. CRUMP: YES. MAYOR FLOOD: ANOTHER THING. ARE YOU GOING TO GO OUT ON VOCELLE AND ARE YOU GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND IF THERE ARE A LOT OF ROADS THAT HAVE THIS KIND OF STUFF, ARE YOU GOING TO REPAVE IT FOR US? MR. CRUMP: I'LL HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. MAYOR FLOOD: THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN IS NOT GOING TO SPEND ANOTHER $5500. TO TELL YOU THAT WE CAN ACCEPT IT. WE CANNOT AFFORD THIS KIND OF MONEY. I FEEL THAT BEFORE WE ACCEPT ANYTHING YOU WILL HAVE TO PROVE TO US THAT YOU HAVE ADEQUATE WEARING SURFACE ON THESE ROADS, ETC. MR. CRUMP: GDC IS NOT GOING TO SPEND ANOTHER $238,000. ON THESE ROADS EITHER. WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME FORM OF WORKING AGREEMENT WITH A WORKING CITY ENGINEER AND A COOPERATIVE CITY COUNCIL AND WE ARE ALL WALKING DOWN THE SAME STREET. MAYOR FLOOD: THERE WERE SOME STIPULATIONS AND IT'S STILL IN THERE AND THE STATEMENT WAS MADE THAT THE ENGINEERS ACCEPT THE SHOULDERS OF ROADS OUT ON LAYPORT. IF YOU GOT THAT FAR YOU'RE IN THE DITCH AND YOU SAID WE'LL PUT REFLECTORS UP AND I ASKED THE QUESTION WHO AUTHORIZED THAT AND YOU SAID THE CITY ENGINEER. THE CITY ENGINEER SAID NO, I DIDN'T ACCEPT IT AND THEN YOU CAME BACK AND SAID THE MAYOR AND I SAID WELL, THE MAYOR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT ANYTHING. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU. I'M TALKING ABOUT A GDC REPRESENTATIVE. WE'VE ACCEPTED THE ROAD WITH PROVISIONS AND IN THOSE PROVISIONS MR. LLOYD SAID HE WANTED l?T LEAST 6' OF SHOULDER MINIMUM AND WE'VE GOT 2' OR LESS. SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT? I SAY WE HAVE AGREEMENTS. LET'S LIVE BY THE AGREEMENTS. WHEN WE HAVE THE PUNCH LIST WHERE IT SAYS WE WILL ACCEPT WITH THESE AGREEMENTS THAT YOU WILL BRING THIS UP, WE HAVE DOCUMENTS THAT THICK. MR. CRUMP: WE DID THEM. MAYOR FLOOD: YOU DIDN'T DO ALL OF THEM. YOU HAVEN'T GOT SHOULDERS ON THE ROADS. MR. CRUMP: AS FAR AS I KNOW WE DID. MAYOR FLOOD: WELL, I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE YOU PUT UP REFLECTORS FOR SHOULDERS. MR. CRUMP: DID THE CITY ENGINEERTRECCMMEND REFLECTORS? MAYOR FLOOD: NO I THINK YOUR ENGINEER DID. MR. CRUMP: DID YOUR ENGINEER RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE? MAYOR FLOOD: YES, WITH THE PROVISION THAT YOU CHANGE THE SHOULDERS ON THESE ROADS. MR. VOCELLE: I THINK WE CAN HAVE SOME MEETING OF THE MINDS ON DRAINAGE AND ON MAINTENANCE. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT AGREED TO - 3 - AS I UNDERSTAND, THESE MYLARS AND PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENTS AND THE PAVING. MAYOR FLOOD: MR. CRUMP, YOU LET ME KNOW WHEN WE CAN MAKE ARRANGE- MENTS TO GO OUT AND INSPECT. I'D LIKE T O GO WITH YOU OUT THERE ON DELMONTE WHERE THE DUPLEXES ARE ON 512. I'D LIKE YOU TO SEE THAT ROAD. PART OF IT ONLY HAS A COAT OF TAR ON IT. VICE MAYOR GRAY: SOMEWHERE WE HAVE TOETALD OUT WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IT IS IF THEY PAID FOR 1" OF ASPHALT AND THEY DON'T HAVE IT, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE UP TO THE TAXPAYERS OF THIS TOWN TO PUT ]TON NOW. MAYOR FLOOD: THE OTHER THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IS THAT IF WE GO FROM SURETY BONDS TO CORPORATE BONDS THAT IOU WOULD GIVE THE CITY HALF OF WHAT IT COST FOR THE SURETY BONDS, EITHER IN SERVICES OR WHATEVER, AND I ASKED TO BESHOWN WHERE WE EVER RECEIVED THIS. WE HAVE A SIGNED AGREEMENT. MR. VOCELLE: I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE INCENTIVES TO THE CITY TO RELEASE THE SURETY BONDS ON THE BASIS OF THE PREMIUMS AND THAT YOU AGREED AT THAT TIME TO GIVE US MONEY OR SERVICES. THIS IS ANOTHER ITEM THAT NEEDS AN ANSWER. COUNCILMAN GASS BROUGHT TO MR. CRUMP'S ATTENTION A DITCH ON LANSDO& DRIVE WHICH WE HAVE ASKED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. WE HAVE PICTURES HERE TO SHOW WHAT A DEPLORABLE SITUATION THIS IS. THEY WERE TAKEN AFTER IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. MR. CRUMP: WE HAD A STEADY WORKING PROGRAM, WE HAD A GOOD SAFE CREW AND THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN ON OUR LIST. IT WOULD HAVE COME UP. WE STOPPED AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO WORK HERE UNTIL I HAVE SOME KIND OF AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. THE POINT I'M MAKING HERE, GENTLEMEN, IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BE WORKING BUT I HAVE TO HAVE SOME KIND OF WORKING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND UNTIL I GET ONE, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY IN THE CITY. COUNCILMAN GASS: BUT THIS IS STILL YOUR AREA. CAN YOU TELL ME WHY, IF IT'S YOUR AREA, YOU DON'T CORRECT IT? MR. CRUMP: BECAUSE I HAVE NO AGREEMENT WITH THIS CITY THAT THEY'LL EVER TAKE ANY ROADS IN HERE. COUNCILMAN GASS: WHETHER WE DO OR NOT, IT IS STILL GDC'S PROPERTY. MR. CRUMP: IT'S NOT GDC'S PROPERTY. MAYOR FLOOD: AS LOIC AS THE CITY HASn'T ACCEPTED IT, WHO DOES IT BELONG TO? MR. CRUMP: IT BELONGS TO THE PUBLIC. MAYOR FLOOD: NO, SIR. THE CITY IS THE PUBLIC AND THE CITY HAS NOT ACCEPTED IT SO HOW CAN YOU SAY IT BELONGS TO THE PUBLIC? MR. CRUMP: I WOULD LIKE TO BE WORKING HERE BUT I'M NOT COMING UP HERE AND SPEND A LOT MORE MONEY UNTIL I HAVE A WORKING AGREEMENT. MAYOR FLOOD: WE CAN WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT. BUT YOU DID MAKE THE STATEMENT, OR YOUR COMPANY MADE A STATEMENT, I WASN'T ON THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME WE GOT THIS AGREEMENT, AND I THINK YOU WILL REMEMBER THAT I WAS OPPOSED TO THIS AGREEMENT. YOU SAID IF WE FOUND THESE PROBLEMS, YOU WOULD SOLVE THEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. WE'VE BEEN ON THIS ONE ROAD I KNOW OVER A YEAR. HOW LONG IS SOON AS POSSIBLE? WHO IS NOT DOING THEIR JOB? IF YOU THINK OUR ENGINEER MADE THE PROBLEM FOR YOU WHY AREN'T YOU SOLVING THAT PROBLEM? MR. CRUMP: I TOLD YOU WHY. MAYOR FLOOD: THEN I WOULD SAY WE'RE REALLY WASTING OUR TIME. COUNCILMAN GASS: WHY DON'T YOU CLEAN THE DRAIN BEHIND THESE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. I BET IT'S BEEN 10 YEARS SINCE THAT DRAIN WAS CLEANED. ITR. CRUMP: THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT - 10 YEARS. HOW LONG IS GDC GOING TO KEEP ON DOING IT - 20, 30 YEARS? COUNCILMAN GASS: IT'S YOUR PROPERTY, I SAY YES. (MR. GASS PROMISED TO FURNISH MR. ALLEN WITH A LIST OF ALL THE COMPLAINTS HE HAD.) MAYOR FLOOD: WE'RE WASTING TIME HERE. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? MR. ALLEN: ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU. COUNCILMAN JOACHIM: WHAT DOES HE CALL A WORKING AGREEMENT? IT'S A CASE OF THE CITY DOES EVERYTHING AND HE DOES NOTHING. MR. VOCELLE: WELL, I THINK THAT'S A BEGINNING IF AN INSPECTION CAN BE MADE. I THINK MR. ALLEN CAN GIVE US SOME INFORMATION PERETAINING TO THE AGREEMENT WE HAD RELATIVE TO THE SERVICES AND THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT HAD WITH LOCAL CITIZENS. I THINK WE'RE MAKING SOME HEADWAY. I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT NO ONE EVER WINS WHEN THEY GO TO COURT. .nQ� MR. CRUMP PROMISED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH MAYOR FLOOD TO ARRANGE A MEETING TO INSPECT THE ROADS AND DRAINAGE. VICE MAYOR GRAY: MR. CRUMP KEEPS REFERRING TO THIS PLAT DATED FEBRUARY, 1959. THIS WAS PROBABLY SURVEYED OUT AND PERMANENT MARKER$ PUT IN, BUT MAYBE 7 OR 8 YEARS LATER THEY CAME IN WITH THE BULLDOZERS, LAID OUT AND PAVED'I'THE ROADS. HOW CAN THIS ENGINEER CERTIFY THAT THESE MONUMENTS ARE THERE IF THE WORK WAS DONE AFTERWARDS? JUST LIKE UNIT 17 ON THAT MAP SHOWS THAT IT'S ALL PLATTED AND LAID OUT AND THERE'S NOT A STREET IN IT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS WHAT THE PLAT WAS WHEN THEY BROUGHT IT TO US TO ACCEPT. MR. CRUMP: THAT'S A COPY OF IT. VICE MAYOR GRAY: ALL RIGHT, TO ACCEPT THE LAYOUT OF IT, BUT THEY ACCEPTED THE RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND THIS AND THAT, BUT THEY DID NOT ACCEPT THE WORK AT THAT TIME. MR. CRUMP: THE WORK IS NEVER DONE WHEN THE SURVEY IS CERTIFIED. VICE MAYOR GRAY: I REALIZE THIS. SOMEHOW YOU HAVE TO HIRE SOMEONE TO GO BACK IN AND MAKE SURE THOSE MONUMENTS ARE THERE, LATER ON AFTER YOU DIG IT UP, PAVE THE STREETS, PUT THE DRAINAGE IN. THERE ARE SUCH LONG GAPS OF YEARS BETWEEN WHEN THIS IS DONE AND LAID OUT THAT THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN BE POSITIVE. EXCEPT FOR ISOLATED CASES THAT WE KEEP COMING UP WITH, PRIMARILY THE DRAINAGE WORKS EXCEPT IN SOME BAD AREAS. THIS COULD BE STRAIGHTENED OUT. BUT OUR BIG PROBLEM IS LACK OF DOCUMENTATION ON THE PAVING OF THE ROADS AND THE BASE. MAYOR FLOOD: MY ONLY PROBLEM AS FAR AS THE DRAINAGE IS CONCERNED, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE COLLIER CREEK BROUGHT BACK UP TO THE ORIGINAL LEVEL THAT WAS THERE FOR YEARS AND THEN LET'S SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO DRAIN. SOMEWHERE, SOMEHOW, SOMEBODY REMOVED THE BOARDS OUT OF THE DAM TO LOWER IT 2'. COUNCILMAN JOACHIM: COLLIER CREEK WAS LOWERED SO THAT HE COULD HAVE THE WEEDS TAKEN OUT WITH WEED KILLER AND THEY DRAGGED THAT TRENCH THAT FILLED UP WITH DEBRIS AND HE SAID THAT THEN COLLIER CREEK WOULD BE RAISED TO THE PROPER HEIGHT, BUT FOR THE LAST 4 MONTHS THERE HAS BEEN NO WORK DONE ON THAT.