Sat Nov 07 2009
By LISA NICELY
NEY -- Homeowners awaiting a decision on the Lick Creek and Little Lick Creek improvement project will have to wait a bit longer.
The joint board of the Defiance and Williams County commissioners voted 3-3 on the project following a preliminary hearing Monday at the Ney American Legion, with the trio of Defiance commissioners voting for the measure and three Williams County commissioners voting in opposition.
This means that the tie-breaking vote, under state law, will go to a representative from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). Brian Mitch of ODNR has 30 days to make a decision.
A public hearing for homeowners to learn the project's fate is slated for Oct. 6 at 1:15 p.m. at the Ney American Legion. If the petition is approved, the next step in the process is a final hearing. Construction and maintenance of the project would commence afterward.
For many the wait is a disappointment, though not completely unexpected.
Nearly 100 people attended the preliminary hearing, held during a joint commissioners meeting by Defiance and Wiliams County officials. The project affects both counties.
The petition involves clearing out log jams, sand bars and leaning trees out of Lick Creek from U.S. 6 to the junction of Prairie Creek, and Little Lick Creek in Defiance County from the county line to where it meets Lick Creek.
A similar project was petitioned through the Soil and Water Conservation District in 1996, but was dismissed by the joint board of county commissioners in April 2008. A new petition was filed with the Defiance County commissioners on May 19.
"The process will be different than the last one," said Warren Schlatter, Defiance County engineer during the meeting.
Schlatter gave a preliminary cost estimate for the project of $930,000. That is divided as follows: Lick Creek east of Ney at $285,000; Lick Creek north of Ney $315,000; Little Lick Creek from U.S. 127 to Ney at $185,000; and Little Lick Creek from the county line to U.S. 127 at $145,000.
"Basically this project is a restoration project that will restore it to the level before the log jams began," said Schlatter. "It's not an improvement, just a restoration."
He added that he believes the channel will continue to get wider, mostly because of the increase from runoffs.
"We are asking that this channel carry at least 50 percent more water than it historically did," he said. "I believe it is trying to get wider to accommodate the additional flow."
Schlatter said it is feasible to do the work stated in the petition. He said when calculating the benefits he looked at two main areas: flood reduction and increased runoff. He said when looking at the value of flood reductions, using figures for homes and land in the flood plain and those touching the watershed, there is not enough value to justify the project from flood reduction alone.
When looking at increased or undetained run-off, he said if there was onsite detention ponds for buildings, roads and other infrastructure in the area it would cost $4-8 million. Two large detention ponds would cost $3-4 million, plus construction costs.
"Assuming the logjam and leaning tree removal opens the channel and that over the long-term the channel is able to continue widening naturally, it would be about half as effective as detention basins and would have a benefit of $2-4 million," Schlatter said. "Using the cost of $930,000, the benefits of this project as petition exceed the costs."
He acknowledged that not every landowner would see a dramatic change if this project was done.
"Those log jams have preliminary a local effect," he said. "If you take all the log jams in this section out, there are some places that don't change much. Yet there are other places, ... where the effect will be very dramatic."
Many landowners questioned cost of assessments for the project as well as for maintenance. Schlatter said he had not come up with any approximate number for homeowner assessments. That would be part of the next step if the petition continues. What ever the cost, homeowners had opinions on the matter.
"We all want the log jams removed, but I'm having a hard time looking at the amount of money that this is going to cost," said Matt Hurd of Bryan. "Why not have the whole county be assessed, not just me as an adjacent land owner? A lot of people don't want their taxes to increase. The adjacent land owners can just get a bunch of chain saws and take care of the problem. I don't want to pay that much."
Russell Zeedyk of Ney disagreed.
"I own farmland and when there's a three-inch rain I try to get the water off as fast as I can," he said. "I want to pay what I'm responsible for. This creek needs more than chainsaws."
Mary Stratton agreed.
"I know as a farmer that land drains into each other's land and then drains into a creek," she said. "I think a lot of people are forgetting that your water is a problem to other people. Whether you want to pay for it or not, your water is coming down our way. As a land owner, my husband and I feel we have a responsibility to pay to clean those log jams."
Lowell Crites said he's not so sure cleaning the log jams will help.
"I've lived 55 years on Lick Creek and there hasn't been a year that we don't expect flooding," he said. "You can clean this thing from the top to the bottom. I agree any log jam laying in the bottom of the creek, it should be removed. ... Just because it's (logs) laying across the creek, though, doesn't mean it causes flooding. If we take all those out Ney will be in worst shape than it is now. They do slow the water down."
Kathleen Ewonus of Bryan questioned how much maintenance would cost for the project.
"I'm hearing there will be a lot of maintenance, so will there be no end to this tax?" she asked.
Schlatter said that under Ohio law projects must undergo maintenance and that assessments will be in accord to benefits from the project. He also said officials cannot assess in a year more than 20 percent of the original construction costs.
Some homeowners questioned if there were any federal grant money available or cheaper way to do the project by lowering its scope.
Bob Arps of Ney asked who would be assessed and how many homeowners would be part of the project. He was told more than 3,000 letters were sent out to homeowners that would be affected by the project. Any landowner who would benefit from the project would be assessed, Schlatter said.
Defiance County Commissioner Otto Nicely said that some of the log jams do need to come out of the creek.
"We might modify this project a bit I don't know if we have to go all the way down to Little Lick Creek," he said. "Otherwise I feel the log jams and leaning trees need to be taken out."
Williams County Commissioner Brian Davis said he questioned if all 2,998 trees the petition states are leaning need to be removed. He said many are stopping erosion and have strong roots.
Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed.
Crescent-News.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Login above or Register to comment.
0 Total Comments Home | Back
Copyright Defiance Publishing, LLC 1995-2009. All Rights Reserved.
Content may not be republished without the expresse written consent of the publisher.
Content may not be republished without the expresse written consent of the publisher.
Dix Communications