Evansville trying to buy properties to fix water issues
The city hopes to negotiate the purchase of land from two property owners as part of a continuing effort to address a west-side flooding problem, City Administrator Dan Wietecha said.
The affected properties are:
-- 2.9 acres owned by William Rundle and Kristine Chilsen. The farmland is west of the existing storm water pond at Sixth Street and Vision Drive.
-- 0.63 acres owned by the Roxann Grenlund Metzger Trust. The agricultural drainage ditch is adjacent to the west side of the Rundle property.
The city wants to buy the property to build a larger capacity detention pond.
If the land purchase cannot be negotiated, the city would use eminent domain to acquire the property, Wietecha said.
For a full story, read Wednesday's Janesville Gazette, read online in the Gazette’s E-Edition or check back at GazetteXtra.com.
Jun 4, 2009 at 10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
I really think the best thing for Evansville is to have people on city council who are NEW to town.. Not a ringhand, or decker who have caused this town great problems and money.. Funny where the nursing home , assisted living was built, who do you think owned that land? What about the fire dept? Who do you think owned that land? ringhand was the one who pushed through the westfield meadows mess , and most found out later she does business with one of the contractors who build out there. We need people who are not buddy , buddy with the contractors in town. People who could give a flyin flip, of someone's last name.. Our council past and present has brought shame and embarrassment and legal problems to Evansville like no other surrounding town, or in the tri-county area even.
Jun 3, 2009 at 11:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Go after the developer?????? That would mean a couple of towners would need to ante up alot of $$$ and that ain't gonna happen. Not when they can continually sucker people into bad land deals (think new F.D. building).
But why stop there???? You might as well go all out and have the planning & zoning comittee, building inspector, builder, realtor, city engineer and any other public or private person(s) who knew about this issue before or after the land was annexed to pay for it.
Then again....why not dig another "grand canyon" water rentention hole like the one on Porter Road in that area? The Porter road hole is 4 times the size it needs to be.
No matter what.....the taxpayers will get "soaked" paying to fix a mistake that was known all along and that the landowner and developer were to cheap/lazy to fix right the first time.
Meanwhile....the residents of the far west side will just get their basements "soaked" everytime there is a chance of showers.
Jun 3, 2009 at 6:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Instead of placing the burden on to the residents, why not go after the developer to foot the cost?
Jun 3, 2009 at 1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
they were warned before they allowed all that building, and they continued to allow the building after the flooding issues became a problem. Those people will never get for their homes what they paid for them.
Jun 3, 2009 at 9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
I said it on another thread, but you really have to be concerned about regional rises in the water table in southern Wisconsin. Overall, we have been in a pattern of increased rainfall for the past 30-50 years. Examples of the effects are seen at Clear Lake in Milton, Crystal and Fish Lake in northern Dane County and that re-emergence of the pond alongside Highway 14 in Brooklyn. More so, the recent buyout of homes in Spring Green is a better example. Sometimes retention and stormwater management may not do the trick. The solution might be to not to develop in areas that used to be tiled farm fields. If it was a tiled field, there a good chance that is was hydric soil (def. - soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part). These examples are real warning signs for future development on the lower west side of E’ville.
Jun 3, 2009 at 9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
ONLY because they made the mess..
Jun 3, 2009 at 9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
How odd they would seize the land for flood control.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.