The current water is sitting on top of the road. In the spring we get approximately 6-8 inches of standing water. Everytime it rains the water stands on the road. One of the homeowners digs a small trench across the road to get the water to drain across to the other homeowners property because the water expands across his driveway as well.
This water does end up on the homeowners property that does not want the culvert placed. Currently he gets the water that is trenched across the road, with a culvert he would still get the same amount of water, if not less. We suggested having a hole approximately 5 feet deep with rip rap and stone to act as a basin so that the amount of water going through the culvert would be minimal. He also rejected that.
The reason I mentioned we can expand the road is to show the culvert would not end up on any homeowners property.
Brenda Cadwallader wrote:
There is a part of this story I am not getting. Would the culvert bring an existing stream under the road instead of over? Would it put water on a homeowner's land that was not there before? How do the ten more feet "available to expand" the road work? How does road expansion help the situation?
We have 5 homeowners in our road association. Part of the road is always flooded with water.
There is approximately 10 more feet of road frontage available for us to expand the road.
We need to put a culvert in due to the excess water. One homeowner states he does not want the excess water on his land. What are the legal rights to placing this culvert on "ROAD PROPERTY".
I do think you have a complex problem here and I can't really answer it, probably not even if I had all the information, but Phillip Curtis would probably be able to. Let us know what happens.