Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews Cole Branch estimates; commissioners asked to decide funding by June
Summary
Engineers provided multiple cost scenarios to fix an eroding ditch and retaining wall in the Cole Branch/Rietersburg area; the board asked county commissioners for a funding decision by the June meeting and noted the formal drain-assessment process would take about two years.
Get email alerts on the Drainage Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Vermillion County Drainage Board reviewed engineer cost estimates for cleaning and stabilizing a problematic ditch and retaining wall in the Cole Branch/Rietersburg area and asked county commissioners to indicate whether they will fund work by the board’s June meeting.
Consultants provided multiple options: a cleaning-only estimate to remove sediment and clear the ditch was about $35,000; removing the existing retaining wall and replacing it with box culverts carried a construction estimate of about $160,000 plus engineering fees estimated at $82,000; a lower-profile repair using a gabion (wire-basket) retaining wall had a combined construction and engineering estimate of about $105,000 (roughly $40,000 construction and $65,000 engineering). An alternate full surveying and watershed design package to accommodate future growth was quoted at about $114,000.
Board members emphasized that even if the county chose to pursue repairs quickly, the statutory drain process — assessing the drain and then collecting assessments — typically pushes large-scale reconstruction out roughly two years. The board’s procedural step was to present the estimates to the county commissioners and ask for a funding position: one board member asked commissioners to let the board know before the June 5 meeting whether they could commit funding.
Several board members argued that removing sediment and restoring flow should take priority over an expensive new retaining wall. They noted downstream property impacts — including a homeowner whose yard and garage have flooded — and discussed potential approaches including dredging, subsurface drainage work and contractor offers from local crews to perform parts of the work.
The board did not authorize construction at the meeting; it placed responsibility on the commissioners to indicate budget support and on staff to return with a clearer scope if commissioners elect to proceed.

