Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infill Drainage Cases topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews closure letter and independent engineering report for infill drainage cases
Summary
Staff presented a proposed closure letter for roughly 65 unresolved infill-lot standing-water cases and reviewed an independent engineering report for one property that cites tailwater from Graham Swamp and neighboring grading as contributing factors; the resident has an open code‑enforcement case and is pursuing a replacement culvert permit.
Palm Coast City stormwater staff asked the committee to review a proposed closure letter intended for about 65 infill‑lot cases where standing water remains and to provide input on an independent engineering report supplied by a concerned resident.
Staff said the draft letter explains likely causes of backyard standing water and lists homeowner remedies — for example, relocating downspouts, installing yard drains or sump pumps, reestablishing inter‑lot BMS, filling low spots and, where appropriate, installing a swale or regrading — and asked the committee to comment before mailing.
The committee also examined an independent engineering report for a specific property draining to Ditch 10 and ultimately Graham Swamp. Staff explained that ‘‘tailwater’’ — backwater in the downstream system after Hurricane Milton — and an undersized or damaged culvert were cited as major contributing factors in the report. Staff displayed GIS maps and said the city’s engineered solution work includes evaluating the capacity of Graham Swamp, assessing three relief ('pop‑off') pipes under I‑95, and a construction project to increase pipe capacity under Colbert Road.
On the property-level case, staff said the resident has already obtained a permit and contracted for replacement of the culvert at the parcel in question. The transcript includes a neighborhood allegation — relayed in the engineering report — that a newly built adjacent house at a higher elevation and altered grading contributed to the runoff; staff characterized that as a factor reported by the resident and said code enforcement remains open but requires evidence of flow from a neighboring property to proceed further.
Committee members did not direct a formal recommendation to code enforcement during the meeting. Staff said they will continue coordinating the infill‑case mailings, monitor the specific code enforcement case, and continue engineering evaluations of Graham Swamp and associated drainage projects.
