Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer says 2010 sewer work largely matched plans; settlement or frost likely caused current problem
Summary
An engineer briefed Sherburn council that 2010 sewer work was returned to near original grades, that two service lines were found for one property, and that subsequent settlement or frost movement likely explains a long-running flow problem rather than an initial construction error.
Travis Winter told the Sherburn City Council the 2010 sewer improvements were intended to match existing elevations and that, from available as-built records and surveying he conducted, the installed sewer line was within "a couple inches" of the planned grade.
Winter said crews found two service connections for the property in question — one serving a campground and one serving buildings at the motel — and that one service was clay tile set in clay soils and "wasn't seen" initially. He explained the sewer had been rerouted because the earlier alignment ran underneath a private co-op building, which would not have been permitted.
On the claim that the "new sewer [was] too high," Winter said the design called for the proposed sewer to be at the same elevation as the existing and that the as-built records showed only minor differences. He noted that typical construction warranties and settlement issues appear in the first two years after installation and that "this far after the fact" it is plausible that settlement, frost-susceptible soils or later trenching near a water main caused a change that led to current problems.
Winter described the minimum slope standards he reviewed (a 2% grade in building-adjacent runs, then 1% per regional guidance) and said the approximately 250-foot service line should have about 2.5 feet of fall; survey work on this property showed the line was "very flat" and "substandard to begin with."
Council asked follow-up questions about whether the second service obstructed the first; Winter said the two services were separate and that the typical corrective approach (a saddle Y) had been used in recent repairs.
Next steps: Council accepted Winter's explanation and did not direct an immediate remedial program beyond noting the historical nature of the installation and the potential for later settlement.
