Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Stormwater Potters Lane topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident urges fixes after Potters Lane drainage project; town says design standards met

Clarksville Town Council · January 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Clarksville resident, Miss Ross, told the council that drainage work at 922 Potters Lane has caused persistent ponding and property damage; town staff and engineers said the project met the design standards and pledged a follow-up inspection and review of punch-list items.

Miss Ross, a Potters Lane homeowner, spent the work session describing what she called ongoing flooding and property damage after the town’s Potters Lane roadway and drainage project. She told the council: “You all should be out there walking up and down Potters Lane to see what the problem is,” and said punch-list items on her property were not completed.

Town staff and the project’s design firm, OHM Engineers, responded with a multi-part presentation documenting pre-construction and post-construction photos, system design and construction steps. Engineer Steve Emily summarized the project scope and cost: “the completed cost of the project was about $2,700,000.” He said the project installed storm sewer lines and yard drains intended to remove standing water and that, in the firm’s assessment, the constructed system met the design standards the town adopted.

Council members and staff acknowledged continuing concerns and committed to follow-up steps. The town said it and the contractor have visited many properties and that a consultant would return to the site once snow and ice clear to review visible problem areas; staff offered to provide Miss Ross a copy of the project punch list and to confirm warranty status and any outstanding corrective work. No formal remediation vote was taken; the council directed staff and the consultant to inspect the sites and report back.