What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Tennessee
Originally, the county road along my farm property was a gravel road and water flowed across it freely during rain events. Many times it would wash out and need repairing. It was first paved around 1990 and most recently three to four years ago. Each time it was paved the road grade was raised approximately four to six inches. Therefore, yielding a total of 8” to 12” in plus elevation. This has created ponding on my property at the sag point of the roadway. After county officals come and looked at the ponding issue, county forces came and cut a ditch along the road on my side (upstream side) with the intention of installing a cross-drain to eliminate the ponding. After marking the location of the proposed pipe on the road surface. The downstream property owner threaten to sue the county if the pipe was installed because he thinks the pipe will release concentrated water on him. This is the natural flow of the drainage area. No new drainage area is being added at the pipe location.
In my case the proposed 18” pipe would relieve the water collecting at the sag in the new roadway ditch and prevent water from ponding on my property that was created by the county due to the raised elevation of the roadway. The proposed pipe would not outlet into an open field or cropland. Any water exiting the pipe would enter a large existing ditch beside the roadway and find its way to an existing stream and then a blue line stream as shown on the TVA Quad Map. The majority of the water from the approximate 30-acre drainage area will still overtop the roadway during large rain events due to the inadequacy of the 18” pipe and the grade of the road. If there was still a concern the proposed pipe would carry concentrated water at the outlet, it could be dissipated with large rip-rap rock placed at the end.
The county also agrees it is a saftey problem for the motoring public, but thinks "high water" signs would prevent them from being sue in the event of an accident. The county has offer to fill in the ditch they cut, but will not install the pipe based on the property owners complaint. No roadway ditch would force more surface water onto the roadway making the saftey issue worse. After I wrote a letter requesting the pipe be installed, they are now saying that ponding water was occurring on my property when I bought the farm. The farm has been in my family for 65 years. I bought out my siblings in 2007 after my mother passed away.
Due to the fact that the county has created the ponding that is occurring on the upstream side, I feel it is the county’s responsibility to provide drainage under the roadway as in the case when any roadway is built. Water left behind that cannot exit at the sag point because there is no cross-drain to relieve it takes weeks to completely evaporate from the ditch they cut. The proposed pipe would also solve some of the safety concerns the county admits to. However, the water would still overtop the roadway during large rain events.
I think the downstream owner is being unreasonable. This is the natural flow of the water that is presently damed up by the road creating a detention area on the upstream side.
What is my legal options? What is my chance of forcing the county to install the pipe with a lawsuit? Will the county pay court cost if I win?
Originally, the county road along my farm property was a gravel road and water flowed across it freely during rain events. Many times it would wash out and need repairing. It was first paved around 1990 and most recently three to four years ago. Each time it was paved the road grade was raised approximately four to six inches. Therefore, yielding a total of 8” to 12” in plus elevation. This has created ponding on my property at the sag point of the roadway. After county officals come and looked at the ponding issue, county forces came and cut a ditch along the road on my side (upstream side) with the intention of installing a cross-drain to eliminate the ponding. After marking the location of the proposed pipe on the road surface. The downstream property owner threaten to sue the county if the pipe was installed because he thinks the pipe will release concentrated water on him. This is the natural flow of the drainage area. No new drainage area is being added at the pipe location.
In my case the proposed 18” pipe would relieve the water collecting at the sag in the new roadway ditch and prevent water from ponding on my property that was created by the county due to the raised elevation of the roadway. The proposed pipe would not outlet into an open field or cropland. Any water exiting the pipe would enter a large existing ditch beside the roadway and find its way to an existing stream and then a blue line stream as shown on the TVA Quad Map. The majority of the water from the approximate 30-acre drainage area will still overtop the roadway during large rain events due to the inadequacy of the 18” pipe and the grade of the road. If there was still a concern the proposed pipe would carry concentrated water at the outlet, it could be dissipated with large rip-rap rock placed at the end.
The county also agrees it is a saftey problem for the motoring public, but thinks "high water" signs would prevent them from being sue in the event of an accident. The county has offer to fill in the ditch they cut, but will not install the pipe based on the property owners complaint. No roadway ditch would force more surface water onto the roadway making the saftey issue worse. After I wrote a letter requesting the pipe be installed, they are now saying that ponding water was occurring on my property when I bought the farm. The farm has been in my family for 65 years. I bought out my siblings in 2007 after my mother passed away.
Due to the fact that the county has created the ponding that is occurring on the upstream side, I feel it is the county’s responsibility to provide drainage under the roadway as in the case when any roadway is built. Water left behind that cannot exit at the sag point because there is no cross-drain to relieve it takes weeks to completely evaporate from the ditch they cut. The proposed pipe would also solve some of the safety concerns the county admits to. However, the water would still overtop the roadway during large rain events.
I think the downstream owner is being unreasonable. This is the natural flow of the water that is presently damed up by the road creating a detention area on the upstream side.
What is my legal options? What is my chance of forcing the county to install the pipe with a lawsuit? Will the county pay court cost if I win?