GIRARD — A report from an engineer hired by Crawford County said he does not foresee any significant damage on Crawford County property from stormwater runoff in proposed the Silverback Landing Development.
Neighboring residents had concerns about water run-off from the development area.
After discussion with the City of Pittsburg and the public, the county decided to hire Senior Engineer of Agricultural Engineering Associates Inc. Frank Young to create a report of findings of the Silverback Landing Subdivision. The development is under P&L Development, who has hired Earl’s Engineering for engineer planning.
Young said the documents he received were preliminary documents, because the project is not final yet and it will not be considered final until it is approved two stage agencies and engineer in charge.
The report was to be completed before the county made a decision on the Rural Housing Incentive District for the Silverback Landing Subdivision during its 30-day county review period. The review period will be over Oct. 25.
According to Director of Community Development & Housing Quentin Holmes RHID is a program set up by the state legislature to incentivize and encourage development in rural communities across Kansas.
Through the RHID the developer pays in advance for infrastructure and roads — rather than the municipality installing the infrastructure — and repaid out of property tax receipts over a 15-year period, which starts Oct. 26.
There is no tax increase for Pittsburg taxpayers, no one is losing tax dollars, Holmes said.
The County and Pittsburg School District had 30 days to review the plans and if there would be an adverse effect on the taxing entity the board or commission could pass a resolution stating it would have an adverse effect, then cause the city and the developer to start over and try again.
On Thursday, Young shared his report with the County Commissioners.
According to the Young’s report, Young had said he felt Earles Engineering, “is taking the steps in the right direction toward a plan that will not negatively affect the county in the form of increased drainage issues, flooding, or public nuisances created by the developer that would not affect property in the jurisdiction of the City of Pittsburg.”
In addition, he said in comparison to other entities having concerns of engineer and developer plans, Earles Engineering is being cooperative and are attempting to address any concerns by placing a water detention pond.
“When we’ve made suggestions, they have looked into it,” Young said.
Commissioners Jeff Murphy and Tom Moody did not motion to make a resolution.
“I’m fairly pleased with where we are at,” Murphy said.
Mood agreed and said, “He [Young] hasn’t really flagged anything [since the addition of the pond]. “There’s not a significant damaging effect.”
Commissioner Carl Wood made a motion to make a resolution twice, but both Murphy and Moody did not second the motion. One to deny the RHID on the grounds of having a “weak set of plans of what is going on,” and with concerns damages will be in his district downstream if plans are not followed through during the next several years and the next phase.
Murphy did however, agree with Wood on communication issues with the city, “I don’t think they knew we were going to get this involved.”
“I wish we had been briefed on this month ago.”
According to Glenn Knopp of Earles Engineering, some form of detention was in discussion all throughout the projects from the start, and that they were looking at different options.
One idea was to place a pond, but there was a space issue and so other options were discussed. However, the other options were not seen as optimal and the pond discussion came back up.
Knopp said they found space for the pond, he said developers must give up real estate for extra developments however, it “ended up working great for everyone concerned” because the pond will be placed in a flood plain.
“It wasn’t in the original concept because we were talking about other options,” Knopp said. “The other option fell apart started looking at this option and it started to work well.”
Knopp said there were also concerns about drainage and trees.
The City of Pittsburg does not currently have any requirements to put in a detention pond.
— Stephanie Potter is a staff writer at the Morning Sun. She can be emailed at firstname.lastname@example.org or follow her on Twitter @PittStephP and Instagram @stephanie_morningsun.