Storm Water Modification: Baffle Box & Lake Lot Easement

The City of Maitland is planning to install a debris removal device in storm water pipes which have an outlet to the lake at the Beach Lot.  It is called a Baffle Box.

It is a substantial concrete device requiring significant excavation from the road into our property.  Work includes the demolition of portions of  the new front wall which will be rebuilt with a new alignment behind the device.

Documents for the project received from Maitland have been posted on this site (DBCA Lake Lot Proposed Storm Drain Modification).  A fifteen foot easement, in perpetuity, is requested by the City and the legal scetch depicting this easement is included.  A construction agreement detailing the scope of work and other documents have been requested.

This post is a conduit of conversation regarding Maitland’s proposal to resolve this storm water debris problem and the granting of an easement.

Post your comments below after reading the document on storm water modifications.  Also, watch your email and facebook for notices regarding new documents and meetings.

Best Regards,

Charlie Adkins & Lisa DeRoo


11 Responses to Storm Water Modification: Baffle Box & Lake Lot Easement

  1. Charlie Adkins November 18, 2011 at 3:09 pm #

    The project needs to be completed. But, along with looking for a clarification of language concerning the easement I need to consider the impact of a 15′ easement on this 75′ wide lot which already has 50′ of ground space covered in the area parallel to the patio.

    • John Wacker November 18, 2011 at 9:48 pm #

      As long as our existing hardscapes are not disturbed other than the wall which will be rebuilt, we should be fine. The easement (correct me if I’m wrong) just means if we build something on this, and they need to access it, they can disrupt what is built… but we can still use that easement area-it’s not fenced off or removed from the usefulness of the lot correct?? In other words, we wouldn’t even know an easement is there the way it proposed, correct? I thought they alreay had an easement over the existing SW pipe??? That was the agreement we made years ago when they did the work to move the hydrant, repair the dock and move the storm water outfall to the current location…. Thanks for all your hard work Charlie!!

      • Charlie November 19, 2011 at 3:26 am #

        The double and triple questions marks in your comments are indicative of my same reading of the easement agreement.

        “THE GRANTEE herein and its assigns shall have the right to clear and keep clear all trees, undergrowth and other obstructions that may interfere with normal operation or maintenance of the utilities and any facilities placed
        thereon by the Grantee and its assigns, out of and away from the herein granted drainage easement, and the Grantor, its successors and assigns, agree not to build, construct, or create, nor permit others to build, construct, or create any buildings or other structures on the herein granted drainage easement that may interfere with the normal operation or maintenance of the facilities installed thereon.”

        A new utilities director or other personnel may take it upon themselves to interpret the language very tightly or improperly. City staff cut down our banners, in violation of their own rules. I prefer written clarification before voting on the agreement.

        And if there is a need for heavy equipment to traverse the drive and grassy areas, who pays for the damage that may result? It’s not specified.

        I also doubt the need for a 15′ easement where the pipe’s invert is maybe less than 3′ below grade. If they need more room for work we can give them a construction easement, just like the one we will give them to install the Baffle Box.

  2. John Wacker November 18, 2011 at 9:43 pm #

    Perfect! Any time the city is willing to clean up our lakes we should jump on it! Especially if we can use our lot to help. We were trying to get them to install a CDS unit years ago… glad they are going to do something to stop the flow of debris from the stormwater system into the lake!! Can we get them to clean out the lake again around the north side of the dock in front of the outfall??? It is packed with sediment/leaves/trash that has been flowing through the pipe for years.
    Thanks Charlie!
    – John Wacker

    • Charlie November 19, 2011 at 3:09 am #

      We already have a quote from a contractor who cleaned Dr. Sterns beach front and did a really bang up job. $200.

  3. Charlie November 19, 2011 at 4:06 am #

    I am not certain if Marissa received the email with questions this morning but there was no reply today. I’ll send an email Monday afternoon if I do not hear from her by then.

  4. Joan Matthews November 19, 2011 at 4:20 am #

    The easement document is a standard form one. Too broad. DBCA needs: 1) graphic: map and survey of proposed easement; 2) description of what will be installed by the city in or on the easement, which may also include a photo or technical sheet; 3) limitations on the city’s use of the easement– the draft has very broad discretion and cities are notorious for not maintaining easements, stormwater ponds, conduits, etc. Several nightmare situations developed on the construction of storm water drainage and easements on the west side of Lake Minnehaha.

    While we all may want to install simple tools such as baffle boxes, we need to understand why the easement needs to be sized this way and how it will impact the lake lot. This one bbox will not solve lake water quality, though they help. I also strongly suggest you speak with the two owners of homes immediately north of the lake lot (who have had less than ideal experience with the city regarding the stormwater outfall’s impact on their lakefront), the two lakefront homes to the south, and the home opposite the lake lot. These homes will particularly experience the impacts of any city work, or possible unsightly structures and maintenance. The work done on the lake lot in the last couple of years been so nicely done, DBCA should be very cautious about granting a perpetual unlimited easement.

    Please let me know if you have any Qs, and send modifications. Thanks again for your hard work.

  5. Charlie November 26, 2011 at 5:59 pm #

    Can you be specific regarding the issues? Your concerns may be unique or others may share your concerns and have guidance for you to consider. The community’s best interests are not served when anyone withholds their properly presented thoughts.

    In my view, association leadership is best when it seeks consensus in the community and the community trusts leadership to listen for the properly ordered priorities.

    This is a great medium because it is an open forum where hopefully each contributor carefully considers their word choice.

  6. Charlie Adkins November 30, 2011 at 6:49 pm #

    I learned last week from Marissa Williams (Maitland’s Stormwater & Lakes Mgmt Coordinator) she is putting together the documents we have requested.

  7. Charlie Adkins January 17, 2012 at 11:09 am #

    Marissa Williams (Maitland’s Stormwater & Lakes Mgmt Coordinator) provided the following comments in early December.

    My apologies for the late posting. I’ve read them through once and generally found the comments reasonable.

    I have a few questions of clarification on the easement proposed and our ability to use the property. I expect to meet with Marissa and possibly Rick Lemke at their earliest convenience to include their comments in that post. I have also observed different fence assemblies in Winter Park that may better serve our community and the Lakes at storm outlets.

    From Marissa Williams:
    The following is a summary of answers to the questions that have arisen regarding the proposed baffle box and easement at the DCBA property. Please let me know if you need any further information or clarifications to better educate your community.
    • The release of easement draft document was constructed to remove to current City drainage easements that are already in existence on the property. As it stands, there are two unnecessary or inaccurate drainage easement; one 10’ by 75’ drainage easement to the south (see attachment Dommerich Estates.pdf) and one 10’ drainage easement incorrectly encompassing the existing stormline to the north of the property (see attachment Dommerich Estates.pdf for the drainage easement with hash marks). We are requesting the release of these easements for “housekeeping” purposes, so that an accurate easement representing the City’s existing and proposed facilities may be adopted.
    • The drainage easement that the City is currently requesting would properly encompass the existing stormline to the north of the property, while also allowing sufficient width to fit the proposed baffle box. As it stands now, our baffle box design would extend approximately 3-4 feet onto DCBA property, and thus would require a drainage easement for maintenance, repair, etc. of the structure. This easement would not remove the DCBA’s ability to utilize this section of their property however, just as the current drainage easement requires, any structure constructed or materials placed over the easement may be disturbed or removed should they impede the City’s ability to repair or maintain its facilities.
    • The attached PDF file illustrates the location of the proposed easement (see the 15’ drainage easement with no hash marks) in relation to other features on the property. Please note that this is not an official signed document from our surveyor, but instead a guidance document intended to illustrate the lot’s current configuration.
    • I’ve attached a generic temporary construction easement that we have used for stormwater construction projects in the past. This document would need to be specifically tailored to the DCBA property and its representatives, but it should give you a good idea of the structure and content. A trench will need to be cut to a depth of almost 20 feet to accommodate the baffle box and appropriate stabilizing material beneath it, which will require sufficient width for trench boxes and equipment access. This will also require removal of a section of the existing wall, landscaping, and irrigation, which will be restored by the City upon completion of the project.
    • You requested that I send information or drawings regarding the proposed drain outlet at the lake. We have no plans or intent to modify any portion of the existing discharge on the DCBA lot. Other than temporary equipment storage, the extent of our disturbance to install the Baffle Box will be within approximately 25 feet of the edge of curb on Dommerich Drive.
    • To better illustrate the configuration of the Baffle Box, I have attached a conceptual PDF labeled NSBB-8-14-172-Dommerich Drive. This drawing illustrates the depth of the structure and its relation to the roadway, along with a conceptual jog of the existing wall. Please ignore the elevated viewing panels, as these were an original concept that has been scrapped due to the depth of the box and location of the structure.
    • In response to your question regarding time constraints, this project was originally scheduled for Fiscal year 2011 and should have been completed by October 2011. Due to delays in negotiations, the Maitland City Council approved that the project be carried forward to Fiscal Year 2012, giving us until October 2012 to complete design, permitting, and construction of the facility.
    • Per our intended design and placement of the Baffle Box, maintenance of the structure will occur solely from the City’s Right of Way with no heavy equipment access needed on the DCBA property. The structure will be maintained at a minimum of four times per year with the use of a vacuum truck to remove accumulated sediment, organic debris, and garbage that has accumulated with the Baffle Box. The proposed Box also contains mixed media filter, that will remove dissolved nutrients from the stormwater flow into Lake Minnehaha. Though it is only a piece in the City’s stormwater improvement puzzle, this treatment device will assist us in improvement of water quality in Lake Minnehaha and the entire Winter Park/ Maitland Chain of Lakes.

  8. Charlie Adkins January 23, 2012 at 11:03 pm #

    January 23, 2012 10AM

    RE Meeting to discuss Baffle Box Installation & Easements

    DBCA: Lisa DeRoo, Charlie Adkins & Steve Brown
    City of Maitland: Marissa Williams & Rick Lempke

    We reviewed the plans drawn by Morgan & Associates and discussed the 10′ easements being released, the new 15′ easement, the invert elevations (i.e. depth to bottom of pipe/structures) and cause for a 15′ easement request on pipe buried 6′, useful life of pipe and structures, any pending issues with pipe which may be a cause to remove and replace, fence at this and other outfalls, an easement to DBCA across Maitland’s easement, effect of excavation on mature Oak and Podocarpus and R&R of front boundary wall.

    There are no known reasons for R&R of existing Storm Water pipe or connective structures. The depth and location on property are perceived to be protective for long term use.

    Fencing at the outfall is rusted and unsightly. With the Baffle Box in place the fencing ceases to have a use so we requested its removal as part of the project. Installing Rip Rap (chunks of broken concrete) or rock at the outfall do not appear appropriate so periodic remediation of beach washouts will be necessary.

    Vinyl coated fencing assemblies at non-baffle box outfalls, to contain debris, was discussed. These are a stop gap but we asked consideration be given pending baffle boxes being installed. DBCA agreed to better educate our members on the Storm Water system.

    We expressed concern for the long term health of the Podocarpus after installation of the Baffle Box. A 12 month period may be necessary to determine its survival. Maitland agreed to remove the tree if it dies and DBCA will install a new tree. There are no intentions to perform any work near the Oak tree on the northern boundary.

    We expressed concern a 15′ easement on shallow buried pipe was unnecessary but if the City’s intent for the agreement was NOT to limit our free use or access, except during necessary maintenance, we had no objection as long as Maitland’s intentions for our use of the property were put in writing.

    We requested the right to place PVC chases across Maitland’s easement and below grade (for whatever reasons we deem necessary)so as to avoid having wires, etc. laying on the ground during events which could become trip hazards.

    We were assured by both Rick and Marissa the property was still our property, to fully use and enjoy, and that, Maitland has no intention of limiting those benefits. Maitland’s only desire is to have access when necessary for repairs or replacement.

    Rick requested the chase locations be documented and we suggested a north-south area the width of the patio posts, extending from the easterly most patio posts across the grassy area and buried storm water pipe.

    We discussed the need to R&R portions of the front boundary wall and matching materials/finishes on reconstruction.

    (A voice message was left for Lee Ungaro after the meeting to advise of a need to find matching materials.)

    Marissa agreed to have the plans revised to delete the old easements and draw the Maitland easement and DBCA chase locations. She also agreed to have the easement agreement to us for dissemination on, Facebook and to the Steering Committee & Board by Friday, January 27th 2012.

    DBCA agreed to have a decision on the documents within 10 business days of receipt.