2009 – Feb 2 SSSF Board Meeting
This meeting was not pre-posted.
Meeting Minutes These minutes were received on March 2, 2009.
Meeting Minutes – Full Record.
Another set of these minutes were received on July 22, 2009
Silver Springs Homeowners Association
Board Meeting to be held at the County Building Auditorium
6505 N. Landmark Drive
at 6:30 PMOpen to the Public
COMMENTARY on Underdrain System discussed this night.
In October of 1985 the SSSFHOA at a General Association Meeting, the board and members voted to abandon the irrigation system and the underdrain system. This was done for reasons listed below*, and that action removed the verbiage and responsibility by the Association referring to these systems from the newly Amended Declaration of CCRs Entry 244975, Book M370, Pages 267-275, and included the statement on CCR Page 273: “All [prior] Declarations relating to the Silver Springs Development Subdivision were repealed.”
The Masters Association was formed late in 1989, gaining control over maintenance of “common areas.” Of course the underdrain system located within Silver Springs Single Family subdivision Phases A & B is within individually owned properties which are not definable as “common area” but instead as “private property.” Therefore the MAHOA has nothing to do with this system.
During 1993-1994 written responsibility for underdrain system “maintenance” was worked out by the presiding board in various CCRs draft documents referencing the underdrain then again removing any reference to the underdrain system. The ending document that was approved by the Association on November 17, 1994 and was recorded at Entry # 419440, Book M851, Pages 334-339, has no reference to any responsibility to an underdrain system by the Association, supporting the 1985 Association vote to abandon the system. No subsequent HOA documents include any reference to the underdrain system which has been abandoned by the Association as defunct, and we imagine the system has for a great part returned to nature.
Summit County officials consistently deny responsibility for “maintaining” the Silver Springs underdrain system. The County supports a sewer system and a storm drain system within our subdivision. And there are a number of waterways for water collection. Noland feels water entering home crawl spaces –such as his and maybe three or four others –, yards and driveways shows that the system is not functioning and that some years the runoff changes course. Noland believes the underdrain system has been invaded at various places by tree roots, other “organic matter,” and displacements. At times during spring run-off sections of the underdrain may still be functioning as a collection and outflow system, in some cases runoff may actually pool into a “distribution system” gathered on sections of subdivision lots. This occasional distribution can be monitored, and it has lessened considerably over the years since the building in Sun Peak, The Canyons, and other uphill developments has absorbed a great deal of the runoff. In the spring the sewer system and the storm drain system remove runoff but can become clogged or over burdened. Willow Creek has been known to overflow and the storm drains provided for this increase in seasonal flow need to be monitored to clear debris and branches from hampering proper drainage. The County has notified property owners along its bank that sandbagging and keeping the waterway clear is the property owners responsibility. Property owners in other member subdivisions in our MAHOA have been given the same instructions.
Noland seems to want to change who is responsible for determining the potential for water seepage difficulties on individual properties, clarifying who is to meet them and deal with them when actual damages and threatened damages appear. Noland suggested three options –
-1. The SSSFHOA can be petitioned to take ultimate responsibility. [See above for Oct. 1985 an November 1994 Association votes.]
-2. Petition the Masters Association to take responsibility. [Highly unlikely to occur as it is not part of their charter and other Silver Springs Member Subdivisions have petitioned and been turned down for similar work.]
-3. “Wait until someone sues over damage.” [Who would sue who? In previous meetings Noland himself has stated that responsibility is already assigned, the SSSFHOA CCRs state in Article IX Easements: “Section. 1. The rights and duties of the owners of lots within the properties with respect to sanitary sewer and water, electricity, solar heating systems, gas, telephone, and Cable Television lines and drainage facilities shall be governed by the following:… The easement area of each lot and all improvements in it shall be maintained continuously by the owner of the lot, except for those improvements for which a public authority or utility company is responsible.” Flood insurance should again be encouraged to each homeowner.
See http://www.
Noland suggested reasons for the homeowners to deny responsibility for the underdrain system would be to avoid maintenance costs, to conserve irrigation water to lawns, trees, gardens within each lot, to avoid costly intrusion by roto-rooting and exploration damage to private property such as fencing, driveways, and mature trees; while reasons for accepting the responsibility include protecting an undetermined number of homeowners from seasonal water related damages [which are actually owner responsibilities], and simply to assure control over the abandoned underdrain system.
The question is whether the Association should fund and proceed in a matter already clearly left to individual homeowner discretion and responsibility. The Association could support the homeowner by providing a system wide plan and maps for preventing and dealing with runoff, and by monitoring and clearing storm drain and sewer grates and waterways. Our subdivision is 30 years old, most of the flow problems that affect the subdivision have been experienced and dealt with over the years. Homeowners who have artesian springs or wells on their properties need to deal with those using different methods.
As I was a brief former president of the MAHOA, and Noland is now the current Master HOA president, we know that petitioning the MAHOA board for intervention or assistance would be futile because it is beyond their function and realm of responsibility. Noland observed that getting general approval for the SSSFHOA to accept any level of responsibility could be complicated by the fact that not every lot in the subdivision is directly on the system’s route and some lots are affected in the front and backyards, and the HOA governing documents already assign the underdrain responsibilty to the individual homeowner.
Former SSSFHOA President Skip Domenic, who is another of the handfull of property owners experiencing spring runoff issues (and his property may be on an artesian spring) pointed out that when the system starts distributing instead of collecting water – especially during spring’s heavy runoff period – it could easily spread beyond the system’s line, threatening property just about anywhere. During general discussion on February 2nd, it was suggested “maintenance” should be better defined; and that a “survey of members” to determine who is or is not affected could help determine how serious and widespread the problem really is. In Noland’s final analysis he thinks the board of trustees is obliged to draft a homeowners membership plan for meeting the runoff problem. Most homeowners are already aware if there are runoff issues associated with their own properties. The suggested action of this magnitude and scope needs to be approved by a majority vote by the entire Association Membership before it can be implemented.
I greatly appreciate Mr. Noland’s substantial work over the last couple years compiling the underdrain report. It has been discussed for nearly a year that a survey of our property owners is necessary to justify the expense, and determine if more than four or five properties are being affected by spring runoff, artesian springs, artesian wells, etc. Since last May I volunteered to the board that I would complete a survey of all 189 property owners before anything else can be decided. The board repeatedly told me I was not to gather this neighborhood data until they were ready to act. My offer still stands.
*It is important to sum up how many Silver Springs properties are affected, whether individual sump pumps are an appropriate remedy, how much personal property in the form of fences, patios, sheds, trees, gardens, driveways, etc. would be negatively affected by the “roto-rooting” exploration and at what expense to the individual homeowner, the Association, and the perceived re-sale image of our neighborhood. One of the voiced concerns is that if we proceed to tear into properties because of water related issues we could become a stigmatized neighborhood such as Propector was affected.
An important consideration is the “dead zone” that will be created. Irrigation sprinkling along the proposed underdrain areas will be leached away from the intended plantings. It is important to consider that in these years of drought the effect of water collection and removal by an underdrain system is that it will percolate irrigation water (intended to benefit our yards) away from the lawn and garden areas contiguous to and under the underdrain system. The few homeowners who are experiencing runoff in their yards and water in their crawlspaces say this occurs in the spring, whereas the revival of the underdrain would take water from homeowner properties during the entire spring-summer-fall plant growth seasons.
Also it is important to consider the economic times we are experiencing as a nation, is it prudent to create more expenses for work that is clearly not a benefit to the Association at large; we have the most expensive water in the state via Mountain Regional, and if global warming-summer drought conditions persist do we really want an underdrain system to draw away the water that we are dearly paying for from our yards, plantings, and properties?