It seems every year we have to deal with this in some form. I have notes going back to 2004 on this issue. This year the proposal hasn't changed much from last time, but it is still equally bad for South Goldenview RRSA tax payors and the owners within Woodridge Subdivision. A news segment was aired on KTUU on January 7, 2009.

The Board and the homeowners along the project are opposed to the proposed solution for many reasons.

1. The drainage plan offers no known “improvements” for the RSA and the residents of Woodrige. The road and drainage are currently stable after many years of work by the contractor for the RSA. The proposed plan will tear up the road bed and will likely cause more problems than it anticipates solving. The longest-term homeowners in Woodridge recall testifying that this subdivision should not be built at the density level it was..... because it would create drainage problems. Now they are being asked to take on that water in their subivision?

2. The cost causers are not the cost payers. The development from the very beginning had poor drainage and issues. The engineers and hydrologists proposing the solution are also the ones who caused the problem. We understand from Jim Lamsen that money was directed away from projects with matching funds and funneled to pay for this project. Why is it the developers are not being asked to pay for the fix and the forever maintenance of this problem?

3. Only one of three possible solutions published in the draft Hillside District Plan Drainage Section are being considered, and arguable this is the worst of the three. Also up for consideration is to direct the water to one of the settling ponds within Goldenview Park or to direct the water to the current storm drain system. These options should be exhausted before even considering another alternative.

4. The basis for evaluation for the possible alternatives needs to consider construction and a rate for maintenance. The funding needs to include the funds to build the project and to maintain it forever. It is not fair to ask the residents of a private road service area to bear the costs from an adjacent and excluded subdivision.

5. The plan was drawn up for the Goldenview HOA without consideration to the stakeholders of the whole plan. Woodridge HOA and the SGVRRSA should be equally represented in any plan which includes us as recipients of drainage and maintenance.

6. Why are the engineers who created the flawed drainage system not being asked for corrective action? The engineers who are proposing this "fix" are also the same ones who designed the subdivision to begin with and signed off that they provided and adequate drainage plan. Isn't there any professional culpability or responsibility to ensure that your designs as an engineer actually work in real life rather than just on paper?

7. The Hillside District Plan will create drainage districts to effectively deal with the water from the top of the mountain to the bottom. Making this choice without the bigger picture perspective will eliminate possible solutions in the future when a more global knowledge is gained. This should not happen outside of a comprehensive drainage plan, if at all.

8. There is not enough information to know for sure that this proposal will solve the problem of the affected homeowners. It is well known that the grounds are wet and these houses are in the low spot of the topography. It is very likely this project could be completed and the affected homeowners will still suffer the same problems.