Oakmont Commons to be surveyed to determine flooding solutions | TribLIVE.com

Oakmont Commons to be surveyed to determine flooding solutions

Michael DiVittorio

A survey of the Oakmont Commons housing plan and nearby areas will be the next step in the borough’s efforts to combat flooding issues.

However, residents may not see construction of any possible solutions until spring.

Storms late July 21 into the next morning wreaked havoc on the Commons and other Allegheny County neighborhoods.

Residents have attended every council meeting since then, imploring Oakmont leaders to find flooding solutions.

Tuesday’s workshop meeting was no exception.

“Every time it thunders, every time there’s lightning in the sky, reports of a hurricane moving up the coast or a storm, the residents of Oakmont Commons are fearful that this is going to happen again,” resident Laurel Houck said. “We would like to remain residents of this borough. I ask that you would seriously not talk about this, but seriously do something and do it quickly before the fall rains come and we end up in this situation again.”

Borough Engineer Amber Yon of Senate Engineering told council she contacted three firms to analyze elevations and other measurements for the survey

“They provide us with topographic information that we need in order to model the impact of any improvements done in the flood plane,” Yon said.

A company is expected to be hired later this month to do the survey work. Estimated cost is between $15,000 and $20,000.

Yon said it may take two to three weeks at the earliest to complete the survey, and four more weeks to plug in the data and run simulations through software used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

It would create a model of Plum Creek and test different scenarios in the impacted areas.

A report may be submitted to the borough in late November or December.

Yon said resulting projects may need to go out for bid. That process, combined with weather, likely will push any major developments into spring.

“The borough is doing everything within their power to address the situation,” Yon said. “They are moving forward with their hired professionals as well as the Commons’ hired professionals. It’s not a matter of them sitting back at all. They’re taking all the necessary steps to move these things forward. These things don’t happen overnight.”

Raising the elevation of the old Plum Creek railroad bed, and removing debris from what’s colloquially called “leaf pile park” near the Commons were among the options discussed Tuesday.

“It’s an area that has been filled up with leaf debris and things collected in the street sweeper the borough has dumped in this area the last 50 years,” Yon said. “We would be removing that material.”

Councilman George Coulter said the borough has received tremendous cooperation from residents and the community’s’ homeowners association, and knows everyone wants to prevent more flooding.

“We all understand the hardship,” Coulter said. “There are things going on, a lot of cooperation going on between the Common’s board and this council with joint meetings and discussions about getting at the root of the problem. We’d like to help as much as we can working with everybody. It’s a bad situation.”

Council President William Benusa encouraged more residents to attend council meetings and bring their concerns before the borough.

Michael DiVittorio is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Michael at 412-871-2367, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Plum
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.