This problem has been going on far too long. Initially the contractor responsible was responsive but I understand that is no longer the case. Perhaps the City should contact the owner of the property. This needs to be fixed and our parking lot and drains restored.
Thank you
Tom Blair
Property owner

We have been property owners in Holly Village since May 2007. Never before have we experienced anything like what has been going on with the near by construction project. We have ALWAYS been good neighbors to the city and surrounding property owners. With that being said, it is time for the city to come to our assistance and help us get this cleanup taken care of. We need your help!

Elizabeth Colyer investigated the parking lot area behind 542 W 2nd Street the morning of 09/14/2015. The white material pictured in the initial SR Report was mostly eliminated with very minor residue remaining. The storm drain inlets contained no white material from the area of the parking lot where the material originated down to a public ROW curb inlet at the corner of 2nd St and Poplar. There is an active construction site located uphill from the site of the discharge, there is about 30 feet of asphalt driveway, then about another 30 feet of gravel between the construction site and the discharge. There was no evidence of any material leaving the construction site, nothing on the gravel area. Elizabeth spoke with the site foreman, Jeff (336) 345-6813 with Karl Stimpson Builders Inc and he had no knowledge of the discharge and had not seen anything unusual around the time of the incident. Elizabeth also spoke with a gentleman performing some interior finishing work at a building uphill from the discharge, above the gravel and asphalt driveway and he also had no knowledge of the discharge. Another business owner who was working in a parking lot across from the discharge also indicated that she had not seen anything. There was a grassy fence line between her parking area and the discharge and no white material was evident in the fence line vegetation. Elizabeth also knocked on the doors of several units, one being 542 W 2nd St, to see if any more information could be obtained and no one was available to speak with at the condo units of the parking area. It is inconclusive as to what the material was or where it originated from the investigation on 09/14/2015.

Thank you for your quick response, however it is not solved.

It is completely conclusive as to where the debris, mud, and sometimes other stuff is coming from. I'll attached is the trail of pictures to make it clear.The discharge came from the site, I watched it happen. The staining has faded a bit and we've attempted various cleaning methods to reduce the unsightly effect.

This drainage situation is not acceptable as it continues to clog and stain our property.

We would like to see some, clean up (again) of the drains and surface, and mitigation for the water path to avoid this happening every time it rains.

Thanks!

Your request has been accepted. Your service request ID is 15-00305896

After receiving initial complaints of storm runoff from the construction project, the City's Stormwater & Erosion Control staff contacted the contractor in an effort to try to assist the affected property owners. However, the fact is that the active construction project was not subject to any land disturbing permits, nor the installation of erosion control devices. Also the City has no Ordinances relating to stormwater runoff from private properties, except for new construction that falls under the post-construction stormwater ordinance. Based on the size and scope of the active construction project on Spruce St., this project is NOT SUBJECT to any stormwater regulations adopted by the City. Therefore the City has no legal authority to compel the contractor or the property owner of the property being renovated to address any stormwater runoff from their property that may affect the condo owner's property. This is a private property matter between one or more private property owners that can be pursued as a private civil suit in the Courts should any affected parties wish to do so.

C. Norton
Asst. Director of Stormwater/Erosion Control
City of Winston-Salem

Would the city then inspect this watershed from the alley down to 2nd street and come up with a plan that doesn't involve all the water from that area heading through our parking lot as run-off? Something is wrong. The alley is city property, correct?

Thanks!

The construction project behind our townhouse is the only situation that is different in our surroundings since we purchased our townhouse in May of 2007.
Now this seems like something that can be proven very easily. Has there over the past seven years been any other complaints filed about a situation like this?
Run off comes from down the alley into our parking lot. How can anyone say the construction site is not causing it.
We all are good neighbors and we expect good neighbors in return.
Help us!
Kim Brown

The "status" of the alley as being City owned and/or maintained has been researched and confirmed by the Asst. Director of Transportation as not being maintained by the City. As to ownership, a property deed of a property adjoining the alley that was recorded February 8, 2007 uses the terms "the unopened alley" and "a corner with an unopened 20 foot alley".

Most alleys in the City that were platted and/or described in deeds as recorded in Forsyth County "back in the day", were provided or dedicated by property owners, land developers, etc. for common use of adjoining property owners, but were never formally deeded to, nor accepted by the City for maintenance.

Lastly, this issue has been discussed with at least two members of the HOA as being a private property matter between the HOA and/or individual owners. Gravel, soil, leaves, debris, etc. that are conveyed onto the HOA property from properties adjoining the alley due to the existing topography, and any claims for property damages therefrom, are private civil matters to be settled by the local courts.

The "status" of the alley as being City owned and/or maintained has been researched and confirmed by the Asst. Director of Transportation as not being maintained by the City. As to ownership, a property deed of a property adjoining the alley that was recorded February 8, 2007 uses the terms "the unopened alley" and "a corner with an unopened 20 foot alley".

Most alleys in the City that were platted and/or described in deeds as recorded in Forsyth County "back in the day", were provided or dedicated by property owners, land developers, etc. for common use of adjoining property owners, but were never formally deeded to, nor accepted by the City for maintenance.

Lastly, this issue has been discussed with at least two members of the HOA as being a private property matter between the HOA and/or individual owners. Gravel, soil, leaves, debris, etc. that are conveyed onto the HOA property from properties adjoining the alley due to the existing topography, and any claims for property damages therefrom, are private civil matters to be settled by the local courts.