Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A-6 <br /> <br />Wright-McLaughlin Engineers <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />October 27, 1972 <br /> <br />adopted, is not likely to be a.bandoneC! by the district, we <br />should mention that after a project is: undertaken, the dis- <br />trict can. abandon it only if the abandonment will not leave <br />individuals in any worse condition than they would have been <br />if the project had never been undertaken. Atchison vs. Challiss., <br />9 Kan 603; Waters vs. Bat View, 61 wis 642, '2'rNW 811. To the <br />extent that any of the a ternatives destroy the natural channel <br />of the water course, particularly if dwellings or other struc- <br />tures are built within the historical flood plain, any attempt <br />by the district to abandon thE) projec't would be rendered in- <br />creasingly difficult. As a practical mat,ter, i.f the adopted <br />alternative involves destruction of the natural channel, the <br />district probably should aSsume t:hat it: is conunitted to the <br />alternative, or a suitable replacement" in perpetuity. <br /> <br />In view of the periodic releases from Standley Lake for <br />irrigation purposes, you a:re cautioned that any project under- <br />taken by 'the district must be so designed and constructed as <br />not to injure the rights 0:E irrigators.. <br /> <br />ALTERNATIVE NO.1: This alternative contemplates no <br />chClnge5"ril collection or dj,version of :;;urface waters and no <br />alteration in the bed of D:ry Creek. Instead, the problems <br />of the basin are approacheo from t:he st:andpoint of adopting <br />regulations to minimize damage from flooding. <br /> <br />The first legal questj,on which we ha'lTe considered in our <br />examination of this alternative is whether any liability ac- <br />crues to a drainage district which has the power to make chang- <br />es in a natural course and fails t:o do so. In our opinion no <br />liability can accrue from @uch a failure 'to act. <br /> <br />Our opinion in this regard is supported by the cases <br />ci ted in t:he section on geI1eral legal principles. It is <br />further supported by the follo'N'ing quotation from a standard <br />legal text:: <br /> <br />"'In accord with the g'~neral rule t:hat muni.cipal <br />corporations have no obliqation to provide sewers <br />