Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-04-18
SURFACE DRAINAGE.
Assistant Attorney Thomas Gives An Opinion
as to the Commissionef.' Power.

Assistant Attorney Thomas Gives an Opinion
as to the Commissionefs' Power.
Recently Capt. Rossell wrote letter to the
Commissioners which he requested be referred
to the attorney asking whether in the i'm
provement of public roads in the Dis
trict in case where the drainage of sur
face water is involved it Is necessary
for the District to put in culverts except to
carry natural water courses across the road; in
other words, has the District the right to fill
up natural drainage ways and back the water
on the land of private individuals abut-
ting on the road? Assistant Attorney Thomas
reported upon the case today. He said that in
considering the question between natural
stream flowing between defined banks and
surface water caused by rain or melting
snow there is a distinction which should
be kept in view, since the law apph-
cable to the two cases is essentially different
In the case of a natural stream, he says the
Commissioners in the absence Of legislative
authority changing what would otherwise be
the rights of the parties, have no right to
obstruct 1T SO as to throw the water
back on the land of private individuals or to
divert the course of the stream. As to sur
face water, the law very largely regards it as
common enemy which every proprietor may
fight and get rid of as best he may. 1t is very
well settled that a municipal corporation
having power to improve streets and roads is
not required to construct culverts and cutters
and provide other means Of draining surface
waters so as to prevent them from
flowing back on adjoining property. Mr..
Thomas cites several cases in support
of his opinion. II, he says, in consequence
of filling streets and cross streets to the
established grade line surface water Is col
lected in pools or ponds upon the lands of ad-
joining owners which by reason of the i'm
provement are brought below the level Of the
street the District is not liable for dam
ages thereby occasioned. For these reasons he
says,he is of the opinion that the District is not
required except in cases Of natural water
courses to put culverts under streets or roads
In order to carry surface drainage across
the street or road. In other words, the
District is not liable for damages to
adjoining lot owners for obstructing the sur
face drainage of their lots resulting from rails
ing the grade of a street road above the
level of their lots. In case where the Dis
trict has raised the grade Of one Of its streets
property and has placed culverts in the fill to
across the street or road and the owner OF the
adjoining property fills up his lot above the
level of the street, thus destroying the culveIt
ana thereby causing the surface water from his
lot to drain or stand in pools or ponds upon the
street, the District remedy would be to fur
Their raise the grade Of this street or road 80 as
to throw the water back. or else to construct a
gutter or drain alongside of the street or road
and In that way conduct the surface water to
pond, where it would reach a natural water
course and be taken up or where it could be
discharged on adjoining lands without damage
to individual owners.