First of all, my deepest apologies to all of the non-human the inhabitants of the mixed-forest Ecosystem dwelling on the Mount Property; tree beings, plant beings, birds, frogs, salamanders, bats, bees, and other creatures - for not following through and insisting that public Works give us a much better publicized open house after Mid- July. I dropped the ball. Secondly, equally heartfelt apologies to the Citizens who don't yet know what will hit them, especially the citizens of the UGA and the people who worked hard at the Stormwater Facility Aesthetics meetings. No excuses will cut it, but burnout and exhaustion and a broken heart all contributed to the ball drop. This was NOT the time to drop the ball! I feel I let you all down. I let myself down, and the few people who wanted to stop this project or stall it until sanity prevailed. I wish I could have done more for you all instead of retreating. I had to walk away. I wish I didn't have to, could have managed it. This is a set of questions I drafted in June, and apparently never sent to the Aesthetics Committee for feedback and brainstorming. I want it here for posterity.
***********************
email from June 17, 2011
Hello.
I want to thank everyone on the Aesthetics Committee and concerned citizens for their input on the Mount Property Stormwater Facility. I apologize for not contacting Shannon about another open house. I left the ball in her court with the last email I sent her, which was unwise. Frankly, I dropped the ball. If that open house was going to happen, I should have kept at her to do it. I didn't. Had to walk away. I'm sorry, and feel that I let us all down. Still having a very hard time with this project's immanence, and still feel upset that they're going through with this plan. But if not for you people, it would have been worse - so thank you for your time, efforts, and energy. It was a pleasure to watch you all work together and brainstorm your good ideas and intelligent questions and concerns and make the best of a less than ideal situation.
For what it's worth, I'd still like to hear your input on the process if you feel like taking the time; especially any questions you have that are still unresolved, any new questions or concerns. Below is the original draft of concerns to present to your perusal, the public, and PW before the open house that never followed. Thanks again.
Sadie
***********************
Written June 17
Public Works has made some concessions, thanks to good input from Michael and Fred. But from what Shannon said yesterday, I have questions and maybe some of you do too. I would like to compile a list of questions we already asked, questions still to ask, and any answers you got and how satisfied or concerned you are with the answers you got.
The biggies that stand out for me are maintenance and monitoring,. PW consistently seems to run out of money when a big project is done, and they don't seem to factor-in operational, maintenance, suppliy, or monitoring costs. A look at their projects would point to the fact that there might be little to no maintenance and a bigger load on the workers, and this is a concern.
What will happen to the standing trees without tree support in an extreme wind tunnel, and the visual shock of no taller greenery in places where people are used to seeing it? Is the public at all prepared for what they're going to see, including all the old and new commercial construction which will now be visible?
How are affected neighbors feeling, and what suggestions do they have to minimize any negative visual impacts? How will these be satisfied? What has been promised?
Shannon addressed the question of hawthorn seedlings; she said that PW would pull them at the "annual maintenance." Does this mean that they actually think they can weed only once per year? Yikes; terrifying thought.What about the reed canary grass, holly, blackberry, and other weed seedlings that birds and wind will bring in? did anyone find out how often PW plans to weed? Water?
Did anyone talk with mindy? Do you think she is going to bid on the planting job or was she present to write another article for Bullwings? Has anyone contacted Ted T about bidding on the plantings or his thoughts on this project or alternatives he would propose? (Moot questions, since Robin K got the bid; but I'd still like to know Ted's take on things.)
What kind of job do you think Orcas Ex will do on the bulldoze/grade/etc? Sensitive? Not?
Monitoring.... Did anyone hear (and get in writing) what they were planning to do for testing and monitoring? This is hugely important, since this is the whole reason the facility is being engineered. What are the actual plans for monitoring? How will they be implemented? By whom? How often? For what will they test? How much will it cost, now and in the long term? Are there written plans and figures for the public to see?
Why do they have to move the berm further south and thus sacrifice the native crabapples and young scoulers willows on the SW corner? Shannon said it was because they had to make the basin bigger to make up for the shallower settling ponds. Can't that be done instead with gentle meandering grading and mounding? Thoughts?
People who attended the open house; would you please weigh in on what questions you asked and what responses you got? I still think this is important to get documented for including in the public records on this project.
Does anyone know if a representative from the Tribes will be present to be sure that no middens are disturbed? Who would contact Tribal officials - PW? Can we follow through to see if this was done?
Although i am pleased that Michael's and Fred's input at least had some better effect, i still feel that more can be done to minimize the impact without compromising the function of the constructed wetland; and far more cheaply, leaving more money for monitoring and operations. Is this reasoning off base? Anyone else feeling this way too? Ideas?
I missed the bid walk-through at the end of June. Did anyone tag along and see where the trees had been marked more clearly regarding what stays and goes? I asked that they mark the trees and delineation of the existing wetland still staying.
What do you think of PW's answer about the discrepancy between the Polaris map and what the wetland expert said is the existing wetland? I attribute that discrepancy to more degradation of the Swale, thus making it appear to be a less sensitive or important wetland. But all this and more was all once a part of Eastsound Swale. Where does degradation factor in? What will happen to the alluvial soil being removed from this site? It is supposed to be put back, and if tarped, probably could. It's important to save the alluvial soil so the wetland can recover if this plan doesn't work out, and I am skeptical that it will work out, from all the science I have read on emergent wetland stormwater treatment facilities.
Anyone want to document a "maturity count" of trees bigger than 12" diameter at chest height? That would be good to do, unless PW already did that and it's obtainable. If so, would someone please direct me to that link or whom to ask for the documents on that?
If Shannon agrees to another open house, late July, this would be helpful. We can then present accurately to the public what's been answered and what still has holes. That date is fast approaching. (MOOT - too bad. The public should have been more involved in this process)
Who got to see the final planting list? Any red flags there? Has anyone seen copies of this on PW website or in the library, as promised?
all the best,
Sadie
No comments:
Post a Comment