Here are a bunch of questions written to PW on February 15, 2011 and handed in at a Stormwater Aesthetics meeting to their representative engineer, Shannon Wilbur.
How many of these questions were addressed by Public Works? It would be good to compile follow-through documentation on this.
“Thousand Questions” re: Mount Property Stormwater Treatment Facility
1) If, according to BAS, wetlands shouldn’t be used for stormwater treatment facilities if there’s any chance of negatively impacting groundwater in sensitive aquifers, how does this plan prevent groundwater or potable water pollution?
2) If this wetland, as-is, can handle normal seasonal runoff (and we’ve had one of the wettest winters on record), isn’t there a way to divert stormwater runoff someplace near the wetlland (ie into a culvert or a pond off-site) that could be slowly absorbed back into the ground rather than into Fishing Bay, and leave the wetland as-is except for canary grass removal and a little gentle grading and splitting of flow? (Michael B’s idea from what he observed while walking the wetland several times.)
3) Regarding future piping from Fern Street and any other piping to this facility being planned: everything I’ve read so far says that stormwater should be diverted away from wetlands, not into them. Would you please point me to science that shares the opposite view?
4) When planning this stormwater treatment facility, how much was future buildout considered? If this connects to future projects, have those been mapped out? What are the piping and other treatment facilities that will tie into this? How can we see those in connection and relation to this first step?
5) How will this facility affect abutting wetlands? What will happen to them as they get filled and more impervious surfaces put into them, more alluvial soils displaced, and more chopping up of the Eastsound Swale into smaller and smaller separated pieces?
6) Is anything at all being done to protect the rest of Eastsound Swale from having to take stormwater and thus we’d lose more tree habitat? (Most of the willows were unfortunately already cut down along lovers land and Enchanted Forest Road.)
7) Since science seems to point to natural functioning wetlands being always preferable over engineered wetlands, I’m wondering how we got to this plan. Is it just that we had no other choice, based on science and geography?
8) Mindy seemed to think that Amanda drew up an alternate plan that was less radical than this one and more natural than engineered. Is that plan available for public perusal?
9) Wetlands, even drained and filled, can be restored if the alluvial soils are left intact. (EPA). What will happen to the alluvial soil? If removed, why, and why not returned to the site? There are some grants for restoration. Should we explore that angle for the rest of the impacted parts of the Swale?
10) Many of the BAS documents on stormwater and wetlands that I read said that detention and retention ponds are being over-used and that the latest BAS studies show that they are doing more harm to wetlands than good, and that ponds can ruin a wetland's function within 20 years due to various factors. Was this considered in the engineering? If there is science disproving this, please point me to those documents, because I’m not finding them.
11) Not one engineered wetland I’ve seen (in the many docs I studied) showed an engineered wetland planted with trees. They all seem to be grassland and marshland. Why is it that these are chosen over tree filtration systems. Can’t trees be planted that would thrive in wet conditions and grow, like the island willows we once had everywhere and have all been destroyed for development? If trees keep wetland life warmer in winter and cooler in summer due to shading and protection, this destroys the ecological balance of that area.
12) I read in the scientific documents that if a potential site’s climate is dry in summer for more than two months, (as the San Juans are), a pond system wetland is not a good pick because the ponds should not be allowed to dry out and the chance of pollutant spread was greater if heavy rains followed a dry summer. Was this considered? How will that be handled? What will be done to provide shade and organic refuse for the ponds, since tree cover will no longer shade the water?
13) making new “edges” (from cutting down trees and excavation) encourages noxious weed proliferation near and into the wetlands (i.e. hawthorn trees replace more desirable willows, blackberries replace nootka rose). Herbaceous perennials and annuals are taken over by invasive plants such as canary reed grass. How will the existing reed canary grass problem be addressed? Blackberry? Edge buffers for the new edges created? Have you considered the rabbit problem in Eastsound?
14) My readings of wetland science suggest that sun, although it can be good for “cleaning” ponds (although I doubt it gets hot enough here), changes the temperature, and that many fish and amphibians are negatively impacted (fatally) by temperature changes of even a few degrees. We lost most of our salamander and frog population due to Enchanted Forest Road being put on top of the swale right over their breeding grounds. What is being done by the County and Public Works to protect the rest of what’s left, and are you working with the Army Corps of Engineers, state DOE, fish and wildlife, and the EPA to protect these critical areas aquifers?
15) Who will maintain the wetland facility after major soil disturbance? Who will regularly maintain and weed-out the inevitable thistle, teasel, and other noxious weeds that follow? Based on the county’s maintenance of other projects due to personnel shortages, I do not feel hopeful that this facility will be properly maintained and monitored.
16) What will major tree removal do to songbird, bat, and amphibian insect catchers in terms of foraging, mating, and breeding sites, which we’re already losing fast or have lost within the UGA? Can we afford to lose any more of their habitat?
17) Since all that I have read says that tree roots have great filtering capabilities, especially conifers, are there any examples of “treed” natural wetlands used as stormwater treatment facilities? If so, would you direct me to links or documents?
18) What can possibly replace trees, aesthetically, for the kind of height and natural backdrop that we’re used to seeing behind the band shell? The band shell was built to be part of an environment which included trees for backdrop. Loss of trees will destroy the scale and scope of the design. Can we plant pines or some other type of small or narrow conifers along the Eastern edge of the wetland to shield our view and help keep late afternoon sun out of our eyes when viewing concerts? (the trees did this for us late afternoon and early evening)
19) What will be done to keep people from walking all over the wetland area if the wetland dries up in summer, which seems probable?
20) What will keep the ponds from becoming mosquito breeding grounds and who will maintain weeds around them? Will the ponds contain aquatic plants?
21) If soil is being excavated out two feet deep or more, aren’t we infiltrating the groundwater and aquifer supply?
22) What is the life (in years) of this kind of facility before it needs to be “re-engineered?”
23) Is a 60 foot long, ten foot wide concrete ramp really necessary to clean the north pond? Can the pond be moved East to mitigate that, or can some temporary metal mesh type material be used to roll out and put down atop a much more minimal concrete structure (perhaps even mostly underwater) when the excavator or backhoe needs to clean the pond, and then rolled back up?
24) How often will the pond need to be cleaned?
25) Has anyone heard of an exciting new thing in possible pollutant cleaning of wetlands – mycology? There has been good success with mycology in forest restoration. Results have been promising in studying mushrooms’ ability to absorb and “eat” pollutants and when tested, the mushrooms are shown to be “clean.” Can we explore this as a potential treatment for pollutants? See Paul Stamets How Mushrooms Can Save the World. Mr. Stamets is a highly sought expert on this subject and how mycology is helping stormwater pollutant absorption.
26) What will be done about the potential litter problem that, so far, is kept to a minimum by tree and shrub buffers and mostly impenetrable wetlands, but is a problem in existing trails? Who will regularly clean up the litter?
27) Is it possible that rather than put the east-west trail right next to the pond, it can go more on the perimeter of the wetland and thus have less foot traffic disturbance of the wetland?
28) How do rain gardens tie in with this facility plan and stormwater in general? How will you give the public incentive to utilize them?
29) What is being planned in terms of culverts and aprons in Eastsound?
30) I would hope that any tree removal/upheaval NOT be done in nesting season and until fledglings have flown.
31) Why was this project chosen here, when the bulk of pollutants are running down Main Street in the ditches and directly polluting Fishing Bay through stormwater outflow pipes?
32) What is being done to consider futurity, 20 years out? 50 years out? How does this project help with that? How many more functioning wetlands will be destroyed to make engineered stormwater treatment facilities, which are not suggested for existing functioning wetlands, according to state and federal laws and the Clean Water Act?
Kim’s Input- Went to the constructed wetland plan workshop today
I would like to know more re:>
~ toxics testing and sediment dredge schedule
~out flow pipe monitoring plan- scouring
~buffering the existing true adjacent wetland and
~risks involved in damage to this preexisting adjacent healthy wetland by altering upstream w/ constructed wetlands
~and when i look closely i question if this small tx site is able to handle the volume present, much less the increase load that comes w/ future development, plus increased impervious surface = what mechanisms are in place to handle overflow?
~I would like public to be aware of the presence of the creatures in the bay where this water is being pumped out.
~ Please go to the beach watchers website and republish photos and information from our data on surfactants
Some documents I requested may be able to answer the drainage and runoff questions interspersed throughout.
Thanks for considering these questions, thoughts, ideas, and concerns. Please understand that Eastsound is home to many of us, and we love and want to protect it. I remember the Swale when it was far more diverse in functionality, vegetation and wildlife, and don’t want to keep losing it piecemeal until it’s so destroyed it can be reclassified to “unregulated” and finished off by rampant and poorly planned development.
Sincerely, Sadie Bailey – Eastsound resident
No comments:
Post a Comment