Timeline for Wednesday’s Meeting with T & ES Officials
Selected communications with the City of Alexandria regarding storm water runoff within Fort Ward Park
Tuesday March 26, 2013
2006
January 3, 2006 and June 26, 2006 Margaret McCormick wrote to the Director of Parks about “the sewer behind my house backing up and causing a torrent of water to sweep into my yard. The rapid water knocked down the entire back corner of my fence. After that the city cleared the sewer out to Van Dorn St. and the problem was much better. If the openings to the sewer are clogged by logs, branches and leaves all the water sweeps into my yard during a heavy rain. Any drainage solution planned should take this problem into consideration and try to fix it”.
2009
2-12-2009 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“I was just out surveying what I call Quicksand Corner, the mess in the corner of my yard created by Tom Fulton's little Hoover Dam a foot on the other side of my fence. Some of the rocks from his dam have actually started settling underneath my fence and are clearly on my property. I don't plan to say anything to him, but it is tempting to tell him to remove his rocks from contact with my fence. His thousand-plus-pounds of rock and very large pressure treated logs have all but blocked the flow of water in my yard and contributed to the total plugging up of a drainage pipe as well as the muck in the corner. The fact that my table in the corner sinks a foot into the mud doesn't appear relevant to him--his dam has nothing to do with the problem in his opinion. In general, he has conveyed the same attitude as the Parks and Recs Dept.--what he does on his property is his business and to heck with any problems that it creates two feet away--just deny them. The upshot is that I will now have to spend about $2,000 to solve the worsened water flow problem in my backyard in a way that doesn't create a muddy mess in the Klings' backyard--or a muddier mess, because Elizabeth has said the water pools in her yard in a way that it never did previous. This will be done by digging down instead of damming up and getting the water to flow hopefully at an angle under the fence”.
3-17-2009 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“ Two inspectors, Dr. Satya Singh and Daniel Imig, looked at the drainage issue from the park side and the residential side. Singh's business card identifies him as a civil engineer; Imig's card gives his title as a Contaminated Land Specialist/Civil Engineer. Basically, they said that they could see nothing on the park side that was causing or contributing to the drainage problem. They said that the natural channel appeared to be along the row of trees in my backyard. Even if the Park (or some specific change in the Park) was actually the source of the problem, I don't think we're going to get the City or any City official to admit it. The only hope would be to have an independent opinion by a hydrologist.
They aren't sure that my plan to divert the water under my fence and into the Park will be effective. They said the excavation and river rock will be expensive and at best will only reduce the problem because there is really no natural channel on the Park side for the water. I asked if the City could do a small amount of digging on the other side of my fence to create a channel. They said the City wouldn't do that. As an alternative, they suggested excavating the low area in my yard toward the Klings and installing a sump pump, which would then pump the water through a pipe that would tie into the storm drain system along the street. Lynn and I don't think much of creating a hole in our backyard for a sump pump that might fail during a rainstorm. As it stands, I think I'll still try to divert the water into the park.
The inspectors also said that there's "no doubt" the dam on Fulton's side of my fence has greatly reduced water flow through my yard, Elizabeth's yard, and farther upstream. They said it has contributed to the drainage problems rather than solved them. I asked them whether there was any law preventing a landowner from blocking the natural flow of water in his yard in a way that creates a flooding situation for other people. They said they weren't sure but that there might be some law that would apply. There's probably no sense in going that route. It will only create worse feelings. As I said previously, I lived next to neighbors like Fulton for over 20 years before moving here. One has to go with the flow--even when the flow doesn't flow. But I am bothered by the fact that Fulton has made a marginally tolerable situation--the water going through my yard--into an intolerable situation that will cost several thousand dollars to remedy. Toward me at least, Fulton's attitude is no different from Roger Blakeley's attitude. He took the cheapest possible solution to HIS problem and rammed it down the throats of the neighbors upstream. That has been the heart of the City's strategy, too!!!”
4-30-2009 Discussion with Rich Baier, within the park and cemetery, regarding stormwater problems.
5-8-2009 e-mail to Maurice Daly re: stormwater problems in Marlboro, Fort Ward and Oakland Baptist Church Cemetery.
5-8-2009 City to Hold Stormwater Outreach Meetings
5-10-2009 Note from Arnold Ambers to Eugster regarding stormwater problems in the Oakland Baptist Church Cemetery
5-12-2009 Note from Eugster to Walter Powell, Recreation Dept. regarding stormwater problems
5-22-2009 Note from Eugster to Maurice Daly, Rich Baier and Lance Mallamo with photos and completed survey form of stormwater problems.
5-26-2009 Note from Eugster to Baier and Mallamo with updated photos and text on stormwater problems.
7-7-2009 Note from Eugster to Baier and Mallamo about the hay bale omission of the stormwater runoff that flows into the cemetery from the park. Photos included.
7-21-2009 reply from Baier rationalizing runoff into the cemetery.
8-24-2009 meeting with Rich Baier, Spengler, Mallamo, and others in the cemetery to discuss stormwater problems from the park and Marlboro Estates.
8-24-2009 Note from Margaret McCormack to Eugster
“Thank you, Glenn, for pointing out the persistent problem the Ho's and I have with the water back up at our back boundary with the park. When the backed-up water floats logs and debris over the storm sewer, the floatsum bashes on my fence and shoves the chicken wire back, consequently creating a breach where my dogs can get out. This is a problem I have only had for the last four or five years. I did not realize how contaminated the water was. I think to resolve this problem would take serious effort by civil engineering. It is not going to just go away”.
8-25-2009 Report from Baier summarizing results of the discussion.
8-25-2009 note from Eugster to Baier providing comments on the report.
8-25-2009 note from Spengler making him the point of contact for Fort Ward Park communications within the Recreation Dept.
9-22-2009 Discussion with TJ Kennedy of the T & ES Department at Fort Ward Park.
Mr. Kennedy beieves “that most of the water coming into the cemetery is from the City property and they will be looking at ways to channel the water away from the cemetery”.
9-22-2009 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“It's good that the City is taking an interest in the flood-and-erosion problem relating to the cemetery. Do you know whether the City's efforts will give any attention to the severe water problems along the property line between Ft. Ward and the backyards of people living "upstream" from the cemetery on Ellicott? Like you, I was pleased to see the City taking measurements, but these measurements (and the accompanying stakes in the ground) seem to be focused several hundred feet from the property line. According to what Elizabeth Kling has said and what I've observed myself, the flooding problem remains a serious concern in our backyards. Elizabeth's basement was flooded, causing considerable expenditures and health-related concerns due to mold. The water problem during and after heavy rains in the Carroll backyard has, if anything, gotten worse. Can you bring this concern to the attention of the City and strongly encourage them to examine the topographical problems along the property line?”
9-26-2009 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“Thanks for keeping the water problem along the Ft. Ward/Ellicott homeowners property line in mind and bringing it to the attention of the City. I think a strong case can be made for the City to take a hard look at the problem. Thad Dilley has echoed my letter. Elizabeth says the standing water problem in her yard is worse now than it ever was--and that's on top of the thousands of dollars of damage to her home from the flood. We narrowly dodged a flood in our basement, when we saw the water starting to pour into the house and I went outside (in a heavy downpour and lightning storm) to bail and redirect water away from the window well. We've also spent thousands of extra dollars specifically to deal with the quagmire problem in our backyard--with a ton of river jack and additional landscaping. As you know, Tom Fulton did the same thing to try to solve the problem in his own way. You indicate now that you're also having a problem. Let's try to line up everybody who is affected by this problem and get the City to take it seriously. I believe that the City had two hydrologists (or engineers of some kind) take a preliminary look a year to two ago and report to me that they could see no problem, but that review, if it's still in the City system, needs to be revisited and revised in light of everybody's experiences. There is a problem!”
11-19-2009 Letter from Geoffrey Lyon to City Manager regarding. Abatement of Public Nuisance (Stagnant Water) in a Public Park (Fort Ward Park)
12-7-2009 Letter from Spengler with “limited” actions to be taken.
12-10-2009 Note from Elizabeth Sullivan and John Kling
“Thanks again for spearheading efforts on this. I'm glad that there seems to be some real forward movement. We've certainly made a great deal of progress since this all began a few years ago.
I agree that something must be done about the "pond" in Ft. Ward, but frankly right now I'm more concerned about the "pond" in my backyard. Before the last few years, my yard was never "wet". Now, after Roger's efforts in the maintenance yard it contains standing water almost all the time, especially after rain or snow. I've had landscaper designers out and I will have to spend a good deal of money to landscape and install a rock bed to try and remedy this situation. I think removal of the excess debris piles near my fence will probably help but it seems they've somehow really changed the topography of that area. It's as if they've abandoned the maintenance yard never to return or to clean up their mess. The trash in and around the greenhouse, which you've nicely documented in photos, is appalling. The piles of debris should be eliminated because of rodents and drainage issues. This is my personal issue though. What would be more helpful input to get the public area properly taken care of?”
12-10-2009 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“You're right in suggesting that the water problems of residents be combined. Margaret's problems at the bottom are matched by those of owners near the cemetery and by other residents such as the Klings and my home farther "upstream." The Klings have a worse standing-water problem in their back yard now than at any time in recent years. I think it's a key source of the mosquito explosion, which has made our backyard unusable at times. Both the Klings' home and my home are still at risk from flooding. The Klings had to spend thousands of dollars repairing their basement after it was inundated and then covered with a bad kind of mold. My own basement has narrowly escaped flooding. Of the total money that we spent on re-doing our backyard, I'd say that about $5,000 went to river jack and other measures to deal with drainage problems. We still have standing water in our backyard in spite of that expenditure. The Klings have not tackled the water problem in their backyard, though they've tried to upgrade it in other ways. The Fultons, of course, spent considerable money dealing with the water problem. SO, IN GENERAL, you might point out that residents all along the Ft. Ward/Marlboro Estates boundary line from way upstream all the way to Margaret at the bottom are dealing with a single, unified mess, whose cause still has not been fully investigated and understood by the City. Mr. Spengler, the Parks Director, does acknowledge that there's a short-term issue with the mess at the bottom but he also acknowledges a long-term issue with water drainage throughout the park and especially around Marlboro Estates. While his staff is taking some remedial measures at the bottom, they still need to figure out what can be done, if anything, to steer water into the park and away from the boundary line between the Park and Marlboro estates, which is threatening property values”.
12-12-2009 Note from Thad Dilley to Eugster
“A couple of thoughts: Since moving into our house in 1996, every time there is a significant thunder storm, we have a small stream form in our back yard that is coming from the maintenance yard. Water pulls in the corner of yard next to the Klings. The indentation from where the water is coming from the maintenance yard is growing each year. From my perspective, the erosion problem is more wide spread then just the cemetery”.
1-4-2010 Reply to Vice Mayor Donley regarding community reaction to Spengler’s response to stormwater concerns. Homeowners and church leaders request a meeting.
1-12-2010 Vice Mayor Donley agrees to meeting.
1-28-2010 Meeting between Church, homeowners and Vice Mayor Donley. ACTION PLAN AGREED TO.
3-15-2010 Note from Thad Dilley to Eugster
“The storm from last week has made the stream from the park wider coming into our yard. I’m thinking about constructing a damn to stop the water coming into our yard.
The standing water behind our fence and into the old nursery is troublesome. If this happens this spring and summer there will be a lot of standing water where mosquitoes will breed. If that happens, then the stakes become higher. The lack of attention by the city is a problem, they created this problem (without our input) and I will have to pay for them to fix it. I wonder if they can spell West Nile disease”
3-17-2010 DONLEY MEETS WITH BAIER TO DISCUSS RESULTS OF 1-28-2010 MEETING.
4-22-2010 Note from Donley about putting money for Fort Ward stormwater work in the budget.
4-28-2010 Note from Vice Mayor Donley to Eugster
“ I think the city has got to get off the point of assigning fault and work to resolve the issue recognizing that they have a role to play as do the homeowners who are willing to make improvements if the City is as well. The city has identified at least the need to commit funds for a design for Ft. Ward. However the Council is reluctant to raise sufficent funds through the stormwater tax, so I am not certain it will get done. I have proposed a full penny on the tax rate for stormwater, but the Council seems inclined to only approve half that amount. I believe the full amount allows us to make more stormwater infrastructue investments and get to more projects, like Ft. Ward which is public property. No matter the outcome on funding, I will continue to press Ft. Ward with staff”.
5-25-2010 Fort Ward Park & Museum Advisory Group Meeting to discuss stormwater. Presentations by Baier, Cumbey and Eugster
5-26-2010 note from Rashad Friday to Eugster
“As was mentioned in the advisory meeting, the planning effort shall be holistic and collective and will involve the input of various stakeholders, including Engineering, Archeology, Historic Alexandria, Cemetery Representatives, Park Planners, and private property owners. The improvement effort will involve a public/private partnership, but with the community's input, I am confident we will be able to surmount any challenges during the planning process, since our best client is a fully informed community member”.
Spring 2010 Spengler “No Mow” policy created
6-7-2010 Note from Councilman Rob Kripucka to Eugster.
“Thank you, Glenn. I completely agree this is something that needs to be fixed. As our economy improves, we can add more funding to address this need, along with many others in the city related to flooding and storm water”.
9-28-2010 Fort Ward Park & Museum Advisory Group Meeting. Rich Baier announces that T & ES will pursue a stormwater grant for the drainage channel downslope from the cemetery.
11-8-2010 Note from Rich Baier to Eugster.
“The overall purpose of the presentation is to present a grant opportunity that may be applied for next year to address the storm water issue as their is only a small amount of money in the budget for field data collection. Nothing will be able to go forward until there is some marriage of the programming--historic---and master planning within the park. The infrastructure needs to be done all as a part of these efforts. I have raised to Roger Blakeley and Jim Spengler that next year's budget will be tight and Ft Ward has to be master planned prior to getting into a drainage project”.
11-11-2010 Fort Ward Park & Museum Advisory Group presentation by T & ES staff Daniel Imig on grant for stormwater for the channel below the cemetery.
3-7-2011 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“My wife and I noticed a lot of standing water in our yard along the fence for the first time since redoing our backyard landscaping early last year. We thought that our $2,000 expenditure had accomplished what we intended. Now, after the first heavy rain this year, I saw the problem was back and went around to the park side to have a look. The hay bales that have been stacked along my fence and then at right angles to my fence seem to have "precipitated" the problem. It has been 12 hours since the rain ended yesterday, and there is still standing water six inches deep in places, including at a fence post, which will rot it. There is basically no drainage from my yard at this point. Please let me know who I can call about the hay bale problem and what can be done about it.
I've pretty much given up trying to help deal with the general problems in the park. The $3,000 that we spent to replace the original fence when park neglect on the other side destroyed it and the additional $2,000 that we spent responding to the problems created by the "Fulton Dam" have more or less soured me on further involvement. I would like to have been involved in the archaeological/historic activities, but Fulton's presence made me stay away from them. His arrogance, stupidity, and turgid way of talking at the few meetings I attended when he was the chair have made me steer clear of everything”.
3-7-2011 Note from Dennis Carroll to Eugster
“ I just looked over my fence "upstream" at Elizabeth's yard. The standing water is the worst I've ever seen. It's a 20-foot long, 6-feet wide pool that looks to be at least several inches deep and is not moving at all. The water is up against my fence. This water used to flow away until the Fulton Dam went up. I guess my own dam in reluctant response to his had made the problem worse for Elizabeth. It now looks as if the hay bales, which are also along Elizabeth's fence, have made the problem still worse--and this is after she spent a lot of money reshaping her back yard”.
3-15-2011 Note from Jeanne O’Leary to Eugster
“ I don’t think it would cost much money to fix the problem caused by the city. The City deposited huge piles of dirt behind Gary Slade’s (now Dennis Carroll’s fence). They subsequently planted trees on top of these piles. During severe rain storms, the water streams down the back of these piles into the corner of Dennis Carroll’s yard and into our yard (thus Merrifield installed the French drain to combat this). Our soil and mulch was being carried across our yard, with much of it deposited at the fence line between our properties. With a back hoe and about 2 hours time, the City could dig out the trees, flatten the piles, replant the trees and pretty much solve some of the problem. I think you referred to undoing some of the City’s mistakes or restoring the Park to its original contours in a Ft. Ward Observer, and this is just such an example.
With respect to Dennis’s yard, with the sand and soil he added to his back yard, his yard is now about 18 inches higher than it was before and a lot of his soil is coming through his fence into our back yard – so there is drainage. We by the way have no water standing in our French drain, so we are not blocking any water flow from his yard. Dennis and Gary before him, added soil to level the lot making it more usable. Our property was level with 4018 at the fence line before the addition of all that soil. I also want to note that drainage hoses connected from our downspouts do not reach the fence line. Years ago, before you moved into your house, Vepco tunneled through our back yards and replaced the underground wires. The hoses from the downspouts were severed during this process, so our roof run off actually deposits water in the middle of our back yard. Tom has also redirected a drainage hose that Merrifield installed away from the fence line near the cemetery so that it better deposits water into our rain garden. So, with all that said, a couple of hours of work behind Dennis’s fence should solve some of the problem, although I understand that more needs to be done at the Dilly’s and Cling/Sullivan property to improve drainage that should also help Dennis with his concerns. I was very interested to read that Dennis’s sump pump connection is depositing water in the front yard as we have had considerable water standing by our Linden tree and couldn’t figure out the source of the water – we thought it was just Dennis’s downspouts causing the problem.
As I have mentioned before, we are very interested in working with the City to solve the problem of drainage. We invested a lot of money with Merrifield to fix the problem caused by the City and frankly are sick of hearing Dennis complain about the Merrifield solution. I don’t want to invest more until I know that it will fix the problem and stop the assaults by Dennis”.
3-25-2011 Note from Vice Mayor Donley to Eugster
“ Happy to help, particularly on the storm water issues which cut across a number of elements - the protection of public property, effects on private property and the preservation of the Oakland gravesites. I think we need to start moving the project toward completion, and hopefully the costs will be less than projected but at this point it is important to begin something more tangible than continued study and planning”.
4-14-2011 Meeting with City, Church aND HOMEOWNER INTERESTS at Fort Ward about stormwater problems.
ALL,
4-15-2011 Note from Rich Baier to Eugster
“I would like to thank everyone for meeting with me and my staff on site yesterday morning. Let me just quickly recap what we all agreed the next steps should be. It was decided to investigate an interim fix with a french drain type of system to move the water from the more southern properties more toward the center of the property. First steps are to notify the neighbors adjacent to the park of a meeting to discuss the possibility of this interim fix. The more global activity will be to generate a more sustainable long-term stormwater plan for the area bound by the central road on the west, Braddock on the South, Seminary on the north and the subdivision on the east. This will be done concurrently with the interim fix”.
5-26-2011 Meeting with Church, homeowner and city officials to discuss Fort Ward stormwater. T & ES staff make power-point presentation.
5-27-2011 Note from Rashad Friday to Eugster, and others.
“As with any construction project, there may be some unforseen challenges during the construction process, especially given the high probability of shallow graves within the park’s footprint, but we intend to meet any challenges head on, so as to avoid project delay. With the community's input, we will surmount any challenges during the construction process and proceed to completion, since our best client is a fully informed community member. Nonetheless, I thank you for taking the time to convene at the interim drainage meeting last night and, as we move forward, we hope you continue to be a key supporter of this project and future projects. In the event there are any changes or unlikely delay in the completion of the project, then we will not hesitate to keep you and other community members informed”.
6-28-2011 Note from Emily Baker to Eugster
“Rich is out of the office this week, but I would like to clarify the email from Rashad. The archaeology work is getting ready to begin, as was discussed at the Stakeholder meeting. That work will take place entirely within the park property. We do plan to meet with you again before construction of the drainage improvements begin to ensure that you have a good understanding of the scope of work, and to obtain permission from you to perform the work on your property. That meeting can be held at the site so that the extent of work can be clearly pointed out. Please contact me or Rashad to schedule a convenient time to do so. We are happy to meet with your neighbors as well, if you believe they are interested in more clearly seeing the limits of the work”.
6-29-2011 Note from Eugster to Emily Baker
“Thanks for the note. I assumed that Rich was away or busy with the City Council Meeting preparations.
We do want to meet to discuss the proposed, how it will be implemented on our property, and the agreement we need to sign. Earlier this month I wrote to Rashad and indicated that my wife and I wouldn't sign the agreement until after the meeting that Rich promised we would have. I can't tell if you and the others decided you don't want to meet with us as a group. However, a meeting to go over details and questions is important to us.
We would like to meet sometime next week, perhaps either Wednesday, Thursday or Friday--or the following week. Most of these days are free for Deborah and me.
Please note that Jeanne O'Leary and Jeff Lane would like to be part of our meeting and we will need to coordinate their schedules with yours and ours. I also think that it would be a good idea to check with the Carroll's, Kling-Sullivan's, and Dilley's to determine whether they want to be a part of this meeting. I've copied the others for their information”.
5-26-2011 Storm Water Meeting with Rich Baier, Brian, Claudia and Rashad.
Rashad noted as the priomary point of contact. Rashad said that “The City will monitor interim solutions”.
7-8-2011 TES Meeting with homeowners
8-24-2011 Note from Tom Fulton to Rich Baier
“ We were happy to see your crew install the corrugated piping connected to our French drain system along our back fence. One problem—the crew indicated that they were leaving this above ground. It was not my understanding that this would remain above ground. With two dogs in our back yard, any material that can be readily chewed needs to be underground. Could you please send a crew back to dig a trench and place this underground?”
9-14-2011 Fort Ward Park & Museum Advisory Group Meeting.
Claudia asked the group, “Are the drainage improvements working properly?” Tom Fulton said “I’m not sure the drainage system is working by my property”. Eugster noted that there had been a design change and we wanted an explanation to understand the modification. Claudia said she “would look into this”. Brian Rahal was identified as the T&ES contact for Fort Ward.
10-12-2011 Fort Ward Park & Museum Advisory Group Meeting.
Brian Rahal said that “They had some problems with certain areas that they did not expect”. Lena Rainey indicated that “There is still water going through the cemetery”. Brian said “We are looking into that”.
Brian Rahal said “The inlet connection couldn’t be made. We will be redesigning this”. Lena Rainey asked “What will be done?” Brain said “We will look at stopping water that comes south to the cemetery. Money is still available. We will look at installing berms and a channel to the French-drain”. Fran Terrell asked, “Can we eliminate the hay bales?”
3-5-2012 Note to Brian Rahal from Eugster
“The solution you describe still isn't working. I've been out in the cemetery during the last two rainfalls and the water continues to flow into the cemetery from parkland in the corner where Marlboro Estates, the Oakland Baptist Church Cemetery, and Fort Ward Park meet. Despite your earlier work, and some rainwater gardens created by homeowners, the boundary line runoff, due to park and resident contributions, continues to flow into the cemetery and cause damage to graves and grave stones.
I 'll wait until you report is available. However, it seems as if you have changed the design that we all agreed to. I have no interest in having a large above ground pipe on our property if it isn't being used to move storm water from the property above 4022 Ellicott Street. If the pipe won't be used as originally proposed I suggest it be removed.
My sense is that we still need to walk the area that is causing the storm water so that we are all focused on the same problem. Last year we discussed a walk with all involved but that never happened”.
3-5-2012 Note from Brian Rahal to Eugster
“I apologize for not responding sooner. We’ve been working on a memo for the advisory group that would cover your concerns, but it’s taking longer than I had hoped, as our proofread/editor process can take some time.
At any rate, the area in question was a natural point to which we could have added an inlet to pick-up runoff before it got to the cemetery. However, the ultimate design was that the other interim improvements (trench-drains) would have collected the majority of the runoff entering the cemetery at that point and that it really wouldn’t be needed, but was there as sort of a “backup” intercept point. Nice to have but not really necessary.
We did notice that during extreme rainfall events, such as September 8th, 2011, some runoff entering the park under the fence did bypass the end of the trench-drain and flow into that corner. So, we added some straw wattles (see pic below) to “spread” that water coming from under the fence over a greater length of the trench-drain and keeping it from bypassing the end of the trench-drain. The idea was that the straw wattles would mitigate not being able to install an inlet in the corner, as we discussed at the last advisory group meeting Rich and I attended. So far, I haven’t seen any evidence that that wasn’t successful.
If it does continue to be a point of accumulating nuisance amounts of rainwater runoff, one option would be to extend the connection point up to the next neighbor where they can connect their downspouts, which may the greatest source of runoff to that corner.
Hopefully, this was helpful in clarifying our thinking in regards to the functioning of the systems put in place. If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me”.
3-5-2011 Note from Rich Baier to Eugster
“ Glenn….I have to interject and say that TES has been holding up its end of the agreement in that this interim project has intercepted the vast majority of the drainage. Improvements which will go further will have to be part of the master planning efforts which will include the master planning of the park itself. Further, we have contacted the Oakland Baptist Church Pastor ---Pastor Don Hayes---and we await the meeting with the groundskeepers as to best mgmt. practices so that this spring the mowing (as described at our last presentation at the church)will be more in keeping with sloped historic sites of interest as described. Also, we have had a conversation with Tom Fulton as the Chair of the Advisory Group in an effort to quantify other low hanging fruit and the main issue that remains outstanding is the amount of runoff emanating into the cemetery itself from roof tops for varying duration rainfall events. I believe that the next big gain in reducing runoff, as I noted in 2009 as Interim Director of RPCA, would be to have the downspouts connected to the collection system so that this volume of rapidly moving overland runoff would be intercepted and not get over/around the pipe atop of the ground. As the closest property adjacent to the cemetery, you may want to lead by example and connect your pipes to this system. Brian has to get a bevy of projects to get out the door for a number of drainage issues within the City so I am going to have to ask him to focus on those projects until we can get farther along with the master planning efforts as lead by the RPCA Dept. with the community and cemetery stakeholders”.
3-5-2012 Note to Rich Baier from Eugster
“ Thanks for the note. We need to solve the problem on an interim basis and not just continue to put things off indefinitely. You were given this project as a priority by Council, with funding and the support of adjacent landowners. You need to find a short-term solution if you won't follow-through with the one you proposed.
Also, If you change the deal that was agreed to and want people to buy-into a new agreement then we have to be a part of that decision. Your softer suggestion isn't an interim solution for solving the storm water problems that we have been discussing. It simply delays action at least another 18 months or more.
Thanks again for the note. I hope you will follow through on last years agreement”.
3-5-2011 Note to Lena Rainey from Thad Dilley
“ I would like to chime in here. Since the city has made an attempt to solve the water runoff from the old maintenance yard is not working from my perspective. With the last two storms we not only have more water pooling, the ponds are getting larger and staying on the ground longer.
This is a textbook example of slow-walking a project. This is disappointing” .
3-8-2011 Note from Rich Baier to Sharon Annear
“ Sharon and Glenn---From the first presentation that I had made on this matter, I had always stated that there must be three parties that must work cooperatively in order to resolve the drainage into the cemetery—the park custodians, the adjacent homeowners and the cemetery custodians as all three parties are a stakeholder. I committed to the installation of the park interim drainage system and to support the master planning process from an infrastructure stand point. I find myself now being blind copied on emails.
As Glenn questioned if the park work was completed, The 9 x 9 inch square box was an afterthought and added to the plans by my staff after our survey work of the plan that was described to the community. The connection of the Fulton-O’Leary rear pipe to the Eugster pipe drains the runoff within the pipe down to the swale into the ivy area. In other words, there is a continuous pipe behind both houses with an outflow into the park beyond the cemetery. If this connection was not existing or there were no discharge at all or an inadequate capacity within the pipe, then there would be not outfall for the pipe and indeed a problem and the additional connection needed. However as the rear yard pipes as described above are connected via the Fulton-O’Leary and Eugster yard interface an outfall exists. Further, the park piping system along the Braddock side of the cemetery and the arboretum area along with the two rows of hay bales intercept storm water traveling overland toward the cemetery and diverts this water away from the cemetery .
This park collection system was not intended or designed to lower the water table or alter drainage patterns within the residential private property. If desired and as was discussed, the homeowners may connect their downspouts and, or their sump pump discharges to the collection system itself. In my prior email, I recounted that in order to address the issue of drainage into the park that the three parties would have to work together in the areas of the cemetery maintenance, adjacent property drainage and park drainage. The park drainage piece is completed as noted. I was pleased to receive the note the that Glenn is installing rain barrels which will capture some of his down spout runoff and we will be working with the caretakers of the cemetery as to best management practices. I called Tom Fulton several weeks ago as the Chair of the group to make sure that he was aware that we were following through on what we had reviewed at the work group’s November meeting---adding additional hay bale rows, and the contact with the cemetery as discussed.
I have copied everyone that was on an initial email which I received but since then I have received a blind copy of an email from Glenn to which I cannot respond to everyone as I do not know who was on that email group. I would hope that this information is passed along to those parties and I would also note that all three parties need to work together in order to achieve the best solution”
No comments:
Post a Comment