[Durham INC] Help --Trinity Park Wetland could save Durham $20M and more...

Thu May 10 20:36:19 EDT 2012

As someone in the habit of looking for my own agenda items on the web,  
thought I would point out
that there's much material on the City website, Council agenda page,  
on this item as presented
to today's work session:
http://www.durhamnc.gov/agendas_new/2012/cws_051012.cfm

It's #21. When you link to the materials, all the materials for all  
items come up. These are under #8451.

Lead staff is Sandy Wilbur. As engineers go, she's very engaging, and  
cares a lot about the community.

I lived on the ridge to the west of the project while in grad school  
and afterwards (Ford and Carter administrations, back
before the rest of the world knew Durham was cool). The steep slope  
above the creek was heavily wooded then, with unique soil, interesting  
shrubs and mature trees. It's full of invasive species now. The  
floodplain below, where the project is proposed,  was playfields for  
the Y.

The staff materials make a good case for the project. I don't see  
current involvement by other agencies. Council instruction to do that  
could help add that.

Ed Harrison

On May 10, 2012, at 6:51 PM, Catotti, Diane wrote:

> Staff is planning briefings and neighborhood engagement all summer.
>
> Diane N Catotti
>
>
> On May 10, 2012, at 6:40 PM, "Philip Azar" <pazar at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> I am neither opposing, nor, at this point, supporting the proposal.  
>> I am concerned, however, on at least two points:  1. There is room  
>> for the adjacent neighborhoods to weigh the greater good, if any,  
>> in their deliberations and 2. Trinity Park has requested,  
>> repeatedly, Staff updates on the proposal only to be put off  
>> because council or other staff needed to be briefed first. Now,  
>> it's being presented in the paper and on , if not the paper, as a  
>> done deal which I humbly submit ain't right.
>>
>> Regardless of the eventual outcome, there's time for neighborhood  
>> input that's real and not based on an assumed outcome.
>>
>> Not opposed. Not supporting. Wanting some neighborhood briefings  
>> and neighborhood input, and INC support for that process.
>>
>> Philip Azar
>> TPNA delegate
>>
>>
>> On May 10, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Totally understand where everyone is coming from on the other  
>>> issues. However, I know first hand of properties (my own and  
>>> others) being literally washed away due to the velocity with which  
>>> storm water is directed through them...particularly those  
>>> containing what should be a small intermittent stream. I have  
>>> spoken on site with storm water services and soil and water  
>>> conservation people as well as an environmental landscaper, and  
>>> all said the best solution is to convince upstream residents to  
>>> donate land for a retention pond to slow down (as well as filter)  
>>> the water.
>>>
>>> So when I read this article, I was thrilled that the city was  
>>> looking into this.
>>>
>>> This does not just affect these particular neighborhoods. It  
>>> stands to benefit properties far downstream as well.
>>>
>>> Other BMPs may only treat the chemical content of the water, not  
>>> the damage caused to properties by the accumulated stormwater (and  
>>> erosion) that is the source of the problem.
>>>
>>> I do not see how a wetland or retention pond that is home to  
>>> beavers, turtles, frogs and water foul can do anything but improve  
>>> the aesthetics and the values of the homes in the nbhds directly  
>>> impacted.
>>>
>>> Would certainly love to hear from all sides at upcoming INC  
>>> meetings (including Stormwater Services and SWCD) and for INC to  
>>> discuss and contemplate weighing in on this.
>>>
>>> Melissa (Rooney)
>>>
>>> From: Pat Carstensen <pats1717 at hotmail.com>;
>>> To: bill anderson <theocean1 at aol.com>; john martin <bulldurhamnc at yahoo.com 
>>> >; Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>; inc listserv <inc-list at durhaminc.org 
>>> >;
>>> Subject: RE: [Durham INC] Help --Trinity Park Wetland could save  
>>> Durham $20 M and more...
>>> Sent: Thu, May 10, 2012 10:13:53 AM
>>>
>>> I thought we discussed this at a delegate meeting and thought the  
>>> question for us was less "yes or no" but "how do we do it in a way  
>>> that is most compatible with neighborhood needs?"
>>>
>>> Regards, pat
>>>
>>> From: TheOcean1 at aol.com
>>> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 22:57:18 -0400
>>> To: bulldurhamnc at yahoo.com; mmr121570 at yahoo.com; inc-list at durhaminc.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] Help --Trinity Park Wetland could save  
>>> Durham $20	M and more...
>>>
>>> Yup, I'm with John, those neighborhoods (and any that might be  
>>> forming in that area) should have first and heavier weighted votes  
>>> - for want of a better term.
>>>
>>> That also allows other neighborhoods to scratch their heads awhile  
>>> and examine such things as cost benefits.  Personally, the total  
>>> estimated cost seemed shocking to me. They had this property under  
>>> contract to buy for well under $3 million a couple years ago, and  
>>> you'll need to add demolition and tipping the building into the  
>>> landfill fees. (I hope some things can be salvaged, like the gym  
>>> floor)
>>>
>>> So it will cost how many million to create a natural area?
>>>
>>> Bill Anderson
>>>
>>> In a message dated 5/9/2012 10:09:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, bulldurhamnc at yahoo.com 
>>>  writes:
>>> Melissa,
>>>
>>> Before you and others rush to embrace this, I think it would be  
>>> wise to get input from the neighborhoods most directly affected:   
>>> Trinity Park, Old North Durham, and Central Park.
>>>
>>> I have a lot of questions about this and the effects it will have  
>>> on those neighborhoods. The cost savings and environmental  
>>> concerns are not the only issues.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 5/9/12, Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Melissa Rooney <mmr121570 at yahoo.com>
>>> Subject: [Durham INC] Help --Trinity Park Wetland could save  
>>> Durham $20 M and more ---
>>> To: "INC" <inc-list at rtpnet.org>, "Durham Enviro" <durhamenviro at yahoogroups.com 
>>> >
>>> Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2012, 9:15 PM
>>>
>>> Please review the article below and consider writing Mayor Bell  
>>> and the City Council (council at durhamnc.gov) with your support for  
>>> construction of a wetland at the old Diet and Fitness Center on  
>>> Trinity Avenue for the following reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) this wetland will help to reduce the velocity of water runoff  
>>> during storm events, thereby reducing erosion of private  
>>> properties that now suffer from storm water run-off directed  
>>> through those properties. We NEED more wetlands and retention  
>>> ponds in this watershed to protect existing structures and private  
>>> properties.
>>>
>>> 2) this wetland would be aesthetically pleasing and provide  
>>> wildlife with a much needed habitat in our urban area;
>>>
>>> 3) this wetland would immensely help naturally filter Nitrogen and  
>>> Phosphorous and other pollutants out of the Ellerbe Creek  
>>> Watershed, which flows into Falls Lake and could save Durham as  
>>> much as $20 Million in the long run with regard to costs of BMPs  
>>> (best management practices) required to reduce N and P runoff into  
>>> Falls Lake (as a result of the Falls Lake Rules).
>>>
>>> The Durham News | Wetland could save city up to $20M
>>>
>>> http://www.thedurhamnews.com/2012/05/08/212014/wetland-could-save-city-up-to.html
>>>
>>> Thanks for your consideration and input!
>>> Melissa (Rooney)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Durham INC Mailing List
>>> list at durham-inc.org
>>> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Durham INC Mailing List
>>> list at durham-inc.org
>>> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Durham INC Mailing  
>>> List list at durham-inc.org http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Durham INC Mailing List
>>> list at durham-inc.org
>>> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> Durham INC Mailing List
>> list at durham-inc.org
>> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
> _______________________________________________
> Durham INC Mailing List
> list at durham-inc.org
> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20120510/f18f11d3/attachment.html>