From what I read from the Scott woods group on next door the city is replacing the drain. Therefore they are cutting down every tree on the drainage easement and digging up and replacing the old drain with a new one. This is my favorite place to walk and it will be less so after they cut down all these trees.
I'm with you. Can't they run it into the stream or into Hawk Lake (shouldn't this man made lake also drain into the stream?)
What about running it through the golf range? It is very close to Scot woods. Plus both properties are city-owned, correct? I do not know the slope they require or how much planning is necessary for this. It is a bit strange that they like cutting down the oldest trees around without thought or mention to the people using it.
I wrote to the Mayor. This seems like the sunken garden all over again. Or like Ormand Park when they cut the trees first and answered questions later. I am hoping that the mayor might be more sympathetic towards these kinds of issues.
Okay, so I found the story:
This is a really bad way to go about this. The women who lives on Clifton is right; Scott Woods is the most beautiful part of the River Trail, which is saying something given how many nice parts there are. When you've got an asset like this, it should be viewed as hands-off unless absolutely necessary.
I feel like if it was absolutely necessary to cross Sycamore Creek east-to-west, that it was dumb to do it in this area. I don't see why they can't/couldn't have just run it immediately north of Scott Woods in the Sycamore Creek golf course and the back of Mt. Hope Cemetery. They'd have to cut down many fewer trees.
This entire area is city-owned land, so it's not as if they'd have to buy property to make this work. This is crazy. Yes, here are some contacts. First, the park's department:
And the public service department who is apparently overseeing this:
I need to know if this went before the parking board; if they were even told of this.
There are rumors that the Montgomery Drain work will require tearing up Ranney Skate Park to move the water from the northern part of Ranney Park towards the Red Cedar River.
We can't stand to lose one of the best regional and specialty parks for this.
Jared, I agree 100% Here's a situation where they should definitely tunnel it under the existing amenities. They better not try to tear up that beautiful softball field either. Or the handball courts.
Unfortunately I think tunneling beneath the concrete park will cause foundational issues. If they have to route a stream south, I'd like to see them use the easement between the park and Frandor Plus.
I did hear back from Andrew Kilpatrick. See below for his response. The city is looking at making some potential modifications.
"Thank you for your suggestions regarding this project. We are looking into modifying the alignment of a section of the pipe and are reducing the tree clearing limits in consultation with the City's forester. The alignment picked is the shortest distance for the force main which minimizes both the cost of the project and the impact on the park. We did look at lining, however, because of higher construction cost, uncertainty of the integrity of the existing pipe, the need to bypass pump during the lining and the fact that access along the sewer main to install bore pits would still have been needed, this option was not determined to be the best option for the situation.
Notice will be sent to the neighborhood groups and posted on the trail prior to tree clearing taking place and once a final design has been completed, a public meeting will be held to provide details and gather feedback on options to mitigate any visual impact of the tree clearing."
I have no idea what he's talking about through most of that (lining, force main, etc.), but I'm glad he's at least saying they are looking at a different alignment. Though, I imagine he's just saying that since this has attracted negative attention.
I just question how distance seems to be a bigger cost factor than stump grinding. I have a relative who clears stumps; it is not cheap, and we're talking dozens. I imagine a slightly longer route balances out not having to clear dozens of trees, but it's just a guess.
Anyway, looking forward to hearing more details.