Red Oak Park Plan
MAYBE, this plan would help protect the property of the landowner downstream to the north toward Hamestring Creek. But it will totally miss the point of trying to protect the existing mature trees and will allow an incredible increase in erosion during construction and have only a minimal chance of improving the park in any credible way.
The only worthwhile and effective use of the money set aside for this plan would be KEEPING the water WATER WHERE IT FALLS: On the lots in the subdivisions to the south, east and west in raingardens created in the yards and in the treeless portion of the park at the southeast corner.
Helping people create raingardens using the natural soil remaining in the area and encouraging NOT to mow but to protect native vegetation there would decrease the dangerous runoff to a manageable level.
It is illogical to spend money doing some that won't meet the goals of the people who originally began complaining about the situation.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Red Oak Park plan would tear up the ground and displace mature trees and other significant vegetation but do nothing to protect the park from the huge upstream flow of water from the south, east and west
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Tour of Woolsey Wet Prairie and Fayetteville's westside sewage-treatment plant at 2 p.m. today precedes big evening for Illinois River Watershed Partnership
Illinois River Watershed Partnership
Annual Stakeholders Meeting
November 10, 2009
2:00 to 3:30 pm Tour of Fayetteville West Side Treatment Plant and Woolsey Wet Prairie
4:00 pm. Tour of Fayetteville Sam's Club
5:30 pm Hors d'oeuvres at Arvest Ballpark, Springdale
6:00 pm Sponsor Recognition and Golden Paddle Awards Reception
7:00 pm. Annual Membership and Board Meeting
Thank you for your dedicated efforts and support
to preserve, protect and restore the Illinois River Watershed.
To see evidence of the need for protection, please click on image to ENLARGE example of construction-site erosion in the Illinois River Watershed.
Annual Stakeholders Meeting
November 10, 2009
2:00 to 3:30 pm Tour of Fayetteville West Side Treatment Plant and Woolsey Wet Prairie
4:00 pm. Tour of Fayetteville Sam's Club
5:30 pm Hors d'oeuvres at Arvest Ballpark, Springdale
6:00 pm Sponsor Recognition and Golden Paddle Awards Reception
7:00 pm. Annual Membership and Board Meeting
Thank you for your dedicated efforts and support
to preserve, protect and restore the Illinois River Watershed.
To see evidence of the need for protection, please click on image to ENLARGE example of construction-site erosion in the Illinois River Watershed.
 |
| From Northwest Arkansas environment central |
Friday, November 6, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Walker Park Trail built through formerly thick grove of trees in the riparian zone of Spout Spring Branch, resulting in hideous erosion of stream banks and dangerous spots for people using the trail: curb and gutter and piping upstream on Government Ave. will make problem worse!
Please click on each image to go to Flickr site and see full photos.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Green-infrastructure groups gather with Green Drinks group at Smiling Jack's on October 19, 2009
Please click on photos from Monday night's meeting of the Green Drinks group with members of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's green-infrastructure group and the Fayetteville Forward green-infrastructure group at the Smiling Jack's restaurant and bar a half block from Dickson Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Ducks Unlimited Banquet October 29, 2009, in Fayetteville, Arkansas
Please click on images to move to Flickr site and use magnifying tool above photo to ENLARGE for easy reading.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Green Groups Guild meeting Thursday
From: Green Groups Guild (ggg@listserv.uark.edu) on behalf of ggg (ggg@UARK.EDU)
Sent: Tue 10/13/09 2:31 PM
To: GGG@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Meeting 10/15/09 7:00 p.m.
209 Thompson Ave. Three Sisters Bldg on Dickson above Fez Hookah Lounge.
Patrick Kunnecke
GGG President
ASLA Vice President
4th Year Landscape Architecture Student
479-544-1906
Sent: Tue 10/13/09 2:31 PM
To: GGG@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Meeting 10/15/09 7:00 p.m.
209 Thompson Ave. Three Sisters Bldg on Dickson above Fez Hookah Lounge.
Patrick Kunnecke
GGG President
ASLA Vice President
4th Year Landscape Architecture Student
479-544-1906
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Runners and Sponsors sought for Nov. 7, 2009, 5K veterans' memorial race to benefit Fayetteville National Cemetery
Please click on image to move to Flickr site and ENLARGE for easy reading. The Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation meets at 10:30 a.m. Saturday October 10 and needs to add sponsor names to the file for the race T shirts and the brochures so that printing can begin. Already, Tyson Foods has donated at the Medal of Honor level and has challenged others to join them at the top of the list, thanks to the effort of RNCIC Secretary Peggy McClain.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Veterans' Memorial 5K race set for November 7, 2009, in Town Branch neighborhood: Sponsorship information below
The Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation (RNCIC) is organizing a Veteran’s Memorial 5K race on Saturday, November 7th at the National Cemetery in Fayetteville. The purpose of this 5K race is to raise funds for purchase and clearing of land to expand the Cemetery and, even more importantly, to raise the awareness of the Cemetery and the ongoing threat of closure.
We write to ask that you consider sponsoring the event.
The sole mission of the nonprofit RNCIC is to secure and clear land adjacent to the Fayetteville National Cemetery to ensure that the cemetery can continue to receive veterans for burial. Established immediately after the Civil War, the Fayetteville National Cemetery is an important part of the history of this region and the country. Veterans living in Northwest Arkansas, as well as many veterans from here but now living outside our region, have planned their final resting place here. But that may not be possible in the near future.
The Veteran’s Administration maintains the Cemetery, but the purchase of new land to expand
existing National Cemeteries has not occurred in decades.
When the RNCIC was organized only seven unfilled grave sites remained at Fayetteville National
Cemetery and the Cemetery was soon to be permanently closed to new interments. We have kept the Cemetery open and increased its size by over 120 percent in the ensuing 25 years, but with the passing of the World War II generation of veterans, the Cemetery will be full in a few years and closed to new burials.
Unless, of course, we act now to prevent that.
The recent controversy over the possible rezoning and development of the adjoining property has regularly been on the front page of local newspapers this summer. The massive turnout of veterans and non-veterans alike to public hearings demonstrates the deep emotional currents that surround the National Cemetery. We are grateful for past commitments to support veterans made by this community. We plan to make the race an annual event and, in this inaugural year, we are happy to give you the opportunity to associate yourself with keeping an important part of this region’s and nation’s heritage alive and to honor those who guarded us. We hope that you will see your way clear to sponsor this event. Please feel free to contact us with any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Wesley Stites, Race Organizer
wstites@uark.edu
Tel: 479-871-7478
5K RACE
VETERANS MEMORIAL
Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation
P.O. Box 4221
Fayetteville, AR 72702
http://regncic.tripod.com
2009 Veteran’s Memorial 5K Race Sponsorship Levels
We thank you for considering sponsorship of this fundraising event. As you may know, all
proceeds of the race go to purchase and clear land for the expansion of Fayetteville National
Cemetery. The Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation is a registered nonprofit
with a 25-year history. Through the efforts of this group and, even more importantly, the
generosity of past donors, land has been purchased, cleared, and donated to the Veterans Administration increasing the size of the National Cemetery by 120% and keeping it open for
burial of veterans. However, without additional purchases of land, the cemetery will be closed in 14 years or less.
MEDAL OF HONOR - $1000
Business name and logo prominently on front and back of race shirt
Business name and logo on all race materials and race website
Sponsorship noted in all press releases
Business name and logo on finish line banner
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
10 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
DISTINGUISHED SERVICE - $500
Business name and logo prominently on back of race shirt
Business name and logo on race website
Business name and logo on finish line banner
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
5 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
SILVER STAR - $250
Business name and logo on back of race shirt
Business name and logo on race website
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
3 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
BRONZE STAR - $100
Business name and logo on back of race shirt if room allows
Business name and logo on race website
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of product samples in race goodie bags
1 complimentary entry and/or race shirt
CONTACT Information:
Wesley Stites 479-871-7478
All checks should be payable to Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation or to R.N.C.I.C.
Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation
P.O. Box 4221
Fayetteville, AR 72702
We write to ask that you consider sponsoring the event.
The sole mission of the nonprofit RNCIC is to secure and clear land adjacent to the Fayetteville National Cemetery to ensure that the cemetery can continue to receive veterans for burial. Established immediately after the Civil War, the Fayetteville National Cemetery is an important part of the history of this region and the country. Veterans living in Northwest Arkansas, as well as many veterans from here but now living outside our region, have planned their final resting place here. But that may not be possible in the near future.
The Veteran’s Administration maintains the Cemetery, but the purchase of new land to expand
existing National Cemeteries has not occurred in decades.
When the RNCIC was organized only seven unfilled grave sites remained at Fayetteville National
Cemetery and the Cemetery was soon to be permanently closed to new interments. We have kept the Cemetery open and increased its size by over 120 percent in the ensuing 25 years, but with the passing of the World War II generation of veterans, the Cemetery will be full in a few years and closed to new burials.
Unless, of course, we act now to prevent that.
The recent controversy over the possible rezoning and development of the adjoining property has regularly been on the front page of local newspapers this summer. The massive turnout of veterans and non-veterans alike to public hearings demonstrates the deep emotional currents that surround the National Cemetery. We are grateful for past commitments to support veterans made by this community. We plan to make the race an annual event and, in this inaugural year, we are happy to give you the opportunity to associate yourself with keeping an important part of this region’s and nation’s heritage alive and to honor those who guarded us. We hope that you will see your way clear to sponsor this event. Please feel free to contact us with any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Wesley Stites, Race Organizer
wstites@uark.edu
Tel: 479-871-7478
5K RACE
VETERANS MEMORIAL
Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation
P.O. Box 4221
Fayetteville, AR 72702
http://regncic.tripod.com
2009 Veteran’s Memorial 5K Race Sponsorship Levels
We thank you for considering sponsorship of this fundraising event. As you may know, all
proceeds of the race go to purchase and clear land for the expansion of Fayetteville National
Cemetery. The Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation is a registered nonprofit
with a 25-year history. Through the efforts of this group and, even more importantly, the
generosity of past donors, land has been purchased, cleared, and donated to the Veterans Administration increasing the size of the National Cemetery by 120% and keeping it open for
burial of veterans. However, without additional purchases of land, the cemetery will be closed in 14 years or less.
MEDAL OF HONOR - $1000
Business name and logo prominently on front and back of race shirt
Business name and logo on all race materials and race website
Sponsorship noted in all press releases
Business name and logo on finish line banner
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
10 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
DISTINGUISHED SERVICE - $500
Business name and logo prominently on back of race shirt
Business name and logo on race website
Business name and logo on finish line banner
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
5 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
SILVER STAR - $250
Business name and logo on back of race shirt
Business name and logo on race website
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of marketing materials and/or product samples in race goodie bags
3 complimentary entries and/or race shirts
BRONZE STAR - $100
Business name and logo on back of race shirt if room allows
Business name and logo on race website
Business recognized at award ceremony
Distribution of product samples in race goodie bags
1 complimentary entry and/or race shirt
CONTACT Information:
Wesley Stites 479-871-7478
All checks should be payable to Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation or to R.N.C.I.C.
Regional National Cemetery Improvement Corporation
P.O. Box 4221
Fayetteville, AR 72702
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Green Infrastructure presentation from 2-4 p.m. today at Chotkowski Gardens north of Wedington Woods similar to yesterday's
Thanks to Kate Ward and the Northwest Arkansas Times for good article on yesterday's gathering. This is an open meeting for public education and public input.
Natural Heritage Association makes plans for a green future
By Kate Ward
Sunday, September 13, 2009
FAYETTEVILLE — Working farms, agricultural land, streams and forests were among the areas outlined by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association’s Green Infrastructure Plan on Saturday.
Barbara Boland, project coordinator, said the project is being funded through a pilot grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. The regional plan encompasses 172 square miles and will be used by local decision makers to guide conservation and growth in Northwest Arkansas.
“This is a long-term approach to regional planning,” she said. “It will provide a tool for the different municipalities in Washington County. It has what the public deems to be areas of preservation as well as areas deemed appropriate for potential growth.”
Last year, the group hosted its first public forum in partnership with the Arkansas Forestry Commission’s Urban Forestry Program and the Beaver Water District in hopes of gaining community support. The three organizations received a $25,000 grant to develop a Plan for Green Infrastructure-Linking Arkansas Communities. The project is one of four pilot studies in the Southeast region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service and will serve as a prototype for developing other plans in Arkansas.
Washington County Judge Marilyn Edwards said sheattended the public input forum to lean about the group’s future plans.
“This is a rural state, and we have to preserve our roots,” she said. “We don’t want to lose our identity. I think this is a good group, and that the direction they’re taking is certainly good for the county.”
Members of the design team have been working to identify networks of natural and working land that supports the biological, cultural and economic vitality of the region. The project area encompasses Farmington, Johnson, Greenland and Fayetteville, as well as their planning areas and surrounding land in Washington County.
In addition to farms, agricultural land, streams and forests, the group’s preservation areas also include riparian zones, prairie and grassland remnants and parks and trails.
“Initially, we presented our ideas to about 300 stake holders,” Boland said. “Of that number, about 60 volunteered to participate in the planning process. They helped us collect data by talking about what areas of the county are important to them.”
The group will hold a second public input meeting from 2-4 p.m. today at the same, 16142 Pin Oak Road, off Wedington Drive north of the Wedington Woods area.
Chotkowski Gardens 479-587-8920
16142 Pin Oak Rd , Fayetteville, AR 72704
A follow-up meeting has been slated for Oct. 1 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Fayetteville Public Library. Three additional forums, which have yet to be planned, will also take place for members of the public.
Boland said the data linked to the Green Infrastructure Plan will soon be available to members of the public via the Internet thanks to the University of Arkansas’ Center for Advance Spacial Technology.
For more information about green infrastructure planning, visit www.fayettevillenatural.org/whatshappening.php or call Boland at (479) 521-2801.
Natural Heritage Association makes plans for a green future
By Kate Ward
Sunday, September 13, 2009
FAYETTEVILLE — Working farms, agricultural land, streams and forests were among the areas outlined by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association’s Green Infrastructure Plan on Saturday.
Barbara Boland, project coordinator, said the project is being funded through a pilot grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. The regional plan encompasses 172 square miles and will be used by local decision makers to guide conservation and growth in Northwest Arkansas.
“This is a long-term approach to regional planning,” she said. “It will provide a tool for the different municipalities in Washington County. It has what the public deems to be areas of preservation as well as areas deemed appropriate for potential growth.”
Last year, the group hosted its first public forum in partnership with the Arkansas Forestry Commission’s Urban Forestry Program and the Beaver Water District in hopes of gaining community support. The three organizations received a $25,000 grant to develop a Plan for Green Infrastructure-Linking Arkansas Communities. The project is one of four pilot studies in the Southeast region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service and will serve as a prototype for developing other plans in Arkansas.
Washington County Judge Marilyn Edwards said sheattended the public input forum to lean about the group’s future plans.
“This is a rural state, and we have to preserve our roots,” she said. “We don’t want to lose our identity. I think this is a good group, and that the direction they’re taking is certainly good for the county.”
Members of the design team have been working to identify networks of natural and working land that supports the biological, cultural and economic vitality of the region. The project area encompasses Farmington, Johnson, Greenland and Fayetteville, as well as their planning areas and surrounding land in Washington County.
In addition to farms, agricultural land, streams and forests, the group’s preservation areas also include riparian zones, prairie and grassland remnants and parks and trails.
“Initially, we presented our ideas to about 300 stake holders,” Boland said. “Of that number, about 60 volunteered to participate in the planning process. They helped us collect data by talking about what areas of the county are important to them.”
The group will hold a second public input meeting from 2-4 p.m. today at the same, 16142 Pin Oak Road, off Wedington Drive north of the Wedington Woods area.
Chotkowski Gardens 479-587-8920
16142 Pin Oak Rd , Fayetteville, AR 72704
A follow-up meeting has been slated for Oct. 1 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Fayetteville Public Library. Three additional forums, which have yet to be planned, will also take place for members of the public.
Boland said the data linked to the Green Infrastructure Plan will soon be available to members of the public via the Internet thanks to the University of Arkansas’ Center for Advance Spacial Technology.
For more information about green infrastructure planning, visit www.fayettevillenatural.org/whatshappening.php or call Boland at (479) 521-2801.
Green Infrastructure presentation from 2-4 p.m. today at Chotkowski Gardens north of Wedington Woods similar to yesterday's
Thanks to Kate Ward and the Northwest Arkansas Times for good article on yesterday's gathering. This is an open meeting for public education and public input.
Natural Heritage Association makes plans for a green future
By Kate Ward
Sunday, September 13, 2009
FAYETTEVILLE — Working farms, agricultural land, streams and forests were among the areas outlined by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association’s Green Infrastructure Plan on Saturday.
Barbara Boland, project coordinator, said the project is being funded through a pilot grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. The regional plan encompasses 172 square miles and will be used by local decision makers to guide conservation and growth in Northwest Arkansas.
“This is a long-term approach to regional planning,” she said. “It will provide a tool for the different municipalities in Washington County. It has what the public deems to be areas of preservation as well as areas deemed appropriate for potential growth.”
Last year, the group hosted its first public forum in partnership with the Arkansas Forestry Commission’s Urban Forestry Program and the Beaver Water District in hopes of gaining community support. The three organizations received a $25,000 grant to develop a Plan for Green Infrastructure-Linking Arkansas Communities. The project is one of four pilot studies in the Southeast region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service and will serve as a prototype for developing other plans in Arkansas.
Washington County Judge Marilyn Edwards said sheattended the public input forum to lean about the group’s future plans.
“This is a rural state, and we have to preserve our roots,” she said. “We don’t want to lose our identity. I think this is a good group, and that the direction they’re taking is certainly good for the county.”
Members of the design team have been working to identify networks of natural and working land that supports the biological, cultural and economic vitality of the region. The project area encompasses Farmington, Johnson, Greenland and Fayetteville, as well as their planning areas and surrounding land in Washington County.
In addition to farms, agricultural land, streams and forests, the group’s preservation areas also include riparian zones, prairie and grassland remnants and parks and trails.
“Initially, we presented our ideas to about 300 stake holders,” Boland said. “Of that number, about 60 volunteered to participate in the planning process. They helped us collect data by talking about what areas of the county are important to them.”
The group will hold a second public input meeting from 2-4 p.m. today at the same, 16142 Pin Oak Road, off Wedington Drive north of the Wedington Woods area.
Chotkowski Gardens 479-587-8920
16142 Pin Oak Rd , Fayetteville, AR 72704
A follow-up meeting has been slated for Oct. 1 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Fayetteville Public Library. Three additional forums, which have yet to be planned, will also take place for members of the public.
Boland said the data linked to the Green Infrastructure Plan will soon be available to members of the public via the Internet thanks to the University of Arkansas’ Center for Advance Spacial Technology.
For more information about green infrastructure planning, visit www.fayettevillenatural.org/whatshappening.php or call Boland at (479) 521-2801.
Natural Heritage Association makes plans for a green future
By Kate Ward
Sunday, September 13, 2009
FAYETTEVILLE — Working farms, agricultural land, streams and forests were among the areas outlined by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association’s Green Infrastructure Plan on Saturday.
Barbara Boland, project coordinator, said the project is being funded through a pilot grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. The regional plan encompasses 172 square miles and will be used by local decision makers to guide conservation and growth in Northwest Arkansas.
“This is a long-term approach to regional planning,” she said. “It will provide a tool for the different municipalities in Washington County. It has what the public deems to be areas of preservation as well as areas deemed appropriate for potential growth.”
Last year, the group hosted its first public forum in partnership with the Arkansas Forestry Commission’s Urban Forestry Program and the Beaver Water District in hopes of gaining community support. The three organizations received a $25,000 grant to develop a Plan for Green Infrastructure-Linking Arkansas Communities. The project is one of four pilot studies in the Southeast region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service and will serve as a prototype for developing other plans in Arkansas.
Washington County Judge Marilyn Edwards said sheattended the public input forum to lean about the group’s future plans.
“This is a rural state, and we have to preserve our roots,” she said. “We don’t want to lose our identity. I think this is a good group, and that the direction they’re taking is certainly good for the county.”
Members of the design team have been working to identify networks of natural and working land that supports the biological, cultural and economic vitality of the region. The project area encompasses Farmington, Johnson, Greenland and Fayetteville, as well as their planning areas and surrounding land in Washington County.
In addition to farms, agricultural land, streams and forests, the group’s preservation areas also include riparian zones, prairie and grassland remnants and parks and trails.
“Initially, we presented our ideas to about 300 stake holders,” Boland said. “Of that number, about 60 volunteered to participate in the planning process. They helped us collect data by talking about what areas of the county are important to them.”
The group will hold a second public input meeting from 2-4 p.m. today at the same, 16142 Pin Oak Road, off Wedington Drive north of the Wedington Woods area.
Chotkowski Gardens 479-587-8920
16142 Pin Oak Rd , Fayetteville, AR 72704
A follow-up meeting has been slated for Oct. 1 from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Fayetteville Public Library. Three additional forums, which have yet to be planned, will also take place for members of the public.
Boland said the data linked to the Green Infrastructure Plan will soon be available to members of the public via the Internet thanks to the University of Arkansas’ Center for Advance Spacial Technology.
For more information about green infrastructure planning, visit www.fayettevillenatural.org/whatshappening.php or call Boland at (479) 521-2801.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Open house for green-infrastructure study set for Saturday and Sunday afternoon
Open House Planned For Green Infrastructure Study
LAST UPDATED FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 11:33 AM CDT IN NEWS
By THE MORNING NEWS
EMAIL THIS STORY PRINT THIS STORY COMMENT ON THIS STORY
FAYETTEVILLE — The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association will hold two open house sessions Saturday and Sunday to receive public response on the Regional Green Infrastructure Plan. The plan hopes to take a stretegic approach to preserve and improve natural spaces and waterways in Washington County.
The plan is part of a $25,000 pilot grant by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service to study 172 square miles in Washington County and identify areas of conservation as well as put in place practices to preserve farmland, forests and waterways.
"Ultimately, this open house is to gain information about what natural features within western Washington county to include in the Regional Green Infrastructure Plan to be presented to Washington County and local cities in the near future," said Kim Hesse, who is working on the project.
The open house meetings will be Saturday and Sunday from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. at 16142 Pin Oak Road in Fayetteville.
LAST UPDATED FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 11:33 AM CDT IN NEWS
By THE MORNING NEWS
EMAIL THIS STORY PRINT THIS STORY COMMENT ON THIS STORY
FAYETTEVILLE — The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association will hold two open house sessions Saturday and Sunday to receive public response on the Regional Green Infrastructure Plan. The plan hopes to take a stretegic approach to preserve and improve natural spaces and waterways in Washington County.
The plan is part of a $25,000 pilot grant by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service to study 172 square miles in Washington County and identify areas of conservation as well as put in place practices to preserve farmland, forests and waterways.
"Ultimately, this open house is to gain information about what natural features within western Washington county to include in the Regional Green Infrastructure Plan to be presented to Washington County and local cities in the near future," said Kim Hesse, who is working on the project.
The open house meetings will be Saturday and Sunday from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. at 16142 Pin Oak Road in Fayetteville.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
League of Women voters sponsoring discussion of Arkansas' electric future on September 23, 2009
Concerned about a proposed SWEPCO rate increase and developing energy efficiency?
A panel of experts will discuss the electrical power dilemma facing
Arkansas and ratepayers during a public information program
moderated by Hoyt Purvis, University of Arkansas Journalism Department.
Wed., Sept. 23, 2009, from 6:00 to 8:00 at the Fayetteville Public Library
This is also a special LWVWC membership invitation event. Come early, 5:30 to 6:00, for refreshments and visit the membership table before the program for more information.
Topic:
Arkansas finds itself with a need to expand electrical production at the same time it has overcapacity. A controversial coal-fired generating plant, choice of what fuels should be used in the future, an urgency to upgrade transmission, serious environmental concerns and ratepayer costs combine for a perfect “electrical” storm. Learning what Arkansas is facing and what that means to ratepayers is the focus for this League of Women Voters of Washington County’s public program.
Panel Participants:
Sandra Byrd, VP, Strategic Affairs, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation and former chair of the Arkansas Public Service Commission
Nicholas Brown, President and CEO of Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Ken Smith, Executive Director of Audubon Arkansas, an organization involved in the lawsuit over the J.W.Turk, Jr. coal-fired plant
Eddie Moore, an attorney working with Audubon on electric efficiency and ratepayers issues and representing the Arkansas Public Policy Panel on energy issues during the 2009 legislative session
A panel of experts will discuss the electrical power dilemma facing
Arkansas and ratepayers during a public information program
moderated by Hoyt Purvis, University of Arkansas Journalism Department.
Wed., Sept. 23, 2009, from 6:00 to 8:00 at the Fayetteville Public Library
This is also a special LWVWC membership invitation event. Come early, 5:30 to 6:00, for refreshments and visit the membership table before the program for more information.
Topic:
Arkansas finds itself with a need to expand electrical production at the same time it has overcapacity. A controversial coal-fired generating plant, choice of what fuels should be used in the future, an urgency to upgrade transmission, serious environmental concerns and ratepayer costs combine for a perfect “electrical” storm. Learning what Arkansas is facing and what that means to ratepayers is the focus for this League of Women Voters of Washington County’s public program.
Panel Participants:
Sandra Byrd, VP, Strategic Affairs, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation and former chair of the Arkansas Public Service Commission
Nicholas Brown, President and CEO of Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Ken Smith, Executive Director of Audubon Arkansas, an organization involved in the lawsuit over the J.W.Turk, Jr. coal-fired plant
Eddie Moore, an attorney working with Audubon on electric efficiency and ratepayers issues and representing the Arkansas Public Policy Panel on energy issues during the 2009 legislative session
Friday, September 4, 2009
Tree and Landscape Committee to meet at 4 p.m. Wednesday
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
Tree & Landscape Advisory Committee
Wade Colwell, Business
John Crone, University Representative
Chris Wilson, Environmental
Vacant, Utility Representative
Paula Larson, Community/Citizen-at-Large
J.P. Peters, Community/Citizen-at-Large
Gayle Howard, Service Organization
David Reynolds, Land Development
Cynthia Cope, Forestry, Landscaping, or Horticulture (Chair)
Greg Howe, Urban Forester
MEETING AGENDA – Wednesday, September 9, 2009
4:00pm Room 216 City Administration Building (City Hall)
Call to Order
Accept or Revise the August 18th meeting minutes.
New Business
1) Celebration of Trees – Fall Update
2) Review a proposed change to the Landscape Manual
3) Tree Escrow Planting – Clabber Creek PH II Update
4) Discussion on permanent meeting day and time
Open Forum
1) Member’s discussions on other areas of concern, ideas or suggestions outside of agenda.
2) Guests and visitors opportunity to address the committee on non-agenda items.
Meeting adjourns
Tree & Landscape Advisory Committee
Wade Colwell, Business
John Crone, University Representative
Chris Wilson, Environmental
Vacant, Utility Representative
Paula Larson, Community/Citizen-at-Large
J.P. Peters, Community/Citizen-at-Large
Gayle Howard, Service Organization
David Reynolds, Land Development
Cynthia Cope, Forestry, Landscaping, or Horticulture (Chair)
Greg Howe, Urban Forester
MEETING AGENDA – Wednesday, September 9, 2009
4:00pm Room 216 City Administration Building (City Hall)
Call to Order
Accept or Revise the August 18th meeting minutes.
New Business
1) Celebration of Trees – Fall Update
2) Review a proposed change to the Landscape Manual
3) Tree Escrow Planting – Clabber Creek PH II Update
4) Discussion on permanent meeting day and time
Open Forum
1) Member’s discussions on other areas of concern, ideas or suggestions outside of agenda.
2) Guests and visitors opportunity to address the committee on non-agenda items.
Meeting adjourns
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Why is no one doing a study such as the one below to determine relationship of seasonal wetland and karst geology of Northwest Arkansas?
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/karst/kigconference/wfl_ecologicalwetlands.htm
The Ecological Role of the Karst Wetlands of Southern Florida in Relation to System Restoration
By William F. Loftus1, Maria Cristina Bruno2, Kevin J. Cunningham3, Sue Perry2, and Joel C. Trexler4 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Everglades National Park. Homestead, Florida 33034. Bill_Loftus@usgs.gov 2 South Florida Natural Resources Center, Everglades National Park. Homestead, Florida 33034. 3 U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Miami Subdistrict, Miami, Florida 33178. 4 Florida International University, University Park, Miami, Florida 33199
Download PDF 2.87 MB
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view the report and can be downloaded for free
<--Return to Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
With the recent funding of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), the largest ecosystem restoration program ever attempted, there is a pressing need to be able to detect changes in natural habitats as a result of restoration actions. Human activities, particularly the construction of canals and levees that can either drain or flood wetlands, have affected the natural variability of environmental conditions (Gunderson and Loftus 1993). CERP intends to restore natural hydropatterns to areas that have been damaged by water management. Baseline data on constituent aquatic communities and their ecology are needed before, during, and after the restoration activities commence.
Freshwater fishes and invertebrates are important ecosystem components in the Everglades/Big Cypress system. They operate at several trophic levels in the wetlands, from primary consumers of plant material and detritus to carnivores and scavengers. Factors that influence fish and invertebrate numbers, biomass, and composition therefore affect energy flow through the wetlands. The ecology and life histories of these animals are intimately tied to the hydrology of the wetlands, which is determined mainly by rainfall, but increasingly by water-management practices. Because of the hydrological changes wrought by drainage and impoundment, and the loss of spatial extent and functioning of former wetlands to development (Gunderson and Loftus 1993), there is little doubt that standing crops and overall numbers have declined. Changes to the original ecosystem have also altered the timing and the areas of prey availability to predators. Non-native fishes have colonized natural and disturbed habitats during the past three decades. Non-native fishes have affected native animals through predation, nest-site competition, and habitat disturbance (Loftus 1988) and may divert food-web energy into biomass unavailable to top-level predators.
Aquatic animals in southern Florida wetlands have a variety of ways to cope with environmental variability. These include movements to find refuge from drying habitats in winter and spring, and dispersal away from those refuges with the onset of the wet season (Kushlan 1974, Loftus and Kushlan 1987). This pattern of movements among habitats with fluctuating water depths is common to seasonal wetlands in the tropics (Lowe-McConnell 1987, Machado-Allison 1993). The major natural refuge habitat most-studied by scientists in southern Florida is the alligator hole (Craighead 1968, Kushlan 1974, Nelson and Loftus 1996). Canals and ditches offer a relatively recent but spatially extensive form of artificial refuge for aquatic animals on the landscape (Loftus and Kushlan 1987). In this study, we are studying the function of other types of aquatic refuges in the Everglades.
The Rocky Glades, or Rockland, habitat is a karstic wetland unique to Everglades National Park (ENP) in southern Florida (Figure 1), although similar habitats exist elsewhere in Yucatan, Cuba, and the Bahamas. Approximately half of the original area of this habitat occurs outside of ENP where agricultural and urban development has forever altered its geological structure and ecological function. This region is a high priority for restoration in CERP because it is the largest remnant, short-hydroperiod wetland in the eastern Everglades. That habitat has been disproportionately lost from the ecosystem. Unfortunately, the habitat remaining in ENP has been degraded by water management (Loftus et al. 1992).
Figure 1. Locations of the study sites within the Rocky Glades and Atlantic Coastal Ridge in southern Florida. The numbers indicate the drift-fence arrays on the main park road, and the stars on the coastal ridge are the well sites with Miami cave crayfish.
The highly eroded karst structure of the Rocky Glades appears to be responsible for the persistence of aquatic-animal communities by offering dry-season refuge in thousands of solution holes of varying depths, (Loftus et al. 1992). Their work was the first to indicate a tight relationship among the biological, geological, and hydrologic components of this region. Loftus et al. (1992) also found evidence that aquatic animals disperse, feed, and reproduce on the wetland surface during the short flooding period, then retreat below ground for periods of months to years. They also reported that several introduced species, particularly the pike killifish (Belonesox belizanus), walking catfish (Clarias batrachus), Mayan cichlid (Cichlasoma urophthalmus), and black acara (Cichlasoma bimaculatum) were common in the Rocky Glades (Loftus et al. 1992). Unfortunately, their study was interrupted by Hurricane Andrew and not continued.
In this paper, we report the rationale and results of the first year of a new study in which the primary goal is to define the interactions of the aquatic-animal community with the geologic structure and hydrologic conditions of the Rocky Glades. We are addressing questions that have arisen from past work there. How do composition, size-structure, and recruitment of aquatic animals change during the flooding period? Are the dispersal patterns of animals related to water flow? Are the animals dispersing from the main sloughs to recolonize the Rocky Glades, or is the Rocky Glades a source of animal colonists for the sloughs? Do roadways act as barriers to movement? The objectives of this study segment are:
• Collect baseline ecological data on the epigean aquatic communities in the karst landscape of the Rocky Glades.
•
•
• Quantify the direction and degree of dispersal by fishes and invertebrates during the wet season.
•
•
• Document the seasonal changes in species composition, size structure, and reproductive patterns of animals on the wetland surface.
•
•
• Survey the topography of representative areas of the Rocky Glades, particularly around the sampling sites, to provide depth-distribution data for the simulation model of the region.
•
•
• Develop a visual survey method for sampling fish communities in open, rugged terrain to follow community dynamics in the Rocky Glades in the wet season.
•
•
• Identify the extent of near-surface voids.
The Atlantic Coastal Ridge is another area affected by urbanization and changing hydrologic management (Figure 1). Aquatic habitats, such as the transverse glades that cut through the Ridge, have been replaced by canals and will not be restored. Ground-water habitats and animal communities may have been less affected. As in karst areas elsewhere, deeper geological formations (>5 m) beneath the Rocky Glades and the Atlantic Coastal Ridge have voids of various dimensions known to house truly subterranean aquatic species (Radice and Loftus 1995, Bruno et al., this volume). These include the Miami Cave Crayfish (Procambarus milleri), known only from a few wells in southern Florida (Hobbs 1971). The composition, distribution, and abundance of other hypogean animals are poorly known. Ground-water withdrawal and saltwater intrusion (Leach et al. 1972), limestone mining, and pollution may threaten these communities before they have been fully catalogued. Elsewhere in the world, such communities are known to be very sensitive to changes in their delicately balanced physical environment. The second goal of this project is to identify the composition, distribution by depth and space, and ecological relations of this subterranean fauna. The objectives of the second study element include:
• Develop effective traps to capture invertebrates and possibly fishes from subterranean habitats.
•
•
• Inventory hypogean communities and relate the composition and distribution to environmental factors.
•
•
• Collect life-history data for the Miami cave crayfish from a large captive population.
METHODS
This first project year has been a pilot study to test designs and methods. The study is divided into two elements with several components each.
Element 1: In the Rocky Glades, we selected four sites along the ENP main road (Figure 1) to test the use of drift-fence arrays to describe directional animal dispersal and community successional patterns in the wet season. The four X-shaped arrays had 12-m wings made of black plastic ground cloth (Figure 2) to direct animals into one of 3 traps that faced east, north, and west, based on the direction that they were moving (Figure 2). The road shoulder formed a barrier to the south of each array. The 3-mm mesh minnow traps were fished overnight for 24 h to provide data on fish relative abundances, movements, and catch per unit effort (CPUE).
The Ecological Role of the Karst Wetlands of Southern Florida in Relation to System Restoration
By William F. Loftus1, Maria Cristina Bruno2, Kevin J. Cunningham3, Sue Perry2, and Joel C. Trexler4 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Everglades National Park. Homestead, Florida 33034. Bill_Loftus@usgs.gov 2 South Florida Natural Resources Center, Everglades National Park. Homestead, Florida 33034. 3 U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Miami Subdistrict, Miami, Florida 33178. 4 Florida International University, University Park, Miami, Florida 33199
Download PDF 2.87 MB
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view the report and can be downloaded for free
<--Return to Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
With the recent funding of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), the largest ecosystem restoration program ever attempted, there is a pressing need to be able to detect changes in natural habitats as a result of restoration actions. Human activities, particularly the construction of canals and levees that can either drain or flood wetlands, have affected the natural variability of environmental conditions (Gunderson and Loftus 1993). CERP intends to restore natural hydropatterns to areas that have been damaged by water management. Baseline data on constituent aquatic communities and their ecology are needed before, during, and after the restoration activities commence.
Freshwater fishes and invertebrates are important ecosystem components in the Everglades/Big Cypress system. They operate at several trophic levels in the wetlands, from primary consumers of plant material and detritus to carnivores and scavengers. Factors that influence fish and invertebrate numbers, biomass, and composition therefore affect energy flow through the wetlands. The ecology and life histories of these animals are intimately tied to the hydrology of the wetlands, which is determined mainly by rainfall, but increasingly by water-management practices. Because of the hydrological changes wrought by drainage and impoundment, and the loss of spatial extent and functioning of former wetlands to development (Gunderson and Loftus 1993), there is little doubt that standing crops and overall numbers have declined. Changes to the original ecosystem have also altered the timing and the areas of prey availability to predators. Non-native fishes have colonized natural and disturbed habitats during the past three decades. Non-native fishes have affected native animals through predation, nest-site competition, and habitat disturbance (Loftus 1988) and may divert food-web energy into biomass unavailable to top-level predators.
Aquatic animals in southern Florida wetlands have a variety of ways to cope with environmental variability. These include movements to find refuge from drying habitats in winter and spring, and dispersal away from those refuges with the onset of the wet season (Kushlan 1974, Loftus and Kushlan 1987). This pattern of movements among habitats with fluctuating water depths is common to seasonal wetlands in the tropics (Lowe-McConnell 1987, Machado-Allison 1993). The major natural refuge habitat most-studied by scientists in southern Florida is the alligator hole (Craighead 1968, Kushlan 1974, Nelson and Loftus 1996). Canals and ditches offer a relatively recent but spatially extensive form of artificial refuge for aquatic animals on the landscape (Loftus and Kushlan 1987). In this study, we are studying the function of other types of aquatic refuges in the Everglades.
The Rocky Glades, or Rockland, habitat is a karstic wetland unique to Everglades National Park (ENP) in southern Florida (Figure 1), although similar habitats exist elsewhere in Yucatan, Cuba, and the Bahamas. Approximately half of the original area of this habitat occurs outside of ENP where agricultural and urban development has forever altered its geological structure and ecological function. This region is a high priority for restoration in CERP because it is the largest remnant, short-hydroperiod wetland in the eastern Everglades. That habitat has been disproportionately lost from the ecosystem. Unfortunately, the habitat remaining in ENP has been degraded by water management (Loftus et al. 1992).
Figure 1. Locations of the study sites within the Rocky Glades and Atlantic Coastal Ridge in southern Florida. The numbers indicate the drift-fence arrays on the main park road, and the stars on the coastal ridge are the well sites with Miami cave crayfish.
The highly eroded karst structure of the Rocky Glades appears to be responsible for the persistence of aquatic-animal communities by offering dry-season refuge in thousands of solution holes of varying depths, (Loftus et al. 1992). Their work was the first to indicate a tight relationship among the biological, geological, and hydrologic components of this region. Loftus et al. (1992) also found evidence that aquatic animals disperse, feed, and reproduce on the wetland surface during the short flooding period, then retreat below ground for periods of months to years. They also reported that several introduced species, particularly the pike killifish (Belonesox belizanus), walking catfish (Clarias batrachus), Mayan cichlid (Cichlasoma urophthalmus), and black acara (Cichlasoma bimaculatum) were common in the Rocky Glades (Loftus et al. 1992). Unfortunately, their study was interrupted by Hurricane Andrew and not continued.
In this paper, we report the rationale and results of the first year of a new study in which the primary goal is to define the interactions of the aquatic-animal community with the geologic structure and hydrologic conditions of the Rocky Glades. We are addressing questions that have arisen from past work there. How do composition, size-structure, and recruitment of aquatic animals change during the flooding period? Are the dispersal patterns of animals related to water flow? Are the animals dispersing from the main sloughs to recolonize the Rocky Glades, or is the Rocky Glades a source of animal colonists for the sloughs? Do roadways act as barriers to movement? The objectives of this study segment are:
• Collect baseline ecological data on the epigean aquatic communities in the karst landscape of the Rocky Glades.
•
•
• Quantify the direction and degree of dispersal by fishes and invertebrates during the wet season.
•
•
• Document the seasonal changes in species composition, size structure, and reproductive patterns of animals on the wetland surface.
•
•
• Survey the topography of representative areas of the Rocky Glades, particularly around the sampling sites, to provide depth-distribution data for the simulation model of the region.
•
•
• Develop a visual survey method for sampling fish communities in open, rugged terrain to follow community dynamics in the Rocky Glades in the wet season.
•
•
• Identify the extent of near-surface voids.
The Atlantic Coastal Ridge is another area affected by urbanization and changing hydrologic management (Figure 1). Aquatic habitats, such as the transverse glades that cut through the Ridge, have been replaced by canals and will not be restored. Ground-water habitats and animal communities may have been less affected. As in karst areas elsewhere, deeper geological formations (>5 m) beneath the Rocky Glades and the Atlantic Coastal Ridge have voids of various dimensions known to house truly subterranean aquatic species (Radice and Loftus 1995, Bruno et al., this volume). These include the Miami Cave Crayfish (Procambarus milleri), known only from a few wells in southern Florida (Hobbs 1971). The composition, distribution, and abundance of other hypogean animals are poorly known. Ground-water withdrawal and saltwater intrusion (Leach et al. 1972), limestone mining, and pollution may threaten these communities before they have been fully catalogued. Elsewhere in the world, such communities are known to be very sensitive to changes in their delicately balanced physical environment. The second goal of this project is to identify the composition, distribution by depth and space, and ecological relations of this subterranean fauna. The objectives of the second study element include:
• Develop effective traps to capture invertebrates and possibly fishes from subterranean habitats.
•
•
• Inventory hypogean communities and relate the composition and distribution to environmental factors.
•
•
• Collect life-history data for the Miami cave crayfish from a large captive population.
METHODS
This first project year has been a pilot study to test designs and methods. The study is divided into two elements with several components each.
Element 1: In the Rocky Glades, we selected four sites along the ENP main road (Figure 1) to test the use of drift-fence arrays to describe directional animal dispersal and community successional patterns in the wet season. The four X-shaped arrays had 12-m wings made of black plastic ground cloth (Figure 2) to direct animals into one of 3 traps that faced east, north, and west, based on the direction that they were moving (Figure 2). The road shoulder formed a barrier to the south of each array. The 3-mm mesh minnow traps were fished overnight for 24 h to provide data on fish relative abundances, movements, and catch per unit effort (CPUE).
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Green Infrastructure CITY committee to meet at 7 p.m. Thursday September 17, 2009
Reports: Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure Committee --Fayetteville Forward
NEXT !!: LAND USE PLANNING & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE MEETING (LUGI)
THURSDAY, SEPT. 17, 7PM, ROOM 111 --CITY HALL
HI ALL---Thanks to all who came to our last meeting, and I hope everyone interested in green infrastructure will be able to come to the Sept. gathering on the 17th. (PLEASE NOTE: This is a different date than what we set at our last meeting. Space was not available on our first date choice.) Harriet Jansma and Dot Neely will chair the Sept. meeting because I'm going to be out of town so please help them help our committee make some progress. Dot has again done her amazing recording of minutes for our Aug. 13 meeting--see below. Thank you so much, Dot. After the minutes, please find a letter from John Pennington summarizing topics needing research in our chosen focus area of
RIPARIAN PROTECTION.
John works for the Washington County Cooperative Extension Service and is heading up a study of our local Clear Creek watershed . That work can work as a model for studying the needs in all our watersheds and therefore a great outline of how we can plug into the needed background for tackling riparian protection. By protecting waterways, we set the stage for connectivity which is key to green infrastructure success. Please contact John if you have specific areas of interest or expertise and are willing to help. Although a number of people believe riparian protection is vital and are learning what "riparian" means ("a $5.00 word for streambank"), we need many people to take the parts of this issue in order to make a whole infrastructure plan a reality.
As you will see, our focus on the riparian protection issue leads to our need for economic studies illustrating the values and costs of land use planning and green infrastructure so we very much need to have everyone interested in the economics of green infrastructure to be working alongside the policy wonks. REMEMBER: If we can't justify our recommendations economically, our chances of seeing them become reality are not good.
Please read these minutes, etc. and plug into one of these activities or needs as best fits your interests, passions, etc.
Below John's letter is an email from Julie McQuade, who works for the city helping coordinate various efforts, the Fayetteville Forward project among them. This is just information which may be helpful to you. Julie says WE NEED TO KEEP TRACK OF OUR VOLUNTEER HOURS FOR HER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS !!!! COULD YOU PLEASE ESTIMATE YOUR TIME SPENT SO FAR ON OUR COMMITTEE WORK AND SEND TO HER, AND ALSO CONTINUE TO KEEP TRACK IN THE FUTURE!!
THANKS AGAIN,
FRAN
********************************************************************
Summary Minutes of August 13, 2009 FFEAC LUGI Group Meeting p. 1 of 3
ATTENDEES: Fran Alexander/Chair FFEAC LUGI Comm, Dot Neely/FNHA-GIPP/FFEAC, Bob Caulk/FHNA, Pete Heinzelmann/FNHA, Harriet Jansma/FNHA, John Pennington/CEA-Agri, James Gibson, Sarah Lewis/Fvl Alderman, Connie Edmonston/Fvl Pks & Trails, Greg Howe/Fvl Urban Forester, Frank Sharp, Paul Justis, Aubrey Shepherd, Dave Jurgens/Fvl Water-Wastewater Director, Peg Konert/FFEAC, Katie Teague/WaCo Ext Office, Daniel Schaap,
Terry Eastin
FFEAC LUGI GROUP OBJECTIVE:
Provide economic metrics/rationale/justification* for creation/implementation of City of Fayetteville Governmental and Planning Department policies which establish/promote/support/maintain Green Infrastructure Planning (GIP) and an Enduring Green Network at various levels of scale (to be defined/specified).
STARTING POINT:
Determine ways in which Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA) Green Infrastructure Planning Project (GIPP) recommendations overlap or intersect with current or proposed City of Fayetteville policies.
Note that GI can be viewed more broadly than as outlined in FNHA GIPP.
PROPOSED SCALE/GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS:
Watersheds – Include Hillsides, Riparian Zones, Gray & Green Infrastructures, City/Urban & County/Rural areas
DEFINING GI SCALE & OUTLINING IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
1. Formulate a GI/Enduring Green Network Plan (EGN) which identifies natural/green space Cores/Hubs/Corridors
2. Create tools to assemble and maintain GI/EG Network once it is defined (e.g. Conservation Easements, Guidelines for City Growth and Development)
3. Generate Policies and Ordinances for building the GI and make all development part of EGN – The Riparian Ordinance is a good tool to begin building of an EGN. Streams make good corridors and protection of stream ecology is a good step toward protecting and establishing EGN
GI RATIONALE CATEGORIES – Economic, Environmental Quality, Social Justice, Quality of Life
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR GI
ECONOMIC
1. Conservation Easements – Tax Write-Offs for conserving/preserving land (local e.g. Frank Sharp’s Conservation Easement agreement with City of Fayetteville, Charles J. Finger Park, Mt. Sequoyah Woods)
2. Value &/or increased effectiveness added to City management plans – (e.g. 1980 Green Space Policy, White River Restoration, Green Water District, Storm Water Initiatives)
3. See economics of GI in other cities/areas - Austin, Seattle, Portland, Chesapeake Bay
4. Review work of Terry Whaley/Ozarks Greenways Executive Director (http://www.ozarkgreenways.org/greenway_info.html), “GREAT RIVERS GREENWAYS” (http://www.greatrivers.info/Default.aspx) & Mississippi River Trail (http://www.mississippirivertrail.org/about.html)
Summary Minutes of August 13, 2009 FFEAC LUGI Group Meeting p. 2 of 3
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1. White River Restoration in 1980s – Dramatic improvement in water quality
2. Beaver Water “Green Water District” recently established to mitigate impact on Beaver Lake through minimizing and controlling septic system failures, protecting watershed, reducing nutrient pollution, creating Storm Water initiatives
3. Fayetteville Storm Water (StW) Facility proposed - Feasibility study with Sarah Wrede/Fvl Storm Water Engineer in progress
4. Review other cities/areas approaches to StW Mgmt- Austin, Seattle, Portland, Chesapeake Bay
POINTS NOTED:
· Fayetteville has the most forward looking environmental plan of any of the area municipalities
· The Fayetteville City Administration and Staff acknowledge, refer to, and press for, but cannot enforce compliance with recommendations for adherence to alternative and environmentally progressive Green Infrastructure (GI) practices
· Incentives that demonstrate cost savings or profits that GI could provide, in contrast to cost/benefits of Standard Systems (e.g. curb & gutter storm water infrastructure) are needed to make the case for generation of GI policies, because the City of Fayetteville has Standard Systems on budget and in place
NEXT !!: LAND USE PLANNING & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE MEETING (LUGI)
THURSDAY, SEPT. 17, 7PM, ROOM 111 --CITY HALL
HI ALL---Thanks to all who came to our last meeting, and I hope everyone interested in green infrastructure will be able to come to the Sept. gathering on the 17th. (PLEASE NOTE: This is a different date than what we set at our last meeting. Space was not available on our first date choice.) Harriet Jansma and Dot Neely will chair the Sept. meeting because I'm going to be out of town so please help them help our committee make some progress. Dot has again done her amazing recording of minutes for our Aug. 13 meeting--see below. Thank you so much, Dot. After the minutes, please find a letter from John Pennington summarizing topics needing research in our chosen focus area of
RIPARIAN PROTECTION.
John works for the Washington County Cooperative Extension Service and is heading up a study of our local Clear Creek watershed . That work can work as a model for studying the needs in all our watersheds and therefore a great outline of how we can plug into the needed background for tackling riparian protection. By protecting waterways, we set the stage for connectivity which is key to green infrastructure success. Please contact John if you have specific areas of interest or expertise and are willing to help. Although a number of people believe riparian protection is vital and are learning what "riparian" means ("a $5.00 word for streambank"), we need many people to take the parts of this issue in order to make a whole infrastructure plan a reality.
As you will see, our focus on the riparian protection issue leads to our need for economic studies illustrating the values and costs of land use planning and green infrastructure so we very much need to have everyone interested in the economics of green infrastructure to be working alongside the policy wonks. REMEMBER: If we can't justify our recommendations economically, our chances of seeing them become reality are not good.
Please read these minutes, etc. and plug into one of these activities or needs as best fits your interests, passions, etc.
Below John's letter is an email from Julie McQuade, who works for the city helping coordinate various efforts, the Fayetteville Forward project among them. This is just information which may be helpful to you. Julie says WE NEED TO KEEP TRACK OF OUR VOLUNTEER HOURS FOR HER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS !!!! COULD YOU PLEASE ESTIMATE YOUR TIME SPENT SO FAR ON OUR COMMITTEE WORK AND SEND TO HER, AND ALSO CONTINUE TO KEEP TRACK IN THE FUTURE!!
THANKS AGAIN,
FRAN
********************************************************************
Summary Minutes of August 13, 2009 FFEAC LUGI Group Meeting p. 1 of 3
ATTENDEES: Fran Alexander/Chair FFEAC LUGI Comm, Dot Neely/FNHA-GIPP/FFEAC, Bob Caulk/FHNA, Pete Heinzelmann/FNHA, Harriet Jansma/FNHA, John Pennington/CEA-Agri, James Gibson, Sarah Lewis/Fvl Alderman, Connie Edmonston/Fvl Pks & Trails, Greg Howe/Fvl Urban Forester, Frank Sharp, Paul Justis, Aubrey Shepherd, Dave Jurgens/Fvl Water-Wastewater Director, Peg Konert/FFEAC, Katie Teague/WaCo Ext Office, Daniel Schaap,
Terry Eastin
FFEAC LUGI GROUP OBJECTIVE:
Provide economic metrics/rationale/justification* for creation/implementation of City of Fayetteville Governmental and Planning Department policies which establish/promote/support/maintain Green Infrastructure Planning (GIP) and an Enduring Green Network at various levels of scale (to be defined/specified).
STARTING POINT:
Determine ways in which Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA) Green Infrastructure Planning Project (GIPP) recommendations overlap or intersect with current or proposed City of Fayetteville policies.
Note that GI can be viewed more broadly than as outlined in FNHA GIPP.
PROPOSED SCALE/GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS:
Watersheds – Include Hillsides, Riparian Zones, Gray & Green Infrastructures, City/Urban & County/Rural areas
DEFINING GI SCALE & OUTLINING IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
1. Formulate a GI/Enduring Green Network Plan (EGN) which identifies natural/green space Cores/Hubs/Corridors
2. Create tools to assemble and maintain GI/EG Network once it is defined (e.g. Conservation Easements, Guidelines for City Growth and Development)
3. Generate Policies and Ordinances for building the GI and make all development part of EGN – The Riparian Ordinance is a good tool to begin building of an EGN. Streams make good corridors and protection of stream ecology is a good step toward protecting and establishing EGN
GI RATIONALE CATEGORIES – Economic, Environmental Quality, Social Justice, Quality of Life
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR GI
ECONOMIC
1. Conservation Easements – Tax Write-Offs for conserving/preserving land (local e.g. Frank Sharp’s Conservation Easement agreement with City of Fayetteville, Charles J. Finger Park, Mt. Sequoyah Woods)
2. Value &/or increased effectiveness added to City management plans – (e.g. 1980 Green Space Policy, White River Restoration, Green Water District, Storm Water Initiatives)
3. See economics of GI in other cities/areas - Austin, Seattle, Portland, Chesapeake Bay
4. Review work of Terry Whaley/Ozarks Greenways Executive Director (http://www.ozarkgreenways.org/greenway_info.html), “GREAT RIVERS GREENWAYS” (http://www.greatrivers.info/Default.aspx) & Mississippi River Trail (http://www.mississippirivertrail.org/about.html)
Summary Minutes of August 13, 2009 FFEAC LUGI Group Meeting p. 2 of 3
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1. White River Restoration in 1980s – Dramatic improvement in water quality
2. Beaver Water “Green Water District” recently established to mitigate impact on Beaver Lake through minimizing and controlling septic system failures, protecting watershed, reducing nutrient pollution, creating Storm Water initiatives
3. Fayetteville Storm Water (StW) Facility proposed - Feasibility study with Sarah Wrede/Fvl Storm Water Engineer in progress
4. Review other cities/areas approaches to StW Mgmt- Austin, Seattle, Portland, Chesapeake Bay
POINTS NOTED:
· Fayetteville has the most forward looking environmental plan of any of the area municipalities
· The Fayetteville City Administration and Staff acknowledge, refer to, and press for, but cannot enforce compliance with recommendations for adherence to alternative and environmentally progressive Green Infrastructure (GI) practices
· Incentives that demonstrate cost savings or profits that GI could provide, in contrast to cost/benefits of Standard Systems (e.g. curb & gutter storm water infrastructure) are needed to make the case for generation of GI policies, because the City of Fayetteville has Standard Systems on budget and in place
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Leased riparian areas to be restored to protect Illinois watershed
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
State, Federal Government To Lease Land To Protect River
By Doug Thompson
THE MORNING NEWS
ROGERS — More than 20 square miles of land along the Illinois River and its tributaries will be planted with trees, native grasses and other plants under a project launched Tuesday.
The program's goal is to stop 10,000 tons a year of pollutants and sediment from getting into the river, state and federal organizers said. The 15,000-acre, $30 million program will be the largest of its type in Arkansas, by far, said Randy Young, director of the state Natural Resources Commission.
"Northwest Arkansas, growing economic gem that it is, is also cognizant of the need to protect our natural resources," said Gov. Mike Beebe. The governor publicly thanked the Walton Family Foundation for a $1 million contribution to the project.
The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program is voluntary, organizers said. Landowners can apply to sign 15-year contracts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture for their plots of land along the river and streams.
Cropland and poor quality pastures are sought under the $30 million project. Those lands will be planted with native plants to stem erosion and provide food and shelter to wildlife, organizers said. The contracts will pay an estimated average of $85 per acre annually with a starting bonus amounting to as much as $350 an acre.
"I'm very interested. I'd sign up today if the forms were here," said dairy farmer Bill Haak of Gentry. "This is very farmer friendly and, if you look at the details, you can see that the people who wrote this up have the insight into what will make it work."
"I have grandkids," Haak said when asked why he was interested. "You need another reason than that? Well, this is a chance for farmers to step up to the plate and help preserve water quality."
Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson is suing Arkansas poultry companies in federal court over pollution in the Illinois River. The case is scheduled for trial Sept. 21.
"We hope this project will help prevent pollution from reaching the waters of the Illinois and its tributaries and support these types of efforts in both states," Edmondson said in a prepared statement about Tuesday's announcement.
The conservation program in Arkansas will match up with a similar one in Oklahoma. The two programs will cover the entire Illinois River watershed, Young said.
Of the $30 million, $24 million will come from a federal appropriation sought and obtained largely through the efforts of 3rd District Rep. John Boozman, R-Rogers, organizers said. Most of the rest will come from a $1.5 million appropriation from the state and in-kind services provided by the state, such as planning for each plot's project by the state Game and Fish Department and other agencies and water quality monitoring by the state Department of Environmental Quality.
Contact Information
Watershed Leases
Those interested in the project can call the Washington County office of the federal Farm Service Agency, 479-521-4520, or the Benton County office, 479-273-2622. Information is also available at www.fsa.usda.gov.
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
State, Federal Government To Lease Land To Protect River
By Doug Thompson
THE MORNING NEWS
ROGERS — More than 20 square miles of land along the Illinois River and its tributaries will be planted with trees, native grasses and other plants under a project launched Tuesday.
The program's goal is to stop 10,000 tons a year of pollutants and sediment from getting into the river, state and federal organizers said. The 15,000-acre, $30 million program will be the largest of its type in Arkansas, by far, said Randy Young, director of the state Natural Resources Commission.
"Northwest Arkansas, growing economic gem that it is, is also cognizant of the need to protect our natural resources," said Gov. Mike Beebe. The governor publicly thanked the Walton Family Foundation for a $1 million contribution to the project.
The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program is voluntary, organizers said. Landowners can apply to sign 15-year contracts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture for their plots of land along the river and streams.
Cropland and poor quality pastures are sought under the $30 million project. Those lands will be planted with native plants to stem erosion and provide food and shelter to wildlife, organizers said. The contracts will pay an estimated average of $85 per acre annually with a starting bonus amounting to as much as $350 an acre.
"I'm very interested. I'd sign up today if the forms were here," said dairy farmer Bill Haak of Gentry. "This is very farmer friendly and, if you look at the details, you can see that the people who wrote this up have the insight into what will make it work."
"I have grandkids," Haak said when asked why he was interested. "You need another reason than that? Well, this is a chance for farmers to step up to the plate and help preserve water quality."
Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson is suing Arkansas poultry companies in federal court over pollution in the Illinois River. The case is scheduled for trial Sept. 21.
"We hope this project will help prevent pollution from reaching the waters of the Illinois and its tributaries and support these types of efforts in both states," Edmondson said in a prepared statement about Tuesday's announcement.
The conservation program in Arkansas will match up with a similar one in Oklahoma. The two programs will cover the entire Illinois River watershed, Young said.
Of the $30 million, $24 million will come from a federal appropriation sought and obtained largely through the efforts of 3rd District Rep. John Boozman, R-Rogers, organizers said. Most of the rest will come from a $1.5 million appropriation from the state and in-kind services provided by the state, such as planning for each plot's project by the state Game and Fish Department and other agencies and water quality monitoring by the state Department of Environmental Quality.
Contact Information
Watershed Leases
Those interested in the project can call the Washington County office of the federal Farm Service Agency, 479-521-4520, or the Benton County office, 479-273-2622. Information is also available at www.fsa.usda.gov.
Video from the Fayetteville National Cemetery with Washington County Livestock Auction barn in the background
Please go to
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7295307@N02
to see some of today's photos online. My picasa gigabite is full!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7295307@N02
to see some of today's photos online. My picasa gigabite is full!
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Fayetteville Forward green-infrastructure committee to meet at 7 p.m. in Room 111 of City Hall
R: Land Use Planning & Green Infrastructure Committee
HELLO ALL--
Thursday, Aug. 13
7 p.m. Room 111, City Hall
This is your reminder that we will be meeting again this Thursday to both review what we accomplished last month (see the recent committee/report work below--in case you didn't open these in July when sent)
AND formulating what we want to accomplish in each group. I hope you have all been researching in your areas of interest or contemplating how you would like to contribute to formalizing the avenues to establishing a green infrastructure for Fayetteville.
In the Policy realm, for example, I talked last week with a few people from different departments in the city and learned that a riparian ordinance is being developed, but it's not ready for "prime time" yet. When it is, they said our committee would definitely be asked for input and help in putting it into shape. This ordinance will be very important in addressing water quality issues. As most of you may know, Alderman Sarah Lewis has been working on a Low Impact Development ordinance, which ties directly into watershed issues as well. The current city Hillside Ordinance needs close examination for strengths and weaknesses, especially in regard to watershed integrity, and this is a very important role this sub-committee could play in green infrastructure enhancement. And, of course, if we have committee members who can work to formulate an effort for Transfer of Development Rights legislation, passage of this enabling law would make green infrastructure linking and corridor/hub/core acquisitions much more feasible.
And, the needed policies that link to the work of the Green Infrastructure:Identification and Definition sub-committee need to be discussed at this August meeting.
The economic impacts, advantages or disadvantages, of local green infrastructure (or the lack thereof) need to be discussed and avenues determined as to how to evaluate these impacts.
We have a lot to do! And it's all very important work!
Here are a few links people have sent to me since our last meeting. Please help our efforts by familiarizing yourself with some of this material and adding to it:
http://www.tpl.org/content_documents/EconBenefitsReport_7_2009.pdf
http://www.jeffersoncountywv.org/JCGIA/Jefferson%20County%20Green%20Infrastructure%20Assessment.htm
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Groundwater
http://www.solaramericacities.energy.gov/
HELLO ALL--
Thursday, Aug. 13
7 p.m. Room 111, City Hall
This is your reminder that we will be meeting again this Thursday to both review what we accomplished last month (see the recent committee/report work below--in case you didn't open these in July when sent)
AND formulating what we want to accomplish in each group. I hope you have all been researching in your areas of interest or contemplating how you would like to contribute to formalizing the avenues to establishing a green infrastructure for Fayetteville.
In the Policy realm, for example, I talked last week with a few people from different departments in the city and learned that a riparian ordinance is being developed, but it's not ready for "prime time" yet. When it is, they said our committee would definitely be asked for input and help in putting it into shape. This ordinance will be very important in addressing water quality issues. As most of you may know, Alderman Sarah Lewis has been working on a Low Impact Development ordinance, which ties directly into watershed issues as well. The current city Hillside Ordinance needs close examination for strengths and weaknesses, especially in regard to watershed integrity, and this is a very important role this sub-committee could play in green infrastructure enhancement. And, of course, if we have committee members who can work to formulate an effort for Transfer of Development Rights legislation, passage of this enabling law would make green infrastructure linking and corridor/hub/core acquisitions much more feasible.
And, the needed policies that link to the work of the Green Infrastructure:Identification and Definition sub-committee need to be discussed at this August meeting.
The economic impacts, advantages or disadvantages, of local green infrastructure (or the lack thereof) need to be discussed and avenues determined as to how to evaluate these impacts.
We have a lot to do! And it's all very important work!
Here are a few links people have sent to me since our last meeting. Please help our efforts by familiarizing yourself with some of this material and adding to it:
http://www.tpl.org/content_documents/EconBenefitsReport_7_2009.pdf
http://www.jeffersoncountywv.org/JCGIA/Jefferson%20County%20Green%20Infrastructure%20Assessment.htm
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Groundwater
http://www.solaramericacities.energy.gov/
Monday, August 3, 2009
Green Faith Alliance of Central Arkansas to meet by telephone with like-minded or curious Northwest Arkansas residents at UA business school
The Green Faith Alliance of Central Arkansas will meet with us by
telephone on Monday, August 3, at 5:30 pm. Our meeting will be held in
Willard J. Walker Hall, room 546 (fifth floor) on the Business School Campus area at the
University. Attached are directions (from I-540) to the Harmon
parking garage, which is directly across from Walker Hall. The cost
to park there is about $3 for an hour.
As you may recall from my previous email, we talked briefly about the
possibility of having a Green Faith Alliance of Arkansas (dropping the
word “central”) instead of forming a second group called Green Faith
Alliance of Northwest Arkansas. This way, there would be one group,
instead of two, and we might accomplish more by working together than
we can separately.
I am currently on vacation in Georgia. Vivian Hill from St. Paul’s
will be your host for this meeting.
Please RSVP accept or regret to Vivian at vhill@walton.uark.edu as
soon as you can.
We hope that you will be able to join us for this meeting. Again, the
details are:
· Monday, August 3rd
5:30 pm
Willard J Walker Hall, Room 546, U of A Campus
Many thanks to you and thanks for your ministry for the planet that we share.
Michele Halsell
telephone on Monday, August 3, at 5:30 pm. Our meeting will be held in
Willard J. Walker Hall, room 546 (fifth floor) on the Business School Campus area at the
University. Attached are directions (from I-540) to the Harmon
parking garage, which is directly across from Walker Hall. The cost
to park there is about $3 for an hour.
As you may recall from my previous email, we talked briefly about the
possibility of having a Green Faith Alliance of Arkansas (dropping the
word “central”) instead of forming a second group called Green Faith
Alliance of Northwest Arkansas. This way, there would be one group,
instead of two, and we might accomplish more by working together than
we can separately.
I am currently on vacation in Georgia. Vivian Hill from St. Paul’s
will be your host for this meeting.
Please RSVP accept or regret to Vivian at vhill@walton.uark.edu as
soon as you can.
We hope that you will be able to join us for this meeting. Again, the
details are:
· Monday, August 3rd
5:30 pm
Willard J Walker Hall, Room 546, U of A Campus
Many thanks to you and thanks for your ministry for the planet that we share.
Michele Halsell
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Carbon Caps Task Force meeting at 1:30 p.m. today at the OMNI Center office downstairs at 902 W. Maple
Sunday August 2
1:30 pm
Carbon Caps Task Force
Re-Organizing Meeting
OMNI office
United Campus Ministries 902 W. Maple (Maple Street & Storer Avenue)
Several interesting options for action are emerging. Come find out how you can plug in, because you are needed. And meet OMNI's new environmental organizer, Ryan Bancroft. And Robert McAfee will bring lemon cake. You don't want to miss this meeting.
Gladys Tiffany
www.omnicenter.org
Omni Center for Peace, Justice & Ecology
Fayetteville, Arkansas USA
479-973-9049 -- gladystiffany@yahoo.com
1:30 pm
Carbon Caps Task Force
Re-Organizing Meeting
OMNI office
United Campus Ministries 902 W. Maple (Maple Street & Storer Avenue)
Several interesting options for action are emerging. Come find out how you can plug in, because you are needed. And meet OMNI's new environmental organizer, Ryan Bancroft. And Robert McAfee will bring lemon cake. You don't want to miss this meeting.
Gladys Tiffany
www.omnicenter.org
Omni Center for Peace, Justice & Ecology
Fayetteville, Arkansas USA
479-973-9049 -- gladystiffany@yahoo.com
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Fayetteville food drive and Washington County "stop the quarry" efforts touted on square on Saturday July 18, 2009
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of details. The finger points to the area where the red-dirt pit that owners want to convert to a limestone mine sits on the edge of Fayetteville. It is up to the Washington County Quorum Court to see that the proposal is not allowed. Residents of Fayetteville and the rest of Washington County must let their justices of the peace know their feelings about this project or it could become an even uglier disaster than shown on the poster. And the limestone pit is estimated to take 75 years to deplete!
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Land-use and Green Infrastructure committee brings together wise heads on Thursday July 9, 2009
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of Fayetteville residents planning efforts of green-infrastructure and land-use committee of the Fayetteville Forward summit on July 9, 2009.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Land-use and Green Infrastructure committee to meet at 7 p.m. Thursday July 9, 2009
THE NEXT MEETING OF THE FAYETTEVILLE FORWARD ECONOMIC ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL'S LAND USE PLANNING AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE WILL BE:
THURSDAY---JULY 9-----7 PM-----ROOM 111 ------ CITY HALL
GOAL SETTING: This meeting will briefly review the "What We Have" and "What We Need" of each category and determine short term goals in order to take our information and needs to the next level. Committees have been formed and objectives outlined:
Define and Identify: Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure
Develop: Policy-- To make Land Use and Green Infrastructure Plan
Describe: Economic Impacts with or without LU & GI Planning
The Committee will review discussion at the June 4 meeting summarized below::
Bob Caulk of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association presented a power point program outlining the organizations work to date including maps of green areas within and surrounding Fayetteville. He also described the group’s ongoing effort to present infrastructure planning into the small towns on Fayetteville’s borders -- Johnson, Greenland, Farmington, and the Lake Wedington area---as well as plans to bring their project to Fayetteville.
Three poster boards were available for recording WHAT WE HAVE and WHAT WE NEED in each of the three categories for attendees to suggest where the community should be putting green infrastructure/land use planning into the working policies of our community and area.
IDENTIFY: LAND USE PLANNING AND GREEN RASTRUCTURE
What We Have---
--Maps/work/contacts generated by Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
--School grounds, parks, trails, green spaces –private and public
--Botanical Garden of the Ozarks
--“will”
What We Need----
--Geologic map of city
--Inventory of old growth forest remnants
--Outreach to neighborhoods, individuals, businesses, and other communities to explain and garner support for green infrastructure
DEVELOP: POLICIES –TO MAKE LAND USE & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE A REALITY
What we have----
Stormwater Issues & Actions
--Developing Stormwater Feasability Study—by Council Directive
--Stormwater infrastructure
--Planning Ordinances & Policies
--Field staff for storm water maintenance
--Nutrient Reduction Plan
Trees---Tree Preservation Ordinance and Landscape Manual
Green Teams---in schools
What we need-----
Storm Water--Complete Storm Water Feasibility Study
--Develop way to move forward—
--Identify ordinances, structure, philosophy, changes
Trees & Habitat
--Conduct Ecological analysis to see if Tree Ordinance working
--Establish a Wildlife Habitat Preservation Ordinance as part of Green Infrastructure
--Conduct a UFORE study to establish data on what trees contribute from an economic point of view
--Encourage use of native plant species
Other----
--Establish a Riparian Zone Ordinance
--Improve/strengthen the Hillside Ordinance
--Transfer Development Rights---get state enabling legislation passed
--Underground Utility policy for public construction projects
--Habitat or conservation zoning
--Education about structural designs that support roof gardens, etc.
--Bees throughout city –attention to insects and pollination needs they provide as well as the ecological system links between insects and bird and bat populations
--Educate children and adults
ECONOMICS ---IMPACTS OF LAND USE PLANNING & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
What we have----
--Websites & Links
* Robert Costanza/ Gund Institute Website: http://www.uvm.edu/giee/?Page=about/Robert_Costanza.html&SM=about/about_menu.html
“The Gund Institute for Ecological Economics (GIEE) is an environmental institute housed at The Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Vermont. Its primary mission is the study of the relationships between ecological and economic systems through the collaborative work of experts, educators, students, and others from around the world and across a wide variety of academic and environmental disciplines related to ecological economics."
:
THURSDAY---JULY 9-----7 PM-----ROOM 111 ------ CITY HALL
GOAL SETTING: This meeting will briefly review the "What We Have" and "What We Need" of each category and determine short term goals in order to take our information and needs to the next level. Committees have been formed and objectives outlined:
Define and Identify: Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure
Develop: Policy-- To make Land Use and Green Infrastructure Plan
Describe: Economic Impacts with or without LU & GI Planning
The Committee will review discussion at the June 4 meeting summarized below::
Bob Caulk of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association presented a power point program outlining the organizations work to date including maps of green areas within and surrounding Fayetteville. He also described the group’s ongoing effort to present infrastructure planning into the small towns on Fayetteville’s borders -- Johnson, Greenland, Farmington, and the Lake Wedington area---as well as plans to bring their project to Fayetteville.
Three poster boards were available for recording WHAT WE HAVE and WHAT WE NEED in each of the three categories for attendees to suggest where the community should be putting green infrastructure/land use planning into the working policies of our community and area.
IDENTIFY: LAND USE PLANNING AND GREEN RASTRUCTURE
What We Have---
--Maps/work/contacts generated by Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
--School grounds, parks, trails, green spaces –private and public
--Botanical Garden of the Ozarks
--“will”
What We Need----
--Geologic map of city
--Inventory of old growth forest remnants
--Outreach to neighborhoods, individuals, businesses, and other communities to explain and garner support for green infrastructure
DEVELOP: POLICIES –TO MAKE LAND USE & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE A REALITY
What we have----
Stormwater Issues & Actions
--Developing Stormwater Feasability Study—by Council Directive
--Stormwater infrastructure
--Planning Ordinances & Policies
--Field staff for storm water maintenance
--Nutrient Reduction Plan
Trees---Tree Preservation Ordinance and Landscape Manual
Green Teams---in schools
What we need-----
Storm Water--Complete Storm Water Feasibility Study
--Develop way to move forward—
--Identify ordinances, structure, philosophy, changes
Trees & Habitat
--Conduct Ecological analysis to see if Tree Ordinance working
--Establish a Wildlife Habitat Preservation Ordinance as part of Green Infrastructure
--Conduct a UFORE study to establish data on what trees contribute from an economic point of view
--Encourage use of native plant species
Other----
--Establish a Riparian Zone Ordinance
--Improve/strengthen the Hillside Ordinance
--Transfer Development Rights---get state enabling legislation passed
--Underground Utility policy for public construction projects
--Habitat or conservation zoning
--Education about structural designs that support roof gardens, etc.
--Bees throughout city –attention to insects and pollination needs they provide as well as the ecological system links between insects and bird and bat populations
--Educate children and adults
ECONOMICS ---IMPACTS OF LAND USE PLANNING & GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
What we have----
--Websites & Links
* Robert Costanza/ Gund Institute Website: http://www.uvm.edu/giee/?Page=about/Robert_Costanza.html&SM=about/about_menu.html
“The Gund Institute for Ecological Economics (GIEE) is an environmental institute housed at The Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Vermont. Its primary mission is the study of the relationships between ecological and economic systems through the collaborative work of experts, educators, students, and others from around the world and across a wide variety of academic and environmental disciplines related to ecological economics."
:
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Joe Neal's new book now for sale
Please click on images to ENLARGE
Northwest Arkansas Audubon Society has published a new book, BIRDS in northwestern Arkansas, an ecological perspective. This venture is part of the ongoing re-launch of NWAAS. It narrates and summarizes a mass of
bird data from 9 counties in the NW corner of the state -- Breeding Bird Surveys, Christmas Bird Counts, records in Arkansas Audubon Society bird records database by many observers, Forest Service landbird point counts, field research by graduate students, etc. The book is $12.95 and is available at Nightbird Books in Fayetteville (205 W. Dickson). It is also available by mail by contacting our immediate past president, Joan Reynolds (joanreynolds@gmail.com)-- cost, 12.95 plus 3.00 postage. The book will also be available while they last (small press run) at society
functions, including the upcoming July 12 field trip to Chesney Prairie Natural Area -- bring the correct amount (if by check, make it out to NWAAS). Finally, if we sell 5 or more copies in one transaction, the price is $10 each (so get together & save more; this price would not include
postage, if the books are to be mailed). This is a not-for-profit venture. Hopefully, this will widen understanding of bird occurrences in this part of Arkansas and stimulate more birding!
Northwest Arkansas Audubon Society has published a new book, BIRDS in northwestern Arkansas, an ecological perspective. This venture is part of the ongoing re-launch of NWAAS. It narrates and summarizes a mass of
bird data from 9 counties in the NW corner of the state -- Breeding Bird Surveys, Christmas Bird Counts, records in Arkansas Audubon Society bird records database by many observers, Forest Service landbird point counts, field research by graduate students, etc. The book is $12.95 and is available at Nightbird Books in Fayetteville (205 W. Dickson). It is also available by mail by contacting our immediate past president, Joan Reynolds (joanreynolds@gmail.com)-- cost, 12.95 plus 3.00 postage. The book will also be available while they last (small press run) at society
functions, including the upcoming July 12 field trip to Chesney Prairie Natural Area -- bring the correct amount (if by check, make it out to NWAAS). Finally, if we sell 5 or more copies in one transaction, the price is $10 each (so get together & save more; this price would not include
postage, if the books are to be mailed). This is a not-for-profit venture. Hopefully, this will widen understanding of bird occurrences in this part of Arkansas and stimulate more birding!
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Honeybee on butterfly milkweed on June 30, 2009
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of honeybee on milkweed on June 30, 2009, at World Peace Wetland Prairie.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Butterfly gardens easy to grow all over, especially in the black, rich soil of the Town Branch valley in south Fayetteville, Arkansas
Please click on image to ENlarge view of obedient plant on Pinnacle Foods Inc. Prairie west of World Peace Wetland Prairie on June 19, 2009, a big non-native pink flower whose name I can't remember at the moment at the entry to the trail through Pinnacle Prairie and a butterfly milkweed near WPWP.
Butterfly gardens can be grown throughout the
United States. There is a wide variety of both butterfly
attracting (nectar) plants and host (food) plants cover-
ing climates zones throughout the country.
Creating a Garden
Gardens can range in size from containers to sever-
al acres. Butterflies like sunny sites and areas sheltered
from high winds and predators. Warm, sheltered sites
are most needed in the spring and fall. Butterflies are
cold-blooded insects that can only fly well when their
body temperatures are above 70oF. They are often seen
resting on rocks, which reflect the heat of the sun help-
ing to raise their body temperatures, so be sure to
include some rocks in your garden. It’s also beneficial
to have partly shady areas, like trees or shrubs, so they
can hide when it’s cloudy or cool off if it’s very hot.
Plants that attract butterflies are usually classified
as those that areafood source,anectar source or both.
Butterflies require food plants for their larval stages and
nectar plants for the adult stage. Some larvae feed on
specifichost plants, while others will feed on a variety
of plants. If possible, include both larval host plants
and adult nectar plants in your butterfly garden.
Butterflies also like puddles. Males of several
species congregate at small rain pools, forming “puddle
clubs”. Permanent puddles are very easy to make by
buryingabucket to therim, filling it with gravel or
sand, and then pouring in liquids such as stale beer,
sweet drinks or water. Overripe fruit, allowed to sit for
afew days is a very attractive substance to butterflies
as well!
Life Cycle of A Butterfly
Butterflies go through a four-stage developmental
process known as metamorphosis (egg, larva or caterpil-
lar, pupa or chrysalis and adult). Understanding a but-
terfly’s life cycle can make butterfly watching more
enjoyable, andthis knowledge is an important asset to
those who want to understand the principles of attract-
ingbutterflies to their gardens.
Butterflies begin their life as an egg, laid either
singly or in clusters depending on the species. A very
tiny caterpillar emerges and, after consuming its egg
shell, begins feeding on its host plant. Caterpillars must
crawl out of their skin or molt, usually around five times,
before changing into a pupa. Finally, an adult butterfly
emerges, spreads its wings and flies away.
Butterflies typically lay their eggs in late spring and
hatch 3 to 6 days after they are laid. It takes 3 to 4
weeks for a caterpillar to pupate and 9 to 14 days to
emerge as an adult.
Host Plants
Adult female butterflies spend time searching for
food plants required by the immature caterpillar stage.
Most butterflies have specific host plants on which they
develop. For example, caterpillars of the monarch but-
terfly develop only on milkweed, while the black swal-
lowtail feeds only on parsley, dill and closely related
plants. Planting an adequate supply of the proper host
plants gives butterflies a place to lay their eggs, which
will successfully hatch and result in butterflies that will
continue to visit thegarden. Providing the necessary
food plants for the developing caterpillars also allows
production of a “native” population that can be
observed in all stages ofdevelopment.
To enjoy adult butterflies, you have to be willing to
allow their caterpillars to feed on foliage in your garden.
Food source plants that support caterpillars include the
annual marigold, snapdragon and violet; the perennial
butterfly milkweed, daisy and various herbs; the ash,
birch, cherry, dogwood, poplar and willow trees; lilac
shrubs; juniper evergreens and more.
The weediness of some host plants makes them less
than desirable for a space within your more attractive
garden beds, but they serve the same function if you
place them away in a corner of the yard. To keep them
from becoming invasive, remember to remove their
spentblooms before they go to seed.
Plants to Attract Butterflies
To attract the most butterflies, design a garden
that provides a long season of flowers (nectar plants).
The time of flowering, duration of bloom, flower color
and plant size are all important considerations when
selecting plants to attract butterflies. A wide variety of
food plants will give the greatest diversity of visitors.
Choose a mixture of annuals and perennials.
Annuals bloom all summer but must be replanted every
spring (after the last frost). Perennials bloom year after
year from the same roots but their blooming periods are
typically limited to a few weeks or months. To ensure
the availability of nectar sources throughout the sum-
mer, long-blooming annuals should be planted between
the perennials.
Try staggering wild and cultivated plants, as well as
blooming times of the day and year. Planting in mass
(several plants of the same kind) will usually attract
more butterflies, as there is more nectar available to
them at a single stop. Plants with clusters of flowers
are often better than plants with small, single flowers
because it is easier for butterflies to landon clustered
and/or larger flowers.
Many plants which attract butterflies, especially
trees and shrubs, may already be present in a specific
area. Shrubs include azalea, spirea, butterfly bush and
lilacs. Although weeds andsomenative plants are gen-
erally not welcomein a garden, allowingthem to grow
under supervision may be an option, as these plants
help attract butterflies. Try to avoid plants that readily
reseed and may take over and dominate garden sites.
Perennials, such as chives, dianthus, beebalm, but-
terfly weed, mints, black-eyed susan and purple cone-
flower offer a succession of blooms, other perennials
include coreopsis, lavender, phlox, sedum and yarrow.
Add annuals that flower all season, such as cosmos, lan-
tana, pentas,petunias, phlox, salvia and zinnias. Select
flowers with manysmall tubular flowers or florets like
liatris, goldenrod and verbena. Or chose those with sin-
gle flowers, such as marigold, daisy and sunflower.
Butterflies are attracted to flowers with strong
scents and bright colors, where they drink sweet energy-
rich nectar. Planting a variety of nectar sources will
encourage more butterflies to visit the garden.
For better butterfly viewing, plant the tallest
plants in the rear of the garden and work smaller or
shorter towardthefront.
Butterfly
Gardens
Creating, Growing and Enjoying
EARLMAYSEED&NURSERY
www.earlmay.com
SHENANDOAH, IOWA51603
Butterfly Host Plants(continued)
Trees Herbs
Ash Dill
Birch Parsley
Cherry Sweet Fennel
Dogwood
Linden
Poplar
Willow
Butterfly Attracting Plants
Annuals Perennials
Ageratum Aster
Cosmos Beebalm
Gomphrena Blanket Flower
Heliotrope Butterfly Milkweed
Lantana Coreopsis
Marigold Daisy
Nasturtium Dame’s Rocket
Nicotiana Daylily
Pentas Dianthus
Petunia Liatris
Phlox Phlox
Salvia Purple Coneflower
Snapdragon Rudbeckia
Statice Russian Sage
Sunflower Salvia
Sweet Alyssum Scabiosa
Verbena Sedum
Zinnia Veronica
Yarrow
Shrubs Herbs
Azalea Catnip
Butterfly Bush Chives
Lilacs Lavender
Mock Orange Mint
Potentilla
Viburnun
Cut Back on Insecticides
It’s difficult to have a successful butterfly garden
inalocation where insecticides are used. Pesticides,
specifically insecticides, kill not only the insects you
want to get rid of – they also kill the insects you want
tokeep, such as monarch caterpillars. Even biological
controls such as Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) will kill but-
terfly larvae. When treating for insect pests, always
consider non-chemical methods of pest control before
turning to pesticides.
Let Your Garden Grow
Most butterfly species over-winter nearby. This
means that their eggs, chrysalises, or larvae are likely to
be in or near your yard during the non-gardening
months. Some will even hibernate as adults. Do not
mow weed sites, cut down dead plants or dismantle
woodpiles which provide them safe shelter in the off-
season until the weather warms up.
Enjoying Your Butterfly Garden
Butterfly gardens are a great source of enjoyment
for everyone. Visiting butterflies include a variety of
different species and names, depending upon the region
of the country in which you live. To learn more about
which plants help in attracting butterflies get your copy
of National Wildlife Federation Attracting Birds,
Butterflies and Other Backyard Wildlife by David
Mizejewski or the Earl May Perennial Guideavailable at
your local Earl May Nursery & Garden Center.
Butterfly Host Plants
Annuals Perennials
Marigold Butterfly Milkweed
Snapdragon Daisy
Violet
Shrubs Evergreens
Lilacs Juniper
IBM# 912600 750 4/08
Copyright Earl May Seed & Nursery L.C. ©
Butterfly gardens can be grown throughout the
United States. There is a wide variety of both butterfly
attracting (nectar) plants and host (food) plants cover-
ing climates zones throughout the country.
Creating a Garden
Gardens can range in size from containers to sever-
al acres. Butterflies like sunny sites and areas sheltered
from high winds and predators. Warm, sheltered sites
are most needed in the spring and fall. Butterflies are
cold-blooded insects that can only fly well when their
body temperatures are above 70oF. They are often seen
resting on rocks, which reflect the heat of the sun help-
ing to raise their body temperatures, so be sure to
include some rocks in your garden. It’s also beneficial
to have partly shady areas, like trees or shrubs, so they
can hide when it’s cloudy or cool off if it’s very hot.
Plants that attract butterflies are usually classified
as those that areafood source,anectar source or both.
Butterflies require food plants for their larval stages and
nectar plants for the adult stage. Some larvae feed on
specifichost plants, while others will feed on a variety
of plants. If possible, include both larval host plants
and adult nectar plants in your butterfly garden.
Butterflies also like puddles. Males of several
species congregate at small rain pools, forming “puddle
clubs”. Permanent puddles are very easy to make by
buryingabucket to therim, filling it with gravel or
sand, and then pouring in liquids such as stale beer,
sweet drinks or water. Overripe fruit, allowed to sit for
afew days is a very attractive substance to butterflies
as well!
Life Cycle of A Butterfly
Butterflies go through a four-stage developmental
process known as metamorphosis (egg, larva or caterpil-
lar, pupa or chrysalis and adult). Understanding a but-
terfly’s life cycle can make butterfly watching more
enjoyable, andthis knowledge is an important asset to
those who want to understand the principles of attract-
ingbutterflies to their gardens.
Butterflies begin their life as an egg, laid either
singly or in clusters depending on the species. A very
tiny caterpillar emerges and, after consuming its egg
shell, begins feeding on its host plant. Caterpillars must
crawl out of their skin or molt, usually around five times,
before changing into a pupa. Finally, an adult butterfly
emerges, spreads its wings and flies away.
Butterflies typically lay their eggs in late spring and
hatch 3 to 6 days after they are laid. It takes 3 to 4
weeks for a caterpillar to pupate and 9 to 14 days to
emerge as an adult.
Host Plants
Adult female butterflies spend time searching for
food plants required by the immature caterpillar stage.
Most butterflies have specific host plants on which they
develop. For example, caterpillars of the monarch but-
terfly develop only on milkweed, while the black swal-
lowtail feeds only on parsley, dill and closely related
plants. Planting an adequate supply of the proper host
plants gives butterflies a place to lay their eggs, which
will successfully hatch and result in butterflies that will
continue to visit thegarden. Providing the necessary
food plants for the developing caterpillars also allows
production of a “native” population that can be
observed in all stages ofdevelopment.
To enjoy adult butterflies, you have to be willing to
allow their caterpillars to feed on foliage in your garden.
Food source plants that support caterpillars include the
annual marigold, snapdragon and violet; the perennial
butterfly milkweed, daisy and various herbs; the ash,
birch, cherry, dogwood, poplar and willow trees; lilac
shrubs; juniper evergreens and more.
The weediness of some host plants makes them less
than desirable for a space within your more attractive
garden beds, but they serve the same function if you
place them away in a corner of the yard. To keep them
from becoming invasive, remember to remove their
spentblooms before they go to seed.
Plants to Attract Butterflies
To attract the most butterflies, design a garden
that provides a long season of flowers (nectar plants).
The time of flowering, duration of bloom, flower color
and plant size are all important considerations when
selecting plants to attract butterflies. A wide variety of
food plants will give the greatest diversity of visitors.
Choose a mixture of annuals and perennials.
Annuals bloom all summer but must be replanted every
spring (after the last frost). Perennials bloom year after
year from the same roots but their blooming periods are
typically limited to a few weeks or months. To ensure
the availability of nectar sources throughout the sum-
mer, long-blooming annuals should be planted between
the perennials.
Try staggering wild and cultivated plants, as well as
blooming times of the day and year. Planting in mass
(several plants of the same kind) will usually attract
more butterflies, as there is more nectar available to
them at a single stop. Plants with clusters of flowers
are often better than plants with small, single flowers
because it is easier for butterflies to landon clustered
and/or larger flowers.
Many plants which attract butterflies, especially
trees and shrubs, may already be present in a specific
area. Shrubs include azalea, spirea, butterfly bush and
lilacs. Although weeds andsomenative plants are gen-
erally not welcomein a garden, allowingthem to grow
under supervision may be an option, as these plants
help attract butterflies. Try to avoid plants that readily
reseed and may take over and dominate garden sites.
Perennials, such as chives, dianthus, beebalm, but-
terfly weed, mints, black-eyed susan and purple cone-
flower offer a succession of blooms, other perennials
include coreopsis, lavender, phlox, sedum and yarrow.
Add annuals that flower all season, such as cosmos, lan-
tana, pentas,petunias, phlox, salvia and zinnias. Select
flowers with manysmall tubular flowers or florets like
liatris, goldenrod and verbena. Or chose those with sin-
gle flowers, such as marigold, daisy and sunflower.
Butterflies are attracted to flowers with strong
scents and bright colors, where they drink sweet energy-
rich nectar. Planting a variety of nectar sources will
encourage more butterflies to visit the garden.
For better butterfly viewing, plant the tallest
plants in the rear of the garden and work smaller or
shorter towardthefront.
Butterfly
Gardens
Creating, Growing and Enjoying
EARLMAYSEED&NURSERY
www.earlmay.com
SHENANDOAH, IOWA51603
Butterfly Host Plants(continued)
Trees Herbs
Ash Dill
Birch Parsley
Cherry Sweet Fennel
Dogwood
Linden
Poplar
Willow
Butterfly Attracting Plants
Annuals Perennials
Ageratum Aster
Cosmos Beebalm
Gomphrena Blanket Flower
Heliotrope Butterfly Milkweed
Lantana Coreopsis
Marigold Daisy
Nasturtium Dame’s Rocket
Nicotiana Daylily
Pentas Dianthus
Petunia Liatris
Phlox Phlox
Salvia Purple Coneflower
Snapdragon Rudbeckia
Statice Russian Sage
Sunflower Salvia
Sweet Alyssum Scabiosa
Verbena Sedum
Zinnia Veronica
Yarrow
Shrubs Herbs
Azalea Catnip
Butterfly Bush Chives
Lilacs Lavender
Mock Orange Mint
Potentilla
Viburnun
Cut Back on Insecticides
It’s difficult to have a successful butterfly garden
inalocation where insecticides are used. Pesticides,
specifically insecticides, kill not only the insects you
want to get rid of – they also kill the insects you want
tokeep, such as monarch caterpillars. Even biological
controls such as Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) will kill but-
terfly larvae. When treating for insect pests, always
consider non-chemical methods of pest control before
turning to pesticides.
Let Your Garden Grow
Most butterfly species over-winter nearby. This
means that their eggs, chrysalises, or larvae are likely to
be in or near your yard during the non-gardening
months. Some will even hibernate as adults. Do not
mow weed sites, cut down dead plants or dismantle
woodpiles which provide them safe shelter in the off-
season until the weather warms up.
Enjoying Your Butterfly Garden
Butterfly gardens are a great source of enjoyment
for everyone. Visiting butterflies include a variety of
different species and names, depending upon the region
of the country in which you live. To learn more about
which plants help in attracting butterflies get your copy
of National Wildlife Federation Attracting Birds,
Butterflies and Other Backyard Wildlife by David
Mizejewski or the Earl May Perennial Guideavailable at
your local Earl May Nursery & Garden Center.
Butterfly Host Plants
Annuals Perennials
Marigold Butterfly Milkweed
Snapdragon Daisy
Violet
Shrubs Evergreens
Lilacs Juniper
IBM# 912600 750 4/08
Copyright Earl May Seed & Nursery L.C. ©
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The Morning News says neighbors, veterans oppose apartments next to National Cemetery
The Morning News
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/06/16/news/061709fzcouncil.txt
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
New Water Tank Gets Approval; neighbors, veterans disapprove powerfully of sale-barn rezoning next to National Cemetery
By Skip Descant
THE MORNING NEWS
FAYETTEVILLE — It took a week, but a decision among the city and residents has been reached to locate a half-million-gallon water tank on the hilltop neighborhood of Hyland Park.
A 143-foot water tank will be built on a .66-acre secluded site on Lovers Lane. The site is one of the four sites originally explored, but it was generally viewed as too expensive, in terms of land cost and needed infrastructure. This site will add about $220,000 to the cost of the project, said Dave Jurgens, Fayetteville utility director.
However, city officials have negotiated a deal with Hyland Park resident Jim Waselues for him to pay the city $75,000 for the original lot intended for the tank — known as Lot 22. In turn, Gary Combs, owner of the Lovers Lane site will donate his site to the city.
"Although I'm not crazy about spending $200,000 more, I think it shows that the city is willing to be flexible and work with people," said Bobby Ferrell a council member.
"Maybe everyone's not totally satisfied, but this is probably the best solution," said Adella Gray a council member from Ward 1.
The project was opposed by the Hyland Park Homeowner's Association that did not want a water tank in their backyards, saying it will negatively impact views, property value and the general aesthetic nature of the neighborhood.
What did not move forward was any decision regarding rezoning the old Washington County Sale Barn site. The barn intends to hold its last sale June 25, said Steve Bartholemew, one of the sale barn's owners.
A 192-unit student housing apartment development is proposed for the nine-acre site. Some 50 people showed up for the council meeting Tuesday to oppose not only the rezoning, but more largely, the development.
It wasn't just residents from the area petitioning the council to deny the downtown general rezoning, but numerous veterans from across Northwest Arkansas. A national military cemetery — the final resting place for 7,963 deceased veterans — sits adjacent to the site. Veterans would like to expand the cemetery into the sale barn site. However, no deal has been reached say veterans and Bartholemew.
"If we can just stave off this rezoning at this time, it will give us that time," said Jim Buckner, a retired lieutenant colonel and a representative of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
"There are private resources," Buckner added, and who said student housing would be "a terrible neighbor."
"In fact it would only be a beer can throw away from our veterans buried there," he continued.
"There has been no contact with us on a dollar amount," said Bartholomew. "I do know that they have talked, but there has never been a dollar amount."
Wanda Peterson, who's lived in the neighborhood since 1938 and has family buried in the cemetery, was passionate in her plea to stop the rezoning.
"I just can't bear an apartment building shadowing those graves," Peterson told the council.
Others reminded the council the current zoning is light industrial and a number of undesirable land uses could move in without the rezoning.
"The rezoning tonight is a downzoing from industrial to a downtown general," said Dustin Bartholomew, grandson to Billy Joe Bartholomew, co-owner of the Washington County Sale Barn.
"The things that could be built there at this time could be a lot more damaging than what's being proposed," Dustin Bartholomew said.
What Comes Next?
Washington County Sale Barn Rezoning
• The ordinance was left on its first reading.
• It will be considered again at the next council meeting.
For government channel schedule of reruns of the council meeting on City 16 on Cox Cable, please see
http://fayettevillearkgovernmentchannel.blogspot.com
The first rebroadcast of the June 16 city council meeting begins at 1:30 p.m. today and the second is at 7:30 p.m. today.
Rebroadcasts of the June 8 meeting of the Town Branch neighbors with the developers who want the sale barn rezoned for student apartments are set for CAT 18 on cox cable at 11 a.m. Wednesday, 3 p.m. Thursday, 11 a.m. Friday and 10 a.m. Saturday.
I am uncertain how this affects the short takes normally run at those times. Some weeks, few short takes are recorded. In fact, the one I recorded for those time slots is mostly about the same issue! I apologize to anyone who did a short take and is bumped by this very timely production.
When all equipment is running properly, the shows run on CAT 18 are run simultaneously on the Internet from the CAT Web site for those with access to the Web but no cable television.
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/06/16/news/061709fzcouncil.txt
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
New Water Tank Gets Approval; neighbors, veterans disapprove powerfully of sale-barn rezoning next to National Cemetery
By Skip Descant
THE MORNING NEWS
FAYETTEVILLE — It took a week, but a decision among the city and residents has been reached to locate a half-million-gallon water tank on the hilltop neighborhood of Hyland Park.
A 143-foot water tank will be built on a .66-acre secluded site on Lovers Lane. The site is one of the four sites originally explored, but it was generally viewed as too expensive, in terms of land cost and needed infrastructure. This site will add about $220,000 to the cost of the project, said Dave Jurgens, Fayetteville utility director.
However, city officials have negotiated a deal with Hyland Park resident Jim Waselues for him to pay the city $75,000 for the original lot intended for the tank — known as Lot 22. In turn, Gary Combs, owner of the Lovers Lane site will donate his site to the city.
"Although I'm not crazy about spending $200,000 more, I think it shows that the city is willing to be flexible and work with people," said Bobby Ferrell a council member.
"Maybe everyone's not totally satisfied, but this is probably the best solution," said Adella Gray a council member from Ward 1.
The project was opposed by the Hyland Park Homeowner's Association that did not want a water tank in their backyards, saying it will negatively impact views, property value and the general aesthetic nature of the neighborhood.
What did not move forward was any decision regarding rezoning the old Washington County Sale Barn site. The barn intends to hold its last sale June 25, said Steve Bartholemew, one of the sale barn's owners.
A 192-unit student housing apartment development is proposed for the nine-acre site. Some 50 people showed up for the council meeting Tuesday to oppose not only the rezoning, but more largely, the development.
It wasn't just residents from the area petitioning the council to deny the downtown general rezoning, but numerous veterans from across Northwest Arkansas. A national military cemetery — the final resting place for 7,963 deceased veterans — sits adjacent to the site. Veterans would like to expand the cemetery into the sale barn site. However, no deal has been reached say veterans and Bartholemew.
"If we can just stave off this rezoning at this time, it will give us that time," said Jim Buckner, a retired lieutenant colonel and a representative of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
"There are private resources," Buckner added, and who said student housing would be "a terrible neighbor."
"In fact it would only be a beer can throw away from our veterans buried there," he continued.
"There has been no contact with us on a dollar amount," said Bartholomew. "I do know that they have talked, but there has never been a dollar amount."
Wanda Peterson, who's lived in the neighborhood since 1938 and has family buried in the cemetery, was passionate in her plea to stop the rezoning.
"I just can't bear an apartment building shadowing those graves," Peterson told the council.
Others reminded the council the current zoning is light industrial and a number of undesirable land uses could move in without the rezoning.
"The rezoning tonight is a downzoing from industrial to a downtown general," said Dustin Bartholomew, grandson to Billy Joe Bartholomew, co-owner of the Washington County Sale Barn.
"The things that could be built there at this time could be a lot more damaging than what's being proposed," Dustin Bartholomew said.
What Comes Next?
Washington County Sale Barn Rezoning
• The ordinance was left on its first reading.
• It will be considered again at the next council meeting.
For government channel schedule of reruns of the council meeting on City 16 on Cox Cable, please see
http://fayettevillearkgovernmentchannel.blogspot.com
The first rebroadcast of the June 16 city council meeting begins at 1:30 p.m. today and the second is at 7:30 p.m. today.
Rebroadcasts of the June 8 meeting of the Town Branch neighbors with the developers who want the sale barn rezoned for student apartments are set for CAT 18 on cox cable at 11 a.m. Wednesday, 3 p.m. Thursday, 11 a.m. Friday and 10 a.m. Saturday.
I am uncertain how this affects the short takes normally run at those times. Some weeks, few short takes are recorded. In fact, the one I recorded for those time slots is mostly about the same issue! I apologize to anyone who did a short take and is bumped by this very timely production.
When all equipment is running properly, the shows run on CAT 18 are run simultaneously on the Internet from the CAT Web site for those with access to the Web but no cable television.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Peace-garden tour from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Saturday June 13, 2009
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of OMNI Peace Garden Tour Poster.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Illinois River Watershed Partnership's appreciation Day set for Saturday June 6, 2009, at Lake Fayetteville
This Saturday, June 6, in appreciation of our IRWP sponsors, members, volunteer corps and StreamTeam members...
Illinois River Watershed Appreciation Day, Lake Fayetteville Veteran's Memorial Park
2:00 to 4:00 pm
Canoe races --- canoes and life vests provided by Lake Fayetteville Environmental Study Center
Geocaching treasure hunts --- GPS units and treasure hunt guides provided by USGS
Make your own Water-cycle beaded bracelets, enjoy Disney's Nemo and Ariel face paintings by local artists
Recycling bean bag toss, fishing and kid's games courtesy of Washington County Environmental Affairs and Benton County Extension Service
Sand volleyball with UA's Dr. Dirk Philipp!
4:30 to 7:00 pm
Scrumptious barbecue brisket and hot-dogs with the trimmings
Country western concert by local artist Marshall T. Mitchell http://www.marshallmitchell.com/
All Activities, Food, and Music are FREE! Come, bring your family and friends, join us for a beautiful day in the Illinois River Watershed! Park entrance located just east of Lowe's on Zion Road.
IRWP NEWS:
Arkansas Urban Forestry Council names the IRWP as it's Outstanding Organization of the Year "in recognition of the effort, dedication and outstanding contribution in the promotion and development of the urban forest." Thank you to our friends at AUFC and this honor in recognition of the work of our sponsors, members and volunteer corps! We truly believe "Trees make better water!" and look forward to working with you in the future, combining our efforts in fulfilling our common missions through education, outreach and partnerships.
Watershed Challenge Winners: May Online Challenge to Arkansas Science and Technology Teachers and Students
1st Place: Hector Elementary School, Hector, AR. Teacher Kathy Brunetti.
Prize: Watershed Model Enviroscape - $800 value
2nd Place: R.E. Baker Elementary School, Bentonville, AR. Teacher Phyllis Abraham.
Prize: Magellan Triton 300 GPS unit - $150 value
3rd Place: Fayetteville High School, Fayetteville, AR. Teacher Robin Buff.
Prize: "Make Your Own Watershed" Model - $50 value
4th Place: Greenland High School, Greenland, AR. Teacher John Diesel.
Prize: Watershed Eco-Puzzle - $30 value
Congratulations to the IRWP Online Watershed Challenge May 2009 Winners!
Dr. Delia Haak
Executive Director
Illinois River Watershed Partnership
PO Box 8506
Fayetteville, AR 72703
www.irwp.org
479-238-4671
Illinois River Watershed Appreciation Day, Lake Fayetteville Veteran's Memorial Park
2:00 to 4:00 pm
Canoe races --- canoes and life vests provided by Lake Fayetteville Environmental Study Center
Geocaching treasure hunts --- GPS units and treasure hunt guides provided by USGS
Make your own Water-cycle beaded bracelets, enjoy Disney's Nemo and Ariel face paintings by local artists
Recycling bean bag toss, fishing and kid's games courtesy of Washington County Environmental Affairs and Benton County Extension Service
Sand volleyball with UA's Dr. Dirk Philipp!
4:30 to 7:00 pm
Scrumptious barbecue brisket and hot-dogs with the trimmings
Country western concert by local artist Marshall T. Mitchell http://www.marshallmitchell.com/
All Activities, Food, and Music are FREE! Come, bring your family and friends, join us for a beautiful day in the Illinois River Watershed! Park entrance located just east of Lowe's on Zion Road.
IRWP NEWS:
Arkansas Urban Forestry Council names the IRWP as it's Outstanding Organization of the Year "in recognition of the effort, dedication and outstanding contribution in the promotion and development of the urban forest." Thank you to our friends at AUFC and this honor in recognition of the work of our sponsors, members and volunteer corps! We truly believe "Trees make better water!" and look forward to working with you in the future, combining our efforts in fulfilling our common missions through education, outreach and partnerships.
Watershed Challenge Winners: May Online Challenge to Arkansas Science and Technology Teachers and Students
1st Place: Hector Elementary School, Hector, AR. Teacher Kathy Brunetti.
Prize: Watershed Model Enviroscape - $800 value
2nd Place: R.E. Baker Elementary School, Bentonville, AR. Teacher Phyllis Abraham.
Prize: Magellan Triton 300 GPS unit - $150 value
3rd Place: Fayetteville High School, Fayetteville, AR. Teacher Robin Buff.
Prize: "Make Your Own Watershed" Model - $50 value
4th Place: Greenland High School, Greenland, AR. Teacher John Diesel.
Prize: Watershed Eco-Puzzle - $30 value
Congratulations to the IRWP Online Watershed Challenge May 2009 Winners!
Dr. Delia Haak
Executive Director
Illinois River Watershed Partnership
PO Box 8506
Fayetteville, AR 72703
www.irwp.org
479-238-4671
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Arkansas officials say 'Don't Do Fescue'
Arkansas “Don't Do Fescue" is theme of AGFC public campaign
JONESBORO - Tall fescue is a widely used forage crop. It is insect resistant, tolerates poor soil and climatic conditions well and has a long growing season. Unfortunately, tall fescue also has a downside.
With approximately four million acres of pasturelands planted in tall fescue, Arkansas has a great deal of this crop. According to David Long, agricultural liaison with the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, the agency is working diligently to help the public understand the shortcomings of this type of grass.
"The AGFC has developed a new tool in its effort to educate landowners about the toxic and negative effects of Kentucky 31 Tall Fescue to farm wildlife. A new bumper sticker entitled 'Don't Do Fescue' is now being distributed to agency employees and others interested in spreading the word," Long said. Tall fescue is a common forage grass that has been planted across Arkansas for over 40 years.
Estimates are that about 70 percent-95 percent or 4 million acres of the pasturelands planted with tall fescue in Arkansas are infected with an endophyte fungus. The fungus causes declines in bobwhite quail, cottontail rabbits, grassland songbirds and also limited other game populations such as white-tailed deer and wild turkey.
"The fact that the plant is actually toxic to both domestic livestock and farm wildlife species is accepted by agriculture extension specialists and wildlife biologists alike," Long said. "The plant produces chemicals causing the fescue to have very toxic qualities. The alkaloids are found throughout the plant, but are especially concentrated in the seeds and leaves," he explained.
In cattle, the fungus causes excessive body temperatures, elevated respiratory rates, loss of appetite, body weight loss, lowered fertility rates and abortion of fetuses. Dairy cows often show sharp declines in milk production. Horses are affected also with more aborted fetuses, foaling problems, weak foals and reduced or no milk production. The CES estimates that this endopytic toxin cost American beef producers up to $1 billion a year in lost profits.
"It's very important for private landowners who desire viable wildlife populations on their property to know the effects of planting fescue," Long noted. "Many species of wildlife would directly suffer these same negative effects if they were confined to the pasturelands as are livestock. However, since they are free ranging, they simply avoid the fungus infected fescue pastures, but nevertheless, this results in loss of farm wildlife habitat on these acres. You may have deer and turkey travel through tall-fescue pastures, but they rarely find food sources available they can utilize, since the aggressiveness of the fescue usually results in solid stands of the plant," Long concluded.
The grass is a sod-forming turf with thick matted growth that also limits movement of young bobwhite quail, turkey and cottontail rabbits, provides no nesting habitat for wild turkey or quail, and is extremely poor habitat for many declining grassland species of songbirds. "Bottom line, fungus infected tall-fescue pastures offer little food, cover or nesting habitat to a broad range of farm wildlife," he said.
"Tall fescue has been planted in an estimated 4 million acres of the 5.4 million acres of pasture scattered over the state and for all practical purposes is of no value to farm wildlife. With the widespread establishment of tall fescue pastures, a great loss of wildlife habitat for deer, turkey, quail, cottontails and grassland songbirds has occurred.
Many landowners now recognize this problem and are interested in eliminating tall-fescue on some or all of their acreage. However, many landowners continue to plant tall-fescue, not knowing the detrimental effects it will have to wildlife. (There is an endophyte-free variety of tall fescue available for planting but it is less viable and hardy, and still provides very limited habitat for wildlife.)
We want to educate all landowners regarding this fact because there are other planting options to providing livestock forage and wildlife habitat on their farms," Long explained.
Please help spread the word to landowners "Don't Do Fescue!" by requesting a bumper sticker to place on your vehicle. Especially if they have an interest in managing for wildlife on their farm. For more information contact David Long at 877-972-5438 or dlong@agfc.state.ar.us.
JONESBORO - Tall fescue is a widely used forage crop. It is insect resistant, tolerates poor soil and climatic conditions well and has a long growing season. Unfortunately, tall fescue also has a downside.
With approximately four million acres of pasturelands planted in tall fescue, Arkansas has a great deal of this crop. According to David Long, agricultural liaison with the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, the agency is working diligently to help the public understand the shortcomings of this type of grass.
"The AGFC has developed a new tool in its effort to educate landowners about the toxic and negative effects of Kentucky 31 Tall Fescue to farm wildlife. A new bumper sticker entitled 'Don't Do Fescue' is now being distributed to agency employees and others interested in spreading the word," Long said. Tall fescue is a common forage grass that has been planted across Arkansas for over 40 years.
Estimates are that about 70 percent-95 percent or 4 million acres of the pasturelands planted with tall fescue in Arkansas are infected with an endophyte fungus. The fungus causes declines in bobwhite quail, cottontail rabbits, grassland songbirds and also limited other game populations such as white-tailed deer and wild turkey.
"The fact that the plant is actually toxic to both domestic livestock and farm wildlife species is accepted by agriculture extension specialists and wildlife biologists alike," Long said. "The plant produces chemicals causing the fescue to have very toxic qualities. The alkaloids are found throughout the plant, but are especially concentrated in the seeds and leaves," he explained.
In cattle, the fungus causes excessive body temperatures, elevated respiratory rates, loss of appetite, body weight loss, lowered fertility rates and abortion of fetuses. Dairy cows often show sharp declines in milk production. Horses are affected also with more aborted fetuses, foaling problems, weak foals and reduced or no milk production. The CES estimates that this endopytic toxin cost American beef producers up to $1 billion a year in lost profits.
"It's very important for private landowners who desire viable wildlife populations on their property to know the effects of planting fescue," Long noted. "Many species of wildlife would directly suffer these same negative effects if they were confined to the pasturelands as are livestock. However, since they are free ranging, they simply avoid the fungus infected fescue pastures, but nevertheless, this results in loss of farm wildlife habitat on these acres. You may have deer and turkey travel through tall-fescue pastures, but they rarely find food sources available they can utilize, since the aggressiveness of the fescue usually results in solid stands of the plant," Long concluded.
The grass is a sod-forming turf with thick matted growth that also limits movement of young bobwhite quail, turkey and cottontail rabbits, provides no nesting habitat for wild turkey or quail, and is extremely poor habitat for many declining grassland species of songbirds. "Bottom line, fungus infected tall-fescue pastures offer little food, cover or nesting habitat to a broad range of farm wildlife," he said.
"Tall fescue has been planted in an estimated 4 million acres of the 5.4 million acres of pasture scattered over the state and for all practical purposes is of no value to farm wildlife. With the widespread establishment of tall fescue pastures, a great loss of wildlife habitat for deer, turkey, quail, cottontails and grassland songbirds has occurred.
Many landowners now recognize this problem and are interested in eliminating tall-fescue on some or all of their acreage. However, many landowners continue to plant tall-fescue, not knowing the detrimental effects it will have to wildlife. (There is an endophyte-free variety of tall fescue available for planting but it is less viable and hardy, and still provides very limited habitat for wildlife.)
We want to educate all landowners regarding this fact because there are other planting options to providing livestock forage and wildlife habitat on their farms," Long explained.
Please help spread the word to landowners "Don't Do Fescue!" by requesting a bumper sticker to place on your vehicle. Especially if they have an interest in managing for wildlife on their farm. For more information contact David Long at 877-972-5438 or dlong@agfc.state.ar.us.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Illinois River Watershed Partnership's Appreciation Day set for Saturday June 6, 2009, at Lake Fayetteville
Illinois River Watershed Appreciation Day
Enjoy our watershed, meet new friends, greet old friends ... Bring the Family!
WHEN: June 6 from 2 pm to 7 pm.
WHERE: Lake Fayetteville Veteran’s Pavilion entrance on Zion Rd just east of Lowe's
* Geocaching GIS treasure hunt with USGS water quality experts 2 pm – 4 pm
* Family games, canoe races, volleyball tournament 2 pm – 4 pm
* Free delicious barbecue dinner 4:30 pm
* Recognition of IRWP StreamTeam Volunteers 5 pm
* Free family folk music concert by local artist Marshall T. Mitchell 5:30 pm
Co-sponsors USGS, AWRC, Washington County Environmental Affairs, UA Cooperative Extension Service
www.irwp.org
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
June 3-5 conference in Atlanta to focus on green roofs
Extraordinary Policy Maker Sessions at Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities - Atlanta 2009
From: Jordan Richie [GRHC] (jrichie@greenroofs.org)
Sent: Tue 5/26/09 8:40 AM
To: jrichie@greenroofs.org
1 attachment
image001.jpg (11.5 KB)
Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, the North American industry association for green roofs, is pleased to bring you some extraordinary, leading edge policy maker sessions at its 7th Annual Conference - Pushing the Envelope - in Atlanta Georgia, June 3-5, 2009. See www.greenroofs.org/atlanta for details. Highlights include:
Wednesday June 3, 2009
9 am - 12 noon Green Infrastructure Workshop - Presented by the Green Infrastructure Foundation.
Learn the basics of green infrastructure and leading edge policies to support it. These include:
· The major elements of green infrastructure.
· Research on the benefits of green infrastructure.
· Policy case studies and how to information.
9 am -12 noon Policy Round Table Session: Exploring Opportunities to Use the New
GRP Designation Discussions topics will include:
I. License Objectives:
1. Industry Credibility for the Consumer
As the greenroof industry expands consumers are looking for assurances about the quality of those working in the green roof business community, a GRP certification is part of establishing industry standards.
2. Confidence/Knowledge for the Reviewers
The growing use of greenroofs to meet various Municipal, County, State and Federal mandates for stormwater management, air quality standards, energy efficiency standards etc means that the Agency Staff, Regulators, Permit Reviewers, Contract Officers, Project Managers and others must increase their own education and confidence level with the technology. Would requiring GRP certification help Agencies tackle this?
3. Organizing Professional Skills
Some in the profession start from the green side, landscaper architects, horticulturalists etc and some start from the roofing side, roofers, water proofers etc or the structural/engineering side. A single GRP certification establishes that everyone in the industry has mastered the same range of material.
4. Promoting Green Jobs
Can the GRP certification be linked to green job corps programs emerging.
The District could be a test case for this idea.
II. Points for Discussion and Questions around the Green Roof Professional (GRP) certification:
1. Discuss how this certification squares with other professional certifications such as LEED and what, if any views and/or endorsements the professional societies like ASLA and ASCE have offered. Have they been involved in the review process? Do their licenses compete or complement the GRP designation?
2. Discuss how municipalities should interpret the Green Roof Professional Certification. What does the certification endorse about those that receive it? Is this equivalent to a general contractor’s license, a design license, etc…
3. What kind of background does an applicant for the Green Roof Professional Certification need? Is it possible to take/pass the GRP exam without the GRHC courses? Are there other study programs available for the exam? How could the District channel graduates of the green jobs program into a GRP certification program?
4. How are other municipalities viewing the GRP certification? Chicago, NYC, Philadelphia, etc.. How are our neighbors in MD and VA looking at the GRP certification and how are our regional partners in the Chesapeake Bay viewing/thinking about the certification. We don’t want to stifle the growing community of practitioners working in the District, is there a danger of a “preferred certification” policy doing this?
5. How does the GRP certification support, or is supported by, the Federal stimulus funding green set asides for the awards from the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF). The GRP certification could play a role in the implementation of the new Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) that requires all Federal Facilities to manage their stormwater runoff on site to pre-development hydrology conditions.
1:00 - 6:00 pm From Sites To Communities - Developing an Evaluation Matrix For Community Scale Benefits of Green Roofs
Science meets public policy as we gather together to understand how to generate better biophysical and socio-economic data from widespread green roofs implementation. Discussion topics to include:
1. How much of the existing research can be used in other communities?
2. What are the unique attributes of a community that require additional studies?
3. What is the best scale, or scales to conduct biophysical/social-economic research on benefits?
Thursday June 4
Track 1 - Policy and Program Development
Learn from policy makers and researchers about their efforts to implement green roofs and other forms of green infrastructure throughout the day.
One Day Passes Available. See www.greenroofs.org/atlanta
We look forward to seeing you in Atlanta!
Steven W. Peck
Founder and President
Green Roofs for Healthy Cities
406 King St. E, Toronto, Canada, M5A 1L4
www.greenroofs.org
(416) 971 4494 ext. 233
From: Jordan Richie [GRHC] (jrichie@greenroofs.org)
Sent: Tue 5/26/09 8:40 AM
To: jrichie@greenroofs.org
1 attachment
image001.jpg (11.5 KB)
Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, the North American industry association for green roofs, is pleased to bring you some extraordinary, leading edge policy maker sessions at its 7th Annual Conference - Pushing the Envelope - in Atlanta Georgia, June 3-5, 2009. See www.greenroofs.org/atlanta for details. Highlights include:
Wednesday June 3, 2009
9 am - 12 noon Green Infrastructure Workshop - Presented by the Green Infrastructure Foundation.
Learn the basics of green infrastructure and leading edge policies to support it. These include:
· The major elements of green infrastructure.
· Research on the benefits of green infrastructure.
· Policy case studies and how to information.
9 am -12 noon Policy Round Table Session: Exploring Opportunities to Use the New
GRP Designation Discussions topics will include:
I. License Objectives:
1. Industry Credibility for the Consumer
As the greenroof industry expands consumers are looking for assurances about the quality of those working in the green roof business community, a GRP certification is part of establishing industry standards.
2. Confidence/Knowledge for the Reviewers
The growing use of greenroofs to meet various Municipal, County, State and Federal mandates for stormwater management, air quality standards, energy efficiency standards etc means that the Agency Staff, Regulators, Permit Reviewers, Contract Officers, Project Managers and others must increase their own education and confidence level with the technology. Would requiring GRP certification help Agencies tackle this?
3. Organizing Professional Skills
Some in the profession start from the green side, landscaper architects, horticulturalists etc and some start from the roofing side, roofers, water proofers etc or the structural/engineering side. A single GRP certification establishes that everyone in the industry has mastered the same range of material.
4. Promoting Green Jobs
Can the GRP certification be linked to green job corps programs emerging.
The District could be a test case for this idea.
II. Points for Discussion and Questions around the Green Roof Professional (GRP) certification:
1. Discuss how this certification squares with other professional certifications such as LEED and what, if any views and/or endorsements the professional societies like ASLA and ASCE have offered. Have they been involved in the review process? Do their licenses compete or complement the GRP designation?
2. Discuss how municipalities should interpret the Green Roof Professional Certification. What does the certification endorse about those that receive it? Is this equivalent to a general contractor’s license, a design license, etc…
3. What kind of background does an applicant for the Green Roof Professional Certification need? Is it possible to take/pass the GRP exam without the GRHC courses? Are there other study programs available for the exam? How could the District channel graduates of the green jobs program into a GRP certification program?
4. How are other municipalities viewing the GRP certification? Chicago, NYC, Philadelphia, etc.. How are our neighbors in MD and VA looking at the GRP certification and how are our regional partners in the Chesapeake Bay viewing/thinking about the certification. We don’t want to stifle the growing community of practitioners working in the District, is there a danger of a “preferred certification” policy doing this?
5. How does the GRP certification support, or is supported by, the Federal stimulus funding green set asides for the awards from the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF). The GRP certification could play a role in the implementation of the new Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) that requires all Federal Facilities to manage their stormwater runoff on site to pre-development hydrology conditions.
1:00 - 6:00 pm From Sites To Communities - Developing an Evaluation Matrix For Community Scale Benefits of Green Roofs
Science meets public policy as we gather together to understand how to generate better biophysical and socio-economic data from widespread green roofs implementation. Discussion topics to include:
1. How much of the existing research can be used in other communities?
2. What are the unique attributes of a community that require additional studies?
3. What is the best scale, or scales to conduct biophysical/social-economic research on benefits?
Thursday June 4
Track 1 - Policy and Program Development
Learn from policy makers and researchers about their efforts to implement green roofs and other forms of green infrastructure throughout the day.
One Day Passes Available. See www.greenroofs.org/atlanta
We look forward to seeing you in Atlanta!
Steven W. Peck
Founder and President
Green Roofs for Healthy Cities
406 King St. E, Toronto, Canada, M5A 1L4
www.greenroofs.org
(416) 971 4494 ext. 233
Friday, May 22, 2009
Public hearing at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday to consider rezoning sale-barn property to allow multistory apartment buildings next to National Cemetery
Please click on images to ENLARGE and read.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Saturday, May 2, 2009
FarmToTable theme of today's program in the Rose Garden of the Walton Art Center with renewable-energy lecture at Night Bird bookstore at 2 p.m.
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of OMNI Springfest poster.
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of poster.
Solar Power Struggle
Professor Richard Hutchinson of Louisiana Tech University in Ruston will speak on "The Struggle for the Solar Future" at 2 p.m. on Saturday, May 2, at Nightbird Books on Dickson Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
An inquiry into environmental change and the obstacles and opportunities in the path of the renewable energy transition.
Sponsored by OMNI Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of poster.
Solar Power Struggle
Professor Richard Hutchinson of Louisiana Tech University in Ruston will speak on "The Struggle for the Solar Future" at 2 p.m. on Saturday, May 2, at Nightbird Books on Dickson Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
An inquiry into environmental change and the obstacles and opportunities in the path of the renewable energy transition.
Sponsored by OMNI Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Louisiana Tech professor to discuss the struggle for the solar future Saturday afternoon at Nightbird Books on Dickson Street in Fayetteville
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of poster.
Solar Power Struggle
Professor Richard Hutchinson of Louisiana Tech University in Ruston will speak on "The Struggle for the Solar Future" at 2 p.m. on Saturday, May 2, at Nightbird Books on Dickson Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
An inquiry into environmental change and the obstacles and opportunities in the path of the renewable energy transition.
Sponsored by OMNI Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
Solar Power Struggle
Professor Richard Hutchinson of Louisiana Tech University in Ruston will speak on "The Struggle for the Solar Future" at 2 p.m. on Saturday, May 2, at Nightbird Books on Dickson Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
An inquiry into environmental change and the obstacles and opportunities in the path of the renewable energy transition.
Sponsored by OMNI Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Indian Trail spring from three angles
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of Indian Trail spring from three angles: From the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River looking up the southwest shore and two shots of the spring from the riparian zone of the Town Branch off Indian Trail east of Paris Avenue and south of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Earth Day a great day for cleaning up urban streams
Please click on images to ENLARGE views of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River south of Martin Luther King Boulevard on Aril 22, 2009.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Brown thrashers among the many species to be seen on World Peace Wetland Prairie during Sunday's Earth Day celebration
Please click on image to Enlarge view of one of the many species of birds feeding and picking nesting sites on World Peace Wetland Prairie on April 17, 2009. The elusive brown thrasher is often able to slip into the thickets before a camera can capture its image. But the attraction of scattered brush piles and the excitement of mating season can make them a bit careless.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Buzzards rest on broken tree on World Peace Wetland Prairie on April 16, 2009
Please click on images to enlarge view of buzzards on World Peace Wetland Prairie on April 16, 2009.
When I spotted these two alighting only 30 feet off the ground, I had to check my own pulse to make sure I wasn't their intended lunch for the day.
When I spotted these two alighting only 30 feet off the ground, I had to check my own pulse to make sure I wasn't their intended lunch for the day.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Honeybees and all pollinators threatened by pesticides
Please click on images to ENLARGE view in top photo of honeybee on redbud and bumblebee in second photo on redbud in a chemical-free area around World Peace Wetland Prairie on April 8, 2009.
Honeybees in Danger
Sunday 12 April 2009
by: Evaggelos Vallianatos, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
When I was teaching at Humboldt State University in northern California 20 years ago, I invited a beekeeper to talk to my students. He said that each time he took his bees to southern California to pollinate other farmers' crops, he would lose a third of his bees to sprays. In 2009, the loss ranges all the way to 60 percent.
Honeybees have been in terrible straits.
A little history explains this tragedy.
For millennia, honeybees lived in symbiotic relationship with societies all over the world.
The Greeks loved them. In the eighth century BCE, the epic poet Hesiod considered them gifts of the gods to just farmers. And in the fourth century of our era, the Greek mathematician Pappos admired their hexagonal cells, crediting them with "geometrical forethought."\
However, industrialized agriculture is not friendly to honeybees.
In 1974, the US Environmental Protection Agency licensed the nerve gas parathion trapped into nylon bubbles the size of pollen particles.
What makes this microencapsulated formulation more dangerous to bees than the technical material is the very technology of the "time release" microcapsule.\
This acutely toxic insecticide, born of chemical warfare, would be on the surface of the flower for several days. The foraging bee, if alive after its visit to the beautiful white flowers of almonds, for example, laden with invisible spheres of asphyxiating gas, would be bringing back to its home pollen and nectar mixed with parathion.
It is possible that the nectar, which the bee makes into honey, and the pollen, might end up in some food store to be bought and eaten by human beings.
Beekeepers are well aware of what is happening to their bees, including the potential that their honey may not be fit for humans.
Moreover, many beekeepers do not throw away the honey, pollen and wax of colonies destroyed by encapsulated parathion or other poisons. They melt the wax for new combs: And they sell both honey and pollen to the public.
Government "regulators" know about this danger.
An academic expert, Carl Johansen, professor of entomology at Washington State University in Pullman, Washington, called the microencapsulated methyl parathion "the most destructive bee poisoning insecticide ever developed."
In 1976, the US Department of Agriculture published a report by one of its former employees, S. E. McGregor, a honeybee expert who documented that about a third of what we eat benefits from honeybee pollination. This includes vegetables, oilseeds and domesticated animals eating bee-pollinated hay.
In 2007, the value of food dependent on honeybees was $15 billion in the United States.
McGregor also pointed out that insect-pollinated legumes collect nitrogen from the air, storing it in their roots and enriching the soil. In addition, insect pollination makes the crops more wholesome and abundant. He advised the farmer he should never forget that "no cultural practice will cause fruit or seed to set if its pollination is neglected."\
In addition, McGregor blamed the chemical industry for seducing the farmers to its potent toxins. He said:
"[P]esticides are like dope drugs. The more they are used the more powerful the next one must be to give satisfaction" and therein develops the spiraling effect, the pesticide treadmill. The chemical salesman, in pressuring the grower to use his product, practically assumes the role of the "dope pusher." Once the victim, the grower, is "hooked," he becomes a steady and an ever-increasing user.
No government agency listened to McGregor.
The result of America's pesticide treadmill is that now, in 2009, honeybees and other pollinators are moving towards extinction.
In October 2006, the US National Research Council warned of the" "demonstrably downward" trends in the populations of pollinators. For the first time since 1922, American farmers are renting imported bees for their crops. They are even buying bees from Australia.
Honeybees, the National Academies report said, pollinate more than 90 crops in America, but have declined by 30 percent in the last 20 years alone. The scientists who wrote the report expressed alarm at the precipitous decline of the pollinators. Unfortunately, this made no difference to EPA, which failed to ban the microencapsulated parathion that is so deadly to honeybees.
Bee experts know that insecticides cause brain damage to the bees, disorienting them, making it often impossible for them to find their way home.
This is a consequence of decades of agribusiness warfare against nature and, in time, honeybees. In addition, beekeepers truck billions of bees all over the country for pollination, depriving them of good food, stressing them enormously, and, very possibly, injuring their health.
-------
Evaggelos Vallianatos, former EPA analyst, is the author of "This Land Is Their Land" and "The Passion of the Greeks.
Honeybees in Danger
Sunday 12 April 2009
by: Evaggelos Vallianatos, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
When I was teaching at Humboldt State University in northern California 20 years ago, I invited a beekeeper to talk to my students. He said that each time he took his bees to southern California to pollinate other farmers' crops, he would lose a third of his bees to sprays. In 2009, the loss ranges all the way to 60 percent.
Honeybees have been in terrible straits.
A little history explains this tragedy.
For millennia, honeybees lived in symbiotic relationship with societies all over the world.
The Greeks loved them. In the eighth century BCE, the epic poet Hesiod considered them gifts of the gods to just farmers. And in the fourth century of our era, the Greek mathematician Pappos admired their hexagonal cells, crediting them with "geometrical forethought."\
However, industrialized agriculture is not friendly to honeybees.
In 1974, the US Environmental Protection Agency licensed the nerve gas parathion trapped into nylon bubbles the size of pollen particles.
What makes this microencapsulated formulation more dangerous to bees than the technical material is the very technology of the "time release" microcapsule.\
This acutely toxic insecticide, born of chemical warfare, would be on the surface of the flower for several days. The foraging bee, if alive after its visit to the beautiful white flowers of almonds, for example, laden with invisible spheres of asphyxiating gas, would be bringing back to its home pollen and nectar mixed with parathion.
It is possible that the nectar, which the bee makes into honey, and the pollen, might end up in some food store to be bought and eaten by human beings.
Beekeepers are well aware of what is happening to their bees, including the potential that their honey may not be fit for humans.
Moreover, many beekeepers do not throw away the honey, pollen and wax of colonies destroyed by encapsulated parathion or other poisons. They melt the wax for new combs: And they sell both honey and pollen to the public.
Government "regulators" know about this danger.
An academic expert, Carl Johansen, professor of entomology at Washington State University in Pullman, Washington, called the microencapsulated methyl parathion "the most destructive bee poisoning insecticide ever developed."
In 1976, the US Department of Agriculture published a report by one of its former employees, S. E. McGregor, a honeybee expert who documented that about a third of what we eat benefits from honeybee pollination. This includes vegetables, oilseeds and domesticated animals eating bee-pollinated hay.
In 2007, the value of food dependent on honeybees was $15 billion in the United States.
McGregor also pointed out that insect-pollinated legumes collect nitrogen from the air, storing it in their roots and enriching the soil. In addition, insect pollination makes the crops more wholesome and abundant. He advised the farmer he should never forget that "no cultural practice will cause fruit or seed to set if its pollination is neglected."\
In addition, McGregor blamed the chemical industry for seducing the farmers to its potent toxins. He said:
"[P]esticides are like dope drugs. The more they are used the more powerful the next one must be to give satisfaction" and therein develops the spiraling effect, the pesticide treadmill. The chemical salesman, in pressuring the grower to use his product, practically assumes the role of the "dope pusher." Once the victim, the grower, is "hooked," he becomes a steady and an ever-increasing user.
No government agency listened to McGregor.
The result of America's pesticide treadmill is that now, in 2009, honeybees and other pollinators are moving towards extinction.
In October 2006, the US National Research Council warned of the" "demonstrably downward" trends in the populations of pollinators. For the first time since 1922, American farmers are renting imported bees for their crops. They are even buying bees from Australia.
Honeybees, the National Academies report said, pollinate more than 90 crops in America, but have declined by 30 percent in the last 20 years alone. The scientists who wrote the report expressed alarm at the precipitous decline of the pollinators. Unfortunately, this made no difference to EPA, which failed to ban the microencapsulated parathion that is so deadly to honeybees.
Bee experts know that insecticides cause brain damage to the bees, disorienting them, making it often impossible for them to find their way home.
This is a consequence of decades of agribusiness warfare against nature and, in time, honeybees. In addition, beekeepers truck billions of bees all over the country for pollination, depriving them of good food, stressing them enormously, and, very possibly, injuring their health.
-------
Evaggelos Vallianatos, former EPA analyst, is the author of "This Land Is Their Land" and "The Passion of the Greeks.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Earth Day celebration on April 19, 2009, at World Peace Wetland Prairie
Please click on image to ENLARGE to read details of the poster.
Bird-watchers welcome every day from dawn to dusk!
Bird-watchers welcome every day from dawn to dusk!
Monday, April 6, 2009
Would student apartments be more appropriate than a livestock auction barn next to National Cemetery for veterans? Not likely
Everyone is welcom at today's 5:30 p.m. meeting of Ward One residents and the Town Branch Neighborhood at the S. Hill Avenue Church of Christ near the intersection of 11th Street and S. Hill Avenue to hear and discuss a proposal to rezone the Washington County Livestock Auction Barn for student apartments. The area is shown on Google Maps below.
View Larger Map
The sale barn in the view below is at right and the national cemetery is at left. WOULD STUDENT APARTMENTS be any more appropriate next to the National Cemetery than a sale barn? The cemetery was created in 1867 and the sale barn in 1937.
View Larger Map
Please share information about the 5:30 p.m. April 5 (TODAY) meeting of Ward One residents at the Church of Christ on South Hill Avenue in Fayetteville.
Attorney Bob Estes is to present a proposal to have the Washington County Sale Barn rezoned so that student apartments may be built on the land in the Town Branch Neighborhood. If the rezoning is accepted, then a North Carolina company will buy the land and build the apartments.
The cattle-auction facility was constructed in 1937 by the grandfather of the current owner.
Cattle are brought in early each week and auctioned on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday. There is no permanent housing of a large group of animals.
Because of the north slope's being well vegetated, stormwater runoff to streams in each direction is relatively clean, much cleaner than the runoff from the Hill Place Apartment complex being constructed three blocks to the west.
Closing the sale barn in south Fayetteville would greatly inconvenience ranchers and farmers in south Washington County. In fact, having to travel to Springdale to buy and sell cattle could be final factor in some landowners deciding to sell out and stop farming.
All this would come at a time when encouraging local production of food and protecting the rich soil on the prairies in the river valleys is high on the agenda of many people and many conservation organizations.
Closing the sale barn could affect the local farm economy and several other businesses in south Fayetteville that rely on local farming. It would encourage more unneeded housing to be built in rural areas while allowing more unneeded apartments to be built in a city where empty apartments and condominiums are plentiful.
Anything that damages the agricultural economy of Northwest Arkansas will reduce the effectiveness of such ongoing efforts as the FNHA's green-infrastructure project, the Beaver Lake and Illinois River watershed-protection efforts and the efforts of OMNI Center, the Sierra Club, Audubon Arkansas, the League of Women voters, the Ozark Society, the Arkansas Wildlife Federation, Ducks Unlimited and many other conservation organizations to protect and improve our environment and counter the threat of global climate change.
Town Branch Neighborhood Association meeting at 5:30 p.m. Monday April 6, 2009
Ward One City Council members, members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the public will hear a presentation from a developer seeking to rezone the Washington County Sale Barn property to allow construction of student apartments. Everyone is welcome to the meeting in the church at 1136 S Ellis Avenue south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street at 5:30 p.m. Monday, April 6.
For details, please call 479-444-6072 or visit http://townbranchneighborhood.blogspot.com
View Larger Map
The sale barn in the view below is at right and the national cemetery is at left. WOULD STUDENT APARTMENTS be any more appropriate next to the National Cemetery than a sale barn? The cemetery was created in 1867 and the sale barn in 1937.
View Larger Map
Please share information about the 5:30 p.m. April 5 (TODAY) meeting of Ward One residents at the Church of Christ on South Hill Avenue in Fayetteville.
Attorney Bob Estes is to present a proposal to have the Washington County Sale Barn rezoned so that student apartments may be built on the land in the Town Branch Neighborhood. If the rezoning is accepted, then a North Carolina company will buy the land and build the apartments.
The cattle-auction facility was constructed in 1937 by the grandfather of the current owner.
Cattle are brought in early each week and auctioned on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday. There is no permanent housing of a large group of animals.
Because of the north slope's being well vegetated, stormwater runoff to streams in each direction is relatively clean, much cleaner than the runoff from the Hill Place Apartment complex being constructed three blocks to the west.
Closing the sale barn in south Fayetteville would greatly inconvenience ranchers and farmers in south Washington County. In fact, having to travel to Springdale to buy and sell cattle could be final factor in some landowners deciding to sell out and stop farming.
All this would come at a time when encouraging local production of food and protecting the rich soil on the prairies in the river valleys is high on the agenda of many people and many conservation organizations.
Closing the sale barn could affect the local farm economy and several other businesses in south Fayetteville that rely on local farming. It would encourage more unneeded housing to be built in rural areas while allowing more unneeded apartments to be built in a city where empty apartments and condominiums are plentiful.
Anything that damages the agricultural economy of Northwest Arkansas will reduce the effectiveness of such ongoing efforts as the FNHA's green-infrastructure project, the Beaver Lake and Illinois River watershed-protection efforts and the efforts of OMNI Center, the Sierra Club, Audubon Arkansas, the League of Women voters, the Ozark Society, the Arkansas Wildlife Federation, Ducks Unlimited and many other conservation organizations to protect and improve our environment and counter the threat of global climate change.
Town Branch Neighborhood Association meeting at 5:30 p.m. Monday April 6, 2009
Ward One City Council members, members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the public will hear a presentation from a developer seeking to rezone the Washington County Sale Barn property to allow construction of student apartments. Everyone is welcome to the meeting in the church at 1136 S Ellis Avenue south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street at 5:30 p.m. Monday, April 6.
For details, please call 479-444-6072 or visit http://townbranchneighborhood.blogspot.com
Friday, April 3, 2009
Ward One council members, residents of south Fayetteville to meet to discuss proposal to build student apartments on Washington County Sale Barn land
Town Branch Neighborhood Association meeting at 5:30 p.m. Monday April 6, 2009
Ward One City Council members, members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the public will hear a presentation from a developer seeking to rezone the Washington County Sale Barn property to allow construction of student apartments. Everyone is welcome to the meeting in the church at 1136 S Ellis Avenue south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street at 5:30 p.m. Monday, April 6.
For details, please call 479-444-6072 or visit http://townbranchneighborhood.blogspot.com
Earth Day at World Peace Wetland Prairie from 1 to 5 p.m. Sunday April 19, 2009
Members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the OMNI Center for Peace, Justice and Ecology present the fifth-annual Earth Day celebration with activities for kids and adults. Wildflowers will be planted in the butterfly garden and peace-circle garden on the east portion of the city-owned nature park by children and adult volunteers. Ice-storm damaged limbs will be removed by those who wish to help. Volunteers may dig out fescue grass or remove Japanese honeysuckle that is suppressing native plants in parts of the western 2 acres.
Musicians and poets will be invited to play, sing or read in a pleasant outdoor setting.
Still on the Hill and Emily Kaitz are the headliners.
Several activities for youngsters will be provided by volunteers.
Parking is free from 1 to 5 p.m. at the the Hill Avenue Church of Christ south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street, and street parking is legal in much of the neighborhood.
Everyone is welcome. For details, call 444-6072
or visit http://worldpeacewetlandprairie.blogspot.com
World Peace Wetland Prairie is at 1121 South Duncan Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Ward One City Council members, members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the public will hear a presentation from a developer seeking to rezone the Washington County Sale Barn property to allow construction of student apartments. Everyone is welcome to the meeting in the church at 1136 S Ellis Avenue south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street at 5:30 p.m. Monday, April 6.
For details, please call 479-444-6072 or visit http://townbranchneighborhood.blogspot.com
Earth Day at World Peace Wetland Prairie from 1 to 5 p.m. Sunday April 19, 2009
Members of the Town Branch neighborhood association and the OMNI Center for Peace, Justice and Ecology present the fifth-annual Earth Day celebration with activities for kids and adults. Wildflowers will be planted in the butterfly garden and peace-circle garden on the east portion of the city-owned nature park by children and adult volunteers. Ice-storm damaged limbs will be removed by those who wish to help. Volunteers may dig out fescue grass or remove Japanese honeysuckle that is suppressing native plants in parts of the western 2 acres.
Musicians and poets will be invited to play, sing or read in a pleasant outdoor setting.
Still on the Hill and Emily Kaitz are the headliners.
Several activities for youngsters will be provided by volunteers.
Parking is free from 1 to 5 p.m. at the the Hill Avenue Church of Christ south of the intersection of S. Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street, and street parking is legal in much of the neighborhood.
Everyone is welcome. For details, call 444-6072
or visit http://worldpeacewetlandprairie.blogspot.com
World Peace Wetland Prairie is at 1121 South Duncan Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Reagan family farm north of Arkansas 16 exemplifies the kind of land that must be protected in the cities of Northwest Arkansas to save Beaver Lake
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of Bill Reagan pointing to the line of trees along the fence on the south edge of his family farm along the north edge of East Fifteenth Street.
The Reagan family has owned the land for many years and Bill said that he has bought it from his mother and will keep it in the family. The farm is prairie that has been used for cattle grazing and other agriculture over the decades. It is an example of a heritage farm of the sort identified in the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's Green Infrastructure plan. Its rich soil captures water where falls and does not cause flooding downstream with its limited stormwater runoff entering the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River without causing siltation or pollution. See Google map with view of Fifteenth Street area in a preceding post on this subject.
Democrat-Gazette on widening of Arkansas 16
View Larger Map
Please use controls and cursor to move the image, zoom in or out and trace the whole route discussed at the meeting yesterday. The Reagan property is near the middle left part of the image above.
If you use your cursor to travel north of the open Reagan property between Washington Avenue and Wood Avenue from 11th Street up to near 9th Street you can see the 7 wooded wetland acres that the Partners for Better housing board is trying to buy to dredge and fill for a low-income housing development. Water drains from north of Jefferson School, all the way from north of MLK Boulevard (former 6th St.) down to 15th St. and into the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and is slowed and purified by the moist-soil area where the tiny branch overflows.
This portion of the Beaver Lake watershed is under extreme threat. Thanks to the Reagan family and others for keeping a bit of green infrastructure intact and allowing a small part of the rainwater to stay it falls.
The Reagan family has owned the land for many years and Bill said that he has bought it from his mother and will keep it in the family. The farm is prairie that has been used for cattle grazing and other agriculture over the decades. It is an example of a heritage farm of the sort identified in the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's Green Infrastructure plan. Its rich soil captures water where falls and does not cause flooding downstream with its limited stormwater runoff entering the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River without causing siltation or pollution. See Google map with view of Fifteenth Street area in a preceding post on this subject.
Democrat-Gazette on widening of Arkansas 16
View Larger Map
Please use controls and cursor to move the image, zoom in or out and trace the whole route discussed at the meeting yesterday. The Reagan property is near the middle left part of the image above.
If you use your cursor to travel north of the open Reagan property between Washington Avenue and Wood Avenue from 11th Street up to near 9th Street you can see the 7 wooded wetland acres that the Partners for Better housing board is trying to buy to dredge and fill for a low-income housing development. Water drains from north of Jefferson School, all the way from north of MLK Boulevard (former 6th St.) down to 15th St. and into the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and is slowed and purified by the moist-soil area where the tiny branch overflows.
This portion of the Beaver Lake watershed is under extreme threat. Thanks to the Reagan family and others for keeping a bit of green infrastructure intact and allowing a small part of the rainwater to stay it falls.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Public invited to view plan for widening portions of Huntsville Road and Fifteenth Street from 4 to 7 p.m. today
People interested in protecting Northwest Arkansas' two major watersheds, in this case, the watershed of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and Beaver Lake, need to turn out and make sure that the planners are taking into account the potential affect of this project on water quality and the need for stormwater retention to avoid increasing the flooding and erosion threat downstream.
View Larger Map
Please use controls and cursor to move the image, zoom in or out and trace the whole route to be discussed this afternoon.
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department officials will reveal the first phase of design for widening a 2.7-mile stretch of Arkansas 16 between S. College Avenue and Stonebridge Road to four lanes and installing a traffic light at the Stonebridge intersection, east of Crossover Road from 4 to 7 p.m. in the activity center of Fayetteville First Assembly of God at 550 E. 15th St. There won't be a presentation; residents can look at displays, ask questions and give feedback verbally or on survey forms, The Northwest Arkansas Times reported in its March 31, 2009, edition.
View Larger Map
Please use controls and cursor to move the image, zoom in or out and trace the whole route to be discussed this afternoon.
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department officials will reveal the first phase of design for widening a 2.7-mile stretch of Arkansas 16 between S. College Avenue and Stonebridge Road to four lanes and installing a traffic light at the Stonebridge intersection, east of Crossover Road from 4 to 7 p.m. in the activity center of Fayetteville First Assembly of God at 550 E. 15th St. There won't be a presentation; residents can look at displays, ask questions and give feedback verbally or on survey forms, The Northwest Arkansas Times reported in its March 31, 2009, edition.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Severed limb budding at end. Birds and squirrels and rabbits may eat them
Here is the caption with the photo of limbs burning in Benton County:
Up in smoke:
Benton County employee Harvey Johnson watched a fire at 10791 Stoney Point Road near Lowell on Thursday. The county is burning limbs and trees broken by this winter’s ice storm. Other burn sites are at 9900 Marchant Road in Elm Springs, 21447 Waukesha Road in Siloam Springs and 19941 Bettis Hill Road near War Eagle. Washington County is also burning ice-storm debris on North 40th Street in Springdale. DAVID FRANK DEMPSEY / Benton County Daily Record
If no one in either county had a fireplace or a wood stove, this might seem slightly less ridiculous.
I hope a lot of people who can use firewood or who would collect it and sell it will be at those sites before more is burned and load it up and take it away.
This wood would save people money, reduce air pollution now and save the carbon in these limbs for actual home heating and reduce global climate change (because people with wood stoves and fire places will be buying wood next fall and reducing the tree cover even more in Northwest Arkansas).
Additionally, birds and squirrels are eating buds on those limbs where they are lying. In fact, many large limbs or trunks lying separated from the main trunk for nearly two months are budding right now! So wildlife are having to search a bit more for food, which may be tough for birds facing nesting season.
Burning material with this much value is WRONG.
It is even worse than chipping it all. This is incredibly wasteful and inconsiderate of people and other living things. I am proud to live in Fayetteville where an effort is being made to separate potential firewood for sharing and where the rest is being chipped rather than burned.
This is an example of the need for cross-training and keeping all environmental enforcement under one big umbrella. Apparently, it would be the responsibility of the EPA to see that FEMA's requirements for subsidizing "cleanup" efforts meet environmental guidelines. But I would bet that the EPA has had no input in the cleanup efforts. Otherwise, they would have required sound environmental use of the downed trees and limbs.
And, if there were any budgetary control of FEMA, their pet contractors would be required to compact and compress the loads of loose limbs in their trailers and trucks before claiming a load is full and counting it on the basis of cubic yards.
If you take waste metal to a steel yard or aluminum-recycling facility, you will have your vehicle weighed and then weighed again after the workers pull off what can be recycled. They don't pay more for half-empty truckloads or uncrushed cans that fill a big bag. The scales tell the story.
Should the taxpayers support a system that rewards only selected contractors and ignores the value of the material being destroyed in the pretense of "cleaning up" after a disaster? And requires the hiring of "inspectors" or whatever from different pet companies to make sure the trucks aren't overfilled?
My questions aren't original. I have heard these questions from residents of Fayetteville who are offended by the appearance of poor management and waste.
The city can't ask these questions because the EPA MIGHT look into the problem and FEMA MIGHT delay reimbursement of the city for the work that took a big chunk out of the city's reserve fund.
But somebody has to ask why they don't just weigh the loads and pay and reimburse on the results. My neighbors have asked.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Focus group to discuss plan for Beaver Lake
On Wednesday, March 25th, you are invited to a focus group meeting with Tetratech to discuss the status of the Beaver Lake Watershed Management Plan that they have been helping facilitate. This follow-up focus group meeting with conservation and environmental representatives will take place on Wednesday, March 25th at 3pm in the Chicago Room (room #220) at the Jones Center for Families in Springdale. They want to gather your feedback on some of the management options that they have been developing for the watershed.
I believe each of you participated in the first focus group meeting Tetratech convened a few months back. If you have suggestions for other folks who should be included in this focus group, please let me know or pass this invitation along to them.
Tetratech has put together a series of newsletters to update you and other focus group members on the status of the project. I will distribute some of the newsletters attached to this message and others attached to another message early next week.
Please let me know if you have any questions and whether you will be able to attend the meeting on Wednesday, March 25th at 3pm.
Thank you!
Mike Malone
387-5590 (cell)
I believe each of you participated in the first focus group meeting Tetratech convened a few months back. If you have suggestions for other folks who should be included in this focus group, please let me know or pass this invitation along to them.
Tetratech has put together a series of newsletters to update you and other focus group members on the status of the project. I will distribute some of the newsletters attached to this message and others attached to another message early next week.
Please let me know if you have any questions and whether you will be able to attend the meeting on Wednesday, March 25th at 3pm.
Thank you!
Mike Malone
387-5590 (cell)
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Shackleford adds acreage to list of savannas deserving protection and restoration
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of Westside Sewage Treatment Plant and surrounding area.
|
map for another savanna
From: Bruce Shackleford (bruceshackleford@aristotle.net)
Sent: Sat 3/07/09 6:23 AM
To: Barbara Boland (barbaraboland@hotmail.com)
Cc: Delia Haak (deliahaak@irwp.org); bob morgan (rmorgan@bwdh2o.org); Joe Neal (joeneal@uark.edu); Bob Cross (racross@uark.edu); Aubrey Shepherd (AubreyShepherd@hotmail.com); ozarkendemic@gmail.com; bobcaulk@cox.net
1 attachment
West Side...jpg (1318.6 KB)
Barbara,
Attached is an aerial showing another savanna we need to identify on
our GI map. I will be including the site in the revised wetland/
prairie write-up. If I add artwork to it outlining the location, it
makes it very memory hungry. Therefore, I will describe the
location. It is the square wooded plot at the south end of the
aerial at the NW corner of Broyles Rd. and Woolsey Farm Rd. It is a
post oak savanna that has a brushy understory. It can be restored
with a good burn. I am calling it "Broyles Savanna" since we already
have a "Woolsey Savanna" at the north end of the property next to
Woolsey Wet Prairie. The Broyles Savanna is across the street (and
north of) the Broyles/Yates Prairie. The Broyles Savanna is next to
the old Woolsey home place that was occupied by the Broyles Family
100 years later. I estimate the Broyles Savanna to be 2.5 to 3.0
acres. Woolsey Farm Rd. runs east-west and is the line that divides
Fayetteville City Limits from Farmington City Limits. Broyles
Savanna is owned by the City of Fayetteville.
Later,
Bruce
West Side Wetland 2008.jpg
|
map for another savanna
From: Bruce Shackleford (bruceshackleford@aristotle.net)
Sent: Sat 3/07/09 6:23 AM
To: Barbara Boland (barbaraboland@hotmail.com)
Cc: Delia Haak (deliahaak@irwp.org); bob morgan (rmorgan@bwdh2o.org); Joe Neal (joeneal@uark.edu); Bob Cross (racross@uark.edu); Aubrey Shepherd (AubreyShepherd@hotmail.com); ozarkendemic@gmail.com; bobcaulk@cox.net
1 attachment
West Side...jpg (1318.6 KB)
Barbara,
Attached is an aerial showing another savanna we need to identify on
our GI map. I will be including the site in the revised wetland/
prairie write-up. If I add artwork to it outlining the location, it
makes it very memory hungry. Therefore, I will describe the
location. It is the square wooded plot at the south end of the
aerial at the NW corner of Broyles Rd. and Woolsey Farm Rd. It is a
post oak savanna that has a brushy understory. It can be restored
with a good burn. I am calling it "Broyles Savanna" since we already
have a "Woolsey Savanna" at the north end of the property next to
Woolsey Wet Prairie. The Broyles Savanna is across the street (and
north of) the Broyles/Yates Prairie. The Broyles Savanna is next to
the old Woolsey home place that was occupied by the Broyles Family
100 years later. I estimate the Broyles Savanna to be 2.5 to 3.0
acres. Woolsey Farm Rd. runs east-west and is the line that divides
Fayetteville City Limits from Farmington City Limits. Broyles
Savanna is owned by the City of Fayetteville.
Later,
Bruce
West Side Wetland 2008.jpg
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Redwing blackbirds find wetland wherever they migrate
Click on image to Enlarge view of redwing blackbird on wetland area south of the Audubon nature area, south of
Sam's Club, on a Springwoods wetland area on March 5, 2009, in northwest Fayetteville, Arkansas, 300 yards north of
Clabber Creek.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Frank and Rob Sharp serious about protecting green infrastructure of Northwest Arkansas
Please click on images to ENLARGE photos of Frank and Rob Sharp on February 26, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Five-year-old photo of wetland construction site seen in preceding post. The wooded wetland served as a floodway but was kept wet by three springs
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of the area shown in the three immediately preceding photos as it appeared on March 28, 2004, before being bulldozed and dredged and filled for Aspen Ridge. Camera wasn't particularly good, camera operator was worse and the photo was actually reduced in size and quality to go on line at that time. Additionally, of course, the area was always shaded by tall trees! Even in winter one could see no more than 100 feet because of understory vegetation and thickness of the trees.
This is one of several types of sensitive sites that members of the green-infrastructure committee believe deserve protection. This one offered the opportunity to continue to help reduce flooding and siltation of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and thus Beaver Lake. The opportunity to save this area was lost and cannot be mitigated offsite.
This is one of several types of sensitive sites that members of the green-infrastructure committee believe deserve protection. This one offered the opportunity to continue to help reduce flooding and siltation of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and thus Beaver Lake. The opportunity to save this area was lost and cannot be mitigated offsite.
Lowest wetland portion of Hill Place (former Aspen Ridge) property being dredged and filled for parking lot in former overflow area of Town Branch
Please click on images to ENLARGE photos of dredging and filling of Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River west of South Hill Avenue and north of 11th Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas, on February 26, 2009. Rich, absorbent soil being hauled away to make space for truckloads of non-absorbent, non-organic red dirt to provide parking spaces for Hill Place student apartments.
Don't let the contractors take all your brushpiles; the birds won't forgive you
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of mockingbird on brushpile at World Peace Wetland Prairie on February 25, 2009,
The more buds you spot on the ends of small limbs the more likely these limbs are the ones to keep on your property if you want plenty of song birds to be in your neighborhood when spring comes. You might also try to convince your neighbors to preserve some similar brushpiles on their property. And urging neighbors to preserve ice-damaged trees on their property also will help.
Many won't understand. But every property owner who keeps a brush pile or resists pressure to cut down a damaged tree can make a difference in the reproductive success of song birds in the coming spring.
The more buds you spot on the ends of small limbs the more likely these limbs are the ones to keep on your property if you want plenty of song birds to be in your neighborhood when spring comes. You might also try to convince your neighbors to preserve some similar brushpiles on their property. And urging neighbors to preserve ice-damaged trees on their property also will help.
Many won't understand. But every property owner who keeps a brush pile or resists pressure to cut down a damaged tree can make a difference in the reproductive success of song birds in the coming spring.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Thursday February 26, 2009, meeting of FNHA's green-infrastructure committee set for Millar Lodge on Mount Sequoyah
We have nailed down the location for the Design Team meeting next Thursday 2/26/2009 7pm; it is going to be in the Millar Lodge at the Mount Sequoyah Conference and Retreat Center. You will find a map of the Conference Center grounds at this url: http://www.mountsequoyah.org/www.mountsequoyah.org/Home_files/Map.jpg
Millar Lodge is building 48 (for orientation: when the Design Team first met in early October we met in the Cafeteria Building 41)
I would like to remind you all that since this is a matching funds grant we need you to complete a time sheet that shows the hours you have so generously given to the project. Time sheet MSWord document attached.
I have been working closely with several of the Working Groups to finalize their maps; I think we are all going to be really 'WOWWED!'
I have received a few RSVPs, but if you haven't sent me an email to say yea or nay on attendance, please do.
See you next week,
Barbara
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
Millar Lodge is building 48 (for orientation: when the Design Team first met in early October we met in the Cafeteria Building 41)
I would like to remind you all that since this is a matching funds grant we need you to complete a time sheet that shows the hours you have so generously given to the project. Time sheet MSWord document attached.
I have been working closely with several of the Working Groups to finalize their maps; I think we are all going to be really 'WOWWED!'
I have received a few RSVPs, but if you haven't sent me an email to say yea or nay on attendance, please do.
See you next week,
Barbara
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
Monday, February 16, 2009
Meetings set for 7 p.m. Wednesday Feb. 18 and 7 p.m. Thursday Feb. 26
The Environmental Working Group will meet with Barbara Boland this Wed. Feb. 18 at 7 pm. in Ozark Hall, Rm. 209, to finalize the EWG Map for the Green Infrastructure Planning Report.
REMINDER: Green Infrastructure Planning meeting, Thursday, Feb. 26, 7 pm. Mt. Sequoyah.
REMINDER: Green Infrastructure Planning meeting, Thursday, Feb. 26, 7 pm. Mt. Sequoyah.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Summary of achievements of weland/prairie/savanna subgroup
SUMMARY OF ACHIEVEMENTS OF
WETLAND/PRAIRIE/SAVANNA SUBGROUP (W/P/SS)
Subgroup Members:
Joe Neal, Chris Wilson, Aubrey Shepherd, Bob Cross, Bruce Shackleford
The WPSS developed the following general objectives in October of 2008.
1. Identify the environmental resources that are important for the communities to preserve for the future.
2. Complete a map identifying where key environmental areas are and the linkages and hubs to access them.
3. Identify to the best of our abilities “what the community wants” and what ecosystems require.
The W/P/SS developed the following list of potential prairie/wetland/savanna sites in October 2008:
SITE 1: Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course (also known as Goff Farm): Low wet prairie plants on approximately 10 acres next to Course on south side of Hwy.16E.
SITE 2: Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30-40 acres of City-owned land.
SITE 3: Wilson Springs/Clabber Creek: Audubon Society owned wet-prairie land (120 acres) southwest of 540 and Hwy 112.
SITE 4: Zion Road: Sweetser owned land south of Zion Road – app. 5 acres.
SITE 5: Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary: 30-acre wetland mitigation site with 70 adjacent acres of prairie and savanna; owned by City of Fayetteville next to the West Side WWTP; could be expanded by another 70 acres as a mitigation bank/natural area.
SITE 6: World Peace Wetland Prairie Park (and adjacent tract) south of Hwy. 16 on Duncan & nearby Pinnacle Foods property.
SITE 7: University of Arkansas Farm on Garland has savanna and grassland fields.
SITE 8: Broyles/Yates Prairie on Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 40 acres owned by Mr. & Mrs. Carl Yates.
SITE 9: Wedington Unit Forest: Grassland restoration on the west side of Ozark National Forest.
SITE 10: Pieces of prairie grasslands in the South Industrial Park on Armstrong (Combs Park).
SITE 11: South of Hwy. 16 large oak barren (savanna).
Site Evaluation Methodology: The Subgroup developed a W/P/SS Site Characterization Sheet (attached) to be completed to categorize each site. The evaluation criteria included both socioeconomic and ecological issues, and a site categorization strategy to determine each site’s potential for preservation and/or restoration. Site Characterization Sheets were completed for sites 1-8. Due to time limitations, evaluations for sites 9-11 were not completed. The sites were classified into one of the following categories:
Category 1 Site: Site size and location make it a prime candidate for preservation/restoration with minimal expenditure of financial and human resources; site may be protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site may provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and may be inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna that has been minimally impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group who currently applies an “adaptive management” strategy to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will likely have significant community support; protection of site will very likely have high potential to provide a critical wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor.
Category 2 Site: Site size and location make it a possible candidate for preservation/restoration although requirements for expenditures of financial and human resources may not be optimal on a cost/acre basis; site may be a wetland, but not necessarily protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site’s capability to provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna, and/or native plant species of concern is moderate, questionable, or unknown primarily due to its small size; site may exist as a very small remnant fragment of prairie/wetland/savanna ecosystem; site may exhibit impacts by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and/or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group that may not be willing to consider long-term preservation due to land value, planned site use, or lack of interest; site is currently not actively managed (or is minimally managed) with an “adaptive management” strategy to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will have questionable or minimal community support, therefore, site’s potential to provide a wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor is minimal to moderate.
Category 3 Site: Site size and location make it an unlikely candidate for preservation/restoration since a substantial expenditure of financial and human resources would be required; site is not protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site does not provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and is not inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents only a remnant prairie or wetland that has been substantially impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group most likely not willing to actively manage site to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will likely have little community support; protection of site will provide little potential to provide even a minimal wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor.
Insert Blank W/P/SS Site Characterization Sheet as pages 3 and 4
RESULTS OF SITE EVALUATIONS
The site categorization results are as follows:
CATEGORY 1 SITES
SITE 2: Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30/40 acres of City-owned land
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site has large stands of native grasses such as little bluestem, big bluestem and Indian grass. It is well drained and no wetlands were observed, however, a small stream runs through the property. Oak/elm/hickory forests surround the grassland openings. Public access is available via paved trails, and it is our understanding that the site has some level of permanent protection. The condition of the site supports habitat for mammals and songbirds. The vegetation succession status appears to indicate that the site is minimally managed. Stands of eastern red cedar, smooth sumac, and blackberry are overtaking the grassland habitat, and it will continue to degrade without more aggressive management. A prescribed burn would serve well to maintain and restore this upland prairie. Bush-hogging and chainsaw cutting of larger woody plants will be needed in some areas. Burning and clearing should be done during the avian non-nesting seasons. It appears that fescue has been planted on the outer edges of the trails. Herbicide applications of sulfosulfuron should be completed in early spring or late fall while the fescue is actively growing and the native plants are dormant. A detailed plant species inventory should be conducted twice annually; once in May and again in October to fully evaluate the presence of rare species.
SITE 3: Wilson Springs: Clabber Creek Wet Prairie - Audubon Society owned 120 acres
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site exhibits prairie mounds (pimples) with inclusions of small scattered wetland areas in depressions between the mounds. This diversity in microtopography provides diversity in hydrology that, in turn, provides the potential to support a very diverse plant community.
However, due to little vegetation management, the site is losing its prairie character and former grasslands are being replaced with thickets of brushy shrubs and trees. This is exacerbated by the fact that invasive species such as sericea lespedeza and tall fescue continue to outcompete the native prairie forbs and grasses. This increases the potential for the loss of habitat for prairie birds and mammals.
The site is believed by local ornithologists to support the only known population of Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) in northwestern Arkansas. Mike Mlodinow of Fayetteville discovered this rare and inconspicuous bird at the site, in 2001. This species is declining over most of its range, and has been found in Arkansas in the nesting season on only a few prairies. The only record in more than a decade is from a protected prairie south of the Arkansas River. Of particular concern is that some studies have suggested that Henslow’s does not tolerate areas having high densities of woody vegetation.
Clabber Creek flows across the property, providing habitat for various species of fish, amphibians, and birds. This is the lowermost portion of Clabber Creek that is inhabited by the Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini) a small fish (2 to 3 inches long). The Arkansas darter has been designated as an Arkansas Species of Concern by the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, listed as a fish of Special Concern by the American Fisheries Society, and is a Candidate Species for federal listing as endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
The site is in need of an achievable vegetation management program that includes prescribed burning, bush-hogging and herbicide applications to control the growth of woody and invasive non-native plant density. A detailed plant species inventory is recommended.
Pics available from Joe Neal??
WETLAND/PRAIRIE/SAVANNA SUBGROUP (W/P/SS)
Subgroup Members:
Joe Neal, Chris Wilson, Aubrey Shepherd, Bob Cross, Bruce Shackleford
The WPSS developed the following general objectives in October of 2008.
1. Identify the environmental resources that are important for the communities to preserve for the future.
2. Complete a map identifying where key environmental areas are and the linkages and hubs to access them.
3. Identify to the best of our abilities “what the community wants” and what ecosystems require.
The W/P/SS developed the following list of potential prairie/wetland/savanna sites in October 2008:
SITE 1: Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course (also known as Goff Farm): Low wet prairie plants on approximately 10 acres next to Course on south side of Hwy.16E.
SITE 2: Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30-40 acres of City-owned land.
SITE 3: Wilson Springs/Clabber Creek: Audubon Society owned wet-prairie land (120 acres) southwest of 540 and Hwy 112.
SITE 4: Zion Road: Sweetser owned land south of Zion Road – app. 5 acres.
SITE 5: Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary: 30-acre wetland mitigation site with 70 adjacent acres of prairie and savanna; owned by City of Fayetteville next to the West Side WWTP; could be expanded by another 70 acres as a mitigation bank/natural area.
SITE 6: World Peace Wetland Prairie Park (and adjacent tract) south of Hwy. 16 on Duncan & nearby Pinnacle Foods property.
SITE 7: University of Arkansas Farm on Garland has savanna and grassland fields.
SITE 8: Broyles/Yates Prairie on Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 40 acres owned by Mr. & Mrs. Carl Yates.
SITE 9: Wedington Unit Forest: Grassland restoration on the west side of Ozark National Forest.
SITE 10: Pieces of prairie grasslands in the South Industrial Park on Armstrong (Combs Park).
SITE 11: South of Hwy. 16 large oak barren (savanna).
Site Evaluation Methodology: The Subgroup developed a W/P/SS Site Characterization Sheet (attached) to be completed to categorize each site. The evaluation criteria included both socioeconomic and ecological issues, and a site categorization strategy to determine each site’s potential for preservation and/or restoration. Site Characterization Sheets were completed for sites 1-8. Due to time limitations, evaluations for sites 9-11 were not completed. The sites were classified into one of the following categories:
Category 1 Site: Site size and location make it a prime candidate for preservation/restoration with minimal expenditure of financial and human resources; site may be protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site may provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and may be inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna that has been minimally impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group who currently applies an “adaptive management” strategy to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will likely have significant community support; protection of site will very likely have high potential to provide a critical wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor.
Category 2 Site: Site size and location make it a possible candidate for preservation/restoration although requirements for expenditures of financial and human resources may not be optimal on a cost/acre basis; site may be a wetland, but not necessarily protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site’s capability to provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna, and/or native plant species of concern is moderate, questionable, or unknown primarily due to its small size; site may exist as a very small remnant fragment of prairie/wetland/savanna ecosystem; site may exhibit impacts by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and/or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group that may not be willing to consider long-term preservation due to land value, planned site use, or lack of interest; site is currently not actively managed (or is minimally managed) with an “adaptive management” strategy to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will have questionable or minimal community support, therefore, site’s potential to provide a wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor is minimal to moderate.
Category 3 Site: Site size and location make it an unlikely candidate for preservation/restoration since a substantial expenditure of financial and human resources would be required; site is not protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site does not provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and is not inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents only a remnant prairie or wetland that has been substantially impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group most likely not willing to actively manage site to effectively preserve, restore, or enhance rare ecosystem features; protection of site will likely have little community support; protection of site will provide little potential to provide even a minimal wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor.
Insert Blank W/P/SS Site Characterization Sheet as pages 3 and 4
RESULTS OF SITE EVALUATIONS
The site categorization results are as follows:
CATEGORY 1 SITES
SITE 2: Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30/40 acres of City-owned land
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site has large stands of native grasses such as little bluestem, big bluestem and Indian grass. It is well drained and no wetlands were observed, however, a small stream runs through the property. Oak/elm/hickory forests surround the grassland openings. Public access is available via paved trails, and it is our understanding that the site has some level of permanent protection. The condition of the site supports habitat for mammals and songbirds. The vegetation succession status appears to indicate that the site is minimally managed. Stands of eastern red cedar, smooth sumac, and blackberry are overtaking the grassland habitat, and it will continue to degrade without more aggressive management. A prescribed burn would serve well to maintain and restore this upland prairie. Bush-hogging and chainsaw cutting of larger woody plants will be needed in some areas. Burning and clearing should be done during the avian non-nesting seasons. It appears that fescue has been planted on the outer edges of the trails. Herbicide applications of sulfosulfuron should be completed in early spring or late fall while the fescue is actively growing and the native plants are dormant. A detailed plant species inventory should be conducted twice annually; once in May and again in October to fully evaluate the presence of rare species.
SITE 3: Wilson Springs: Clabber Creek Wet Prairie - Audubon Society owned 120 acres
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site exhibits prairie mounds (pimples) with inclusions of small scattered wetland areas in depressions between the mounds. This diversity in microtopography provides diversity in hydrology that, in turn, provides the potential to support a very diverse plant community.
However, due to little vegetation management, the site is losing its prairie character and former grasslands are being replaced with thickets of brushy shrubs and trees. This is exacerbated by the fact that invasive species such as sericea lespedeza and tall fescue continue to outcompete the native prairie forbs and grasses. This increases the potential for the loss of habitat for prairie birds and mammals.
The site is believed by local ornithologists to support the only known population of Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) in northwestern Arkansas. Mike Mlodinow of Fayetteville discovered this rare and inconspicuous bird at the site, in 2001. This species is declining over most of its range, and has been found in Arkansas in the nesting season on only a few prairies. The only record in more than a decade is from a protected prairie south of the Arkansas River. Of particular concern is that some studies have suggested that Henslow’s does not tolerate areas having high densities of woody vegetation.
Clabber Creek flows across the property, providing habitat for various species of fish, amphibians, and birds. This is the lowermost portion of Clabber Creek that is inhabited by the Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini) a small fish (2 to 3 inches long). The Arkansas darter has been designated as an Arkansas Species of Concern by the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, listed as a fish of Special Concern by the American Fisheries Society, and is a Candidate Species for federal listing as endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
The site is in need of an achievable vegetation management program that includes prescribed burning, bush-hogging and herbicide applications to control the growth of woody and invasive non-native plant density. A detailed plant species inventory is recommended.
Pics available from Joe Neal??
SITE 5: Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary: City of Fayetteville-owned 30 acres of wetland mitigation with adjacent 70 acres of prairie and savanna.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site is located immediately to the north of the City of Fayetteville’s West Side Wastewater Treatment Plant and was established as a requirement by the Corps of Engineers for compensatory wetland mitigation due to wetland losses caused by the city’s sewer improvement project. Restoration activities have included the construction of earthen berms to modify the hydrology, prescribed burns, mowing to prevent fescue from forming seedheads, and herbicide applications. Over a three-year period, the plant community has increased from 47 to 340 species. Seven of those plant species are Washington County records and are listed as Arkansas Species of Concern by the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission. Adaptive management techniques have focused on creating conditions favorable to plant species that have been dormant within the seedbed for decades. Bird life is abundant and diverse, including songbirds, shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl, and birds of prey. Woolsey Wet Prairie is listed as one of the nation’s birding hotspots on “ebird.org” a website jointly sponsored by Cornell University and Audubon.
The City of Fayetteville owns an additional 70 acres of prairie/savanna complex that is adjacent to the site. The adjacent acreage is very amenable to be expanded into a wetland mitigation bank and natural area. Approximately 20 acres of this tract is a rare hardwood savanna with large trees that were recently damaged by the January 2009 ice storm. Plans are underway to preserve as many of the damaged trees as possible. A draft prospectus has been prepared that will go before the City Council to make the final decision of a commitment of the additional 70 acres for the mitigation bank. More detailed information is available on the Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary website at: http://ecoarkansas.com/WoolseyMain.html.
SITE 8: Broyles/Yates Prairie on Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 40 acres owned by Mr. & Mrs. Carl Yates.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This 40-acre site is a remnant prairie with intact mounds (prairie pimples) and wet depressions between mounds. The southern-most 10 acres are predominately wet meadow (palustrine emergent wetland class PEM) that is progressing to Palustrine System Scrub-Shrub Wetland Class (PSS) due to lack of mowing. A small (approx. 3 acres) area in the extreme southwest corner has become Palustrine System Forested Wetland Class (PFO) as the green ash are taking over and shading out the understory. With continued lack of vegetation management, upland areas will evolve from grasslands to shrub/scrub habitat as eastern red cedar, elm, and honey locust will take over.
The W/P/SS has suggested vegetation management to the landowner to include bush-hogging to remove woody vegetation (most of the green ash and some of the cedar) that is taking over wet prairie depressions and uplands and a prescribed burn early in 2009 growing season. This would preserve prairie habitat and enhance plant species diversity. The City of Fayetteville owns property to the north, which includes forested and prairie areas (including Woolsey Wet Prairie) and headwaters of Goose Creek. Cattle pasture is located to the west, an elementary school to the east, and residential to the south. Several very large old growth bur oak and American elm trees were observed on the site. The Broyles/Yates property has good habitat diversity; onsite and nearby offsite aquatic resources; good connectivity to surrounding habitats primarily to the north; and an ecological integrity that supports wildlife. This site would fit very well into a local hub/link network and could be easily managed with minimal periodic prescribed burning and mowing. The site visit made by the W/P/SS can be viewed at:
http://greeninfrastructure.blogspot.com/2008/11/green-infrastructure-team-meets-on.html
Pics available from aubrey???
CATEGORY 2 SITES
SITE 1: Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course (also known as Goff Farm): on approximately 10 acres on south side of Hwy.16E.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This is a small site that is somewhat isolated due to surrounding land use as a golf course. Various native prairie forbs and grasses are dominant, and a layer of tall fescue appears to be working its way into the community as a dominant. The site is sloped and a drainageway extends through the middle, creating areas that support wetland plant species. An interesting feature is the abundance of compass plants (Silphium laciniatum). This unique plant world has the ability for its leaves to orient themselves in a North and South direction. The compass plant supposedly served as a compass for prairie settlers traveling through who lost or forgot to bring a compass.
The manager of the property stated that they simply leave this area alone so that they can have a small “natural area”. The W/P/SS should contact the landowner to provide guidance about management of invasive species such as fescue, and inquire about getting seeds from mature compass plants next fall for use in restoration activities at other sites.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site is located immediately to the north of the City of Fayetteville’s West Side Wastewater Treatment Plant and was established as a requirement by the Corps of Engineers for compensatory wetland mitigation due to wetland losses caused by the city’s sewer improvement project. Restoration activities have included the construction of earthen berms to modify the hydrology, prescribed burns, mowing to prevent fescue from forming seedheads, and herbicide applications. Over a three-year period, the plant community has increased from 47 to 340 species. Seven of those plant species are Washington County records and are listed as Arkansas Species of Concern by the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission. Adaptive management techniques have focused on creating conditions favorable to plant species that have been dormant within the seedbed for decades. Bird life is abundant and diverse, including songbirds, shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl, and birds of prey. Woolsey Wet Prairie is listed as one of the nation’s birding hotspots on “ebird.org” a website jointly sponsored by Cornell University and Audubon.
The City of Fayetteville owns an additional 70 acres of prairie/savanna complex that is adjacent to the site. The adjacent acreage is very amenable to be expanded into a wetland mitigation bank and natural area. Approximately 20 acres of this tract is a rare hardwood savanna with large trees that were recently damaged by the January 2009 ice storm. Plans are underway to preserve as many of the damaged trees as possible. A draft prospectus has been prepared that will go before the City Council to make the final decision of a commitment of the additional 70 acres for the mitigation bank. More detailed information is available on the Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary website at: http://ecoarkansas.com/WoolseyMain.html.
SITE 8: Broyles/Yates Prairie on Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 40 acres owned by Mr. & Mrs. Carl Yates.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This 40-acre site is a remnant prairie with intact mounds (prairie pimples) and wet depressions between mounds. The southern-most 10 acres are predominately wet meadow (palustrine emergent wetland class PEM) that is progressing to Palustrine System Scrub-Shrub Wetland Class (PSS) due to lack of mowing. A small (approx. 3 acres) area in the extreme southwest corner has become Palustrine System Forested Wetland Class (PFO) as the green ash are taking over and shading out the understory. With continued lack of vegetation management, upland areas will evolve from grasslands to shrub/scrub habitat as eastern red cedar, elm, and honey locust will take over.
The W/P/SS has suggested vegetation management to the landowner to include bush-hogging to remove woody vegetation (most of the green ash and some of the cedar) that is taking over wet prairie depressions and uplands and a prescribed burn early in 2009 growing season. This would preserve prairie habitat and enhance plant species diversity. The City of Fayetteville owns property to the north, which includes forested and prairie areas (including Woolsey Wet Prairie) and headwaters of Goose Creek. Cattle pasture is located to the west, an elementary school to the east, and residential to the south. Several very large old growth bur oak and American elm trees were observed on the site. The Broyles/Yates property has good habitat diversity; onsite and nearby offsite aquatic resources; good connectivity to surrounding habitats primarily to the north; and an ecological integrity that supports wildlife. This site would fit very well into a local hub/link network and could be easily managed with minimal periodic prescribed burning and mowing. The site visit made by the W/P/SS can be viewed at:
http://greeninfrastructure.blogspot.com/2008/11/green-infrastructure-team-meets-on.html
Pics available from aubrey???
CATEGORY 2 SITES
SITE 1: Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course (also known as Goff Farm): on approximately 10 acres on south side of Hwy.16E.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This is a small site that is somewhat isolated due to surrounding land use as a golf course. Various native prairie forbs and grasses are dominant, and a layer of tall fescue appears to be working its way into the community as a dominant. The site is sloped and a drainageway extends through the middle, creating areas that support wetland plant species. An interesting feature is the abundance of compass plants (Silphium laciniatum). This unique plant world has the ability for its leaves to orient themselves in a North and South direction. The compass plant supposedly served as a compass for prairie settlers traveling through who lost or forgot to bring a compass.
The manager of the property stated that they simply leave this area alone so that they can have a small “natural area”. The W/P/SS should contact the landowner to provide guidance about management of invasive species such as fescue, and inquire about getting seeds from mature compass plants next fall for use in restoration activities at other sites.
SITE 4: Zion Road: Sweetser owned land south of Zion Road – app. 5 acres.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This is a very interesting site because it is small and surrounded by a densely populated residential area, yet has and extremely high quality prairie plant community. Big bluestem, little bluestem and Indiangrass are the dominant grasses, and the abundance of rattlesnake master (Eryngium yuccifolium) is a unique feature. This plant is a very odd member of the Carrot family that resembles a yucca or some other desert plant. However, it is a true tallgrass prairie species with a unique appearance. In previous times, Native Americans used the dried seedheads of rattlesnake master as rattles. Pioneers thought the roots could be used as an effective antidote to rattlesnake bites, hence the common name of this plant. However, this belief was erroneous.
The W/P/SS should contact the landowner to provide guidance about site management, and inquire about getting seeds from mature plants, and or digging and transplanting specimens, for use in restoration activities at other sites.
SITE 6: World Peace Wetland Prairie Park (and adjacent tract) north of 15th Street at 1121 South Duncan Avenue.
Existing Status and Management Needs: World Peace Wetland Prairie is a small city-owned nature park at 1121 South Duncan Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The land includes wetland prairie and savanna with rich, black soil and a mixture of hundreds of native plants typical of many similar areas being cleared for development all over Northwest Arkansas. Although small in size, it hosts an extremely diverse community of flora and fauna. It has served as a model for what can be achieved by volunteers who participate in the site management.
The adjacent Pinnacle Foods Prairie is west of World Peace Wetland Prairie and may be seen from the end of West 12th St.
Aubrey, can you please elaborate on this and provide pics? It is only fair that you do this because you know this site better than anyone and have put your own sweat into it.
More information about the site can be found at:
http://www.worldpeacewetlandprairie.com/
SITE 7: University of Arkansas Farm on Garland savanna & grassland fields.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site of undetermined acreage appears to be a remnant savanna and prairie grassland area. The W/P/SS has not made a detailed site visit, and little is known about the property use and management. The W/P/SS should contact the U of A to see if they could use the area as an educational demonstration project for ecological restoration.
CATEGORY 3 SITES
None
Community needs: It has been obvious to the W/P/SS that there is a common lack of public knowledge about the endangerment and need for management of vanishing Wetland/Prairie/Savanna ecosystems in Northwest Arkansas. Even those who do care about preserving and managing these ecosystems on their own land, know very little about vegetation management. Bruce Shackleford is in the process of developing the “Prairie Stewardship Network” as a hyperlink to the Woolsey Wet Prairie website. This site will include published articles from ecological restoration journals to educate the public about ecosystem restoration and vegetation management tools. Individuals will also be able to make inquiries about management issues via email.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This is a very interesting site because it is small and surrounded by a densely populated residential area, yet has and extremely high quality prairie plant community. Big bluestem, little bluestem and Indiangrass are the dominant grasses, and the abundance of rattlesnake master (Eryngium yuccifolium) is a unique feature. This plant is a very odd member of the Carrot family that resembles a yucca or some other desert plant. However, it is a true tallgrass prairie species with a unique appearance. In previous times, Native Americans used the dried seedheads of rattlesnake master as rattles. Pioneers thought the roots could be used as an effective antidote to rattlesnake bites, hence the common name of this plant. However, this belief was erroneous.
The W/P/SS should contact the landowner to provide guidance about site management, and inquire about getting seeds from mature plants, and or digging and transplanting specimens, for use in restoration activities at other sites.
SITE 6: World Peace Wetland Prairie Park (and adjacent tract) north of 15th Street at 1121 South Duncan Avenue.
Existing Status and Management Needs: World Peace Wetland Prairie is a small city-owned nature park at 1121 South Duncan Avenue in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The land includes wetland prairie and savanna with rich, black soil and a mixture of hundreds of native plants typical of many similar areas being cleared for development all over Northwest Arkansas. Although small in size, it hosts an extremely diverse community of flora and fauna. It has served as a model for what can be achieved by volunteers who participate in the site management.
The adjacent Pinnacle Foods Prairie is west of World Peace Wetland Prairie and may be seen from the end of West 12th St.
Aubrey, can you please elaborate on this and provide pics? It is only fair that you do this because you know this site better than anyone and have put your own sweat into it.
More information about the site can be found at:
http://www.worldpeacewetlandprairie.com/
SITE 7: University of Arkansas Farm on Garland savanna & grassland fields.
Existing Status and Management Needs: This site of undetermined acreage appears to be a remnant savanna and prairie grassland area. The W/P/SS has not made a detailed site visit, and little is known about the property use and management. The W/P/SS should contact the U of A to see if they could use the area as an educational demonstration project for ecological restoration.
CATEGORY 3 SITES
None
Community needs: It has been obvious to the W/P/SS that there is a common lack of public knowledge about the endangerment and need for management of vanishing Wetland/Prairie/Savanna ecosystems in Northwest Arkansas. Even those who do care about preserving and managing these ecosystems on their own land, know very little about vegetation management. Bruce Shackleford is in the process of developing the “Prairie Stewardship Network” as a hyperlink to the Woolsey Wet Prairie website. This site will include published articles from ecological restoration journals to educate the public about ecosystem restoration and vegetation management tools. Individuals will also be able to make inquiries about management issues via email.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Minutes of January 14, 2009, meeting of the environmental working group of the Green Infrastructure Project of FNHA
Environmental Working Group (EWG) - Minutes
Meeting: 7PM January 14, 2009; Bell Engineering Center, Room 2267
Attendees: Delia Haak as Chairman, Bob Morgan, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Aubrey Shepherd, Bruce Shackleford, Judy Woltjen as Scribe.
The Chairman asked for sub-committee reports.
Wetlands/Prairies:
Bruce said that this group established 3 primary goals, criteria for evaluating sites, and identified 11 potential sites as wetlands/prairies. So far they have field checked 8 of the 11 sites and listed them in categories of importance. Written report to be submitted.
Watersheds/Water Quality:
Bob Morgan will submit a written report. The working map has been marked with stream corridors and their flood plains throughout the study area. Report included below.
Upland Forests:
Doug James completed the corridors of forested areas on the working map. His report explains these features and includes an addendum of an arrow to Webber Mountain in Springdale because of its outstanding natural features and potential as protected green space.
Delia requested that Bruce meet with Barbara Boland to identify the 11 sites on the working map using their name on a reference section.
Delia asked Judy to meet with Barbara Boland to have the spring sites numbered and a list made with the locations of the springs so they can be located by anyone interested in finding them. List below.
Delia asked all committee members to turn in any list of names for contacting in Johnson, Farmington, and Greenland about the Green Infrastructure Plan.
Committee members were reminded to turn in work sheets with their volunteer hours.
Meeting ended at 8:30 PM.
Green Infrastructure Project
Environmental Working Group
Water/Streams Sub-committee
Submitted by Robert Morgan and Matt VanEps
Streams are an obvious but critical component of the green infrastructure of a community. A healthy stream system includes not only channels but also the adjacent streamside or riparian zone, floodplain and transition zone. The stream and surrounding riparian zones provide:
• Transport of water, energy and sediment,
• pollutant cycling and removal,
• aquatic and terrestrial habitat and refugia,
• corridors for movement,
• amelioration of water temperature,
• air pollution abatement,
• flood water storage,
• recreational and aesthetic values.
Fayetteville and the surrounding communities have a well developed dendritic stream system with no spot in town being more than a few hundred yards from a stream or ditch. Much of this system is still intact, or only moderately degraded. Other portions of the system have been substantially altered and degraded.
Stream ordination is a simple system of classifying streams by size. Streams are first ordered from their headwaters until they unite with another stream. When two first order streams unite, they become a second order stream. The junction of two second order streams forms a third order stream and so forth. The stream protection plan has identified second order and higher streams as identified on USGS 7½ minute quadrangle maps as priority areas for protection. This system of streams provides connective links between larger green nodes such as parks and wetlands within our community. Since second order streams are relatively large, smaller parcels of property have boundary lines that tend to run along these streams rather than being divided by them. Therefore this stream ordination system (off stream corridor prioritization) recognizes the reality of preserving private property rights.
For maximum protection of ecological function, the full width of the floodplain should be protected. Protection of lesser widths offers protection of less function. The Natural Resources Conservation Service recommends a minimum buffer of 66 feet for water-quality protection.
Ways to preserve stream corridors include acquisition as part of the cities park program, inclusion of corridors as part of required greenspace in commercial developments, low-impact development practices and possibly other innovative approaches. The City of Fayetteville recognized the utility of connectivity along streams in the development of its trail system.
FNHA 2008-9 GIPP STUDY----SPRINGS
January 22, 2009
Submitted by Judy and Duane Woltjen
Data from USGS 7 ½ min Topographic Maps
NAD 83 UTM/UPS Coordinates Zone 15S
Recap: 44 Springs on USGS topos and in the study area. One spring outside area is listed, and one spring not on maps is listed.
Name Easting Northing Area Center Ref.
Hewitt Spring (Not in area) 0402396 4003583 0401500 4002000 *
039611 4001080 1
0394381 4000293 039500 4002000 2
0394095 4000866 3
0389804 40015005 0391500 4002000 4
0390038 4001995 5
0388445 4001310 0387681 4003000 6
0385167 4001380 7
0384105 4001909 8
038154 4003386 0381500 4002000 9
0383078 4002601 10
0381814 4001831 11
0383601 4001536 12
0382934 4000743 13
0382387 4000067 14
0378604 45003980 0376575 4002000 15
Springs 0377920 4000068 16
0375529 3996501 0376500 3998000 17
Fish hatchery 0378412 3996456 18
(Savoy area) 0380175 3997071 0381539 3998001 19
0382456 3997083 20
0382597 3996729 21
0387985 3998057 0386500 3998000 22
Springs 0389714 3998675 0391500 3998000 23
0389314 3998626 23A
Greathouse Spring 0391785 3999772 24
Springs 0392032 3998657 25 (Chris Hollow Rd.) 0393529 3998520 26
0397990 3996705 0396500 3998000 27
Springs 0397387 3999260 28
0401500 3998000
0401500 3994000
(Craft Park, not on map) 0397092 3993814 0396500 3994000 28A
0391000 3994000
0388874 3992819 0386500 0394000 29
Springs (Double Springs) 0385743 3993955 30
0384188 3995032 31
Elkhorn Springs 0382341 3992188 0381500 3994000 32
(On Viney Grove Rd.) 0378856 3994752 0376500 3994000 33
0376500 3990000
0381500 3990000
0384292 3990200 0386500 3999000 34
0384675 3989988 35
0386793 3991062 36
0391500 3990000
Tin Cup Spring (Not on map) 0396038 3991804 0396500 3990000 Note
0401500 3990000
0401500 3986000
0396500 3986000
0391500 3986000
0385906 3985987 0386500 3986000 37
0386226 3986341 38
0382129 3987772 0381480 3986000 39
Ruby Spring 0382717 3987395 40
037426 3986923 0376500 3786000 41
0376500 3982000
Living Water Spring 0380393 3983588 0381500 3982000 42
0386500 3982000
0391500 3982000
0396500 3982000
Note:Wilson Spring of Fayetteville is not shown. It is in the vicinity of I-540 and AR 112.
* This is an area of interest respective to Springdale, Webber Mountain, etc.
Area Map List
7 ½ minute Topographic Maps
Sonora
Springdale
Robinson
Gallatin
Rhea
Wheeler
Fayetteville
Elkins
Sulfur City
West Fork
Prairie Grove
Rudy NE
Meeting: 7PM January 14, 2009; Bell Engineering Center, Room 2267
Attendees: Delia Haak as Chairman, Bob Morgan, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Aubrey Shepherd, Bruce Shackleford, Judy Woltjen as Scribe.
The Chairman asked for sub-committee reports.
Wetlands/Prairies:
Bruce said that this group established 3 primary goals, criteria for evaluating sites, and identified 11 potential sites as wetlands/prairies. So far they have field checked 8 of the 11 sites and listed them in categories of importance. Written report to be submitted.
Watersheds/Water Quality:
Bob Morgan will submit a written report. The working map has been marked with stream corridors and their flood plains throughout the study area. Report included below.
Upland Forests:
Doug James completed the corridors of forested areas on the working map. His report explains these features and includes an addendum of an arrow to Webber Mountain in Springdale because of its outstanding natural features and potential as protected green space.
Delia requested that Bruce meet with Barbara Boland to identify the 11 sites on the working map using their name on a reference section.
Delia asked Judy to meet with Barbara Boland to have the spring sites numbered and a list made with the locations of the springs so they can be located by anyone interested in finding them. List below.
Delia asked all committee members to turn in any list of names for contacting in Johnson, Farmington, and Greenland about the Green Infrastructure Plan.
Committee members were reminded to turn in work sheets with their volunteer hours.
Meeting ended at 8:30 PM.
Green Infrastructure Project
Environmental Working Group
Water/Streams Sub-committee
Submitted by Robert Morgan and Matt VanEps
Streams are an obvious but critical component of the green infrastructure of a community. A healthy stream system includes not only channels but also the adjacent streamside or riparian zone, floodplain and transition zone. The stream and surrounding riparian zones provide:
• Transport of water, energy and sediment,
• pollutant cycling and removal,
• aquatic and terrestrial habitat and refugia,
• corridors for movement,
• amelioration of water temperature,
• air pollution abatement,
• flood water storage,
• recreational and aesthetic values.
Fayetteville and the surrounding communities have a well developed dendritic stream system with no spot in town being more than a few hundred yards from a stream or ditch. Much of this system is still intact, or only moderately degraded. Other portions of the system have been substantially altered and degraded.
Stream ordination is a simple system of classifying streams by size. Streams are first ordered from their headwaters until they unite with another stream. When two first order streams unite, they become a second order stream. The junction of two second order streams forms a third order stream and so forth. The stream protection plan has identified second order and higher streams as identified on USGS 7½ minute quadrangle maps as priority areas for protection. This system of streams provides connective links between larger green nodes such as parks and wetlands within our community. Since second order streams are relatively large, smaller parcels of property have boundary lines that tend to run along these streams rather than being divided by them. Therefore this stream ordination system (off stream corridor prioritization) recognizes the reality of preserving private property rights.
For maximum protection of ecological function, the full width of the floodplain should be protected. Protection of lesser widths offers protection of less function. The Natural Resources Conservation Service recommends a minimum buffer of 66 feet for water-quality protection.
Ways to preserve stream corridors include acquisition as part of the cities park program, inclusion of corridors as part of required greenspace in commercial developments, low-impact development practices and possibly other innovative approaches. The City of Fayetteville recognized the utility of connectivity along streams in the development of its trail system.
FNHA 2008-9 GIPP STUDY----SPRINGS
January 22, 2009
Submitted by Judy and Duane Woltjen
Data from USGS 7 ½ min Topographic Maps
NAD 83 UTM/UPS Coordinates Zone 15S
Recap: 44 Springs on USGS topos and in the study area. One spring outside area is listed, and one spring not on maps is listed.
Name Easting Northing Area Center Ref.
Hewitt Spring (Not in area) 0402396 4003583 0401500 4002000 *
039611 4001080 1
0394381 4000293 039500 4002000 2
0394095 4000866 3
0389804 40015005 0391500 4002000 4
0390038 4001995 5
0388445 4001310 0387681 4003000 6
0385167 4001380 7
0384105 4001909 8
038154 4003386 0381500 4002000 9
0383078 4002601 10
0381814 4001831 11
0383601 4001536 12
0382934 4000743 13
0382387 4000067 14
0378604 45003980 0376575 4002000 15
Springs 0377920 4000068 16
0375529 3996501 0376500 3998000 17
Fish hatchery 0378412 3996456 18
(Savoy area) 0380175 3997071 0381539 3998001 19
0382456 3997083 20
0382597 3996729 21
0387985 3998057 0386500 3998000 22
Springs 0389714 3998675 0391500 3998000 23
0389314 3998626 23A
Greathouse Spring 0391785 3999772 24
Springs 0392032 3998657 25 (Chris Hollow Rd.) 0393529 3998520 26
0397990 3996705 0396500 3998000 27
Springs 0397387 3999260 28
0401500 3998000
0401500 3994000
(Craft Park, not on map) 0397092 3993814 0396500 3994000 28A
0391000 3994000
0388874 3992819 0386500 0394000 29
Springs (Double Springs) 0385743 3993955 30
0384188 3995032 31
Elkhorn Springs 0382341 3992188 0381500 3994000 32
(On Viney Grove Rd.) 0378856 3994752 0376500 3994000 33
0376500 3990000
0381500 3990000
0384292 3990200 0386500 3999000 34
0384675 3989988 35
0386793 3991062 36
0391500 3990000
Tin Cup Spring (Not on map) 0396038 3991804 0396500 3990000 Note
0401500 3990000
0401500 3986000
0396500 3986000
0391500 3986000
0385906 3985987 0386500 3986000 37
0386226 3986341 38
0382129 3987772 0381480 3986000 39
Ruby Spring 0382717 3987395 40
037426 3986923 0376500 3786000 41
0376500 3982000
Living Water Spring 0380393 3983588 0381500 3982000 42
0386500 3982000
0391500 3982000
0396500 3982000
Note:Wilson Spring of Fayetteville is not shown. It is in the vicinity of I-540 and AR 112.
* This is an area of interest respective to Springdale, Webber Mountain, etc.
Area Map List
7 ½ minute Topographic Maps
Sonora
Springdale
Robinson
Gallatin
Rhea
Wheeler
Fayetteville
Elkins
Sulfur City
West Fork
Prairie Grove
Rudy NE
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Fayette Junction Master Plan to be presented at 6 p.m. Thursday
Please click on image to ENLARGE one of the slides found at the link below.
All,
The Fayette Junction Master Plan Community Presentation has been rescheduled
for Thursday, Feb. 5 at BioBased Companies, which is located at the SE corner of Razorback Road and Cato Springs Road. Over 100 stakeholders contributed to the vision that will be presented, and a draft of the vision document and Illustrative Plan are now available at http://cityplan2025.accessfayetteville.org.
Please paste in address above or go directly to the information at the link below:
Access Fayetteville drawings and photos from Fayette Junction planning session
Please join us on the 5th for tours at 6:00 p.m., the presentation at 6:30 p.m., and light
refreshments following the presentation.
Best,
Karen Minkel
Karen Minkel
Interim Director of Long Range Planning
City of Fayetteville
(479) 575-8271
All,
The Fayette Junction Master Plan Community Presentation has been rescheduled
for Thursday, Feb. 5 at BioBased Companies, which is located at the SE corner of Razorback Road and Cato Springs Road. Over 100 stakeholders contributed to the vision that will be presented, and a draft of the vision document and Illustrative Plan are now available at http://cityplan2025.accessfayetteville.org.
Please paste in address above or go directly to the information at the link below:
Access Fayetteville drawings and photos from Fayette Junction planning session
Please join us on the 5th for tours at 6:00 p.m., the presentation at 6:30 p.m., and light
refreshments following the presentation.
Best,
Karen Minkel
Karen Minkel
Interim Director of Long Range Planning
City of Fayetteville
(479) 575-8271
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
January 25, 2009, annual meeting of FNHA features water-quality presentations
"Troubled Water: Preserving and Restoring Arkansas' Most Valuable Resource"
will be the program theme for FNHA’s annual meeting at 2:00 pm on January 25, 2009,
in the Walker meeting room of the Fayetteville Public Library.
Two leading experts on water issues in Arkansas, Martin Maner and Marty Matlock, will discuss Arkansas’ persistent water concerns and will talk with us about what they are doing and what we, as citizens, can do to protect the quality of our water and to help restore water quality where it has deteriorated.
Martin Maner is Director of Watershed Management with Central Arkansas Water, a metropolitan system which traces its history to the springs and wells of the early 1800s and which currently provides water to nearly 400,000 users. Central Arkansas Water, which is publicly owned, emphasizes a regional approach to water needs and has won numerous EPA awards for its commitment to water quality. Before becoming Director of Watershed Management for the utility, Maner was chief of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality’s Water Division.
Marty Matlock is Associate Professor of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Arkansas and has conducted research on a variety of ecological issues. One groundbreaking project which has drawn national attention combines urban stream ecological services restoration with outdoor classrooms, greenway trails and park development. Matlock's ecological engineering group collaborates closely with the University of Arkansas Community Design Center, in the School of Architecture, as well as with city and state officials to demonstrate more natural designs for stormwater systems. Among other activities, he will be working with the Springdale water utility in 2009 on the Clear Creek stream restoration project.
Please plan to join us the afternoon of January 25, and encourage your friends and neighbors to come along. Refreshments will be served. The annual business meeting will be brief, and there will be opportunities to learn more about an essential resource on which we and all living things depend.
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
will be the program theme for FNHA’s annual meeting at 2:00 pm on January 25, 2009,
in the Walker meeting room of the Fayetteville Public Library.
Two leading experts on water issues in Arkansas, Martin Maner and Marty Matlock, will discuss Arkansas’ persistent water concerns and will talk with us about what they are doing and what we, as citizens, can do to protect the quality of our water and to help restore water quality where it has deteriorated.
Martin Maner is Director of Watershed Management with Central Arkansas Water, a metropolitan system which traces its history to the springs and wells of the early 1800s and which currently provides water to nearly 400,000 users. Central Arkansas Water, which is publicly owned, emphasizes a regional approach to water needs and has won numerous EPA awards for its commitment to water quality. Before becoming Director of Watershed Management for the utility, Maner was chief of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality’s Water Division.
Marty Matlock is Associate Professor of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Arkansas and has conducted research on a variety of ecological issues. One groundbreaking project which has drawn national attention combines urban stream ecological services restoration with outdoor classrooms, greenway trails and park development. Matlock's ecological engineering group collaborates closely with the University of Arkansas Community Design Center, in the School of Architecture, as well as with city and state officials to demonstrate more natural designs for stormwater systems. Among other activities, he will be working with the Springdale water utility in 2009 on the Clear Creek stream restoration project.
Please plan to join us the afternoon of January 25, and encourage your friends and neighbors to come along. Refreshments will be served. The annual business meeting will be brief, and there will be opportunities to learn more about an essential resource on which we and all living things depend.
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Mayor Lioneld Jordan's 2009 state-of-the-city address to the city council
http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/mayor/documents/sotc/State_of_the_City_2009.pdf
Partners in Progress
Mayor Lioneld Jordan
State of the City
January 20, 2009
I am privileged to serve as Mayor of our wonderful city, and I am humbled by the
responsibility that the people have entrusted to me. I am honored to be your servant, and I
will work every day to make our community better for every citizen. That is my solemn
pledge to you.
Thanks to the vision of Mayor Dan Coody, the dedicated effort of our fine Aldermen, the
hard work of our outstanding city employees, and the contributions of many individual
residents who share our civic concerns, I am pleased to report to the City Council and to
my fellow citizens that the State of our City is sound.
We begin the year with a balanced city budget, solid progress on improving our
infrastructure, dedicated police officers and fire fighters who assure our safety, and a
commitment to institutional and individual partnerships to nurture and sustain the things
we love about this great community.
We also begin the year facing many new challenges and we must be prepared to face
those together with resolve. We are not immune from the problems of a faltering national
economy, and we must anticipate and be prepared for the consequences of any revenue
shortfall. We must be responsible stewards of our tax dollars, and we must maintain
essential city services for our citizens. Toward that end, I have already begun to identify
potential cost savings and have implemented a more effective management structure to
improve efficiency and control costs. Our staff already has offered many good solutions,
and we will institute an ongoing, frequent, consistent review of cost/benefit analysis of
operations and projects to assure the services and quality of life that our citizens expect
and deserve.
I believe in leadership by example, and I have proposed to cut the mayor’s salary and roll
it back to last year’s level. I have signed an affidavit that I will not avail myself of the
special lifetime retirement plan funded from general revenues. I have asked to return the
2
$5,000 annual car allowance formerly paid to the mayor and instead, to use a vehicle
from the city fleet when necessary to travel on city business. We have already achieved
some savings in the salaries of top staff, and I will continue to look for savings in all
areas of city operations. My staff and I are partners in this effort.
Even in uncertain economic times, we must be bold in our efforts to develop and
implement a strategic economic development plan for our city. Not only can this lead to
increased revenues without a tax increase, but more importantly, it can help assure green
jobs, good jobs that pay a living wage, allowing individuals and working families to have
the basic necessities and a better life. We already know that we need greater efficiency in
the development approval process, a workforce trained for the jobs of the future, and
better methods to accurately measure the results of our efforts. We can draw on the
suggestions of recent studies and the work of my outstanding Transition Team to craft a
plan that is consistent with Governor Mike Beebe’s long-term strategic plan to help
achieve economic improvement for our state through collaboration and cooperation.
To that end, know that I am serious, and within six weeks I will host a Community
Summit on the Future of Fayetteville that will be open to every citizen and I will consider
all views in forging our own economic and community development strategy. We must
have the participation of the business community and advocates for working families,
students and retirees, public institutions and private citizens, as partners in our shared
progress. We will have, within 90 days, an economic and community development
strategy that considers support for existing small businesses as well as nurturing new
opportunities, and together we will work to make it a reality. A slow national economy is
no excuse for inaction but an opportunity for us to move quickly and prepare now for our
shared future.
My first and immediate goal will be to do everything possible to secure and support the
establishment of a Satellite Campus of the University of Arkansas Medical School and a
Regional Trauma Center in Fayetteville. In the longer view, we should also develop a
close relationship with Arkansas Children’s Hospital and seek a regional presence for that
institution. This commitment clearly illustrates the close connection between economic
development and our quality of life.
The University of Arkansas is a priceless resource, and it is one that helps define
Fayetteville. We must be active partners in progress with the University, drawing on the
vast local resources of knowledge and expertise as we grow together and achieve our
mutual goals. From the development of knowledge-based industry, to community design
plans, to solving social service needs, to collaborating on support for a vibrant arts
culture, the possibilities are limitless. I will actively reach out and pursue this partnership.
The economic, environmental, and cultural aspects of Fayetteville’s advancement are
deeply interconnected. For example, any consideration of transportation policy must
consider getting to work, moving goods, access to cultural resources, and environmental
impact, requiring an integrated and connected system of streets, mass transit, multi-use
trails, bike lanes, sidewalks, and parking, along with a revised transportation impact fee
3
to help growth pay for itself. We will pursue the development of each of these elements,
and we will urge the Regional Mobility Authority to support a feasibility study and
planning for a future light rail system.
As we consider infrastructure development, we must seize the same opportunities. My
administration will go beyond the current recycling program to implementation of a
comprehensive waste minimization program for our entire community. We are pursuing
the idea of solar greenhouses to kill pathogens and reduce the volume of bio-solids now
going to landfills. We are investigating an effective Hillside Development Ordinance and
a storm water utility to better control the primary transmitter of pollutants into our water
supply, and we will implement and enforce a better plan for the protection of riparian
zones. We will be active partners with the “Green Infrastructure” project being developed
with the help of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Arkansas Forestry
Commission, the city’s Urban Forestry program, the Tree and Landscape Committee, and
citizen volunteers. Our ongoing city sustainability efforts can also be expanded and
shared to benefit the entire community, evidenced by our new initiative to provide and
exchange CFL light bulbs in the apartments at Hillcrest Towers. In each instance, we will
be partners in progress.
One major change that will be implemented is a reorganization of our Parks and
Recreation Department. While much attention in the past has been focused on sports
playing fields, we know that our outdoor public spaces can serve other essential
functions. I will propose a new division, to be implemented without additional costs, that
emphasizes our community heritage and citizen participation. Examples to be considered
will be increasing the number of way-finding signs and local historical markers, planting
of native trees and grasses in portions of the parks, establishing a community garden
program in appropriate neighborhood parks, opening a convenient dog park, and
partnering with the University, the County, the Fayetteville School District, the
Washington County Historical Society, and private citizens to identify, preserve, and
promote our historic buildings and other cultural resources. In conjunction with these
changes, I will appoint a volunteer citizen task force on Festivals and Community Events
to seek a closer partnership with the Convention and Visitors Bureau to identify needs
and opportunities, and we will promote the “creative economy” in Fayetteville by
developing a comprehensive Cultural Plan, in partnership with the Fayetteville Arts
Council, the University, local artists, entertainment businesses, and concerned local
citizens.
Finally, I want to reiterate and make clear my unwavering commitment to Open
Government. This administration is dedicated to access, transparency, inclusion, timely
responses, personal recognition, and exceptional customer service for our citizens, and
we will be held accountable to those we serve. From Town Hall Meetings to an improved
interactive city website to information on civic literacy to empowered Neighborhood
Associations, we are preparing to implement real changes to better provide information to
our citizens and, more importantly, to seek and consider ways for citizens to
communicate their ideas, arguments, suggestions, and problems to their city government.
My Transition Team has listened to your ideas and has made a series of steps we will be
4
implementing to assure an effective community conversation. We must be partners in the
progress of our community, and every citizen must have a voice and be treated with the
respect and dignity that they deserve. You have heard my ideas, I now ask our City
Council to help me work toward these goals and I look forward to hearing their input and
the input of citizens, especially how I can be a better mayor and do a better job for our
city.
Thank you for your patience in listening as I share my plans and thank you for the
opportunity to serve you and our city.
Partners in Progress
Mayor Lioneld Jordan
State of the City
January 20, 2009
I am privileged to serve as Mayor of our wonderful city, and I am humbled by the
responsibility that the people have entrusted to me. I am honored to be your servant, and I
will work every day to make our community better for every citizen. That is my solemn
pledge to you.
Thanks to the vision of Mayor Dan Coody, the dedicated effort of our fine Aldermen, the
hard work of our outstanding city employees, and the contributions of many individual
residents who share our civic concerns, I am pleased to report to the City Council and to
my fellow citizens that the State of our City is sound.
We begin the year with a balanced city budget, solid progress on improving our
infrastructure, dedicated police officers and fire fighters who assure our safety, and a
commitment to institutional and individual partnerships to nurture and sustain the things
we love about this great community.
We also begin the year facing many new challenges and we must be prepared to face
those together with resolve. We are not immune from the problems of a faltering national
economy, and we must anticipate and be prepared for the consequences of any revenue
shortfall. We must be responsible stewards of our tax dollars, and we must maintain
essential city services for our citizens. Toward that end, I have already begun to identify
potential cost savings and have implemented a more effective management structure to
improve efficiency and control costs. Our staff already has offered many good solutions,
and we will institute an ongoing, frequent, consistent review of cost/benefit analysis of
operations and projects to assure the services and quality of life that our citizens expect
and deserve.
I believe in leadership by example, and I have proposed to cut the mayor’s salary and roll
it back to last year’s level. I have signed an affidavit that I will not avail myself of the
special lifetime retirement plan funded from general revenues. I have asked to return the
2
$5,000 annual car allowance formerly paid to the mayor and instead, to use a vehicle
from the city fleet when necessary to travel on city business. We have already achieved
some savings in the salaries of top staff, and I will continue to look for savings in all
areas of city operations. My staff and I are partners in this effort.
Even in uncertain economic times, we must be bold in our efforts to develop and
implement a strategic economic development plan for our city. Not only can this lead to
increased revenues without a tax increase, but more importantly, it can help assure green
jobs, good jobs that pay a living wage, allowing individuals and working families to have
the basic necessities and a better life. We already know that we need greater efficiency in
the development approval process, a workforce trained for the jobs of the future, and
better methods to accurately measure the results of our efforts. We can draw on the
suggestions of recent studies and the work of my outstanding Transition Team to craft a
plan that is consistent with Governor Mike Beebe’s long-term strategic plan to help
achieve economic improvement for our state through collaboration and cooperation.
To that end, know that I am serious, and within six weeks I will host a Community
Summit on the Future of Fayetteville that will be open to every citizen and I will consider
all views in forging our own economic and community development strategy. We must
have the participation of the business community and advocates for working families,
students and retirees, public institutions and private citizens, as partners in our shared
progress. We will have, within 90 days, an economic and community development
strategy that considers support for existing small businesses as well as nurturing new
opportunities, and together we will work to make it a reality. A slow national economy is
no excuse for inaction but an opportunity for us to move quickly and prepare now for our
shared future.
My first and immediate goal will be to do everything possible to secure and support the
establishment of a Satellite Campus of the University of Arkansas Medical School and a
Regional Trauma Center in Fayetteville. In the longer view, we should also develop a
close relationship with Arkansas Children’s Hospital and seek a regional presence for that
institution. This commitment clearly illustrates the close connection between economic
development and our quality of life.
The University of Arkansas is a priceless resource, and it is one that helps define
Fayetteville. We must be active partners in progress with the University, drawing on the
vast local resources of knowledge and expertise as we grow together and achieve our
mutual goals. From the development of knowledge-based industry, to community design
plans, to solving social service needs, to collaborating on support for a vibrant arts
culture, the possibilities are limitless. I will actively reach out and pursue this partnership.
The economic, environmental, and cultural aspects of Fayetteville’s advancement are
deeply interconnected. For example, any consideration of transportation policy must
consider getting to work, moving goods, access to cultural resources, and environmental
impact, requiring an integrated and connected system of streets, mass transit, multi-use
trails, bike lanes, sidewalks, and parking, along with a revised transportation impact fee
3
to help growth pay for itself. We will pursue the development of each of these elements,
and we will urge the Regional Mobility Authority to support a feasibility study and
planning for a future light rail system.
As we consider infrastructure development, we must seize the same opportunities. My
administration will go beyond the current recycling program to implementation of a
comprehensive waste minimization program for our entire community. We are pursuing
the idea of solar greenhouses to kill pathogens and reduce the volume of bio-solids now
going to landfills. We are investigating an effective Hillside Development Ordinance and
a storm water utility to better control the primary transmitter of pollutants into our water
supply, and we will implement and enforce a better plan for the protection of riparian
zones. We will be active partners with the “Green Infrastructure” project being developed
with the help of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Arkansas Forestry
Commission, the city’s Urban Forestry program, the Tree and Landscape Committee, and
citizen volunteers. Our ongoing city sustainability efforts can also be expanded and
shared to benefit the entire community, evidenced by our new initiative to provide and
exchange CFL light bulbs in the apartments at Hillcrest Towers. In each instance, we will
be partners in progress.
One major change that will be implemented is a reorganization of our Parks and
Recreation Department. While much attention in the past has been focused on sports
playing fields, we know that our outdoor public spaces can serve other essential
functions. I will propose a new division, to be implemented without additional costs, that
emphasizes our community heritage and citizen participation. Examples to be considered
will be increasing the number of way-finding signs and local historical markers, planting
of native trees and grasses in portions of the parks, establishing a community garden
program in appropriate neighborhood parks, opening a convenient dog park, and
partnering with the University, the County, the Fayetteville School District, the
Washington County Historical Society, and private citizens to identify, preserve, and
promote our historic buildings and other cultural resources. In conjunction with these
changes, I will appoint a volunteer citizen task force on Festivals and Community Events
to seek a closer partnership with the Convention and Visitors Bureau to identify needs
and opportunities, and we will promote the “creative economy” in Fayetteville by
developing a comprehensive Cultural Plan, in partnership with the Fayetteville Arts
Council, the University, local artists, entertainment businesses, and concerned local
citizens.
Finally, I want to reiterate and make clear my unwavering commitment to Open
Government. This administration is dedicated to access, transparency, inclusion, timely
responses, personal recognition, and exceptional customer service for our citizens, and
we will be held accountable to those we serve. From Town Hall Meetings to an improved
interactive city website to information on civic literacy to empowered Neighborhood
Associations, we are preparing to implement real changes to better provide information to
our citizens and, more importantly, to seek and consider ways for citizens to
communicate their ideas, arguments, suggestions, and problems to their city government.
My Transition Team has listened to your ideas and has made a series of steps we will be
4
implementing to assure an effective community conversation. We must be partners in the
progress of our community, and every citizen must have a voice and be treated with the
respect and dignity that they deserve. You have heard my ideas, I now ask our City
Council to help me work toward these goals and I look forward to hearing their input and
the input of citizens, especially how I can be a better mayor and do a better job for our
city.
Thank you for your patience in listening as I share my plans and thank you for the
opportunity to serve you and our city.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Bruce Shackleford explains relationship of gravity-flow sewer mains and trail construction in Fayetteville, Arkansas
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of riparian zone of the Cato Springs/West arm of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River where a teenage boy is looking down at the ice-covered stream on January 17, 2009. The view is downstream to the east from about 100 feet southeast of Greathouse Park. The clearing of the wide strip of floodplain to the left was done for placement of a gravity-flow sanitary sewer leading to the Noland Wastewater-treatment plant on the White River leading to Beaver Lake.
Regarding our discussion of trails being constructed within stream riparian zones, the minutes quoted me as saying:
"Bruce commented that in other cities, trails are often constructed along sewer line corridors."
This is not exactly what I said. The "in other cities" should be deleted. When someone mentioned that vegetation was being wiped out along streams to build trails, I was trying to clarify that the City of Fayetteville has built many trails along streams on top of sewer lines that run along streams. Therefore, I would like to clarify the matter.
During the current Fayetteville Wastewater System Improvements Project (WSIP), the city has constructed over 38 miles of new sewer lines. Roughly half of the Fayetteville sewer service is located within the Illinois River watershed, within the Arkansas River Basin, and the other half is within the Beaver Reservoir watershed within the White River Basin.
Where possible, the engineering design firms design gravity sewers so that the wastewater can flow to a given point via gravity. Where gravity sewers are not feasible, a force main must be constructed. A force main is a pressurized line that requires a pump station. A pump station can cost several million dollars to build, and there are significant long term expenditures for energy to pump the wastewater. Consequently, designers try to design gravity sewers whenever it is feasible. For the sewer system to serve some locations, it would require a trench over 50 feet deep to construct a gravity sewer. In such cases, construction difficulties are not feasible. This necessitate the construction of lines that are not sloped to allow gravity flow. These are referred to as "force mains" where wastewater has to be pumped.
Prior to the WSIP, wastewater from both drainage areas was conveyed to the Paul Noland Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on the White River side. The treated effluent is discharged proportionately from Outfall 001 on the eastern side of the City, into the White River, and on the western side of the city, into Mud Creek, which flows into Clear Creek, a tributary of the Illinois River. Thirteen pumps/lift stations are required to transport the sewage over the ridge from the Illinois River watershed to the Noland WWTP, and then pump treated wastewater back over the ridge for discharge into Mud Creek.
Objectives of the WSIP are to improve the existing sewer collection system, upgrade the existing Paul Noland WWTP, and construct a new (Westside) WWTP, in order to implement corrective actions to eliminate/reduce the odor and overflow problems associated with the existing treatment plant and collection system, and to provide wastewater treatment to areas currently outside the treatment area while reducing the total loading to the existing Noland WWTP, which was approaching design capacity. In doing so, the WSIP allowed for the elimination of eight pump stations, and for wastewater to be discharged into the watershed from which it is generated.
During the Design Phase, I worked with the engineering firms to evaluate alignment alternatives for each sewer line in order to route around ecologically sensitive areas where possible. The selected alignment also had to consider land ownership. Sewer lines that are designed to run right through the middle of someone's property will guarantee a law suit against the city most of the time because it splits the property and reduces the amount of usable land, therefore reducing the value of the land. The law suits cost the taxpayers more money and delays the project, so they are avoided where possible.
For gravity sewers to work and not require an extremely deep ditch for the sewer line, they must be built next to streams. This also usually puts it in the floodplain where the landowner cannot build anything anyway. Construction of the gravity sewers along streams often involves removal of riparian vegetation. Furthermore, I know of no city that allows trees to grow back on top of sewer lines because it can damage the lines and create access difficulties when repairs may be needed in future years.
The WSIP coordinated with City Trails so that trails could be built on top of the sewer lines where clearing had already occurred and no trees would be allowed to grow anyway, thus preventing the clearing of new ground for new trail construction.
There is opportunity to replace some of the trees that were removed during construction of the sewer lines. Typically, the City had a 100 ft. wide temporary construction easement, and a 25-50 ft wide permanent sewer easement. This varies with location. Some of the new sewer lines were 48 inch diameter lines. It requires a wide path to have access with large excavators to install lines of this size. The city allows trees to be put back within the bounds of the temporary construction easement, but not within the more narrow permanent sewer easement.
Thanks,
Bruce
Regarding our discussion of trails being constructed within stream riparian zones, the minutes quoted me as saying:
"Bruce commented that in other cities, trails are often constructed along sewer line corridors."
This is not exactly what I said. The "in other cities" should be deleted. When someone mentioned that vegetation was being wiped out along streams to build trails, I was trying to clarify that the City of Fayetteville has built many trails along streams on top of sewer lines that run along streams. Therefore, I would like to clarify the matter.
During the current Fayetteville Wastewater System Improvements Project (WSIP), the city has constructed over 38 miles of new sewer lines. Roughly half of the Fayetteville sewer service is located within the Illinois River watershed, within the Arkansas River Basin, and the other half is within the Beaver Reservoir watershed within the White River Basin.
Where possible, the engineering design firms design gravity sewers so that the wastewater can flow to a given point via gravity. Where gravity sewers are not feasible, a force main must be constructed. A force main is a pressurized line that requires a pump station. A pump station can cost several million dollars to build, and there are significant long term expenditures for energy to pump the wastewater. Consequently, designers try to design gravity sewers whenever it is feasible. For the sewer system to serve some locations, it would require a trench over 50 feet deep to construct a gravity sewer. In such cases, construction difficulties are not feasible. This necessitate the construction of lines that are not sloped to allow gravity flow. These are referred to as "force mains" where wastewater has to be pumped.
Prior to the WSIP, wastewater from both drainage areas was conveyed to the Paul Noland Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on the White River side. The treated effluent is discharged proportionately from Outfall 001 on the eastern side of the City, into the White River, and on the western side of the city, into Mud Creek, which flows into Clear Creek, a tributary of the Illinois River. Thirteen pumps/lift stations are required to transport the sewage over the ridge from the Illinois River watershed to the Noland WWTP, and then pump treated wastewater back over the ridge for discharge into Mud Creek.
Objectives of the WSIP are to improve the existing sewer collection system, upgrade the existing Paul Noland WWTP, and construct a new (Westside) WWTP, in order to implement corrective actions to eliminate/reduce the odor and overflow problems associated with the existing treatment plant and collection system, and to provide wastewater treatment to areas currently outside the treatment area while reducing the total loading to the existing Noland WWTP, which was approaching design capacity. In doing so, the WSIP allowed for the elimination of eight pump stations, and for wastewater to be discharged into the watershed from which it is generated.
During the Design Phase, I worked with the engineering firms to evaluate alignment alternatives for each sewer line in order to route around ecologically sensitive areas where possible. The selected alignment also had to consider land ownership. Sewer lines that are designed to run right through the middle of someone's property will guarantee a law suit against the city most of the time because it splits the property and reduces the amount of usable land, therefore reducing the value of the land. The law suits cost the taxpayers more money and delays the project, so they are avoided where possible.
For gravity sewers to work and not require an extremely deep ditch for the sewer line, they must be built next to streams. This also usually puts it in the floodplain where the landowner cannot build anything anyway. Construction of the gravity sewers along streams often involves removal of riparian vegetation. Furthermore, I know of no city that allows trees to grow back on top of sewer lines because it can damage the lines and create access difficulties when repairs may be needed in future years.
The WSIP coordinated with City Trails so that trails could be built on top of the sewer lines where clearing had already occurred and no trees would be allowed to grow anyway, thus preventing the clearing of new ground for new trail construction.
There is opportunity to replace some of the trees that were removed during construction of the sewer lines. Typically, the City had a 100 ft. wide temporary construction easement, and a 25-50 ft wide permanent sewer easement. This varies with location. Some of the new sewer lines were 48 inch diameter lines. It requires a wide path to have access with large excavators to install lines of this size. The city allows trees to be put back within the bounds of the temporary construction easement, but not within the more narrow permanent sewer easement.
Thanks,
Bruce
Report from working groups of the Green-infrastructure group meeting Jan. 8, 2009.
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of some members of the green-infrastructure environmental working group with a map of the area on which the group has been working.
MEETING PURPOSE: – 1) Have Work Groups report on progress so far; 2) Have Resource Team provide support to WGs, if needed; 3) Determine the potential for having WG product(s)/map(s)/report ready for the mid-February Work Group Report Meeting, the date and time uf which to be announced.
Note: BOB CAULK GIPP PROCESS CLARIFICATION POINTS page 12
ATTENDEES: Barbara Boland, Bob Caulk, Cindi Cope, Karen Rollet-Crocker, Patti Erwin, Delia Haak, Pete Heinzelmann, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Harriet Jansma, Alison Jumper, Joann Kvamme, Julie McQuade, Dot Neely, Eden Price, Bruce Shackleford, Aubrey Shepherd, Katie Teague, Duane Woltjen
WORKING GROUP (WG) REPRESENTATIVES' REPORTS
Environmental (EWG) – Delia Haak
The EWG was divided into three subgroups: 1) Wetland Prairie (WP) – Joe Neal, Aubrey Shepherd, Bruce Shackleford, Chris Wilson; 2) Upland Forest (UF) – Doug James, Elizabeth James, Judy Woltjen; 3) Water –Bob Morgan, Matt Van Eps
1) The Wetland Prairie Sub-Group established matrix criteria used to identify, evaluate and rank 11 to 13 potential sites for conservation.
Bob Caulk cautioned meeting participants regarding the risk presented by labeling features as “low”or “high” priority. Better to use terms “Critical” and “Important” to differentiate feature prioritization categories.
Fayetteville owns some of the WP remnants recommended for preservation.
Barbara Boland drew attention to the fact that prairie remnants identified in the GIP Study Area are depicted and differentiated within the Springfield Plateau Ecological Region.
Bruce Shackleford reported on the WP Sub-Group field trip to the Sweetser Prairie led by Aubrey Shepherd.
Bruce described the experience as, “Amazing!”
He said that the site was well worth saving, but if this is not possible it has great potential to serve as a seed bank for NWA regional prairie plant species.
(Read more about Sweetser Prairie on Aubrey’s Blog “ABUNIQUE”- http://aubreyshepherd.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweetser-prairie-could-become-multi.html) .
Developers of the Stonebridge Meadows Golf course at 3495 East Goff Farm Road off Hwy 16 East in Fayetteville, elected to preserve a portion of the property in its “natural” state as remnant prairie.
The prairie area lies south of the clubhouse and to the west of the 1st Fairway.
He expressed concern that prairies are rapidly vanishing with expanding development and fire suppression.
Bruce advised contacting and educating owners of land on which remnant prairie is found.
Private owners should be informed regarding the significance of prairies and made aware of socio-economic incentives for prairie protection/preservation.
According to Bruce, 30 acres of savanna (flat open grassland with sparse number of trees) lie to the north of the Woolsey Wet Prairie (WWP).
Were it not for the present economic situation, development of the 30 acres would be in progress.
The Water/Waste Water Committee suggested that a request to cancel the plans for development and a recommendation to conserve the parcel be submitted to the Fayetteville City Council.
Fayetteville now receives Mitigation Credits for actions taken to preserve WWP.
The addition of the adjacent 30-acre savanna to the WWP would bring more Mitigation Credits which could be sold to the Arkansas Highway Department.
2) The Upland Forest Sub-Group identified mapping corridors.
Duane Woltjen asked about North-South corridors to connect with Springdale.
Doug James mused that, “there’s not much forest in Springdale.”
Pete Heinzelmann observed that Webber Mountain property, in southeast Springdale, is listed for sale.
According to Pete, “Webber Mountain is a miniature Mt. Magazine which should be purchased and secured for preservation.”
Harriet Jansma suggested discussing options concerning the future of Webber Mountain the Shiloah Museum Board of Directors.
3) Karen Rollet-Crocker/Resource Team-Executive Group spoke for the Water Sub-Group.
Higher order streams in the study area were selected according to subjective input from sub-group members.
Of interest as a water feature in Johnson, AR is a trout farm (?)
Delia Haak said that the EWG needs clarification from the Resource Team (RT) regarding the degree of detail required for the “Final” GIPP WG Report.
Bob Caulk/Resource Team-Executive Group, commented that the ideal report format would consist of a 1-2 page summary from each of the 5 working groups.
Report format is to be kept straightforward and succinct for presentation to and use by the public.
Reports are to capture and emphasize the rationale behind the selection of features or sites used to create respective WG maps or other products.
The goal is to make clear to the public, “why experts in the Work Groups thought particular features were important.
This GIP Project is the PROTOTYPE for the Southeastern U.S. The goal of the GIPP is to successfully establish GIP in study area cities, then expand GIP throughout the SE Region. All details regarding reasoning and rationale need to be included for dissemination to other planning entities in the SE Region.”
Heritage (HWG) – Harriet Jansma (Also Submitted 2-page Summary of HWG Activities)
The initial activity of the HWG was a brainstorming session in which members listed all GI related historic features they knew of within the study area (e.g. green space, farms, gardens, cemeteries, church yards, etc . . .).
The HWG then made an attempt to define criteria for the inclusion of a feature in the HWG map and/or report.
The DRAFT HWG Criteria for Inclusion consists of the following items:
1) Places that are considered or serve as “Community Icons”
2) Community gathering place
3) Accessibility
4) Components complete enough to reveal history
5) Linkage possible
6) Viewshed or Site endangered by development
The Criteria List was used to narrow down entries on the features list created in the brainstorming session.
A charrette was held in which generalized collective knowledge of participants provided the basis for the categorization and ranking of features remaining on the list for inclusion on the HWG map.
HWG Feature Categories
1) UA Campus & System Properties
2) Working Farms – Preservation of heritage farms proves to be the most challenging issue. In the face of development pressures, will larger family farm tracts last as working farms or will they become farm remnants? As far as GIPP maps and reports are concerned, are we going to include/depict 10-acre gentlemen’s farms or actual working farms of more than 10 acres?
3) Urban Farm Remnant (e.g. Gregory House)
4) Camps/Retreats (eg. Mt. Sequoyah Methodist Assembly, Markham Hill, Lake Wedington Recreation Area, Washington County Fairgrounds and contiguous properties, Ghost Hollow)
5) Historic Buildings on the National Register (e.g. Johnson Old PO, Walnut Grove Church, Mt. Comfort Church, Son’s Chapel, Boynton Chapel, various Community Centers)
6) Historic Parks & Cemeteries (e.g. Wilson Park, Evergreen Cemetery)
7) Gardens (e.g. Botanical Garden of the Ozarks)
8) Historic Springs, Lakes, Mills, Bridges (e.g. Fayetteville Big Spring (#552), Johnson Trout Farm, Greenland Ward Slough and Adams Lake, Greathouse Spring)
9) Heritage Routes – Selection and rank based on number of historic features found along the route (e.g. Farmington Hwy 170, Greenland Hwy 265, Greathouse Springs and Reed Valley Roads, No-Ark & St. Paul Railroads, Trail of Tears - http://ualr.edu/sequoyahcenter/trail-of-tears.html , Butterfield Stage Coach Route, 11-Sided Barn, Heritage Trails Partners Website - http://heritagetrailpartners.com/ )
Category overlap pertaining to a feature or features increases significance in ranking process.
Karen Rollet-Crocker then visited listed sites to verify their existence, note the present condition, and arranged interviews with study area land owners and/or residents regarding respective feature history/cultural significance.
In most every instance, interviewees would point out additional features for consideration and refer Karen to other community members for information, leading to the expanding of the HWG Features and the GIPP Community Representatives/Contacts lists.
Karen posed the question of how individuals or communities were to implement GIPP recommendations.
Barbara Boland drew attention to the compendium of funding sources in the GI Book chapter on Implementation pages 151-195.
As far as outside time constraints on the GIPP go, Bob Caulk said that the plan to use the GIP Map(s) and Report to influence the planning process in the Study Area should be in place by September 2009.
Barbara stated that it is “critical to keep in communication with community representatives who will then feed information to and raise interest in participating towns.”
Pete Heinzlemann commented on the need for constant input from community contact persons.
Barbara pointed out that Judy Woltjen is keeping a Contact Database.
Bob summarized that, “The HWG is pretty far along.”
Karen affirmed noting that “We’re trying to keep everything on one map.”
Harriet added that, “We have lots written up.”
Bob reminded all present at the WG Representatives Meeting that we are to keep track of the time we spend on the GIPP.
Community Representatives (CRWG)
Pete Heinzlemann described the CRWG as “still developing.
Input on who has been contacted is needed from the other Work Groups.
Frank Sharp and Herman Jones have a long history with the region and extensive ties to a vast number of people in the study area.
They are CRWG members and great assets to the GIPP.
Pete asked about actions taken by other communities to establish a GI.
As an example of a community similar to Fayetteville, Barbara Boland described some of the GI amenities and successes achieved by Boulder, CO:
• University town
• 28,000 acres protected
• $135 million in funds for promoting GIP raised through various means
Pete expressed curiosity as to how Boulder promoted its GIP and managed to raise such an impressive number of contributions.
Joann Kvamme offered to provide Pete with contact information for her friend, a Boulder resident, who was on the first committee for No Growth/Boulder.
Pete intended that a PowerPoint presentation for promoting GIP be put together and trotted out to the public in study area communities, as well as to designated UA departments and entities.
Karen Rollet-Crocker said that she has a “good” contact list and asked if it would help to have 2 or 3 people from a town to help with organizing a public meeting?
Joann Kvamme recommended GIP presentations be scheduled with the Geosciences Department, in general, and with Dr. Sonja Hausmann who teaches a Conservation and Natural Resources course.
Cindi Cope was aware of the fact that local school teachers, John Diezel and Manuel Bradshaw, are working on GI related projects with their student.
Julie McQuade announced that the GIP Calendars are ready for distribution.
Bob Caulk said that he would arrange for calendar pickup from Julie on Friday, Jan. 9 and instructed meeting attendees to coordinate dispersing of the calendars with the Awareness Group.
On another note . . .
It was made known that Judy Horne furnished the Greenland City Council with a GI Monograph.
Julie McQuade was of the opinion that a Fayettevillle Alderman should be given a GI Monograph to bring forward to the Fayetteville City Council.
Bob Caulk spoke in favor of first bringing the GIP information to the public for input before submitting it to respective study area city administrations, departments, or commissions. He said that the best scenario for GIPP success is to submit a GI product coming from residents to a city council for consideration.
GIP Calendars would be excellent educational materials to acquaint City Council Members with GI Planning.
Parks & Trails (PTWG) – Joann Kvamme (Also Submitted 2-page Summary of PTWG Activities)
The PTWG decided to work from the known to the unknown and began by marking related GI features (e.g. public areas, flood plain connectors, large contiguous green areas, parks, trails, areas identified in forest conservation assessments, drainage areas) on a map they obtained from Barbara Boland.
Input from neighborhood representatives was also sought by the PTWG.
The PTWG ascertained that “all main streams are navigable by canoe”, thus have the potential for being designated as GI aquatic connector/trail corridors.
Yet to do is to add newly acquired parks and park land to Parks & Trails maps onto which many of the above mentioned features have already been digitized.
Barbara reminded all present that trail connectivity out into the counties was the driving force of behind being awarded the grant for the GIPP.
She said there is a need for clarification pertaining to flood plain designations.
Aubrey Shepherd expressed concern regarding trail construction within riparian zones.
Aubrey’s personal goal has been to negotiate for more donated land on either side of streams so trails can be built outside riparian zones.
Joann Kvamme mused that preservation of all flood plain designated areas would be ideal.
She speculated that there are ways to minimize impact of trail construction in to flood plains and observed, as did others present, that more North-South trail corridors are needed.
At this point, Barbara reiterated the purpose for this meeting – 1) Have WG report on progress so far; 2) Have Resource Team provide support to WG, if needed; 3) Determine the potential for having WG product(s)/map(s)/report ready for the mid-February Work Group Report Meeting, the date and time for which to be announced.
Bob Caulk noted that much is heard about Fayetteville Parks and Trails GI because Fayetteville is further along than other communities.
He asked if there was anything more, in terms of ideas for places to put trails, to include from other towns in the study area.
For Greenland, trail corridor would most likely follow the White River.
Bruce commented that in other cities, trails are often constructed along sewer line corridors.
Joann said that the PTWG didn’t get much input from Greenland, but, as mentioned by Pete Heinzlemann, the Mayor of Greenland, John Gray, has been convalescing after a motorcycle accident in which he was seriously injured.
Land Use (LUWG) – Eden Price
Eden Price described the Land Use Work Group (LUWG) as consisting of city planners and staff, developers, architects, designers, engineers, etc . . .
LUWG Sub-Groups: 1) Policy; 2) Infrastructure & Zoning; 3) Natural Systems
The group first brainstormed and focused on GIP issues:
• Changing state laws and local policies/zoning to allow for a more sustainable approach to GI planning facilitating development that allows for and accommodates GI
• Farmland preservation
• Property rights
• Development pressures
• Utility placements
• Project access
• Public education and outreach, especially in regard farmers and developers pertaining to provision of initiatives to for conservation of GI areas/corridors
She said that she “got lots of jaded perspectives on out to approach GIP. It seems that everyone is at war. No one wants to speak first.”
Karen was interested in knowing which of the issues were most difficult to solve.
Bob Caulk expressed excitement over the prospect of having a GI Plan in place when the western by-pass route is designated, “If the GI Plan can influence placement of the route, then the GIPP will have been a success.”
Eden has found Butch Pond to be a good person to speak with in regard to the future of farming in NW Arkansas.
Barbara praised the GIP group for the respect it has shown Butch.
Farmers make up the primary audience for preservation of larger tracts of land, so it would be a prudent move to bring the Farm Bureau in to the GIPP.
Dot Neely made mention of Conservation Easement initiatives presented to the Farm Bureau by the League of Women Voters member Joyce Hale.
See article entitled, “Conservation Easements: A Positive Move for Landowners” by Tom L. Riley, Jr. and Lorrie Barr/Special to Arkansas Agriculture featuring interview with Frank Sharp on the Farm Bureau Website: http://www.arfb.com/news_information/ark_agri/2007v4i2/easements.aspx
Eden said that in the course of the discussion on GI issues, the ‘Map-oriented” group got bogged down.
Barbara Boland related her conversations with Brian Culpepper of the UA/Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies (CAST) about the possibility of providing present and future on-line access to interactive GIP maps as a service for regional planning groups.
Eden had spoken with Brian Culpepper earlier today about the list of data sets GIP would require.
She said that Juliet Richey and Courtney McNair would be “wrangling” data in preparation for GIP mapping purposes.
Duane Woltjen asked if alternative means of on-line access would be provided for “folks with dial-up Internet accounts.”
Barbara stated that dial-up accounts would not be supported.
She and others addressed the “dial-up access” issue with insights into the nature of the mapping data files, which are quite large requiring high-speed connections.
In addition, low resolution output resulting from pared down data sets to facilitate “dial-up” data transfer or older computer screen display limitations is undesirable.
For the maps to be of use, a high resolution screen image or print is a must.
Pete Heinzlemann inquired as to the kind of input the LUWG was getting from city planning departments.
Eden responded that Fayetteville planners don’t want to say too much.
With the amount of recent publicity on Fayetteville’s GI initiatives and progress, Fayetteville LUWG members do not wish to dominate the process.
They prefer maintaining a low profile, allowing planners of other participating communities to take the lead.
Bob Caulk added that Greenland, Farmington, and Johnson don’t have their own Planning Departments.
They use the NW Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (http://nwarpc.com/index.htm).
Karen said that area planners are looking at regional planning issues and into ways of incorporating GIP.
Bob asked Eden if she could get the LUWG deliberations into some kind of reasonable summary.
Eden’s reaction – “Eeeek!”
She said she would need as much time as could be given to generate the LUWG report.
Bob commented that a DRAFT report, which could be refined as we go forward into the communities, would suffice for now.
Eden requested that another person address the LUWG on the issue of winnowing down information and issues to be included in the group report.
She hopes to produce a series of working DRAFT maps by the end of January.
The LUWG wants to see a map with features LU group members have identified before they engage in further discussion of issues.
Pete agreed as to the utility of maps in helping to see what is on the ground.
As a participant of recent public charrettes, Harriet related her observations of the consensus building effect that results when diverse assemblages of individuals mark maps.
Bob volunteered to advise the LUWG concerning report content at the next LUWG meeting.
He emphasized the need to get to a clearer idea of what the GIP product will be by sometime in February 2009.
Awareness (AWG) – Julie McQuade (Submitted GIP 2009 Calendar)
Julie reported that most AWG members have been involved in recent political campaigns and, therefore have not been available to participate in AWG meetings.
The AWG primary purpose is to build pubic awareness of the GIPP.
Another goal for designating representatives to give presentations on GIP to the public, is to select speakers familiar with, tailored for, and focused on respective special interest groups.
Julie recommended the selection of work group members or community contact persons as key for grooming as communication links to build public support in study area communities.
Effectiveness of presentations would be enhanced by including local “GI Site Stories” as examples of how GIP works and contributes to quality of life in a community or region (e.g. a working farm with river frontage provides a riparian corridor link to another “Green Space” in the study area).
Need to collect site stories and recruit/coach specific respected community individuals to spread the word on GIP.
Harriet suggested establishing on-line(?) Green Mapping Systems in participating cities which present the GI “Big Picture” and show each person’s role in relation to GI.
Julie restated Harriet’s comment as, “Show how GI applies to each individual.”
Cindi Cope serves on the Botanical Garden of the Ozarks (BGO) Board.
As a member of the educational program development team, she would love to have GI materials to use to distribute and appeal to BGO patrons.
In the coming year the BGO will host over 2000 students and wants GIP posters, flyers, brochures . . .
Cindi plans to inform and get kids interested in GI, then have them take the information home to share with and get their parents involved.
Birding and Botany are big draws for people and present tremendous opportunity for promoting GIP.
An Audubon Workshop will be held on Sunday, January 17th at the Lake Fayetteville Environmental Center.
Harriet propagated the notion of compiling a list of individuals with vast knowledge of community/regional history and/or ecology who could be contacted to lead guided walks for special interest groups.
She described these human repositories of historical or environmental information as “Reference Librarians for a GI Library without walls.” An example of such a person is A.D. _____________, who knows the location and history of all the old mills in NW Arkansas.
Bob instructed the AWG to define the message(s) to convey to the public. He wants to get GI Calendars into the hands of Judy Horne, Bob Bova, and others to disperse to key or potential key people who could help move the GIPP along.
Julie needs to know the locations where GIP materials are to be placed.
MEETING ADJOURNED @ 8PM
Wednesday, January 14, 2009 MINUTES SUBMITTED BY DOT NEELY/GIPP SCRIBE
BOB CAULK GIPP PROCESS CLARIFICATION POINTS:
• GIP Calendars would be excellent educational materials to acquaint the public and City Council Members with GI Planning.
• GIP information, other than that included in the GIP Calendar, is to be brought to the public for input before submitting it to respective study area city administrations, departments, or commissions. The best scenario for GIPP success is to submit a GI product coming from residents to a city council for consideration
• Ideal Work Group report format is a 1-2 page summary from each of the 5 Working Groups: Awareness, Environmental, Heritage, Land Use, Parks & Trails
• Report format is to be kept straightforward and succinct for presentation to and use by the public.
• Reports are to capture and emphasize the rationale behind the selection of features or sites used to create respective WG maps or other products. The goal is to make clear to the public, “why experts in the Work Groups thought particular features were important.
• The labeling of features as “low” or “high” priority introduces potential for “low priority” to be disregarded by the public or planning staff. Better to use terms “Critical” and “Important” to differentiate feature prioritization categories.
• This GIP Project is the PROTOTYPE for the Southeastern U.S. The goal of the GIPP is to successfully establish GIP in study area cities, then expand GIP throughout the SE Region. All details regarding reasoning and rationale need to be included for dissemination to other planning entities in the SE Region.”
• The plan to use the GIP Map(s) and Report to influence the planning process in the Study Area should be in place by September 2009
• Design Team/Working Group Members are to keep Time Sheets to track time spent on the GIPP
MEETING PURPOSE: – 1) Have Work Groups report on progress so far; 2) Have Resource Team provide support to WGs, if needed; 3) Determine the potential for having WG product(s)/map(s)/report ready for the mid-February Work Group Report Meeting, the date and time uf which to be announced.
Note: BOB CAULK GIPP PROCESS CLARIFICATION POINTS page 12
ATTENDEES: Barbara Boland, Bob Caulk, Cindi Cope, Karen Rollet-Crocker, Patti Erwin, Delia Haak, Pete Heinzelmann, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Harriet Jansma, Alison Jumper, Joann Kvamme, Julie McQuade, Dot Neely, Eden Price, Bruce Shackleford, Aubrey Shepherd, Katie Teague, Duane Woltjen
WORKING GROUP (WG) REPRESENTATIVES' REPORTS
Environmental (EWG) – Delia Haak
The EWG was divided into three subgroups: 1) Wetland Prairie (WP) – Joe Neal, Aubrey Shepherd, Bruce Shackleford, Chris Wilson; 2) Upland Forest (UF) – Doug James, Elizabeth James, Judy Woltjen; 3) Water –Bob Morgan, Matt Van Eps
1) The Wetland Prairie Sub-Group established matrix criteria used to identify, evaluate and rank 11 to 13 potential sites for conservation.
Bob Caulk cautioned meeting participants regarding the risk presented by labeling features as “low”or “high” priority. Better to use terms “Critical” and “Important” to differentiate feature prioritization categories.
Fayetteville owns some of the WP remnants recommended for preservation.
Barbara Boland drew attention to the fact that prairie remnants identified in the GIP Study Area are depicted and differentiated within the Springfield Plateau Ecological Region.
Bruce Shackleford reported on the WP Sub-Group field trip to the Sweetser Prairie led by Aubrey Shepherd.
Bruce described the experience as, “Amazing!”
He said that the site was well worth saving, but if this is not possible it has great potential to serve as a seed bank for NWA regional prairie plant species.
(Read more about Sweetser Prairie on Aubrey’s Blog “ABUNIQUE”- http://aubreyshepherd.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweetser-prairie-could-become-multi.html) .
Developers of the Stonebridge Meadows Golf course at 3495 East Goff Farm Road off Hwy 16 East in Fayetteville, elected to preserve a portion of the property in its “natural” state as remnant prairie.
The prairie area lies south of the clubhouse and to the west of the 1st Fairway.
He expressed concern that prairies are rapidly vanishing with expanding development and fire suppression.
Bruce advised contacting and educating owners of land on which remnant prairie is found.
Private owners should be informed regarding the significance of prairies and made aware of socio-economic incentives for prairie protection/preservation.
According to Bruce, 30 acres of savanna (flat open grassland with sparse number of trees) lie to the north of the Woolsey Wet Prairie (WWP).
Were it not for the present economic situation, development of the 30 acres would be in progress.
The Water/Waste Water Committee suggested that a request to cancel the plans for development and a recommendation to conserve the parcel be submitted to the Fayetteville City Council.
Fayetteville now receives Mitigation Credits for actions taken to preserve WWP.
The addition of the adjacent 30-acre savanna to the WWP would bring more Mitigation Credits which could be sold to the Arkansas Highway Department.
2) The Upland Forest Sub-Group identified mapping corridors.
Duane Woltjen asked about North-South corridors to connect with Springdale.
Doug James mused that, “there’s not much forest in Springdale.”
Pete Heinzelmann observed that Webber Mountain property, in southeast Springdale, is listed for sale.
According to Pete, “Webber Mountain is a miniature Mt. Magazine which should be purchased and secured for preservation.”
Harriet Jansma suggested discussing options concerning the future of Webber Mountain the Shiloah Museum Board of Directors.
3) Karen Rollet-Crocker/Resource Team-Executive Group spoke for the Water Sub-Group.
Higher order streams in the study area were selected according to subjective input from sub-group members.
Of interest as a water feature in Johnson, AR is a trout farm (?)
Delia Haak said that the EWG needs clarification from the Resource Team (RT) regarding the degree of detail required for the “Final” GIPP WG Report.
Bob Caulk/Resource Team-Executive Group, commented that the ideal report format would consist of a 1-2 page summary from each of the 5 working groups.
Report format is to be kept straightforward and succinct for presentation to and use by the public.
Reports are to capture and emphasize the rationale behind the selection of features or sites used to create respective WG maps or other products.
The goal is to make clear to the public, “why experts in the Work Groups thought particular features were important.
This GIP Project is the PROTOTYPE for the Southeastern U.S. The goal of the GIPP is to successfully establish GIP in study area cities, then expand GIP throughout the SE Region. All details regarding reasoning and rationale need to be included for dissemination to other planning entities in the SE Region.”
Heritage (HWG) – Harriet Jansma (Also Submitted 2-page Summary of HWG Activities)
The initial activity of the HWG was a brainstorming session in which members listed all GI related historic features they knew of within the study area (e.g. green space, farms, gardens, cemeteries, church yards, etc . . .).
The HWG then made an attempt to define criteria for the inclusion of a feature in the HWG map and/or report.
The DRAFT HWG Criteria for Inclusion consists of the following items:
1) Places that are considered or serve as “Community Icons”
2) Community gathering place
3) Accessibility
4) Components complete enough to reveal history
5) Linkage possible
6) Viewshed or Site endangered by development
The Criteria List was used to narrow down entries on the features list created in the brainstorming session.
A charrette was held in which generalized collective knowledge of participants provided the basis for the categorization and ranking of features remaining on the list for inclusion on the HWG map.
HWG Feature Categories
1) UA Campus & System Properties
2) Working Farms – Preservation of heritage farms proves to be the most challenging issue. In the face of development pressures, will larger family farm tracts last as working farms or will they become farm remnants? As far as GIPP maps and reports are concerned, are we going to include/depict 10-acre gentlemen’s farms or actual working farms of more than 10 acres?
3) Urban Farm Remnant (e.g. Gregory House)
4) Camps/Retreats (eg. Mt. Sequoyah Methodist Assembly, Markham Hill, Lake Wedington Recreation Area, Washington County Fairgrounds and contiguous properties, Ghost Hollow)
5) Historic Buildings on the National Register (e.g. Johnson Old PO, Walnut Grove Church, Mt. Comfort Church, Son’s Chapel, Boynton Chapel, various Community Centers)
6) Historic Parks & Cemeteries (e.g. Wilson Park, Evergreen Cemetery)
7) Gardens (e.g. Botanical Garden of the Ozarks)
8) Historic Springs, Lakes, Mills, Bridges (e.g. Fayetteville Big Spring (#552), Johnson Trout Farm, Greenland Ward Slough and Adams Lake, Greathouse Spring)
9) Heritage Routes – Selection and rank based on number of historic features found along the route (e.g. Farmington Hwy 170, Greenland Hwy 265, Greathouse Springs and Reed Valley Roads, No-Ark & St. Paul Railroads, Trail of Tears - http://ualr.edu/sequoyahcenter/trail-of-tears.html , Butterfield Stage Coach Route, 11-Sided Barn, Heritage Trails Partners Website - http://heritagetrailpartners.com/ )
Category overlap pertaining to a feature or features increases significance in ranking process.
Karen Rollet-Crocker then visited listed sites to verify their existence, note the present condition, and arranged interviews with study area land owners and/or residents regarding respective feature history/cultural significance.
In most every instance, interviewees would point out additional features for consideration and refer Karen to other community members for information, leading to the expanding of the HWG Features and the GIPP Community Representatives/Contacts lists.
Karen posed the question of how individuals or communities were to implement GIPP recommendations.
Barbara Boland drew attention to the compendium of funding sources in the GI Book chapter on Implementation pages 151-195.
As far as outside time constraints on the GIPP go, Bob Caulk said that the plan to use the GIP Map(s) and Report to influence the planning process in the Study Area should be in place by September 2009.
Barbara stated that it is “critical to keep in communication with community representatives who will then feed information to and raise interest in participating towns.”
Pete Heinzlemann commented on the need for constant input from community contact persons.
Barbara pointed out that Judy Woltjen is keeping a Contact Database.
Bob summarized that, “The HWG is pretty far along.”
Karen affirmed noting that “We’re trying to keep everything on one map.”
Harriet added that, “We have lots written up.”
Bob reminded all present at the WG Representatives Meeting that we are to keep track of the time we spend on the GIPP.
Community Representatives (CRWG)
Pete Heinzlemann described the CRWG as “still developing.
Input on who has been contacted is needed from the other Work Groups.
Frank Sharp and Herman Jones have a long history with the region and extensive ties to a vast number of people in the study area.
They are CRWG members and great assets to the GIPP.
Pete asked about actions taken by other communities to establish a GI.
As an example of a community similar to Fayetteville, Barbara Boland described some of the GI amenities and successes achieved by Boulder, CO:
• University town
• 28,000 acres protected
• $135 million in funds for promoting GIP raised through various means
Pete expressed curiosity as to how Boulder promoted its GIP and managed to raise such an impressive number of contributions.
Joann Kvamme offered to provide Pete with contact information for her friend, a Boulder resident, who was on the first committee for No Growth/Boulder.
Pete intended that a PowerPoint presentation for promoting GIP be put together and trotted out to the public in study area communities, as well as to designated UA departments and entities.
Karen Rollet-Crocker said that she has a “good” contact list and asked if it would help to have 2 or 3 people from a town to help with organizing a public meeting?
Joann Kvamme recommended GIP presentations be scheduled with the Geosciences Department, in general, and with Dr. Sonja Hausmann who teaches a Conservation and Natural Resources course.
Cindi Cope was aware of the fact that local school teachers, John Diezel and Manuel Bradshaw, are working on GI related projects with their student.
Julie McQuade announced that the GIP Calendars are ready for distribution.
Bob Caulk said that he would arrange for calendar pickup from Julie on Friday, Jan. 9 and instructed meeting attendees to coordinate dispersing of the calendars with the Awareness Group.
On another note . . .
It was made known that Judy Horne furnished the Greenland City Council with a GI Monograph.
Julie McQuade was of the opinion that a Fayettevillle Alderman should be given a GI Monograph to bring forward to the Fayetteville City Council.
Bob Caulk spoke in favor of first bringing the GIP information to the public for input before submitting it to respective study area city administrations, departments, or commissions. He said that the best scenario for GIPP success is to submit a GI product coming from residents to a city council for consideration.
GIP Calendars would be excellent educational materials to acquaint City Council Members with GI Planning.
Parks & Trails (PTWG) – Joann Kvamme (Also Submitted 2-page Summary of PTWG Activities)
The PTWG decided to work from the known to the unknown and began by marking related GI features (e.g. public areas, flood plain connectors, large contiguous green areas, parks, trails, areas identified in forest conservation assessments, drainage areas) on a map they obtained from Barbara Boland.
Input from neighborhood representatives was also sought by the PTWG.
The PTWG ascertained that “all main streams are navigable by canoe”, thus have the potential for being designated as GI aquatic connector/trail corridors.
Yet to do is to add newly acquired parks and park land to Parks & Trails maps onto which many of the above mentioned features have already been digitized.
Barbara reminded all present that trail connectivity out into the counties was the driving force of behind being awarded the grant for the GIPP.
She said there is a need for clarification pertaining to flood plain designations.
Aubrey Shepherd expressed concern regarding trail construction within riparian zones.
Aubrey’s personal goal has been to negotiate for more donated land on either side of streams so trails can be built outside riparian zones.
Joann Kvamme mused that preservation of all flood plain designated areas would be ideal.
She speculated that there are ways to minimize impact of trail construction in to flood plains and observed, as did others present, that more North-South trail corridors are needed.
At this point, Barbara reiterated the purpose for this meeting – 1) Have WG report on progress so far; 2) Have Resource Team provide support to WG, if needed; 3) Determine the potential for having WG product(s)/map(s)/report ready for the mid-February Work Group Report Meeting, the date and time for which to be announced.
Bob Caulk noted that much is heard about Fayetteville Parks and Trails GI because Fayetteville is further along than other communities.
He asked if there was anything more, in terms of ideas for places to put trails, to include from other towns in the study area.
For Greenland, trail corridor would most likely follow the White River.
Bruce commented that in other cities, trails are often constructed along sewer line corridors.
Joann said that the PTWG didn’t get much input from Greenland, but, as mentioned by Pete Heinzlemann, the Mayor of Greenland, John Gray, has been convalescing after a motorcycle accident in which he was seriously injured.
Land Use (LUWG) – Eden Price
Eden Price described the Land Use Work Group (LUWG) as consisting of city planners and staff, developers, architects, designers, engineers, etc . . .
LUWG Sub-Groups: 1) Policy; 2) Infrastructure & Zoning; 3) Natural Systems
The group first brainstormed and focused on GIP issues:
• Changing state laws and local policies/zoning to allow for a more sustainable approach to GI planning facilitating development that allows for and accommodates GI
• Farmland preservation
• Property rights
• Development pressures
• Utility placements
• Project access
• Public education and outreach, especially in regard farmers and developers pertaining to provision of initiatives to for conservation of GI areas/corridors
She said that she “got lots of jaded perspectives on out to approach GIP. It seems that everyone is at war. No one wants to speak first.”
Karen was interested in knowing which of the issues were most difficult to solve.
Bob Caulk expressed excitement over the prospect of having a GI Plan in place when the western by-pass route is designated, “If the GI Plan can influence placement of the route, then the GIPP will have been a success.”
Eden has found Butch Pond to be a good person to speak with in regard to the future of farming in NW Arkansas.
Barbara praised the GIP group for the respect it has shown Butch.
Farmers make up the primary audience for preservation of larger tracts of land, so it would be a prudent move to bring the Farm Bureau in to the GIPP.
Dot Neely made mention of Conservation Easement initiatives presented to the Farm Bureau by the League of Women Voters member Joyce Hale.
See article entitled, “Conservation Easements: A Positive Move for Landowners” by Tom L. Riley, Jr. and Lorrie Barr/Special to Arkansas Agriculture featuring interview with Frank Sharp on the Farm Bureau Website: http://www.arfb.com/news_information/ark_agri/2007v4i2/easements.aspx
Eden said that in the course of the discussion on GI issues, the ‘Map-oriented” group got bogged down.
Barbara Boland related her conversations with Brian Culpepper of the UA/Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies (CAST) about the possibility of providing present and future on-line access to interactive GIP maps as a service for regional planning groups.
Eden had spoken with Brian Culpepper earlier today about the list of data sets GIP would require.
She said that Juliet Richey and Courtney McNair would be “wrangling” data in preparation for GIP mapping purposes.
Duane Woltjen asked if alternative means of on-line access would be provided for “folks with dial-up Internet accounts.”
Barbara stated that dial-up accounts would not be supported.
She and others addressed the “dial-up access” issue with insights into the nature of the mapping data files, which are quite large requiring high-speed connections.
In addition, low resolution output resulting from pared down data sets to facilitate “dial-up” data transfer or older computer screen display limitations is undesirable.
For the maps to be of use, a high resolution screen image or print is a must.
Pete Heinzlemann inquired as to the kind of input the LUWG was getting from city planning departments.
Eden responded that Fayetteville planners don’t want to say too much.
With the amount of recent publicity on Fayetteville’s GI initiatives and progress, Fayetteville LUWG members do not wish to dominate the process.
They prefer maintaining a low profile, allowing planners of other participating communities to take the lead.
Bob Caulk added that Greenland, Farmington, and Johnson don’t have their own Planning Departments.
They use the NW Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (http://nwarpc.com/index.htm).
Karen said that area planners are looking at regional planning issues and into ways of incorporating GIP.
Bob asked Eden if she could get the LUWG deliberations into some kind of reasonable summary.
Eden’s reaction – “Eeeek!”
She said she would need as much time as could be given to generate the LUWG report.
Bob commented that a DRAFT report, which could be refined as we go forward into the communities, would suffice for now.
Eden requested that another person address the LUWG on the issue of winnowing down information and issues to be included in the group report.
She hopes to produce a series of working DRAFT maps by the end of January.
The LUWG wants to see a map with features LU group members have identified before they engage in further discussion of issues.
Pete agreed as to the utility of maps in helping to see what is on the ground.
As a participant of recent public charrettes, Harriet related her observations of the consensus building effect that results when diverse assemblages of individuals mark maps.
Bob volunteered to advise the LUWG concerning report content at the next LUWG meeting.
He emphasized the need to get to a clearer idea of what the GIP product will be by sometime in February 2009.
Awareness (AWG) – Julie McQuade (Submitted GIP 2009 Calendar)
Julie reported that most AWG members have been involved in recent political campaigns and, therefore have not been available to participate in AWG meetings.
The AWG primary purpose is to build pubic awareness of the GIPP.
Another goal for designating representatives to give presentations on GIP to the public, is to select speakers familiar with, tailored for, and focused on respective special interest groups.
Julie recommended the selection of work group members or community contact persons as key for grooming as communication links to build public support in study area communities.
Effectiveness of presentations would be enhanced by including local “GI Site Stories” as examples of how GIP works and contributes to quality of life in a community or region (e.g. a working farm with river frontage provides a riparian corridor link to another “Green Space” in the study area).
Need to collect site stories and recruit/coach specific respected community individuals to spread the word on GIP.
Harriet suggested establishing on-line(?) Green Mapping Systems in participating cities which present the GI “Big Picture” and show each person’s role in relation to GI.
Julie restated Harriet’s comment as, “Show how GI applies to each individual.”
Cindi Cope serves on the Botanical Garden of the Ozarks (BGO) Board.
As a member of the educational program development team, she would love to have GI materials to use to distribute and appeal to BGO patrons.
In the coming year the BGO will host over 2000 students and wants GIP posters, flyers, brochures . . .
Cindi plans to inform and get kids interested in GI, then have them take the information home to share with and get their parents involved.
Birding and Botany are big draws for people and present tremendous opportunity for promoting GIP.
An Audubon Workshop will be held on Sunday, January 17th at the Lake Fayetteville Environmental Center.
Harriet propagated the notion of compiling a list of individuals with vast knowledge of community/regional history and/or ecology who could be contacted to lead guided walks for special interest groups.
She described these human repositories of historical or environmental information as “Reference Librarians for a GI Library without walls.” An example of such a person is A.D. _____________, who knows the location and history of all the old mills in NW Arkansas.
Bob instructed the AWG to define the message(s) to convey to the public. He wants to get GI Calendars into the hands of Judy Horne, Bob Bova, and others to disperse to key or potential key people who could help move the GIPP along.
Julie needs to know the locations where GIP materials are to be placed.
MEETING ADJOURNED @ 8PM
Wednesday, January 14, 2009 MINUTES SUBMITTED BY DOT NEELY/GIPP SCRIBE
BOB CAULK GIPP PROCESS CLARIFICATION POINTS:
• GIP Calendars would be excellent educational materials to acquaint the public and City Council Members with GI Planning.
• GIP information, other than that included in the GIP Calendar, is to be brought to the public for input before submitting it to respective study area city administrations, departments, or commissions. The best scenario for GIPP success is to submit a GI product coming from residents to a city council for consideration
• Ideal Work Group report format is a 1-2 page summary from each of the 5 Working Groups: Awareness, Environmental, Heritage, Land Use, Parks & Trails
• Report format is to be kept straightforward and succinct for presentation to and use by the public.
• Reports are to capture and emphasize the rationale behind the selection of features or sites used to create respective WG maps or other products. The goal is to make clear to the public, “why experts in the Work Groups thought particular features were important.
• The labeling of features as “low” or “high” priority introduces potential for “low priority” to be disregarded by the public or planning staff. Better to use terms “Critical” and “Important” to differentiate feature prioritization categories.
• This GIP Project is the PROTOTYPE for the Southeastern U.S. The goal of the GIPP is to successfully establish GIP in study area cities, then expand GIP throughout the SE Region. All details regarding reasoning and rationale need to be included for dissemination to other planning entities in the SE Region.”
• The plan to use the GIP Map(s) and Report to influence the planning process in the Study Area should be in place by September 2009
• Design Team/Working Group Members are to keep Time Sheets to track time spent on the GIPP
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Environmental group of the Green Infrastructure project of Natural Heritage Association to meet at 7 p.m. Wednesday Jan. 14, 2009
Thanks to Bob for securing the Bell Engineering, Rm. 2267, for our final meeting tomorrow night, Jan. 14, at 7 pm.
If you cannot attend tomorrow night's meeting, please email your volunteer hours and names of persons who should be part of the community stakeholder meetings when this report is presented to the public.
Many thanks to each of you.
Delia
If you cannot attend tomorrow night's meeting, please email your volunteer hours and names of persons who should be part of the community stakeholder meetings when this report is presented to the public.
Many thanks to each of you.
Delia
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Dead Bayou exactly the kind of place Fayetteville can protect with a few watershed-rule changes
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of Fayetteville, Arkansas, dead bayou.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Green-infrastructure group meeting set for 6 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 8, 2008
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 6:38 PM
Subject: Progress report meeting GIP Working Group reps with Resource Team Thursday 1/8 6pm
Greetings all and a Happy New Year to you,
To some this will seem short notice, but I tried to reach you to schedule an opportunity for the Resource Team to meet with Working Group representatives a couple of weeks ago and was not very successful...not to worry...I hope you all had a pleasant holiday season. With the Working Group reporting-out deadline of January 15th quickly approaching, the Resource Team felt we should press ahead with scheduling a time to get together.
The following date, time and location has been set:
Thursday, January 8, 2008, 6pm (in a classroom to be determined) at the Pauline Whittaker Equestrian Center on the U of A Farm campus.
The Resource Team would like to hear a casual report from at least one representative of each of the Working Groups about your progress and what, if anything, you need to complete your undertakings. So be in touch with your Working Group colleagues and see who can attend to give us a quick and dirty update. It is time to schedule what will no doubt prove to be a very interesting and exciting meeting where each group can report-out on their results.
Please RSVP.
Hope all is well with each of you,
Barbara
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
Subject: Progress report meeting GIP Working Group reps with Resource Team Thursday 1/8 6pm
Greetings all and a Happy New Year to you,
To some this will seem short notice, but I tried to reach you to schedule an opportunity for the Resource Team to meet with Working Group representatives a couple of weeks ago and was not very successful...not to worry...I hope you all had a pleasant holiday season. With the Working Group reporting-out deadline of January 15th quickly approaching, the Resource Team felt we should press ahead with scheduling a time to get together.
The following date, time and location has been set:
Thursday, January 8, 2008, 6pm (in a classroom to be determined) at the Pauline Whittaker Equestrian Center on the U of A Farm campus.
The Resource Team would like to hear a casual report from at least one representative of each of the Working Groups about your progress and what, if anything, you need to complete your undertakings. So be in touch with your Working Group colleagues and see who can attend to give us a quick and dirty update. It is time to schedule what will no doubt prove to be a very interesting and exciting meeting where each group can report-out on their results.
Please RSVP.
Hope all is well with each of you,
Barbara
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Lioneld Jordan sworn in as mayor of Fayetteville, Arkansas
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of Mayor Lioneld Jordan a few minutes after being sworn in by Judge Mark Lindsay on Friday, January 2, 2009, being congratulated by admirers and supporters in the Washington County Courthouse.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Why is muddy water flowing in a normally clear Ozark Mountain stream on a sunny New Year's Day?
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of muddy water flowing on New Year's Day into the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River.
For more images and a bit of explanation of this situation, please click the following link Silt-laden water pumped to the Town Branch by contractors flows to Beaver Lake
For a closer view of the pipe spewing water from Hill Place work site, please click on image to ENLARGE. Use cursor to move about and see the contrast between the flow from the pipe and the stream's normal clear water at right.
For more images and a bit of explanation of this situation, please click the following link Silt-laden water pumped to the Town Branch by contractors flows to Beaver Lake
For more images and a bit of explanation of this situation, please click the following link Silt-laden water pumped to the Town Branch by contractors flows to Beaver Lake
For a closer view of the pipe spewing water from Hill Place work site, please click on image to ENLARGE. Use cursor to move about and see the contrast between the flow from the pipe and the stream's normal clear water at right.
For more images and a bit of explanation of this situation, please click the following link Silt-laden water pumped to the Town Branch by contractors flows to Beaver Lake
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Cedar waxwing eats berry of nonnative privit on December 28, 2008, on World Peace Wetland Prairie
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of cedar waxwing with privit berry on WPWP on December 28, 2008.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
January 25, 2009, annual meeting of FNHA features water-quality presentations
"Troubled Water: Preserving and Restoring Arkansas' Most Valuable Resource"
will be the program theme for FNHA’s annual meeting at 2:00 pm on January 25, 2009,
in the Walker meeting room of the Fayetteville Public Library.
Two leading experts on water issues in Arkansas, Martin Maner and Marty Matlock, will discuss Arkansas’ persistent water concerns and will talk with us about what they are doing and what we, as citizens, can do to protect the quality of our water and to help restore water quality where it has deteriorated.
Martin Maner is Director of Watershed Management with Central Arkansas Water, a metropolitan system which traces its history to the springs and wells of the early 1800s and which currently provides water to nearly 400,000 users. Central Arkansas Water, which is publicly owned, emphasizes a regional approach to water needs and has won numerous EPA awards for its commitment to water quality. Before becoming Director of Watershed Management for the utility, Maner was chief of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality’s Water Division.
Marty Matlock is Associate Professor of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Arkansas and has conducted research on a variety of ecological issues. One groundbreaking project which has drawn national attention combines urban stream ecological services restoration with outdoor classrooms, greenway trails and park development. Matlock's ecological engineering group collaborates closely with the University of Arkansas Community Design Center, in the School of Architecture, as well as with city and state officials to demonstrate more natural designs for stormwater systems. Among other activities, he will be working with the Springdale water utility in 2009 on the Clear Creek stream restoration project.
Please plan to join us the afternoon of January 25, and encourage your friends and neighbors to come along. Refreshments will be served. The annual business meeting will be brief, and there will be opportunities to learn more about an essential resource on which we and all living things depend.
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
will be the program theme for FNHA’s annual meeting at 2:00 pm on January 25, 2009,
in the Walker meeting room of the Fayetteville Public Library.
Two leading experts on water issues in Arkansas, Martin Maner and Marty Matlock, will discuss Arkansas’ persistent water concerns and will talk with us about what they are doing and what we, as citizens, can do to protect the quality of our water and to help restore water quality where it has deteriorated.
Martin Maner is Director of Watershed Management with Central Arkansas Water, a metropolitan system which traces its history to the springs and wells of the early 1800s and which currently provides water to nearly 400,000 users. Central Arkansas Water, which is publicly owned, emphasizes a regional approach to water needs and has won numerous EPA awards for its commitment to water quality. Before becoming Director of Watershed Management for the utility, Maner was chief of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality’s Water Division.
Marty Matlock is Associate Professor of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Arkansas and has conducted research on a variety of ecological issues. One groundbreaking project which has drawn national attention combines urban stream ecological services restoration with outdoor classrooms, greenway trails and park development. Matlock's ecological engineering group collaborates closely with the University of Arkansas Community Design Center, in the School of Architecture, as well as with city and state officials to demonstrate more natural designs for stormwater systems. Among other activities, he will be working with the Springdale water utility in 2009 on the Clear Creek stream restoration project.
Please plan to join us the afternoon of January 25, and encourage your friends and neighbors to come along. Refreshments will be served. The annual business meeting will be brief, and there will be opportunities to learn more about an essential resource on which we and all living things depend.
Barbara Elaine Boland
Green Infrastructure Planning, Project Coordinator
Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association
148 E Spring Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 521-2801 home
(479) 387-6724 cell
barbaraboland@hotmail.com
"Green Infrastructure is our nation's life support system - an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for America's communities and people." USDA Forest Service, Green Infrastructure Working Group's definition of Green Infrastructure.
Friday, December 26, 2008
If you think that Fayetteville residents weren't trying to protect the environment 30 or more years ago, please see
parts of the sample of old outdoor columns in several posts at
Aubrey Shepherd Outdoors
and then go to
Northwest Arkansas Arkansas Environment Central
to check a few old Eco-Logue columns from the Northwest Arkansas Times of the mid-1970s.
If you think the world's problems were less serious or unlike today's problems, check out the news pages from the paper from those same years.
Aubrey Shepherd Outdoors
and then go to
Northwest Arkansas Arkansas Environment Central
to check a few old Eco-Logue columns from the Northwest Arkansas Times of the mid-1970s.
If you think the world's problems were less serious or unlike today's problems, check out the news pages from the paper from those same years.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
October 15, 2008, meeting of green-infrastructure planning Environmental working group
Environmental Working Group (EWG) -Minutes
Meeting: Oct. 15, 2008, The Nature Conservancy office
Attendees: Delia Haak, Chairman; Matt Van Eps; Robert Cross; Bob Morgan; Bruce Shackleford; Judy Combs; Doug James; Elizabeth Adam; Joe Neal; Barbara Boland; Aubrey Shepherd
Delia Haak called the meeting to order at 7:00PM
Minutes of the Oct. 2, 2008 meeting were approved.
Barbara (project coordinator) explained that this is the third step in the Green Infrastructure Plan.
1. Urban Ecosystem Analysis Benton and Washington Counties, Arkansas
2. Urban Forest Conservation Assessment for Fayetteville, AR
3. Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking Arkansas Communities
The purpose of the Environmental Working Group is to:
1. Identify the environmental resources that are important for the communities to preserve for the future.
2. Complete a map identifying where key environmental areas are and the linkages and hubs to access them.
3. Identify to the best of our abilities “what the community wants” and what ecosystems require.
Joe Neal listed grassland areas that were formerly prairies to be included on a map by this group.
1. Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course: Low wet prairie plants on approximately 10 acres next to Course on south side of Hwy.16E.
2. Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30/40 acres of City owned land with native grasses of big blue stem and Indian grass.
3. Wilson Springs: Clabber Creek mitigation site. Audubon Society owned land, 120 acres south west of 540 and Hwy 112. This wet prairie land is not being actively managed.
4. Zion Road: Sweetser owned land south of Zion Road – app. 5 acres.
5. Woolsey Wet Prairie: 30 acres of wetlands mitigation with 70 acres just west of plot. Owned by City of Fayetteville next to the west-side sewage treatment plant. Could be expanded by another 30 acres.
6. Wedington Unit Forest: Grassland restoration on the west side of Ozark National Forest.
7. World Peace Wetland Prairie Park south of Hwy. 16 on Duncan.
8. Pieces of prairie grasslands in the South Industrial Park on Armstrong (Combs Park).
9. South of Hwy. 16 large oak barren (savannah).
10. University of Arkansas Farm on Garland has grassland fields.
11. Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 60 acres owned by Carl Yates. 320 acres owned by the City WWTP.
Bruce reports that the Woolsey site will be proposed as a wetland mitigation bank. He will introduce the project later to EPA, City of Fayetteville and Corps of Engineers for approval. The proposal will include a deed for perpetuity, performance standards and mitigation credits for the wetland bank.
Aubrey says that the Pinnacle Foods Plant promised the World Peace Garden 2 acres of land and that has not happened. He also added that this site for consideration – Hollywood Ave. south of Hwy. 62 as prairie/grassland area.
The EWG recommends people become educated on the history and importance of prairies.
Bruce handed out copies of a list of native trees and shrubs that are suitable for planting here instead of planting an invasive species that later spreads uncontrolled.
Bruce is manager for the Woolsey Site. He reports that the City of Fayetteville isn’t spraying the fields next to the Sewage Treatment plant with effluent. Also the inventory of plants at the site increased from 47 species in 2002 to 323 species in 2008.
Delia recommends that we look at the use of carbon credits as it relates to forests and into the use of conservation easements. She asked Bob Cross to look at ordinances that pertain in these cities. Delia has the ordinances for the City of Johnson. Bob agreed to do so.
Sub-group self-selection of assignments:
Upland Forests - Doug James, Judy Woltjen
Watersheds/Water Quality – Bob Morgan, Matt Van Eps, Delia Haak
Prairie/Wetlands – Bob Cross, Joe Neal, Aubrey Shepherd, Erin Billlings and Bruce Shackleford
Caves – Judy Combs and Frances Hime
Prior to our next meeting, each sub-group is to have its own meeting to prepare maps and bring the maps back to our next EWG Meeting.
Awareness needs: Education on native prairies and wetlands. Need to tell historical stories of the area.
Information from Bruce Shackleford on native plants and invasive plants.
Additional information requests included:
1. Location of natural springs.
2. Percentage of tree canopy
3. Regional stormwater reports ie. Red Oak Park erosion example
4. Percentage of pervious to impervious surfaces
5. Information on conservation easements: land purchase or donation?
Bring info to next EWG Meeting which will be:
WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 5, 2008 7:00PM
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
Respectfully submitted,
Judith E. Woltjen, Scribe
Meeting: Oct. 15, 2008, The Nature Conservancy office
Attendees: Delia Haak, Chairman; Matt Van Eps; Robert Cross; Bob Morgan; Bruce Shackleford; Judy Combs; Doug James; Elizabeth Adam; Joe Neal; Barbara Boland; Aubrey Shepherd
Delia Haak called the meeting to order at 7:00PM
Minutes of the Oct. 2, 2008 meeting were approved.
Barbara (project coordinator) explained that this is the third step in the Green Infrastructure Plan.
1. Urban Ecosystem Analysis Benton and Washington Counties, Arkansas
2. Urban Forest Conservation Assessment for Fayetteville, AR
3. Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking Arkansas Communities
The purpose of the Environmental Working Group is to:
1. Identify the environmental resources that are important for the communities to preserve for the future.
2. Complete a map identifying where key environmental areas are and the linkages and hubs to access them.
3. Identify to the best of our abilities “what the community wants” and what ecosystems require.
Joe Neal listed grassland areas that were formerly prairies to be included on a map by this group.
1. Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course: Low wet prairie plants on approximately 10 acres next to Course on south side of Hwy.16E.
2. Lake Fayetteville: North of Environmental Study Center, 30/40 acres of City owned land with native grasses of big blue stem and Indian grass.
3. Wilson Springs: Clabber Creek mitigation site. Audubon Society owned land, 120 acres south west of 540 and Hwy 112. This wet prairie land is not being actively managed.
4. Zion Road: Sweetser owned land south of Zion Road – app. 5 acres.
5. Woolsey Wet Prairie: 30 acres of wetlands mitigation with 70 acres just west of plot. Owned by City of Fayetteville next to the west-side sewage treatment plant. Could be expanded by another 30 acres.
6. Wedington Unit Forest: Grassland restoration on the west side of Ozark National Forest.
7. World Peace Wetland Prairie Park south of Hwy. 16 on Duncan.
8. Pieces of prairie grasslands in the South Industrial Park on Armstrong (Combs Park).
9. South of Hwy. 16 large oak barren (savannah).
10. University of Arkansas Farm on Garland has grassland fields.
11. Woolsey Farm Rd. next to school in Farmington, 60 acres owned by Carl Yates. 320 acres owned by the City WWTP.
Bruce reports that the Woolsey site will be proposed as a wetland mitigation bank. He will introduce the project later to EPA, City of Fayetteville and Corps of Engineers for approval. The proposal will include a deed for perpetuity, performance standards and mitigation credits for the wetland bank.
Aubrey says that the Pinnacle Foods Plant promised the World Peace Garden 2 acres of land and that has not happened. He also added that this site for consideration – Hollywood Ave. south of Hwy. 62 as prairie/grassland area.
The EWG recommends people become educated on the history and importance of prairies.
Bruce handed out copies of a list of native trees and shrubs that are suitable for planting here instead of planting an invasive species that later spreads uncontrolled.
Bruce is manager for the Woolsey Site. He reports that the City of Fayetteville isn’t spraying the fields next to the Sewage Treatment plant with effluent. Also the inventory of plants at the site increased from 47 species in 2002 to 323 species in 2008.
Delia recommends that we look at the use of carbon credits as it relates to forests and into the use of conservation easements. She asked Bob Cross to look at ordinances that pertain in these cities. Delia has the ordinances for the City of Johnson. Bob agreed to do so.
Sub-group self-selection of assignments:
Upland Forests - Doug James, Judy Woltjen
Watersheds/Water Quality – Bob Morgan, Matt Van Eps, Delia Haak
Prairie/Wetlands – Bob Cross, Joe Neal, Aubrey Shepherd, Erin Billlings and Bruce Shackleford
Caves – Judy Combs and Frances Hime
Prior to our next meeting, each sub-group is to have its own meeting to prepare maps and bring the maps back to our next EWG Meeting.
Awareness needs: Education on native prairies and wetlands. Need to tell historical stories of the area.
Information from Bruce Shackleford on native plants and invasive plants.
Additional information requests included:
1. Location of natural springs.
2. Percentage of tree canopy
3. Regional stormwater reports ie. Red Oak Park erosion example
4. Percentage of pervious to impervious surfaces
5. Information on conservation easements: land purchase or donation?
Bring info to next EWG Meeting which will be:
WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 5, 2008 7:00PM
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
Respectfully submitted,
Judith E. Woltjen, Scribe
October 2, 2008, meeting of green-infrastructure planning group
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING – LINKING ARKANSAS COMMUNITITES
2008 - 2009
ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP
Meeting: Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking AR Communities (GIP) working groups held their first meeting on October 2, 2008 in the cafeteria at Mt. Sequoyah Assembly. Sponsored by Fayetteville Natural Heritage (FNHA) .
Participants were assigned to a working group and each individual received a packet of information explaining the organization and the project goals and timeline. Barbara Boland is the Project Coordinator and she introduced the other resource team members.
This meeting is part of Phase II of the project which is to develop network maps for future presentation to the study area jurisdictions for adoption.
Environmental Working Group (EWG) – Minutes
Attendees: Aubrey Sheperd, Bob Cross, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Frances Hime, Delia Haak, Judy Woltjen.
Bob Cross, Acting Chairperson, asked for members to introduce themselves and after intros the
group selected these members to serve as officers:
Chairperson Delia Haak; Vice-Chairperson Frances Hime; Scribe Judy Woltjen.
Members reviewed the assignment for the group as presented on the paper Environmental Working Group: Definition, Assignment and Food for Thought Questions
Doug reported for Joe Neal that he has 5 grassland areas that are important as bird and plant habitat in Northwest AR and need to be considered in this study.
Delia suggested that the group form working sub-groups such as environmental, flora and fauna, water quality and quantity, and habitat health. Doug suggested that the sub-groups be grasslands/prairies, watersheds of streams, upland forest, and wetlands. Frances suggested caves could also be a focus of this region.
The environmental working group will meet Wed. Oct. 15 at 7 pm. at The Nature Conservancy at 675 Lollar Lane. Our agenda will be to:
1. Decide areas of focus for the environmental working group
2. Self select area of focus sub-group
3. Break into subgroups for working session
4. Make individual assignments
5. Decide date, time, location of next meeting
Judy Woltjen, Scribe
2008 - 2009
ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP
Meeting: Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking AR Communities (GIP) working groups held their first meeting on October 2, 2008 in the cafeteria at Mt. Sequoyah Assembly. Sponsored by Fayetteville Natural Heritage (FNHA) .
Participants were assigned to a working group and each individual received a packet of information explaining the organization and the project goals and timeline. Barbara Boland is the Project Coordinator and she introduced the other resource team members.
This meeting is part of Phase II of the project which is to develop network maps for future presentation to the study area jurisdictions for adoption.
Environmental Working Group (EWG) – Minutes
Attendees: Aubrey Sheperd, Bob Cross, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Frances Hime, Delia Haak, Judy Woltjen.
Bob Cross, Acting Chairperson, asked for members to introduce themselves and after intros the
group selected these members to serve as officers:
Chairperson Delia Haak; Vice-Chairperson Frances Hime; Scribe Judy Woltjen.
Members reviewed the assignment for the group as presented on the paper Environmental Working Group: Definition, Assignment and Food for Thought Questions
Doug reported for Joe Neal that he has 5 grassland areas that are important as bird and plant habitat in Northwest AR and need to be considered in this study.
Delia suggested that the group form working sub-groups such as environmental, flora and fauna, water quality and quantity, and habitat health. Doug suggested that the sub-groups be grasslands/prairies, watersheds of streams, upland forest, and wetlands. Frances suggested caves could also be a focus of this region.
The environmental working group will meet Wed. Oct. 15 at 7 pm. at The Nature Conservancy at 675 Lollar Lane. Our agenda will be to:
1. Decide areas of focus for the environmental working group
2. Self select area of focus sub-group
3. Break into subgroups for working session
4. Make individual assignments
5. Decide date, time, location of next meeting
Judy Woltjen, Scribe
Monday, December 22, 2008
Environmental Working Group minutes of December 10, 2008, meeting
Environmental Working Group (EWG) – Minutes
Meeting: 7 PM Dec. 10, 2008; Bell Engineering Center, Rm.2267, University of Arkansas in Fayetteville.
Attendees: Aubrey Shepherd, Barbara Boland, Bruce Shackleford, Bob Morgan, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Chris Wilson, James Gibson (guest), Bob Cross (room set-up), and Judy Woltjen as scribe.
Delia Haak, chairman, was unable to attend.
Group met informally with Barbara Boland, Project Coordinator for Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking Arkansas Communities (GIP)
Barbara presented a new map designed as a working overlay for the EWG to add to, change and eventually complete based on the work of this committee.
The map identifies the planning area; differentiates the streams/creeks and their flow from ephemeral to substantial and their 100-year flood plains; forested areas; a public cave; easements that are owned by City of Fayetteville, Humane Society, and Ozark Regional Land Trust.
Barbara said that all the important information cannot be added to the map and that there will need to be some accompanying reports to complete the work of this group.
Wetland/Prairies:
Bruce Shackleford and other committee members have been visiting and evaluating sites based on the natural conditions that are present. Bruce marked numerous sites of interest on the working map. He reported on remnant prairie areas, and marshy areas that have been visited. He also said that savannahs are very rare.
Bruce recommended that the areas near the West Side Treatment Plant and the Paul Noland Treatment Plant were the best candidates for larger restoration areas. Near the West Side Treatment Plant there is dry prairie and wet prairie that combined could be large enough to provide significant prairie habitat for native plants and animals. In his opinion, the 300 acres at the Paul Noland Treatment Plant could be restored for riparian forest and prairie.
Watersheds/Water Quality:
Bob Morgan marked greenbelt areas to the west along Clear Creek from Lake Fayetteville connecting to the Ozark National Forest Wedington Unit, and two other forested corridors west of I-540.
Upland Forests:
Doug James added greenbelt areas to the map going from Lake Wilson south to the boundary of the Ozark National Forest and a greenbelt from Kessler Mountain to the SSW. (See: report of the Northern Upland Hardwoods Subgroup, Oct. 29, 2008)
Several members asked for City parkland and U of A land to be added to the map.
Barbara will make changes to the map and when complete will ask for a future meeting with the EWG. She thinks that the Design team will be having another meeting for all the groups about Jan. 15, 2009.
The active sub-groups were asked to give a written report in addition to the information they have provided for the EWG map overlay. Doug James has completed the Northern Upland Hardwoods Subgroup report. Reports from watersheds/water quality and prairie/wetland subgroups would complete the needed information.
Judy Woltjen has observed that Hamestring Creek has erosion problems (Red Oak Park) that will only get worse with the further development of the watershed and that the Creek could be a good restoration program.
Judy also suggested that more land owners need to participate in the CRP program and plant trees along the White River and its tributaries.
Meeting ended at 8:45 PM.
Meeting: 7 PM Dec. 10, 2008; Bell Engineering Center, Rm.2267, University of Arkansas in Fayetteville.
Attendees: Aubrey Shepherd, Barbara Boland, Bruce Shackleford, Bob Morgan, Doug James, Elizabeth Adam, Chris Wilson, James Gibson (guest), Bob Cross (room set-up), and Judy Woltjen as scribe.
Delia Haak, chairman, was unable to attend.
Group met informally with Barbara Boland, Project Coordinator for Green Infrastructure Planning – Linking Arkansas Communities (GIP)
Barbara presented a new map designed as a working overlay for the EWG to add to, change and eventually complete based on the work of this committee.
The map identifies the planning area; differentiates the streams/creeks and their flow from ephemeral to substantial and their 100-year flood plains; forested areas; a public cave; easements that are owned by City of Fayetteville, Humane Society, and Ozark Regional Land Trust.
Barbara said that all the important information cannot be added to the map and that there will need to be some accompanying reports to complete the work of this group.
Wetland/Prairies:
Bruce Shackleford and other committee members have been visiting and evaluating sites based on the natural conditions that are present. Bruce marked numerous sites of interest on the working map. He reported on remnant prairie areas, and marshy areas that have been visited. He also said that savannahs are very rare.
Bruce recommended that the areas near the West Side Treatment Plant and the Paul Noland Treatment Plant were the best candidates for larger restoration areas. Near the West Side Treatment Plant there is dry prairie and wet prairie that combined could be large enough to provide significant prairie habitat for native plants and animals. In his opinion, the 300 acres at the Paul Noland Treatment Plant could be restored for riparian forest and prairie.
Watersheds/Water Quality:
Bob Morgan marked greenbelt areas to the west along Clear Creek from Lake Fayetteville connecting to the Ozark National Forest Wedington Unit, and two other forested corridors west of I-540.
Upland Forests:
Doug James added greenbelt areas to the map going from Lake Wilson south to the boundary of the Ozark National Forest and a greenbelt from Kessler Mountain to the SSW. (See: report of the Northern Upland Hardwoods Subgroup, Oct. 29, 2008)
Several members asked for City parkland and U of A land to be added to the map.
Barbara will make changes to the map and when complete will ask for a future meeting with the EWG. She thinks that the Design team will be having another meeting for all the groups about Jan. 15, 2009.
The active sub-groups were asked to give a written report in addition to the information they have provided for the EWG map overlay. Doug James has completed the Northern Upland Hardwoods Subgroup report. Reports from watersheds/water quality and prairie/wetland subgroups would complete the needed information.
Judy Woltjen has observed that Hamestring Creek has erosion problems (Red Oak Park) that will only get worse with the further development of the watershed and that the Creek could be a good restoration program.
Judy also suggested that more land owners need to participate in the CRP program and plant trees along the White River and its tributaries.
Meeting ended at 8:45 PM.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Green-infrastructure map developing at December 10, 2008, meeting
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of green-infrastructure map
Monday, December 8, 2008
WETLAND/PRAIRIE/SAVANNA EWG SITE CHARACTERIZATION RANKING CRITERIA
General Site Information
Date of site evaluation:
EWG member name:
Site Name/Designation
Location/Street Address/lat&long
Property Owner & contact info
Has Owner been contacted and informed of GI strategy?
Map available for site?
SITE RANK/SCORE (Circle applicable score)
Estimated acreage
< 1.0
1 point 1.0 to 5.0
2 points >5.0 to 10.0
3 points >10 to 20.0
5 points >20.0
5 points/each 10 ac.
Habitat Type disturbed/degraded field
0 points wetland
1 point prairie
3 points wet prairie
5 points savanna
10 points
Rare plants present?
No – 0 points
Good potential – 1 point
Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource(s) present on site? No – 0 points Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource type? Heavily used cattle pond
1 point Clean pond
2 points Channelized stream
3 points Minimally disturbed stream
4 points Marsh
5 points
Is aquatic resource is stream, does it have protected riparian zone? Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Is adjacent resource is wetland, does it have upland buffer zone?
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential as avian nesting habitat Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential seasonal use by migratory songbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Mammal use – Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Amphibian/reptile use –
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
% Non-native/invasive plant species cover – >50%
0 points 25%-50%
2 points <25%
5 points
Landowner interest in preservation/restoration Poor
0 points Fair
2 point Good
5 points
Environmental features "Landscape Context" of surrounding area, such as topography, geology, soils, water resources, vegetation, zoning districts, land uses, wildlife habitat, Environmental regimes/processes (fire, flooding), Connectivity (ability of organisms to disperse/recolonize), public parks and farmlands: Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
0 points Fair
5 point Good
10 points
Site structure/ecological integrity/unique features: Current ecological conditions indicate site is a rare ecosystem remnant and considers degree of degradation and potential for preservation/restoration. Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
(severely degraded)
0 points Fair
(moderately degraded)
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
(minimally degraded)
Potential to be critical Hub/Link - Poor
0 points Fair
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
Site is: Hub Link
Hub/Link Type Reserve: protected significant ecological site, including wildlife areas typically in their pristine state.
10 points Conservation Corridor: Linear area, such as river or stream corridor that serves primarily as biological conduits for wildlife and may provide recreational opportunities. Greenways and riparian buffer areas are examples of conservation corridors.
10 points
Managed Native Landscapes: Large publicly owned lands, managed for resource extraction as well as natural and recreational values.
8 points Greenbelts: Protected natural lands or working landscapes that serve as a framework for development while also preserving native ecosystems and/or farms or ranchlands. They often act as partitions within a community – a form of visual and physical relief in the landscape – separating adjacent land uses and buffering the impacts of these uses. Farmland preservation areas can be considered greenbelts.
8 Points
Working Lands: Private working lands, including farmland, forests,and ranch lands.
6 points Landscape Linkages: Open spaces that connect wildlife reserves, parks, managed and working lands and provide sufficient space for native plants and animals to flourish. In addition to protecting the local ecology, these linkages may contain cultural elements, such as historic resources, provide recreational opportunities and preserve scenic views that enhance the quality of life in a community or region. Landscape linkages may include streetscapes and recreational trail corridors.
6 points
Site is: Hub (continued) Link (continued)
Parks and Open Space Areas: Landscapes at the national, state, regional, county, municipal and private level that may protect natural resources and/or provide recreational opportunities. Examples include public parks, natural areas, playgrounds, and golf courses.
4 points Traditional Landscaped Area: Is largely landscaped with non-native plant species on public/private lands subjected to routine excessive mowing/brush removal, but has some vegetative cover utilized by wildlife.
4 points
Recycled Land: Land that was previously damaged by intense public or private use and that have since been restored or reclaimed. Mined lands, landfills or brownfields that have been improved in total or in part to provide an environmental function are examples of recycled lands.
2 points Utility Easement: Land where water, sewer, gas, or electrical lines have been constructed and vegetation is largely non-native species and vegetation management does not optimize wildlife habitat.
2 points
TOTAL SCORE Site Category
Comments:
Category 1 Site: Site size and location make it a prime candidate for preservation/restoration with minimal expenditure of financial and human resources; site may be protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site may provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and may be inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna that has been minimally impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will very likely have high potential to provide a critical wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have significant community support.
Category 2 Site: Site size and location make it a possible candidate for preservation/restoration although requirements for expenditures of financial and human resources may not be optimal on a cost/acre basis; site may be a wetland, but not necessarily protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site’s capability to provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna is moderate, questionable, or unknown and site is not likely to be inhabited by rare native flora species; site does not represent an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna and/or is a very small remnant fragment of such ecosystems that has been impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and/or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group that may not be willing to consider preservation/restoration due to land value, planned site use, or lack of interest; protection of site will provide a minimal to moderate potential to provide a wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will have questionable or minimal community support.
Category 3 Site: Site size and location make it an unlikely candidate for preservation/restoration since a substantial expenditure of financial and human resources would be required; site is not protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site does not provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and is not inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents only a remnant prairie or wetland that has been substantially impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group most likely not willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will provide little potential to provide even a minimal wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have little community support.
General Site Information
Date of site evaluation:
EWG member name:
Site Name/Designation
Location/Street Address/lat&long
Property Owner & contact info
Has Owner been contacted and informed of GI strategy?
Map available for site?
SITE RANK/SCORE (Circle applicable score)
Estimated acreage
< 1.0
1 point 1.0 to 5.0
2 points >5.0 to 10.0
3 points >10 to 20.0
5 points >20.0
5 points/each 10 ac.
Habitat Type disturbed/degraded field
0 points wetland
1 point prairie
3 points wet prairie
5 points savanna
10 points
Rare plants present?
No – 0 points
Good potential – 1 point
Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource(s) present on site? No – 0 points Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource type? Heavily used cattle pond
1 point Clean pond
2 points Channelized stream
3 points Minimally disturbed stream
4 points Marsh
5 points
Is aquatic resource is stream, does it have protected riparian zone? Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Is adjacent resource is wetland, does it have upland buffer zone?
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential as avian nesting habitat Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential seasonal use by migratory songbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Mammal use – Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Amphibian/reptile use –
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
% Non-native/invasive plant species cover – >50%
0 points 25%-50%
2 points <25%
5 points
Landowner interest in preservation/restoration Poor
0 points Fair
2 point Good
5 points
Environmental features "Landscape Context" of surrounding area, such as topography, geology, soils, water resources, vegetation, zoning districts, land uses, wildlife habitat, Environmental regimes/processes (fire, flooding), Connectivity (ability of organisms to disperse/recolonize), public parks and farmlands: Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
0 points Fair
5 point Good
10 points
Site structure/ecological integrity/unique features: Current ecological conditions indicate site is a rare ecosystem remnant and considers degree of degradation and potential for preservation/restoration. Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
(severely degraded)
0 points Fair
(moderately degraded)
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
(minimally degraded)
Potential to be critical Hub/Link - Poor
0 points Fair
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
Site is: Hub Link
Hub/Link Type Reserve: protected significant ecological site, including wildlife areas typically in their pristine state.
10 points Conservation Corridor: Linear area, such as river or stream corridor that serves primarily as biological conduits for wildlife and may provide recreational opportunities. Greenways and riparian buffer areas are examples of conservation corridors.
10 points
Managed Native Landscapes: Large publicly owned lands, managed for resource extraction as well as natural and recreational values.
8 points Greenbelts: Protected natural lands or working landscapes that serve as a framework for development while also preserving native ecosystems and/or farms or ranchlands. They often act as partitions within a community – a form of visual and physical relief in the landscape – separating adjacent land uses and buffering the impacts of these uses. Farmland preservation areas can be considered greenbelts.
8 Points
Working Lands: Private working lands, including farmland, forests,and ranch lands.
6 points Landscape Linkages: Open spaces that connect wildlife reserves, parks, managed and working lands and provide sufficient space for native plants and animals to flourish. In addition to protecting the local ecology, these linkages may contain cultural elements, such as historic resources, provide recreational opportunities and preserve scenic views that enhance the quality of life in a community or region. Landscape linkages may include streetscapes and recreational trail corridors.
6 points
Site is: Hub (continued) Link (continued)
Parks and Open Space Areas: Landscapes at the national, state, regional, county, municipal and private level that may protect natural resources and/or provide recreational opportunities. Examples include public parks, natural areas, playgrounds, and golf courses.
4 points Traditional Landscaped Area: Is largely landscaped with non-native plant species on public/private lands subjected to routine excessive mowing/brush removal, but has some vegetative cover utilized by wildlife.
4 points
Recycled Land: Land that was previously damaged by intense public or private use and that have since been restored or reclaimed. Mined lands, landfills or brownfields that have been improved in total or in part to provide an environmental function are examples of recycled lands.
2 points Utility Easement: Land where water, sewer, gas, or electrical lines have been constructed and vegetation is largely non-native species and vegetation management does not optimize wildlife habitat.
2 points
TOTAL SCORE Site Category
Comments:
Category 1 Site: Site size and location make it a prime candidate for preservation/restoration with minimal expenditure of financial and human resources; site may be protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site may provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and may be inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna that has been minimally impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will very likely have high potential to provide a critical wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have significant community support.
Category 2 Site: Site size and location make it a possible candidate for preservation/restoration although requirements for expenditures of financial and human resources may not be optimal on a cost/acre basis; site may be a wetland, but not necessarily protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site’s capability to provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna is moderate, questionable, or unknown and site is not likely to be inhabited by rare native flora species; site does not represent an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna and/or is a very small remnant fragment of such ecosystems that has been impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and/or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group that may not be willing to consider preservation/restoration due to land value, planned site use, or lack of interest; protection of site will provide a minimal to moderate potential to provide a wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will have questionable or minimal community support.
Category 3 Site: Site size and location make it an unlikely candidate for preservation/restoration since a substantial expenditure of financial and human resources would be required; site is not protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site does not provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and is not inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents only a remnant prairie or wetland that has been substantially impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group most likely not willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will provide little potential to provide even a minimal wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have little community support.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Southpass, budget pass, Hoskins freeway subsidy delayed
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
SouthPass, Budget Move Forward
By Skip Descant
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/12/02/news/120308fzcitycouncil.txt
THE MORNING NEWS
FAYETTEVILLE -- Fayetteville Mayor Dan Coody cast the deciding vote Tuesday night to extend a sewer line to the SouthPass regional park. The council tied 4-4, with Nancy Allen, Shirley Lucas, Bobby Ferrell and mayor-elect Lioneld Jordan voting against.
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of Fayetteville, Arkansas, city council on December 2, 2008
Because of many issues, such as cost and concern about developing on Mount Kessler, the SouthPass project has been controversial. The move Tuesday night was just another step in its slow march forward. Should the city kill the project -- a large mixed-use residential and park project in southeast Fayetteville -- it has been suggested by the city attorney that Fayetteville could be sued for not following through on contact obligations.
"I don't have any choice but to vote 'yes,' because I don't want to see the city end up in a lawsuit," Coody said.
The cost-share approved Tuesday night means the city will pay roughly $745,000 as its half of the cost of bringing sewer service to the project. The money will come from water and sewer impact fees.
The council also unanimously approved its $119.5 million 2009 city budget.
Jordan, who will be Fayetteville's next mayor and campaigned for cost-of-living raises, said the city could revisit raises in the first quarter of next year when officials know exactly how much surplus money the city finished 2008 with.
A 2 percent cost-of-living raise would cost roughly $800,000, said Paul Becker, Fayetteville's finance director.
Chickens can now legally cluck, scratch and lay eggs in Fayetteville backyards.
By a vote of 7-1 the council approved an ordinance to allow up to four hens per home. Robert Rhoads voted against, saying the ordinance seemed vague. It allows for both the slaughter of chickens, and prevents cruel treatment or killing of the birds.
"What is our business is passing legislation that may be confusing," Rhoads said.
"When it comes to the issue of slaughter, you know, we really haven't addressed it," said Jill Hatfield, superintendent of Fayetteville Animal Services.
A plan to require the chickens be registered with the Arkansas Livestock and Poultry Commission did not receive support.
"It would become a permitting process," said Brenda Thiel, a council member. "And I don't think we're really going to have enough chickens to justify that."
By a vote of 5-3, the council voted down an appeal by developers for Amberwood Place, a 40-acre development with 177 dwelling units, some of them slated as attainable housing. Lucas, Jordan and Ferrell supported the project, primarily because it provided homes in the $110,000 to $135,000 range, a house type many say Fayetteville is lacking.
"If we want some (affordable) places -- and we've asked our developers to do this -- we've got a situation right here, and I'm all for it," Ferrell said.
"I really think we need some more homes that people can afford," Lucas added.
Other council members agreed with the city's planning staff and Planning Commission, saying Amberwood Place is contrary to Fayetteville's City Plan 2025. And also, some council members were not in favor of grouping affordable housing as a bloc.
"I have a lot of concern about it being bunched together," Allen said. "I have concerns that today's affordable housing may be tomorrow's slums."
And a move to enter into a $2.16 million cost-share with developer Park West LLC to extend Arkansas 112 into an open field to both encourage and access new development was sent back to the Fayetteville Street Committee for further study.
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
SouthPass, Budget Move Forward
By Skip Descant
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/12/02/news/120308fzcitycouncil.txt
THE MORNING NEWS
FAYETTEVILLE -- Fayetteville Mayor Dan Coody cast the deciding vote Tuesday night to extend a sewer line to the SouthPass regional park. The council tied 4-4, with Nancy Allen, Shirley Lucas, Bobby Ferrell and mayor-elect Lioneld Jordan voting against.
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of Fayetteville, Arkansas, city council on December 2, 2008
Because of many issues, such as cost and concern about developing on Mount Kessler, the SouthPass project has been controversial. The move Tuesday night was just another step in its slow march forward. Should the city kill the project -- a large mixed-use residential and park project in southeast Fayetteville -- it has been suggested by the city attorney that Fayetteville could be sued for not following through on contact obligations.
"I don't have any choice but to vote 'yes,' because I don't want to see the city end up in a lawsuit," Coody said.
The cost-share approved Tuesday night means the city will pay roughly $745,000 as its half of the cost of bringing sewer service to the project. The money will come from water and sewer impact fees.
The council also unanimously approved its $119.5 million 2009 city budget.
Jordan, who will be Fayetteville's next mayor and campaigned for cost-of-living raises, said the city could revisit raises in the first quarter of next year when officials know exactly how much surplus money the city finished 2008 with.
A 2 percent cost-of-living raise would cost roughly $800,000, said Paul Becker, Fayetteville's finance director.
Chickens can now legally cluck, scratch and lay eggs in Fayetteville backyards.
By a vote of 7-1 the council approved an ordinance to allow up to four hens per home. Robert Rhoads voted against, saying the ordinance seemed vague. It allows for both the slaughter of chickens, and prevents cruel treatment or killing of the birds.
"What is our business is passing legislation that may be confusing," Rhoads said.
"When it comes to the issue of slaughter, you know, we really haven't addressed it," said Jill Hatfield, superintendent of Fayetteville Animal Services.
A plan to require the chickens be registered with the Arkansas Livestock and Poultry Commission did not receive support.
"It would become a permitting process," said Brenda Thiel, a council member. "And I don't think we're really going to have enough chickens to justify that."
By a vote of 5-3, the council voted down an appeal by developers for Amberwood Place, a 40-acre development with 177 dwelling units, some of them slated as attainable housing. Lucas, Jordan and Ferrell supported the project, primarily because it provided homes in the $110,000 to $135,000 range, a house type many say Fayetteville is lacking.
"If we want some (affordable) places -- and we've asked our developers to do this -- we've got a situation right here, and I'm all for it," Ferrell said.
"I really think we need some more homes that people can afford," Lucas added.
Other council members agreed with the city's planning staff and Planning Commission, saying Amberwood Place is contrary to Fayetteville's City Plan 2025. And also, some council members were not in favor of grouping affordable housing as a bloc.
"I have a lot of concern about it being bunched together," Allen said. "I have concerns that today's affordable housing may be tomorrow's slums."
And a move to enter into a $2.16 million cost-share with developer Park West LLC to extend Arkansas 112 into an open field to both encourage and access new development was sent back to the Fayetteville Street Committee for further study.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Verbesina virginica attracts pollinators in summer, offers ice display in winter
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of Verbesina virginica on November 22, 2008.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Green infrastructure team meets on Yates/Broyles wetland prairie
Please click on images to ENLARGE.
Joe Neal says saving ancient elms a part of saving green infrastructure.
Members of the green-infrastructure team discuss problems of non-water-tolerant trees that grow in low areas and eventually die from increased flooding that follows developments that don't properly control stormwater and the effects of global warming.
Bob Cross finds giant oak a treasure in low-lying area of Bates/Broyles wetland prairie.
Wetland prairie expert Bruce Shackleford points out buttonbush, a wetland plant that is found only in moist soil or in seasonally flooded riparian areas. Buttonbushes are certain markers of wetland.
Joe Neal says saving ancient elms a part of saving green infrastructure.
Members of the green-infrastructure team discuss problems of non-water-tolerant trees that grow in low areas and eventually die from increased flooding that follows developments that don't properly control stormwater and the effects of global warming.
Bob Cross finds giant oak a treasure in low-lying area of Bates/Broyles wetland prairie.
Wetland prairie expert Bruce Shackleford points out buttonbush, a wetland plant that is found only in moist soil or in seasonally flooded riparian areas. Buttonbushes are certain markers of wetland.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Please help plan for connected green space in Fayetteville area
Dear Neighborhood Representatives,
I am on the Green Infrastructure committee and we are trying to create a map of all the forested (and open areas) within your neighborhood that you feel would be an asset to keep undeveloped. This is not binding and does not consider owenership. We are trying to create a web or network of green spaces that are connected throughout the city. Our task is to identify areas and places the neighbors feel should be kept in their natural state.
You can print a neighborhood map off at the city website and draw on it things like historic trails, good spots for future trails, forested areas, grassy open areas etc. You can e-mail them to me or send them to my home at
1982 Greenview Dr.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
This is your chance as a neighborhood to have areas that are dear to you added to a map of potential green network locations. Please remember it does not matter who owns the land - we are just identifying city resources.
Down the road their may be tax break incentives for those owning properties that they agree to leave in a natural state.
Thanks for your help and please send these to me as soon as possible.
Thanks again!
Jo Ann Kvamme
PS you can call me evenings at 571-2312 with questions.
I am on the Green Infrastructure committee and we are trying to create a map of all the forested (and open areas) within your neighborhood that you feel would be an asset to keep undeveloped. This is not binding and does not consider owenership. We are trying to create a web or network of green spaces that are connected throughout the city. Our task is to identify areas and places the neighbors feel should be kept in their natural state.
You can print a neighborhood map off at the city website and draw on it things like historic trails, good spots for future trails, forested areas, grassy open areas etc. You can e-mail them to me or send them to my home at
1982 Greenview Dr.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
This is your chance as a neighborhood to have areas that are dear to you added to a map of potential green network locations. Please remember it does not matter who owns the land - we are just identifying city resources.
Down the road their may be tax break incentives for those owning properties that they agree to leave in a natural state.
Thanks for your help and please send these to me as soon as possible.
Thanks again!
Jo Ann Kvamme
PS you can call me evenings at 571-2312 with questions.
Land-preservation tax incentives subject of meeting sponsored by League of Women Voters
League Discusses Using Tax Incentives for Land Preservation
If you’ve wondered about how to set aside land for preservation and do it with economic concerns in mind, then there’s a free program you’ll want to attend. The League of Women Voters of Washington County invites the community to hear presentations on the use of tax incentives for land preservation from 6-7 p.m. on Nov. 19 in the Walker Room of the Fayetteville Public Library. The discussion is part of a statewide League study on this topic. Presenters will be LWVWC member Joyce Hale, Bob Kossieck representing property rights concerns, and University of Arkansas graduate student Dorothy Effa, who will discuss her survey on conservation easements. League members will participate in a consensus exercise following the public program. For more information call 527-2777.
If you’ve wondered about how to set aside land for preservation and do it with economic concerns in mind, then there’s a free program you’ll want to attend. The League of Women Voters of Washington County invites the community to hear presentations on the use of tax incentives for land preservation from 6-7 p.m. on Nov. 19 in the Walker Room of the Fayetteville Public Library. The discussion is part of a statewide League study on this topic. Presenters will be LWVWC member Joyce Hale, Bob Kossieck representing property rights concerns, and University of Arkansas graduate student Dorothy Effa, who will discuss her survey on conservation easements. League members will participate in a consensus exercise following the public program. For more information call 527-2777.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Environmental workgroup meeting at 7 p.m. November 5 in room 2267 of the Bell Engineering Building of the University of Arkansas
We have a new location for Wed. Nov. 5 Environmental Working Group meeting.
NOV. 5: BELL ENGINEERING CENTER ON DICKSON ST. RM. 2267. (See Bob's
instructions to the classroom below)
Thank you, Bob!
Thanks to all the sub-committees for your intervening work prior to our
getting together again.
Please be sure and let Barbara Boland know if your sub-group needs any maps
for our meeting to be most productive.
See you all next Wed. Nov. 5 at 7 pm.
Delia Haak
Chairman of the working group of the Green Infrastructure planning group
NOV. 5: BELL ENGINEERING CENTER ON DICKSON ST. RM. 2267. (See Bob's
instructions to the classroom below)
Thank you, Bob!
Thanks to all the sub-committees for your intervening work prior to our
getting together again.
Please be sure and let Barbara Boland know if your sub-group needs any maps
for our meeting to be most productive.
See you all next Wed. Nov. 5 at 7 pm.
Delia Haak
Chairman of the working group of the Green Infrastructure planning group
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Squirrels happiest creature in a bountiful October even sitting on the stump of an old friend
Please click on the image squirrel alert on the sump of an old friend.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Good idea only if using waste material from agriculture and timber production and without decreasing wildlife habitat. Clearing land pollutes air
Summit promotes growing high-energy plants
BY DUSTIN TRACY
Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/69979/
Northwest Arkansas Times Fayetteville’s first ever Sustainability Summit brought more than 300 people to the city’s center to talk about ways organizations can become more environmentally friendly. One way discussed was a switch from conventional diesel fuel to the use of bioenergybased fuel. Jim Wimberly with BioEnergy System LLC in Fayetteville talked about the energy-efficient idea at a small breakout session during the summit. “ Agriculture and energy are so intertwined, ” Wimberly said.
He said the idea is to start promoting the growth of high-energy yielding plants that can be processed and manufactured into a full spectrum of energy projects, including fuel for automobiles.
“ In essence, plants are batteries, ” he said. “ They store energy through photosynthesis. ”
Arkansas provides a large amount of natural resources to make bioenergy manufacturing a reality, Wimberly said, and if the state takes an active interest in the concept, it could cut in half its yearly 1 billion gallons of petroleum used each year.
“ It would take just under a million acres of herbaceous energy crops (crops high in energy ) to displace half of that diesel used, ” he said.
Wimberly said a lot of research is being done on soybeans to create biodiesel, and that it’s a good fuel. However, he said fuel users need to broaden their horizons.
“ We need to quit being worried about planting a future around traditional approaches to biofuel, ” he said.
The state has the forest and farmland to support biofuel operations, which makes it already an attractive location to bioenergy companies, Wimberly said, but Arkansas and its cities need to work towards sealing the deal with the green fuel producers.
“ We are in competition with neighboring states, ” Wimberly said.
Financial incentives as well as getting state landowners and far mers on board with the idea could be the key, Wimberly said.
“ It’s not going to happen unless (farmers ) can make at least as much money as they do growing traditional crops, ” he said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
BY DUSTIN TRACY
Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/69979/
Northwest Arkansas Times Fayetteville’s first ever Sustainability Summit brought more than 300 people to the city’s center to talk about ways organizations can become more environmentally friendly. One way discussed was a switch from conventional diesel fuel to the use of bioenergybased fuel. Jim Wimberly with BioEnergy System LLC in Fayetteville talked about the energy-efficient idea at a small breakout session during the summit. “ Agriculture and energy are so intertwined, ” Wimberly said.
He said the idea is to start promoting the growth of high-energy yielding plants that can be processed and manufactured into a full spectrum of energy projects, including fuel for automobiles.
“ In essence, plants are batteries, ” he said. “ They store energy through photosynthesis. ”
Arkansas provides a large amount of natural resources to make bioenergy manufacturing a reality, Wimberly said, and if the state takes an active interest in the concept, it could cut in half its yearly 1 billion gallons of petroleum used each year.
“ It would take just under a million acres of herbaceous energy crops (crops high in energy ) to displace half of that diesel used, ” he said.
Wimberly said a lot of research is being done on soybeans to create biodiesel, and that it’s a good fuel. However, he said fuel users need to broaden their horizons.
“ We need to quit being worried about planting a future around traditional approaches to biofuel, ” he said.
The state has the forest and farmland to support biofuel operations, which makes it already an attractive location to bioenergy companies, Wimberly said, but Arkansas and its cities need to work towards sealing the deal with the green fuel producers.
“ We are in competition with neighboring states, ” Wimberly said.
Financial incentives as well as getting state landowners and far mers on board with the idea could be the key, Wimberly said.
“ It’s not going to happen unless (farmers ) can make at least as much money as they do growing traditional crops, ” he said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Second meeting, first working-group meeting, of the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's planning process for regional green infrastructure
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of slide show depicting the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's planning process for green infrastructure in the region.
Working groups of green-infrastructure planning process
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of slide show depicting the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's planning process for green infrastructure in the region.
More working groups for green infrastructure, next steps
Please click on image to ENLARGE view of slide show depicting the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association's planning process for green infrastructure in the region.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
