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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
