Letter to Bill Rodgers of the Sierra Club, September 20, 2004
Hi Bill,
We have made the link to the Sierra Club site. Thank you very much.
I wanted to take this opportunity to update you. On September 10, 2004, four
members of the environmental impact committee of CRS walked with
environmental assessor, Don Tilton, on the site of the proposed new high
school project. A representative of the Board of Education, Laura Hagan,
was
also present. Another of Tilton's associates joined us late in the walk.
First I will give you our questions and comments, each followed by
Tilton's
answers. Then I will give you the response from George Fornero's office
received on September 18.
Let me know what you think.
Esther Kirshenbaum
Concerns, questions and input regarding natural features:
- Could the vernal pond in the N.W. section of the woods be spared?
Answer: We'll see what we can do.
- The "pond"
- Will you seek the advice of a herpetologist in determining the
best way
to handle the "frog" pond? Can you really expect to duplicate
this pond
including the surrounding buttonbush shrubs, cattail and sedge plants with
its frog, toad and other amphibian and mammal species?
Answer: You folks can get a herpetologist if you want. Well, we've had
a lot of experience relocating wetlands.
- Why is the pond being "placed" next to Maple Rd. Why move
it at all?
If so, why not on the South side of the lot?
Answer: Looks like it could work down there. (new site plan still has
placement of pond in the North and next to road.)
- What will happen to the wildlife corridor primarily for fox, coyote
and deer, which cuts across the property and onto Maple Rd.? Have you been
in contact with a wildlife specialist? Would animals really stay up in
a woodlot surrounded by athletic fields and roads?
Answer: Oh, we expect animals will just stay in the
remaining woodlots. And the speed limit on N. Maple will probably be
reduced anyway. (The Board rep. interrupted and said that no road study
had been completed to date to prove that a reduction in speed would
occur.)
- Without a threatened species habitat study done, why was the clearing
for surveying so excessive; acres instead of a narrow sight line width?
Answer: Usually a machete is used. I guess that Granger did it
differently.
- Has the MDNR been contacted for an environmental study of the site?
Aren't there threatened and special interest plant species on this site?
(I mentioned that I have such information if he is interested in anything
from the MDNR) Answer: I think we got a letter off to them a couple of days
ago. Response
to my offer: Oh, thanks I'll let you know if I need anything.
- Can the parking lots, stadium and road be be farther from wetland?
Couldn't a permeable surface be used for the parking lots?We are
especially
concerned about salt, phosphorous from the playing fields and other
contaminants,
Answer: We've got a good runoff plan. Part of this runoff redirection
plan
is kind of new. We're going to have something similar to a running stream
along the internal road system that will be part of the landscaping features
of the site. Permeable surfaces are expensive.
- Since the wetland is over 5 acres would you file for an MDEQ permit
before construction? We are concerned that 25 foot buffers would not
adequately protect wetland during or after construction.
Answer: Since our buffers are 25 ft. I think we only need a permit from
the health department, I'm not sure. We've really been successful in the
past.
We've moved and restored a lot of wetlands.
- With current site plans showing the proximity of the roads and fields
to
the wetlands we are concerned about stormwater management engineering.
Answer: We'll use detention. We're still working on this.
This site is like no other (we do not know what he meant).
I brought up many of these issues up at the September 1st Board meeting
as
well. We can send you a tape of the meeting. and we brought them up again
at this meeting on site with Tilton on September 10. We had a note taker
at
this meeting and we can give you those. The following is the answer
verbatim
in its entirety that we received as a response from George Fornero of the
Board of Education to ALL of our environmental questions:
Fortunately, the site is larger than required to develop a comprehensive
high school. This will allow for the preservation of significant
woodlands
and the preservation or replication of significant wetlands. Currently, a
registered Forrester is identifying all of the significant trees on site
and
engineers are mapping the wetlands.
The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has no buffer
regulations around a wetland. A wetland is regulated from the wetland
edge
inward. Some local governments (i.e.. Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor Township,
Pittsfield Township, etc.) have ordinances that require a 25- foot buffer
around all regulated, and in some cases, nonregulated wetlands. A
scientific recommendation suggests a minimum 25-foot naturalized buffer
around wetlands to help reduce surface water runoff impacts that could
increase erosion risks and pollutant loading.
The site will be designed to hold storm water for a 100-year storm and to
protect downstream properties and the Huron River from runoff.
The district will gain Leadership in energy and Environmental Design
(LEED)
certification from the U.S. Green Building Council.
The new high school site offers an impressive array of natural resources
and
habitats to integrate into an environmental education program. Outdoor
classrooms will provide an opportunity for hands-on study of the site's
various ecosystems. Nature study programs will be conducted on school
grounds as a living laboratory outside of the traditional classroom
setting.
Programs can integrate all areas of study including math, science and the
arts and may include water quality monitoring, stream bank restoration,
biodiversity study, and natural habitat garden planning among dozens of
other activities.