Pages

Saturday, September 1, 2012

WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM A SQUIRREL

I became aware of the plans for the resurfacing of Milwaukee Street because of a squirrel which is kind of ironic really given what I have found out in the last few days...

This story began a week ago today. We had a power cut on Saturday morning and as normal in this part of Delafield our neighbors had congregated at the back of the house on the lane to discuss the outage ( I had thought).

My wife Jackie went out and started chatting to Chloe (you will hear more from Chloe later). To cut a long story short Jackie was chatting for nearly an hour and it wasn't about the outage; it was about Delafield City plans for Milwaukee Street, a block way.......

Page 1 January 2012
The City have plans for Milwaukee Street as you can see. Back in January the plan was for resurfacing and the reconstruction of the street, monies had been budgeted and the council said that public input would be gathered. Its on the document so have a read through.

There were three options discussed;

  1. Resurfacing the current surface
  2. A revision to include a path
  3. A further revision with a 6 foot sidewalk and guttering included

Page 2 January 2012
All three options are interesting and  the the road needs resurfacing (it should have been done in 2011 but was put back) and the council said that the public would be involved after any necessary revisions.

 These 2 pages are from the public works committee meeting minutes from the 4th January 2012.All of the minutes can be downloaded from here Public Works Meeting Minutes

So far so good, any improvement that brings tangible benefits to the citizens and the residents of Delafield is good with me.

There is a lot of copy well worth a read
However, it seems that things have moved rapidly on since then. Roll forward  3 months and at the April meeting a lot has been decided as you can see. If you have a read through the full document (download here) its got some statements within it that don't entirely ring true. First up the minutes state three drainage issues but go onto discuss only 2. 

The first reason was that the ditches overflowed in heavy rain. The second that the trees and shading were causing issues with wetness on the road, resulting in damage and deterioration.  The third reason it seems doesn't exist.

Its no surprise that they overflow

One reason that the ditches overflow might be because they haven't been maintained. This is a shot taken on Friday by Daniel Webster. 

Mike Court the city engineer went onto say that the plan involved destroying 23 quality trees as part of the project, with a budget of $10,000 dollars to replace them. This brings me back to to the Squirrel, that has in its own way created this blog.

The reason we lost the power was because a squirrel had a very bad day, it had decided to check out a transformer owned by WE Energies a little too closely resulting in it leaving the planet early. 

At this point you need to know that I personally have never hugged a tree (or a squirrel for that matter). 

But I have done a little research on them this week with Google and Chloe's help and I have to admit I have learned quite a bit.

For example did you know that an average mature tree uses around 30 gallons of water a day. That is a lot of water and living in Lake Country if that water wasn't removed from the ground by trees then where would it go? 

Its a good question especially when you cut down 23 trees and other poor quality ones. 

I needed to learn some more about trees. Did you know that a trees roots are really quite sensitive, that they don't go deep, but they do go quite far. 

If the roots are damaged its highly likely the tree will die
I wanted to do the numbers, and see how many actual trees were to be cut down. I got hold of the plan (download the full plan here) and sat down with Chloe to count up how many actual trees would likely come down because of work. These are the numbers

  • 16 Quality trees
  • 7 questionable trees
  • 34 poor quality trees ( I would like to understand what makes a poor quality tree)
  • 99 trees that would suffer root damage from the development plan
That is 156 trees that on average will each consume 30 gallons of water per day for around 240 days a year in our neck of the woods. Which when you do the math is:

  1,123,200 Gallons of water a year

Now that's a lot of water (if half the trees were saved its still a lot of water) and I would like to understand where it is going to go?

A LOVELY LAKE & WATER 


The lake in winter

A stones through (literally) from the proposed road development is a very lovely lake by the name of Nagawicka (Nagawicka means "there is sand”, the reason this name was chosen can still be seen in the excellent swimming areas surrounding it). The lake is really at the heart of everything in Delafield and as such making sure it is looked after and is protected is important to all the residents.

Some facts and figures on the lake; Its area covers 981 ACRES, with a maximum depth of 90 feet (and a mean depth of 36 feet). Its composition at the bottom is 0% sand, 60% gravel, 0% rock, 40% muck ( the term used to to describe it) and its draining system is hydrologic.

The thing about lakes is that they need looking after and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) are really keen that its citizens do so. So much so that they publish a lot of information on lakes (DNR information) .

There are three big problems associated with lakes:
  1. Eutrophication (this when increased nutrients in the water lead to algae blooms and nuisance weeds)
  2. Sedimentation
  3. Contamination caused by the addition of harmful chemicals. 
The DNR goes onto say that these problems can be avoided or reduced through proper lake and watershed management. The DNR wants Wisconsin Citizens to play a key role in preventing the deterioration of lakes by supporting proper watershed management, protection of shorelines, and control of water uses.

An outstanding question hangs over the project that hasn't been answered by the city council. What environmental impact the road development (and specifically the storm water sewer) will have on the lake, its water quality and its fish? Without this being answered I'm not sure that a decision that effects so many people (including their livelihoods) should be made without further investigation. Now that's my view.

This was sent to me which makes for a good read that was hard to find in the online records:

April 2012 Page 1

April 2012 Page 2

Resolution 2012-06

You know the bigger picture issue for many residents is the lake, and with the exception of the residents on Milwaukee Street,  none of the local residents around or on the lake were asked their opinion or written to about the project. I'm not sure that this is the right way to go about things.  I think that the City council would get either a lot more buy-in or get a clearer picture of the feelings of the community if they involved them; by not doing so simply leads to distrust.

At the beginning I said that you would hear more from Chloe and this seems to me to be a good time to do so. Chloe has written a personal letter and I think that if you read between the lines the distrust is clearly there. Chloe has personally attended many of the meetings and she feels that she is not being listened to when she speaks. She is a lovely lady who has lived in the town for 40 years and as such I think her words are worth reading and listening to:

Just click on the letter to open it up in another window
There are more personal letters and this is one from Jim Buege

Jim Page 1

Jim's page 2
This was put together by Maddy Straka

Maddy has spent a lot of time on this fact sheet. 

And here are 30 questions put down on paper by the residents for the city council:
30 questions from Residents


TAKE A DRIVE DOWN THE ROAD

Probably the easiest way to get a real understanding for what the road looks like is to have a drive down it. Hopefully this video will give you a feel for aesthetics of the road as it is today.


The video starts out on Main Street before driving the full length of Milwaukee Street. It was filmed on Sunday the 2nd September around noon (Labor day weekend).

In the short term if the development goes ahead as planned the road is likely to look this one year down the road.

Just down the road, do wider roads increase safety?
One of the main reasons given for the proposed development is the safety of pedestrians which I totally agree with. According to the public records however there have not been any incidents of cars and pedestrians colliding on Milwaukee Street.

Should safety be compromised to protect the environment? Absolutely not would be my opinion. The safety of the the residents should come first and foremost, that said there are other options that were mentioned by Ed McAleer the Mayor. One such proposal was to make Milwaukee Street a one way street. it is stated that there was not enough support for this however there are no public records or surveys that support this.

And it for these reasons that i would like to see more discussion around the project that brings more voices and ideas to the table. Once a tree is cut down its down and this really is a concern. The tree below will surely go, the tiny pink flags at the bottom show where the roadworks will go extend to.

The Pink Flags show the boundary
Its the roots beneath the tress that that will suffer the damage that will bring them down.

Will fewer trees lining the road improve safety? Possibly as visibility is improved however when you can see further and have improved visibity its easier to speed. Its speed that kills.

British Medical Journal study makes a compelling case for all speed limits to be reduced to 20 MPH to save lives, the majority of pedestrians struck at this speed survive, whilst the majority struck at 30 MPH die.

It would make more sense to lower the speed limit to save lives alongside paved walkways.

I'm sure that this would help however it hasn't been discussed (maybe it will now).



I don't want to stop progress, its necessary. If safety is the primary driver for the project then a 20 MPH speed limit needs to be discussed as well and it hasn't been, which is my point.


This brings me back to squirrels; to be continued............

    

11 comments:

  1. I think anything worth doing is worth doing well & with that in mind I suggest we take care of the beauty that is Delafield carefully and thoughtfully. Safety is critical & but so is the health of the ecosystem. There must be a way to provide for safety as well as protect that which makes Delafield such a beautiful and precious place to live.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I personally really like the idea of making Milwaukee and Main streets one-lane, one-way (opposite directions, of course) along the proposed one-mile distance with a pedestrian walkway, which common sense would tell me could be accomplished without increasing the current footprint of the road. I had heard Police and Fire didn't like this, but there are several streets that would join the two and not slow response time significantly. Obviously one-way streets exist all over the world, and they wouldn't if there were significant safety issues associated with them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is worth noting that there is a paved walking/bike trail a short distance away so that people would not need to utilize Milwaukee Street for recreational purposes. I think that this is all a bad idea. Has anyone considered doing a petition against this to submit to elected officials? This might be something to consider if they aren't listening to residents in the meetings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One simple reason not to add curbs, gutters, sewers, and sidewalks at this time is the expense. Besides the fact that there is a newly paved path just two blocks to the South, We can't justify the expense at this time. This will not improve property values, (or tax revenue) and will only increase maintenance expenses in the future. Most residents, (not including developers or business owners), do not want more growth or urbanization of Delafield.

      Delete
  4. There has been so many recent to memory sad and slow detruction of Delafields natural beauty. 4-5 years ago a housing project call "The sanctuary" ripped hundreds of trees and is now an empty parking lot ...sanctuary all right...
    Now you may be aware there is a current development project called " the Delafield woods" the city kept things really quiet on this one as well,, all of a sudden bulldozers came and destroyed literally an entire forest..total destruction. Hundreds of old growth trees cut down...the poor coyotes, racoons and deers could be seen running for cover and real crime.. Unfortunately no protests no voices heard.. all good business as usual.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Don't know if you have done this yet or not, but consider having everyone who lives along the road sign a petition against the needless expansion and tell the city to keep their dirty developments away from Milwaukee Street. Anyone who lives on or near the street that feels there is "a danger" to their children, etc., tell them to feel free to move to a different location in the city or better yet, a different city. Roads with the beauty of Milwaukee Street are very rare these days and should be cherished by the whole community. If the city officials refuse to listen to the majority who live on that street, then you must get rid of them during the next election. Tell them to get out of Delafield and go somewhere that suits their hunger for modern redevelopment. Perhaps a brand new treeless subdivision in a treeless community? That's where people like that belong. Delafield is a very unique and lovely area. Don't let these sorts ruin it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why only residents who live on Milwaukee street? Post an online petition on this blog and gather digital signatures. Or go around the entire town and collect signatures. Or both. I don't live on the street, but am a Delafield resident and home owner who would like to preserve the character of the street as it exists now...with the exception that I would love to see the service lines put underground...the poles and wires detract from the otherwise lovely nature of the street.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/nonpoint/npscontacts.html

    http://dnr.wi.gov/water/watershedDetail.aspx?code=FX07

    A couple of important connections here: 1. Maureen McBroom from the DNR is our contact. She 'approves' of projects and this one needs looking into. If the Common Council will not listen - perhaps the DNR will. 2. This is a link to the DNR's detailed explanation of the watershed that Delafield is. PLEASE TAKE A LOOK -
    3. If you want to protect your home's value as well as the health and beauty of this special place - you need to act and now.

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.livinglakecountry.com/lakecountryreporter/news/delafield-tree-controversy-grows-tj78g6p-174596571.html

    I'm hoping this "link" works - it's to the lake country reporter and is about our work protecting the trees/water and and land in Delafield from the "cement-o-philes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. CHECK OUT THE LETTER TO MAYOR McALEER ON OUR FACEBOOK PAGE -

    at Facebook.com/MilwaukeeStreetProject

    ReplyDelete
  10. WITH HIS PERMISSION - I am printing this statement given by James Buege -who lives on Milwaukee Street. It was presented to the Common Council last night.

    I was a member of the Delafield Plan Commission from 1976 to 1982 at the time of the drafting of the first Comprehensive Master Plan, and the consequent re-zoning of the City.

    Since then, with one exception, I have not been involved with City government. It took the potential loss of something near and dear to me to get me engaged again.

    I have to tell you, I’m disappointed in what I’ve experienced so far. This Council, at it’s last session, in spite of obvious public sentiment against the Milwaukee Street Project, has determined that it is to proceed pretty much as originally presented, only now, in two phases.

    In doing so, I believe it’s setting a precedent, and a potentially costly one at that. The purported driving force behind this project is public safety. As budgeted, the first phase could cost the taxpayers as much as $450,000.00 for, I’m guessing, about 2,000 feet of roadway & accompanying sidewalks. Delafield has approximately 54 miles of road. A significant amount of that pavement presents the same challenges to pedestrian and bicycle traffic as are being cited as the principle basis for this project.

    So I’m asking, is this Council ready to extend the same blessings of safe travel to all of it’s citizens, or is it only to be made available to the blessed few on and around Milwaukee Street? You do the math. Or, as is wont to happen lately, source it out to the unelected, non-resident professionals who seem to have a greater impact on the operation of the City than the people who actually have to live with the results.

    Thank you for your attention.

    ReplyDelete