Project Update: As of
The project is halted
DPW project managers have revisited the project scope and its design. Per Richard Luna at DPW, the revised number of trees that will be removed is down from over 200 to 88 in total. Of these 88, approx 42 are already dead or dying.
Despite continued requests from City Council Persons and FHRP, DPW has not produced any data or evidence that these types of stream "restoration" projects provide actual results.
Another walk-through including DPW, BCRP, CA Leach, FHRP and others will be held before any work resumes.
FHRP continues to insist on more stringent oversight of the project from external evaluators.
Meeting Date: 11/06/2023
Regarding: ER4054 Western Branch of Herring Run Stream Restoration Project
In attendance:
Mayor’s Office: Faith Leach,City Administrator
Dept Public Works (DPW): Richard Luna, Interim Director
Balt City Recs and Parks(BCRP): Reginald Moore, Director
Loch Raven Improvement Assc (LRIA): Alec J. Wheaden, President
Friends of Herring Run Parks (FHRP): Misty Fae, Exec Director; Tracy Smith, Board member; Amanda Cunningham, Board Arborist & Treasurer
Blue Water Baltimore (BWB): Alice Volpitta, Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper; Barbara Johnson, Senior Manager of Community Advocacy
Councilperson District 4, Mark Conway
Councilperson District 3, Ryan Dorsey
Topics Discussed:
Community Outreach:
Richard Luna informed the group that in 2015 that a Watershed Implementation Plan was designed by DPW, and at that time 4 city wide meetings were held to garner community input. Councilperson Dorsey noted that this happened 4 Mayors ago.
Alec Wheadon (LRIA) expressed that he just learned about the project and only because he saw a city sign posted at the work site that leads with the words “Neighborhoods First.”, and does not feel that the Neighborhood is being put first in this matter. Mr. Wheadon expressed significant concern that the project will negatively impact forest and stream habitat in the area.
Last week Mayor Scott, CA Leach, Interim Director R. Luna, LRIA President A. Wheaden and others walked the site. CA Leach reported that one resident of the neighborhood was in support of the proposed project if it alleviated the Golf Course flooding.
Trees:
The Assessment of the area that identified the number of trees that will be removed was done in 2017.
As a result of this inquiry by the community, DPW is having another assessment done. So far during this assessment, the assessment has noted an increased number of trees in poor condition that will be removed. Final numbers are not yet available.
FHRP notes that the number of trees that may or may not be removed is only a part of the problem with this project. The larger problem is that the Cost-Benefit of the project as a whole has not been shown to be of benefit to the stream, the area itself or to the residents around the area.There is no proof that flooding, erosion or stormwater runoff downstream will be alleviated by this project. FHRP requests supporting data for this project.
Need for the project:
Interim Director Luna stated that: 1) The stream banks in the area are eroding 2) Invasive species are present in the area 3)There is a sewer pipe in the targeted area that may need to be replaced or repaired
FHRP asked for data that supports that the stream banks are actually eroding.
FHRP noted that stream restoration ER4054 does not include any workers to eradicate invasive species, and such work can be accomplished without stream restoration. FHRP asked for any data that shows the extent of the invasive species in the area.
Interim Director Luna stated that the Project Managers for ER4054 should have been present in the meeting, as they have more information about this situation.
Alice Volpita, Blue Water Baltimore, noted that while BWB does not take a particular stand on stream restoration as a whole, there is valid concern that this project will end in the same way that two previous stream projects have, with failures of the structures that were/are to be erected in the stream, creating even more runoff than before, and that these projects as a whole have not shown the outcomes (decrease in downstream runoff/flooding, and decrease in sediments or particulates downstream) that they say they are going to show. In addition, these projects are not addressing the actual amount of stormwater runoff that we actually see today.
Sewer pipes:
It was noted by R. Luna that there are several sewer pipes in the area that may need to be replaced.
Ryan Dorsey (District 3) states that the UtilityViewer shows multiple sewer lines running across and along the Western Branch, and asks R. Luna what the need for upgrades to utilities are in the area. R. Luna states that he does not know off hand, but will find out.
(Note that the stream restoration project ER4054 does not include updates to any sewer pipes in the area. The contract only covers the stream restoration itself)
The staging area and access roads:
M. Conway expressed concerns that clearing the forest to make access roads for the project will also create an opportunity for illegal dumping after the construction period.
Concern was raised by M. Conway, R. Dorsey, FHRP and BWB about the size of the staging area and the access roads being larger than necessary. CA Leach stated that she sees the need to contain the work area, and has directed the project managers to make adjustments.
MS4 Credits:
CA Leach notes that her understanding is that there is concern that this project is being done strictly to get MS4 credits, and states that this is not totally true, and the city is open to other ways of getting these credits.
Mark Conway (District 4) stated that he is still unclear about the MS4 credits issue, though is trying to understand it more fully. He stated that when he visited the site, he saw what looks like a pristine forest and that Baltimore City has very few of these.
FHRP states that stream restoration as a method to achieve MS4 credits is being discredited in many other jurisdictions around the state as well, not just here in Baltimore City.
Issues that were left open and unaddressed due to time constraints:
Outcomes:
The project is halted
DPW project managers have revisited the project scope and its design. Per Richard Luna at DPW, the revised number of trees that will be removed is down from over 200 to 88 in total. Of these 88, approx 42 are already dead or dying.
Despite continued requests from City Council Persons and FHRP, DPW has not produced any data or evidence that these types of stream "restoration" projects provide actual results.
Another walk-through including DPW, BCRP, CA Leach, FHRP and others will be held before any work resumes.
FHRP continues to insist on more stringent oversight of the project from external evaluators.
Meeting Date: 11/06/2023
Regarding: ER4054 Western Branch of Herring Run Stream Restoration Project
In attendance:
Mayor’s Office: Faith Leach,City Administrator
Dept Public Works (DPW): Richard Luna, Interim Director
Balt City Recs and Parks(BCRP): Reginald Moore, Director
Loch Raven Improvement Assc (LRIA): Alec J. Wheaden, President
Friends of Herring Run Parks (FHRP): Misty Fae, Exec Director; Tracy Smith, Board member; Amanda Cunningham, Board Arborist & Treasurer
Blue Water Baltimore (BWB): Alice Volpitta, Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper; Barbara Johnson, Senior Manager of Community Advocacy
Councilperson District 4, Mark Conway
Councilperson District 3, Ryan Dorsey
Topics Discussed:
Community Outreach:
Richard Luna informed the group that in 2015 that a Watershed Implementation Plan was designed by DPW, and at that time 4 city wide meetings were held to garner community input. Councilperson Dorsey noted that this happened 4 Mayors ago.
Alec Wheadon (LRIA) expressed that he just learned about the project and only because he saw a city sign posted at the work site that leads with the words “Neighborhoods First.”, and does not feel that the Neighborhood is being put first in this matter. Mr. Wheadon expressed significant concern that the project will negatively impact forest and stream habitat in the area.
Last week Mayor Scott, CA Leach, Interim Director R. Luna, LRIA President A. Wheaden and others walked the site. CA Leach reported that one resident of the neighborhood was in support of the proposed project if it alleviated the Golf Course flooding.
Trees:
The Assessment of the area that identified the number of trees that will be removed was done in 2017.
As a result of this inquiry by the community, DPW is having another assessment done. So far during this assessment, the assessment has noted an increased number of trees in poor condition that will be removed. Final numbers are not yet available.
FHRP notes that the number of trees that may or may not be removed is only a part of the problem with this project. The larger problem is that the Cost-Benefit of the project as a whole has not been shown to be of benefit to the stream, the area itself or to the residents around the area.There is no proof that flooding, erosion or stormwater runoff downstream will be alleviated by this project. FHRP requests supporting data for this project.
Need for the project:
Interim Director Luna stated that: 1) The stream banks in the area are eroding 2) Invasive species are present in the area 3)There is a sewer pipe in the targeted area that may need to be replaced or repaired
FHRP asked for data that supports that the stream banks are actually eroding.
FHRP noted that stream restoration ER4054 does not include any workers to eradicate invasive species, and such work can be accomplished without stream restoration. FHRP asked for any data that shows the extent of the invasive species in the area.
Interim Director Luna stated that the Project Managers for ER4054 should have been present in the meeting, as they have more information about this situation.
Alice Volpita, Blue Water Baltimore, noted that while BWB does not take a particular stand on stream restoration as a whole, there is valid concern that this project will end in the same way that two previous stream projects have, with failures of the structures that were/are to be erected in the stream, creating even more runoff than before, and that these projects as a whole have not shown the outcomes (decrease in downstream runoff/flooding, and decrease in sediments or particulates downstream) that they say they are going to show. In addition, these projects are not addressing the actual amount of stormwater runoff that we actually see today.
Sewer pipes:
It was noted by R. Luna that there are several sewer pipes in the area that may need to be replaced.
Ryan Dorsey (District 3) states that the UtilityViewer shows multiple sewer lines running across and along the Western Branch, and asks R. Luna what the need for upgrades to utilities are in the area. R. Luna states that he does not know off hand, but will find out.
(Note that the stream restoration project ER4054 does not include updates to any sewer pipes in the area. The contract only covers the stream restoration itself)
The staging area and access roads:
M. Conway expressed concerns that clearing the forest to make access roads for the project will also create an opportunity for illegal dumping after the construction period.
Concern was raised by M. Conway, R. Dorsey, FHRP and BWB about the size of the staging area and the access roads being larger than necessary. CA Leach stated that she sees the need to contain the work area, and has directed the project managers to make adjustments.
MS4 Credits:
CA Leach notes that her understanding is that there is concern that this project is being done strictly to get MS4 credits, and states that this is not totally true, and the city is open to other ways of getting these credits.
Mark Conway (District 4) stated that he is still unclear about the MS4 credits issue, though is trying to understand it more fully. He stated that when he visited the site, he saw what looks like a pristine forest and that Baltimore City has very few of these.
FHRP states that stream restoration as a method to achieve MS4 credits is being discredited in many other jurisdictions around the state as well, not just here in Baltimore City.
Issues that were left open and unaddressed due to time constraints:
- Qualifications and oversight of the contractors for ER4054
- How to engage Maryland Dept of the Environment in the issue of changing how stream restoration provides MS4 credits
Outcomes:
- All present indicated a commitment to doing the right thing for Baltimore City, and that it is necessary to look at how this project can limit damage to the area.
- CA Leach noted that the project has been put on pause until the issues brought up in this meeting can be addressed.
- CA Leach noted that communication with the community must be improved around these issues.
- A second meeting will be held with all those present at this meeting, and will include the project managers
- Interim Director Luna will provide the new Tree Assessment numbers
- CA Leach has tasked the project managers to return a plan to scale back the project and limit the environmental impacts
- At the next meeting, the DPW project managers for the project will be present and present a new plan
- The team of participants at this meeting will then talk through the new proposal
- Interim Director Luna will task his team to provide Data and Proof that stream restoration is effective, and what the parameters for determining effectiveness are.
PO Box 16167
Baltimore, MD 21218 410-417-8565 |