From: Chiye Azuma <email@example.com>
Date: August 6, 2004 10:16:49 PM PDT
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, Mark Brest van Kempen <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Subject: Leona Quarry - creating a creek on site
I had a chance to talk with Marcel today, and he was quite adamant that the following section from the Conditions of Approval (#23, g) that requires a "review ... pertaining to the creation of a perennial creek through the site," was superseded by the Settlement. If I understood correctly, he seemed to be saying that the decision to create the larger capacity detention pond took care of any consideration for restoring the creek above grade and through the development. Is that your understanding as well?
If a decision was made to underground the creek (or runoff, or whatever you need to call this flow of water), I was hoping that it was based on an informed, rational, and scientific process - and not one dictated by politics. In any case, I would be interested in seeing the "review," as required by the Conditions of Approval, or the language in the Settlement that specifically excludes this requirement from the final grading and improvement plans.
Hydrology and Drainage Requirements
23. The Project Applicant shall implement all of the mitigation measures described in
"Section F. Hydrology and Water Quality" of the MMRP. Final grading and
improvement plans for the Project shall include the following information,
analysis and requirements:
g. A review and recommendations pertaining to the creation of a perennial
creek through the site that drains into the lower detention basin, consistent
with condition of Approval No. 19. (Landscape Plan Requirements)