Dear editor:
Thank you for printing the letter, Five Creeks Project – “We Cannot Afford to Get it Wrong.” I agree with the writer, and I find the district’s response inadequate. We can expect more and more of those kinds of rain and snow events as global warming ramps up. The old engineering “100-year storm” standards are no longer applicable.
Instead, planners need to look at ways of retaining more water on-site, and I can think of several options. One would be to preserve significant stands of trees, which would also have the benefit of sequestering carbon and preserving biodiversity. I believe progressive foresters such as Prof. Suzanne Simard, would recommend preserving 50 to 70 per cent of the existing forest. Maybe forget developing these kinds of areas….
Another would be to have several detention/settling ponds with aquatic plants, to take the load off creeks and sewers. This would also have a side benefit of keeping sediment out of creeks and recharging groundwater aquifers.
Finally, site planning and architecture guidelines should limit non-porous areas, plant dense landscaping and install green roofs to help retain water. These actions also help to mitigate summer heat.
These are examples of “demand-side management” and should be more efficient than supply-side engineering, which would have involved building bigger storm sewer pipes and over-burdening downstream creeks.
Alex Jamieson, retired city planner
North Vancouver
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
