Trees and Stormwater

[Jeff Firestone]

Hi folks, << If you received this twice, sorry.  My copy ended up blank in my spam-box, so I'm resending hoping it gets through>>      Following up on the discussion at the last BPNA meeting with some summary and some data that we didn't have at the time.      Dave is understandably uncomfortable with some aspects of the project, and he and his wife have helped us improve the plans by moving to a one-side swale which is much less destructive (and probably cheaper).  I am also glad that they are participating now and instead of just complaining after the fact, as some people would. There are some of their concerns that I'm not qualified to answer, but two that I think I can address here.      1) All too often, what is proposed / sold to the neighbors is not what is actually built.  My own block of Palmer was not built they way that was promised due to dishonesty, and the alley behind Dunn wasn't built as promised due to an error of construction.  Dave's point shouldn't be underestimated -- just because Phil intends to spare trees, get the capacity, etc, it is up to us to make sure that the blueprints match what their public relations says, and that they build to spec.       I'm not nearly as worried as I would be in other circumstances because Isabel is on our side.  Phil can show us/her the actual blueprints and she has more influence than I would.  We make sure they are what we expected, and then only have to trust that the guy running the digging machine does his job -- we don't have to trust the whole project.       Based upon Dave's experience (and, for that matter, Jan's and others), I think we should continue to monitor the actual plans to make sure that our impressions match the specific proposal.  I trust Phil and Patrick's honesty, but not necessarily the ability of a committee to communicate perfectly.       2)  We have managed to save Dave's trees, and the blue spruce at Dixie & Dunn.  Dave has just pointed out a tree that we didn't have on our maps: a large one on Dunn opposite his trees and about 6' north.  (I think it is a red maple, but it was too dark to tell)  The tree is about 85 feet south of Allen on the West side, and immediately adjacent to the driveway and the road edge (only 3' from the pavement on two sides).  I pasted a link to the picture at the end of the message.  It is not the largest tree around, by any means, but is still >50 years.  I'm surprised how healthy it looks considering its proximity to so much pavement, and that it hasn't torn up the pavement more.          It is hard for me (remember, I'm not an engineer, so maybe somebody has better ideas) how to see a solution to protect a tree this close to the pavement edge.  A pipe would probably involve digging up a lot of the important roots.  A swale might be less damaging, but we'd need to ask the city arborist to look and tell us what he knows about rooting depth and if a narrowing of the swale could pass over enough of the roots.  One thing in our favor is that there is already a pipe.  There is a corrugated metal driveway culvert completely filled already in place.  If that one is pulled out and replaced + extended, would we find the roots have grown around it and there is some room?         The only things I can think of -- help out if you've got thoughts -- are not great solutions, but possible. 1)  have the pipe go well into the property-owner's yard or into the street, both of which are bends and would require repaving or replanting and cost money.  2) Change the location of the street-crossing pipe.  The water has to go under the street at some point to avoid the Stewart's trees.  Instead of putting that pipe at Allen, put it as a diagonal near the trees in question, to avoid them.  The pipe would pick up a swale safely north of the Stewart's trees, go under the street on a southwest diagonal and reach the other side after the driveway that is adjacent to the tree.  The driveway would have a culvert pipe anyway, and Dunn would be crossed by pipe anyway, so it would just be the unusual placement and the increased length from putting it at an angle.  Costly, but not necessarily prohibitively costly.  The other drawback is that means putting a pipe or swale on the east side of Dunn, which would probably destroy the garden and several saplings of the corner house.  Maybe a fair tradeoff to save a Maple, but a trade-off nonetheless.        It is a tough problem, but the tree is planted right at the street-edge gravel, not set back further into the yard as with the Stewarts' trees.        There is also a large shrub that would also be impacted, further north on the same property.        Working in favor of any solution to save the tree is that it would cost the city a noticeable amount of money to remove it -- therefore any expense to save it is partially mitigated.         Anyway, that is the information on the tree that none of us knew  last night and a note on one of Dave's points we can / should incorporate in our plans.       I hope this is helpful.  Sorry for the length, but I felt it was easier to be thorough and clear rather than risk miscommunicating.       Jeff http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=allen+and+dunn,+47401&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=31.564064,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=S+Dunn+St+%26+E+Allen+St,+Bloomington,+Monroe,+Indiana+47401&ll=39.155273,-86.528076&spn=0.000471,0.001206&t=k&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.155273,-86.528076&panoid=CK3CAyPAkwkINn6JkZLtVw&cbp=12,204.95,,0,5