You are here

Draft Plans: Comments

The following were written on comment cards at the March 25 Design Open House, and are presented as written. Community members were encouraged to write comments on cards and share them in the comment box. If you would like to add comments please do so at the bottom of this page. 
  • Eucalyptus trees larger than 5" diameter also need to be removed from the lower ditch. Eucalyptus trees along path that compete with mature oaks need to be removed. Trees in section 4 needs to be thinned. [signed J. W.]
  • Good job listening to all the very varied input
  • Perhaps this wasn't the venue for it, but I hope there's outreach and education being integrated here. Both to inform residents and site vistors of coming changes, but also to extol the benefits of this project after implemented. Maybe some educational stations at regular intervals? Perhaps in conjunctions with the Healthbeat stations....or perhaps a guided nature trail along the channel. Also, any opportunities for nature-themed play structures? The corner of the flood control channel at Bird Entry Park would be a great location for a viewing deck. [map drawn which cannot be rendered here] The views are excellent in both directions.
  • Please don't let the NIMBYs drive the process. Many of them want no additional trees. Please don't let them decide of what will affect many people. Many of us want MORE trees. Thank you. 
  • Make sure the new irrigation system does not adversely affect water pressure, supply for existing needs.
  • The fact that Putah Creek Council managed the highly successful Putah Creek Project at Winters gives us much confidence that they will do a good job with the North Davis Creek Channel Project [signed G. T. and JE. R.]
  • This is an amazing project. You're done an amazing job addressing citizen input. 
  • Please make any interpretive displays nice, not with yucky plastic covers.
  • How about a trail running up and down the SLY/ELY slope? [signed L. C.]
  • 1) I think we should be sure that channel plantings do not impede flow and thereby increase flood risk. 2) The eucalyptus, though near the end of their useful life, do still provide some welcome screening of the north winds and also dust from spring and fall planting of the farm to the north. Other non-deciduous trees are coming along (some of which I donated to the City) but it will take some years.
  • The eucalyptus should be removed and replaced with native trees that would provide better habitat.
  • Glad city will address tree maintenance ("other") re: plant choice and weeding. Eucalyptus need maintenance. Good to have fire Marshall  police, and flood control to review. 
  • Still seems like there are too many trees being planned at 150. --Valley oak has problems as well with seedlings sprouting around area (volunteer trees) and large in size. [signed M.M]
  • Will there be any bike parking?
  • Corner viewing deck at the pocket park would be very desirable with interpretive signs.
  • I and others want more trees! 

Below are comments about the project recieved via email: 
March 28, 2013:
Libby:
Thank you for coordinating the public meeting the other night that allowed us to view plans for the North Davis channel restoration.  It is very important that we take opportunities like this to invest in the ecology of our landscape.  Too often we look at infrastructure from a single purpose perspective and in the process eliminate important elements of the land we live in.  This project offers the opportunity to reclaim some value from native plants, insects, birds and other animals that could thrive in a restored channel.
   
I spent some time discussing concerns about flooding at the F street culverts.  My understanding of the flow patterns for this system is that the reaches to be treated all have greater capacity than the design flow.  Specifically at F street the concern voiced was that vegetation would clog the culverts leading to overbank flows into neighboring housing.  Given that the low points in the channel system fall outside the project area, I do not see how this could arise.  It is true that willows and other vegetation will grow at the upstream side of the culvert, and may need to be cut down periodically.  But it is hard to envision willows thick enough to stop flows from going into the culvert, and even if this happened the flatness of the channel means that the point where water would come out of the channel by overtopping is west of Hwy 113.  The fact that all the housing in this area is placed on built up pads further ensures that house flooding is not likely.  There are also drains into the adjacent agricultural field that could alleviate peak flow, and the fact that F street is below the height of the housing pads means water would flow there first.  If the houses flood it would be from a storm event much greater than anything the channel is designed to address.  These characterizations are confirmed by looking at the FEMA flood hazard maps (https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gDCyNfM_OAYGcLA2cjdwMnwwADKADKR2LKmxrD5fHrDgfZh18_WB4HcDTQ9_PIz03Vj9SPMscwxSLABGZKZE5qemJypX5BboRBlkmoIgDulWf9/dl3/d3/L0lJSklna21DU1EhIS9JRGpBQU15QUJFUkNKRXFnLzRGR2dzbzBWdnphOUlBOW9JQSEhLzdfMDgyTTY3UFNDODBDMkcwQjhQNDAwMDAwMDAvOThlWEo0MTE2MDEzMS9zYS52aWV3ZXIuc3VibWl0TWFw/#7_082M67PSC80C2G0B8P40000000 )
None of the channel being considered for this project would likely contribute to flooding of homes.  Flood hazards in the area are driven by other features, such as those that have led to the FEMA zone A designation in the area around the intersection of Hwy 113 and Covell.
There was also some concern about fire hazard being increased by the project.  Currently there is a fire hazard from weed growth in the channel.  The project would likely lower the potential for rapid spread of a ground fire by establishing plants that stay green for a greater part of the fire season.  These plants could burn, but the ability for a fire crew to respond to a spreading fire would be improved with the replacement of the current weedy species with native plants.  The ability for the a fire to use vegetation to “ladder” up into the tree canopy can, and is, similarly being addressed by careful selection and placement of species to minimize these risks.  The fire hazard cannot be eliminated all together, but the design proposed does appear to lessen the risk.
In sum, I applaud the work being done.  I think once this project is in place that the City should consider replanting some of the greenbelt vegetation in this area to make better connections between what will become a valuable resource and our enjoyment of these more open spaces in our community.  Providing connectivity through use of native plants on the green belts will further increase the value of this fine project, and ensure our enjoyment for years to come.
Cordially,
Stefan Lorenzato
[end]
 
April 1, 2013
Thank you and thank you to the team that is developing the North Davis Channel project.  It's great that the Council is building on the good work of neighbors who have planted native vegetation along the channel.  A long term view of the project provides a future of majestic oaks and a diverse understory providing habitat, beauty, learning opportunities, flood control and recreation for our community.  It's good work that you're doing.  The details annoy many people, but please persevere.