It is my understanding that WDNR required the Madison Water Utility to remove lead services to eliminate the risk of ingestion of lead by its customers. (Lead service removal was proposed by the City of Madison: the WDNR preferred chemical blending of phosphorus (ortho-phosphates) into the water supply.)
The Madison Water Utility proceeded to comply and invested considerable capital and effort to address this health issue. I would add, that the replacement of lead services engendered considerable traffic disruption over the years. If the WDNR now believes that replacement of lead services can be delayed without increased health risks to the few remaining customers, please, please, send me the data and studies. Or, does WDNR just want to push the responsibility for that risk onto the Water Utility? Or, is this supposed approval by WDNR a political calculation and not a water quality decision? Finally, I do not appreciate any attempt to try to drum up political pressure to brow beat our Water Utility staff into compromising water quality. Larry D. Nelson, P.E. 1506 Cameron Drive Madison, WI 53711 608 630 6532 (C) From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rich Felsing Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 9:33 PM To: Robin Piper Cc: Bikies Subject: Re: [Bikies] Willy St rebuild at Board of Public Works tonight(Wednesday) (Mis-send! Scratch that last email -- this one is the complete response. Thanks! --R) Robin, Several statements you make here compel a response. You write: As a point of clarification - The reason you have not seen a copy of the letter from the DNR is that there isn't a letter for a further delay . . . The DNR has gone on record to the City, city residents and district leaders, indicating their willingness to issue such a formal letter, for delay through 2013. Enhancing the project to protect our surface waters by incorporating green infrastructure elements is within the DNR's mission, and a coordinated project will reduce costs for everybody, so why wouldn't they be agreeable? The only reason the DNR has not yet issued a formal letter of extension is because you and the Water Utility have not sent a formal letter requesting such a delay. The person most familiar with the rules governing such a request stated that "there is nothing under federal or state rules that would prohibit the water utility from seeking an additional one year extension to their current consent order with the DNR for replacing lead water service lines. . . . . The water utility would need to seek an extension from the DNR. It is entirely the utility's decision on whether to seek an extension." Mr. Piper, your implication that the obstacle here is the DNR or the letter of the law when the sticking point is with you and with the Water Utility, strikes me as less than forthright if not actively misleading. I have no doubt you were aware that the Water Utility had not sent a request letter when you emailed to assign responsibility for the holdup to the DNR, though you omitted to say so. But if you don't know that the DNR will grant a delay, it's only because you didn't bother to pick up the phone to find out. Also, by not identifying your affiliation with the Water Utility in your post to the listserve, Mr. Piper, recipients were effectively prevented from inferring your interest in the discussion, where you're coming from, or where your biases might lie. Yet a quick Google search showed you are or were employed by the Water Utility as Finance Manager. Omitting that key fact seems designed to minimize taxpayers' ability to address their concerns to you. If constituents don't know where you work and don't know that the point of resistance here is your intractable stance, then it appears you are, at least by omission, attempting to prevent constituents from requesting even the most basic level of responsiveness from the Water Utility, and from laying responsibility at the feet of the Water Utility where it belongs (& w/city admin), not with the DNR or with federal rules. Not long ago, reforms at the Water Utility due to operational and communications concerns prompted Mayor Cieslewicz to remove general manager Denig-Dakroff. Given that backdrop, wouldn't you agree that a more forthright and more transparent attitude from you and from the Water Utility would be not only required, but prudent? See: http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_8c1222a9-dfe0-5 521-bf81-e348629bc3c8.html The article states that one personnel change did not go nearly far enough, and even the Mayor recognized that: "The first thing is to re-establish public trust in the water utility," Cieslewicz said. "I think David's moving out is only part of what we needed to do. We'll be looking at communication and we'll be looking at how the rest of the staff works together." You've shown us here that lack of transparency and less-than-accurate communications are an ongoing problem for the Water Utility. The open unwillingness to work with agencies attempting to carry out related water quality projects, or to capture budgetary efficiencies by incorporating goals of other City agencies that also require digging up Williamson Street, speaks of an intransigence that has no place in city administration and undermines the public good along with the best interests of local businesses. Nowhere is that more clear than your statement that you will dig up Williamson Street whether we like it or not. When you say "Robbie is correct, if the reconstruction project is delayed again, the utility will be replacing the lead services on Williamson Street in 2011" -- you're basically threatening to dig up the streets sooner rather than later if you don't get your way. Threatening the business district and local residents with additional road construction, should they have the temerity to seek responsive and good governance, is I think going too far. That you're actually ready to saddle businesses with consecutive years of road construction just because you can is unacceptable. That's particularly so in light of the deceptive comments outlined above. Your --the Water Utility's -- course of action would saddle the City with unnecessarily high financial costs, and apparently without any qualms about doing so in a time of tight fiscal budgets. Proceeding unilaterally in retaliation for merely requesting that you coordinate with other agencies and projects may put your own program interests first, but it undermines the idea that this City Administration expects the project management best practices and interagency coordination that define good governance to be a regular habit of its employees. At root it's a power play, and it's unacceptable. It's no wonder Dave Ciezlewicz has emphasized his concern that unelected commissions and other bodies are unaccountable to the voters. The power politics on display make the Water Utility Exhibit A substantiating an imperative to seek further reform at the Utility. Given that the "Madison Water Utility is an agency of the City of Madison" and that "[i]t is a public water system owned and operated by the municipality," perhaps it's time for the Common Council and Mayor Ciezlewicz to take another longer, closer look at the Water Utility. And how it treats those residents it is paid to serve. With all due respect, Mr. Piper, it's not as though our water faucets are connected to a magic box behind the wall that turns rainwater into drinking water. You'd think anyone paid to ensure we have a clean water supply would be interested in what can be done to reduce pollutant loads hitting our lakes . . . and the requested project coordination would install green infrastructure elements to do exactly that. And since anyone with a passing knowledge of the hydrological cycle knows that surface waters are connected to the groundwater from which we draw our drinking water, it'd behoove you to get on board with getting to the root of the problem, rather than incurring ever-more-costly attempts to deal with the symptoms. It may be you feel an adjustment in the position of the Water Utility is order, and no one will think less of you for acting to address the situation. Best, Rich Robbie is correct, if the reconstruction project is delayed again, the utility will be replacing the lead services on Williamson Street in 2011. Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: tim wong <mailto:[email protected]> To: Robbie Webber <mailto:[email protected]> Cc: Bikies <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [Bikies] Willy St rebuild at Board of Public Works tonight(Wednesday) I haven't seen the letter, but I have been told that the DNR has signed off on a further delay in lead pipe removal until 2013 at the latest. The Williamson St. reconstruction will happen between Blount St. and the Yahara River, so the rail construction, including the Blair-John No Lane-Williamson intersection, will not affect it. In fact, Engineering was planning that traffic detour down the newly constructed Wmson St. around the Blair St. This is something the neighborhood does NOT want, so those reconstructions should happen in the same year. The city has agreed to narrow Wmson west of Baldwin from 48 to 44, but the existing street east of Baldwin is 42 feet wide. None of those widths--42, 44, or 48, qualify as a genuine "complete streets" street--all too narrow. On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Robbie Webber <[email protected]> wrote: Marsha wants to delay, but there is a federal mandate to replace the lead pipes next year. So we either get the street torn up twice, or once. And there is no way to do Willy St in 2012 because of other construction to be done in that year - including the rail construction. That means a several-year delay, not one year. Again, the pipes will definitely be replaced next year, so Willy will be torn up next year. I acknowledge that there are advantages to narrowing the street, and I tried to outline them. I mostly wanted people to be aware that this is coming up TONIGHT. The current plan is 44 feet, not 42, so you can come and speak or not, but tonight is the night. As I said, there are trade-offs, and not everyone may agree whether those trade-offs are worth it. Marsha will not be at the meeting, because she has another one that she cannot miss. As to the "East side biking community" agreeing on this, I do not remember this ever coming up on this list, nor do I remember others asking other bicyclists that may use the area but not live there. Willy St is used by more than just the neighbors, and not all the bicyclists were consulted, as far as I can tell. Again, I am trying to provide information, so that anyone on this list can make their own decisions if they want to speak to the issue. Robbie Webber Bike Walk Madison Steering Committee www.bikewalkmadison.org <http://www.bikewalkmadison.org/> Join our group on Facebook! On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:32 PM, tim wong <[email protected]> wrote: Robbie has several things wrong on this. The east-side bicycling community has been involved in this green streets redesign effort. We strongly support the narrowing of the street, but, in addition, are urging the city to delay this reconstruction until 2012 so that we can get the "green streets" thing right--essentially a reversal of 60+ years of doing streets reconstructions wrong, i.e., making streets wider, faster, and mostly designed to get people to the suburbs faster. I will forward a letter we wrote to the city endorsing the narrower street after this. The short of it is that there are three bicycling alternatives within two blocks of Williamson St. In addition, Wmson east of Baldwin is 42 feet wide, and no one is advocating widening it. The other reason to support narrowing is that it allows for wider terraces, which permits taller trees to be planted, which provide more of a canopy, which has been show to slow cars down, as well as more bike racks and tables for restaurants who want outside seating. We are also hoping to have the utilities undergrounded during reconstruction. The conduit is being put in the ground, but the wires will stay above-ground, meaning the trees will continue to be butchered by MGE, cable companies, etc. If the east-rail bike path, Jenifer, and Spaight were not so close, I might not support this narrowing. But they are, so I do. I would strong urge all interested advocates, and especially 6th district residents, to e-mail or call Marsha and urge her to support a delay until 2012. So far she is standing with the city against the interests of the neighborhood (it's a little more complicated than it looks). Marquette Neighborhood Association and Schenk Atwood Starkweather Yahara (SASY) neighborhood council have both endorsed the delay, MNA unanimously and SASY with one dissenting vote. The alder, so far, is supporting Rob Phillips and Engineering in their opposition to delay. Your e-mails and calls might persuade her to support the delay. Thanks. tim On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Robbie Webber <[email protected]> wrote: Just an FYI that the rebuild of Williamson St will be at the Board of Public Works tonight, in case anyone wants to weigh in on the new design. It looks like the public hearing will start at 6:30 PM, if I am reading the schedule correctly. It is item # 7 on the agenda linked below. http://legistar.cityofmadison.com/meetings/2010/10/8326_A_BOARD_OF_PUBLIC_WO RKS_10-10-20_Agenda.pdf The Board of Public Works meets at the Water Utility Bldg - 119 Olin Ave. Sorry for the late notice, but this sort of crept up on me, (and I'm no longer a paid bike advocate or alder.) The reason that this particular street rebuild might require extra attention is that the proposal is to NARROW the street, which could have implications for all street users. Right now the curb-to-curb width is 48 feet. The outside lane - shared by parked cars and bicyclists most of the day, and an active car travel lane during rush hour - is 13 feet. The inside lane is 11 feet. The new design would narrow the street to 44 feet, and the current proposal would be 4 lanes, each 11 feet. This will mean that the outside lane will no longer be wide enough for bicyclists and parked cars to safely share. The options for bicyclists on Willy St would be A) get in the active car (inside) lane, or B) ride really close to the parked cars and be passed unsafely by car on the street. The advantage of narrowing the street is that there will be more space for trees and other "street amenities," which Willy St sorely lacks. More space for walking, sidewalk cafes, bike racks, benches, etc. Presumably, the traffic will move more slowly as well. This is a definitely trade-off: worse for bicyclists, but better for the overall look and feel of the street. I am of very mixed feelings about this. Beyond where the curbs are placed, there is the matter of where the lane marking are drawn, which is not being decided tonight. I will be pushing for making the outside lanes 12 feet instead of 11. This would still be a tight squeeze for a parked car-bicyclist to share, but it is an additional foot. Robbie Webber Bike Walk Madison Steering Committee www.bikewalkmadison.org <http://www.bikewalkmadison.org/> Join our group on Facebook! _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org -- If you would like to sign a petition opposing Williamson St. Coop's permanent driveway, go to the link http://www.PetitionOnline.com/coop9876/petition.html .Even if you've signed the paper copy, sign this one especially if you have a comment to add. Or buy a T-shirt: STOP THE DRIVEWAY. Inquire here. -- If you would like to sign a petition opposing Williamson St. Coop's permanent driveway, go to the link http://www.PetitionOnline.com/coop9876/petition.html .Even if you've signed the paper copy, sign this one especially if you have a comment to add. Or buy a T-shirt: STOP THE DRIVEWAY. Inquire here. _____ _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
