Chris Johnson seems to fear the worst circa 1868. Let's clear up some misconceptions...again.
(Also, some suggest catastophic collapse of the Stone Arch Bridge- Did it fall when Mill Ruins Park was built? The Crown Hydro project would preform the same type of excvation near the bridge as was done for the park but in a much shallower space. Were utility lines, pollution, hidden caves etc. found in the park? Did the park blow up?)
Shall I use Sean Ryan's insulting tone and take him to task for being a Pollyanna about nothing ever going wrong with large-scale construction and engineering projects? Or should I instead go back and quote myself over and over to demonstrate his repeated misrepresentation of what I said and -- even more amazing -- what I believe. Decisions, decisions...
I have no misconceptions, Sean. I have stated none, either. I've spent many hours studying this project. I've read many of the FERC filings associated with it -- but maybe only half, since they are so numerous. I've seen Crown Hydro's engineering plans.
I've also spent a lot of time researching the history of St. Anthony Falls, the geology, and the historical industries and constructions on both banks and in the river channel. I did much of that before the Crown Hydro issue even came up on this list, because I just happen to be very interested in history and these kinds of archaeological sites.
No, I don't fear the worst since circa 1868. However, try reading a little on the subject of the Army Corp of Engineers efforts to stop the collapse of St. Anthony Falls after the Eastman tunnel collapse over a 15 year period. You'll discover the river was not particularly amenable to being tamed. It kept finding new ways to bore through the sandstone and find an outlet. If not for a very large curtain wall of concrete that the Corp. put in under the limestone, those falls wouldn't be there today.
The collapse of the Falls is a very remote possibility. My statements regarding past disasters in the area only serve to point out that unexpected things can happen when engaging in excavation projects in that geological area. If you want to argue that's not possible, I have a pair of Space Shuttles to sell you real cheap. Guaranteed not to blow up or burn up.
And actually, if memory serves, they did find pollution while excavating the park. Did the first or second shuttle blow up? Nope. Guess that guarantees none of them would. Oops. So much for the argument that the park did not blow up when they excavated it, so nothing can go wrong with the Crown Hydro excavation.
I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop mischaracterizing my statements.
The project would reopen the old headrace channel that already exists underneath the parking lot albeit filled in with debris. The channel is not under the falls, it is seperated from the spillway by the lock & dam. It was filled in the the 1960s so any utility lines that do exist are probably accounted for (why anyone would run utility lines across the crest of falls is beyond me anyway.)
Who said anything about anyone running utility lines across the crest of the falls, etc.? I said Crown Hydro will have to excavate from the power house to the nearest Xcel energy power connection to hook up. That distance is about 400 feet, according to the FERC document I read.
The project will re-use some parts of the Holly and Cataract Mills headraces, but it will also enlarge, alter and add new pieces, because what is there is not adequate or appropriate to the project. This isn't simply digging some dirt and junk out of an existing channel. If this thing does get built, you can go down and perhaps visit the construction site during the project, and I guarantee you'll see a whole lot more digging and concrete pouring than simply re-using an old headrace. Note that I am not accusing you of saying that such re-use is the ONLY channel construction involved. I am merely amplifying on it so that it is clear to the readers it is not so isolated.
The so called 'extension' to the Stone arch bridge would simply cross this restored water-filled channel, which would have exisited originally. The plans call for this extension to be planks similar to the plank road in front of the Mill City Museum. The 'extension' will make the approch the bridge better and more visible.
Sounds wonderful, it that's what really happens. However, I don't trust a company which is trying to cut its costs and has quoted the entire bridge, plank road and landscaping project as costing less than $1 million to be using anything but the quickest and cheapest means to get the bare essentials done. How many bridges have been built recently for substantially less than that figure? Maybe they can do it, but the price is so low I worry about the architectural sensitivity it will have. And if it ends up being ugly and detracting from the area, then we're stuck with a white elephant and decreased public value to the riverfront, aren't we? Crown Hydro could ameliorate this kind of concern if they could show us real construction plans for the bridge and attach real costs to it. But they have not done that, and in a way, I don't blame them. Every dollar they can avoid committing to up front decreases their risk. That's how I would run a business.
That, in fact, is the whole rub here. They're a business, in it primarily for the profits. We're the public, primarily in it for the good of Minneapolis and society. We are being asked to assume too much risk and cost for the benefits we get in return. It's not that there is one single "deal breaker" -- such as the strawman about the Falls collapsing -- but that taken as a whole, the deal is not a good deal for the Park Board and is not a good deal for the City.
Photos- a must see!!!
1929 picture of west side- (cookies must be enabled)
http://collections.mnhs.org/visualresources/image.cfm?imageid=81320&Page=8&Digital=Yes&Keywords=stone%20arch&Type=Photo%2CArtPhoto&SearchType=Basic
See the plank road on the left?
No, actually I don't, though it may be there. I see train cars on train tracks on some indeterminate surface from this photo. Might be planks. Might not. But so what? What's that got to do with whether this project makes sense?
Like I said above -- it's not that one detail of this project makes it worth opposing. It's that it costs us, the public, too much for what we get in return.
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
