Repairs are planned for the west berm at Easton's Pond, but the design has some neighbors expressing concern. (Photo by Lynne Tungett)
NEWPORT, R.I. – An estimated $6 million is being tagged for safeguarding one of Newport’s drinking water sources at Easton Pond.
The residents and neighbors surrounding Newport’s Easton Pond were mailed a notice in early November regarding a request from Newport’s Director of Utilities, Julia A. Forgue for a “State of Rhode Island Water Quality Certification to repair and improve the north and west embankment of Easton Pond.” The notification was from the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM).
This announcement goes on to describe the “improvements:” “The north embankment crest will be twelve feet wide. Work on the north embankment includes installation of vegetated articulated open-cell concrete on the slope for channel protection. Work on the west embankment includes the installation of steel sheeting and concrete cap on the slope. The west embankment crest will also be twelve feet wide.”
Objections to the water quality missive, dated November 5, 2009, are to be received in the Office of Water Resources in Providence by 4 pm on December 5.
Eileen Warbuton, a Eustis Avenue resident stated, “Abutters do not feel we have been part of this process, we have had no clue as to the size and scale of this project. We have loads of questions and trying to get accurate information has been difficult.”
Forgue, Director of Utilities, said the city hand-delivered flyers in the neighborhood for an August 25 workshop specifically addressing the embankment improvements and the architectural plans were distributed. Yet, neighbors are wondering what can be done.
Justin McLaughlin, council representative for the 2nd Ward, said, “At this stage of the game, it’s not likely that the basic design will change. But, the city has a responsibility to listen to resident concerns, and if an opportunity to revisit the fence design exists, we should take advantage of it. The fence, however, is needed in order to restore public access to the berm, something that many residents of the city have asked for.”
McLaughlin and Forgue have both said that a public workshop is due to be scheduled soon, probably in mid to late January so the project can be explained more fully.
Since the nor’ easter storm of April 15-16 2007, the berm’s footpath has been closed. Erosion to the embankments and the dam had clearly presented a safety issue. Damage estimates were provided to FEMA in August 2007.
Forgue stated, “We almost had a breach of the embankment, we were very close to an emptying of the reservoir. The pond is a drinking water supply that we have to protect.”
McLaughlin confirmed that the berm will be raised from its current height of 11-12 feet by about two feet in most places and widened to accommodate maintenance vehicles. “This is being done so the embankment is more secure and safer. The berm repairs have been designed by qualified civil engineers to achieve these outcomes at a cost the city can afford,” McLaughlin said.
At the upcoming workshop, McLaughlin said the proposed 42-inch fence on the inner water-side of the path and the lattice-work concrete may be points of discussion so abutters feel the most aesthetically pleasing options are explored. These improvements, estimated at 6 million dollars, are partially reimbursable from the 2007 storm damage and have been approved for a subsidized loan through a state revolving fund.
The Council is expected to vote on a berm construction contract no earlier than April. According to Mclaughlin, the construction schedule, which may begin as early as May 2010, is contingent on the water supply system demand and capacity from other reservoirs in summer 2010. The organized recreational programs using Braga Park is also a determining consideration.
Forgue said a CRMC permit still needs to be acquired and that all improvements and repairs will be reviewed for dam safety by DEM.
Architectural renderings, sketches, and full power-point presentation from the August presentation is expected to be posted on the city’s website by the end of the week.
Loading ...
Newport, RI
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Why a fence? Is fishing no longer allowed? Used to be a great place to go fishing for kids.
Don’t we have enough paved surfaces and steel fencing on the island already? If the city can take xxx number of cubic feet from the reservoir to enlarge the moat, then why couldn’t it take the same amount to build a retention pond instead? If such a natural pond were built on the southern end, it would also serve as a buffer from wind-driven salt water thereby protecting the city’s drinking water. Then, the UV system could be used to purify our drinking water instead of using chlorine.
I can see the need for the reinforcement of the berm for safety and security. That said, it should be done with the utmost care with regard to the home owners who face the pond/berm—most of whom probably bought there in the first place for the serenity of the view. All too often politics allow decisions to be made with little regard for the long term effect of such decision. I, also, believe that a fence is an affront to the nieghbors and their children. It will, plain and simple, be an eye sore.
The Prince’s comments beg more information.
What are the political interests to which they refer?
Safety and security from whom or what? I thought this is about securing the pond from a catastrophic event and endangering the Newport water supply?
Is an “eye sore” for the taxpayers and property owners who face the pond much different from the CSO odors, and floods that other neighborhoods endure routinely year-round? Of course not.
Why does the proposed design infer automatically a threat to the property values in the Eustis, Cliff Ave ‘hoods? My Kay St abode suffers property value issues due to traffic and noise. Should we close the street for us? Of course not, but please slow down.
However, the Prince comments are worth more than my cynicial questions. I suspect there are other solutions such as those proposed by the Ad Hoc task force and I think we all should become more informed about the options as the review process begins. $6 Million is still not a trivial amount of money no matter how much non-Newport funding is included.
From what little I have read, we were pretty lucky we did not lose the pond during the storm in ‘07. Gales and “nor-easters” are relatively common here. If our water supply is at risk due to the berm being weak or of insufficient height, then we have to do something. I think the Prince comments agree on that. But please let’s not base the discussion on a small provincial perspective of “…the serenity of the view…”. Let’s ask constructive, transparent questions about the best possible design and spending.
As a civil engineer and abutter to the reservoir, I do not understand the need for a concrete road atop the berm. Maintenance vehicles have no need to have access to the berm. The last 50 year storm barely breached the berm. I can understand adding a foot to accomodate the next 100 year storm but not two feet. Why not drive sheet piling into the existing berm with no aesthetic degradation, but reinforcement to the existing structure. In addition to the impact to the environment and wildlife as well as the disruption to the homeowners who have paid for the privilege of a serene and natural view, I am very concerned about the loss of privacy to our family.
The article would suggest given the amount of money to be expended, the scope of the project and the impact of the project not only on abutters (many as they are) but also on one of Newport’s landmarks, the communication, education and outreach process has had its shortcomings to date. That said, it is what it is and we are where we are. According to Mr.McLaughlin, the options may be limited at this point. However, acknowledging the city’s responsibility to hear concerns, he indicates there MAY be an opportunity to revisit the fence design which to me sounds unsightly and among the least attractive fencing options. If Mr. McLaughlin’s remarks are shared by enough of the others who are in a position to effect change, the article is a call for action for those in the community who have an opinion to speak up and be a part of the change. Let your voice be heard and plan to attend the workshop when scheduled to get the facts. Get involved and be part of the process. “The train has left the station” on this project. How much do you/we care where its headed?
On page 18 of the August proposal we see a proposed view that shows no change in the height of the pond berm, and the fence is a common black bent-wire with metal stakes. It would help this discussion to know what it is about that design that is offensive. Color, height, use of wire, or what? Further what materials and design do the offended parties recommend be used? And at what additional cost? Vinyl, wood, post and slat, or just what?
The fence as shown is a very light weight material and the stakes would be easily disturbed or bent as they are quite thin. A heavy animal could easily damage this design with its weight. Indeed this type of stake is used commonly at construction sites as temporary fence. As a “security/safety” fence it seems very minimal to the purpose and further would seem to have a short life span before being bent. My vote is for no fence, but assuming I have missed something here, then I suggest an expensive option but far more robust would be a traditional wrought iron design. Fewer spindles and more robust stakes.
THE CLIFF WALK EASTON’S POND EXTENSION: RE-IMAGINING A NEWPORT LANDMARK
Any change in Newport’s infrastructure, from road surfaces to reservoirs, needs to start with the presumption of rich cultural value. Beginning with Easton’s Pond’s berm reconstruction, no plan for altering Newport’s infrastructure should be developed before its potential value to Newport as a whole is fully brought to light.
The abutters to Easton’s Pond are not just the nearby property owners: We all are the abutters – the businesses and citizens who derive livelihood and pleasure from our lives in Newport. Easton’s Pond is a unique, essential part of Newport’s fabric, no less significant than Bellevue Avenue, Washington Square, Broadway, our beaches, or our waterfront.
Seen through this prism, Easton Pond’s berm becomes our new contribution to Cliff Walk – the Cliff Walk Easton Pond Extension – a name that invokes Cliff Walk’s beauty and the far-sighted vision of its creators, that increases Newport’s cultural capital, and strengthens Newport’s tax base.
Howard Newman’s remarks are right on the mark.
Hopefully common sense will prevail regarding the decisions made about Easton Pond by our city council!