Barton Springs Public Process

On the bartonsprings@yahoogroups.com email list, this week Steve Barnick, past president of Friends of Barton Springs Pool, wrote:

Deda or anyone else for that matter,
Find me one spec of written or spoken evidence that support your accusations.

FBSP never came out in support of the cutting down of the trees. Our support was
for raising awareness of the condition of the trees and finding ways to take
better care of the trees. We were just as surprised as everyone in the community
regarding the decision to cut them down.

The only thing we didn’t to during this time was rant, rave about this decision.
Instead we listened, attended meetings, organized a tree care fund raising event
and worked with the city to get the tree situation where it is today. Our
message remained positive and the results were positive.

Respectfully,
Steve

His request for “one shred of evidence” has provoked an outpouring of documentation. Among them:

From Susan Bright:

SusanBright,

Poet/Publisher, Plain View Press

P.O. 42255

Austin, TX 78704

http://www.plainviewpress.net

From Deda Bea:

I think Susan covers many points of FBSP’s support for cutting down the trees.

You, and FBSP, supported the Master Plan, which supported and funded the “study” from that out-of-state company and the results of their study which determined all of the heritage trees needed to go. It wasn’t FBSP who questioned those results or arranged for Don Gardner, a local, well-respected arborist to give a second opinion, which is actually what gave clout to the grassroots uprising which eventually saved the trees. This is why I find it disingenuous for FBSP to claim credit for it. Yes, you remained “positive” in light of death sentence for the majority of large shade-giving trees, but had others not been so positive about the clearcut, those trees would be gone now. I also recall that several of those trees just happened to be in the path of many of the “improvements” that FBSP was advocating for at the time. It’s great that FBSP got behind Don’s findings, but it is just plain wrong to pretend that you’ve always supported saving the trees, or in some way deserve credit for iFBSP deserves no such credit!t.

From Karen Kreps

Re: FBSP did NOTHING to save the trees from being cut – how dare Steve claim they did?

Steve,

How dare you–or Robin Cravey–or anyone with FBSP claim to have worked to protect the trees at Barton Springs Pool???? SHAME ON YOU!

FBSP has doggedly supported the Masterplan, which funded the faulty study of the trees and called for the urgent removal of 29 trees because they caused a so-called danger to the public.

Brian Leonard has videotape of a meeting I attended in which Robin Cravey said, “Some trees will have to be sacrificed” – sacrificed for WHAT??,  and that “FBSP would be there with shovels to help plant replacement trees” — as if a new sapling could take the place of the great heritage that need provide much-needed shade.

You and FBSP did NOTHING to turn around the plan to fell those trees. Some of the trees marked for removal stood in the direct path of projects proposed by the Masterplan that FBSP strongly supported — such as to build a second bathouse on the south side, or to create a new and unnecessary second ADA path through the wooded area behind the diving board.

The two things that mainly that contributed to the public awareness of the folly of removing the 29 trees and  ultimately got PARD to reject the plan was 1) the establishment of a new website built by Peter Steinhardt, Susan Bright and myself, bartonspringspublicprocess.com, which casts sunshine on the administration of our great  natural resource and 2) the May 1, 2009 press conference that Susan Bright and Abbe Waldman organized outside the entrance to the pool. That was where Susan, Bill Bunch, Robin Rather and highly respected local arborists (including Nickey Bishop, ISA-Certified Arborist; Michell Brown. Owner, Xanadu Nursery; Graham Rasor, Masters in Horticulture from Texas A&M University; Scott Harris, Arborist; Guy Leblanc, ISA-Certified Arborist, and Cheyenne Thomas, Arborist) spoke up in defense of the trees and where elementary school kids contributed poignant drawings begging to save the trees.  NO members of FBSP were active in those activities. Robin Cravey did show up in the back of the audience for the press conference, but he didn’t utter a word at it — much less help to make it happen. If you want documentation, look here: http://earthfamilyalpha.blogspot.com/2009_05_01_archive.html.

As Deda wrote, I’m also glad that FBSP finally came around to seeing the folly of the plan to remove the trees, but shame on you for claiming to have spearheaded that effort. After the plan to remove 29 trees failed, FBSP has gone on to promote other plans linked to the Masterplan that are equally detrimental to public enjoyment of the pool, such as to carve giant terraces in the south lawn to allow for that unnecessary second ADA path, to over engineer the bypass tunnel out of fear that it would float away, and the monster dredge that you are currently advocating to occur this fall.

If you have any doubt about the second ADA path being not needed, please see the report that was sent to Fahad in 2007. it is posted on http://bartonspringspublicprocess.com/2010/07/ada-access-not-needed-on-south-side-per-1987-study/

FBSP seems more interested in creating the semblance of being in support of the public use of the pool than the actual fact. Yesterday you forced the closure of the pool an hour early for your Aug 12 press conference. You even went to the effort of setting up your promotional tent in front of the pool, as you normally would do on a busy Saturday, Since the pool was closed all day, I doubt the public paid any attention to your tent. It must have been only for the sake of the news camera.

You can fool some of us some of the time, but you can’t EVER rightfully claim that you did squat to save the trees last May 2009.

KK

and

Steve,

In my previous note, I failed to properly acknowledge the great role played by Bill Bunch of the Save Our Springs Alliance. After the City wasted $57,000 on the Daves group study, Bill contracted Don Gardner and got a second opinion.

If you need more evidence that it was SOS and others that saves the tres, and that FBSP did NOTHING to save the trees. just go to this document:

http://bartonspringspublicprocess.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Barton-Springs-Tree-Court-Case-Study.pdf

Here’s an excerpt from it:

Background
The City of Austin’s Master Plan for improving Barton Springs Pool included a tree assessment performed by Davey Resource Group (Davey), which submitted its findings in March of 2009. Davey’s recommendation to remove 28 trees generated enormous public reaction. A month later, the Save Our Springs Alliance (SOS) asked Consulting Arborist Don Gardner to conduct an independent assessment of the trees targeted for removal. His findings called for fewer removals and more investigation of questionable cases.

In May of 2009, Bartlett Tree Experts (Bartlett) responded to a City of Austin Request for Proposals (RFP) to conduct a further assessment of 16 trees at Barton Springs Pool. Per the Scope of Work, Bartlett proposed thorough inspections of root collars; buttress, structural, and fine roots; lower and upper trunk condition; and crown condition. Bartlett did not secure this project, and we understand that the City of Austin chose not to award any contract on this RFP due to budgetary constraints.

In June of 2009, after further discussion among all interested parties, the City of Austin reduced to three the number of trees to be removed – all located in the children’s playground.

Raised Consciousness: An Assignment Evolves

Davey’s controversial assessment led to a community conversation that suggests good things for Austin’s trees. Energizing much of that conversation, Don Gardner led a group of citizens, which included City Arborist Michael Embesi, on a tour (recorded on YouTube; link to introduction at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdF5sR9VeD0) of selected subject trees. Mr. Gardner offered frank instruction on tree biology, impacts of construction, thorough risk assessment methods, need for better funding of urban forestry management, and other topics.

In October of 2009, a concerned citizen acquainted with Bartlett called us to discuss the Barton Springs Pool trees. As Don Gardner had pointed out, many of the trees that Davey had recommended for removal did not show evidence of a thorough below ground examination. The Davey report states that “a visual inspection of the quantity and density of both smaller feeder and larger anchor roots within the drip-line of the tree” was used in the assessment, as well as “Soil excavation using the air spade revealed that most trees have greatly diminished feeder roots, possibly resulting from high soil compaction (foot traffic) and high clay content of the soil”. Although the Davey Report provided much useful information, issues uncovered in the assessment were not pursued with further discovery. The condition of the structural support system of the tree below ground is as important as the visible, above-ground tree.

Also, when it comes to giving credit and taking credit, take a look at this email exchange that occurred after the trees were no longer in danger. It’s on the archive on this yahoogroup. First, a note from Dan Crow and then a response from Bill.

September 8, 2009

Dear all who were there for the trees,

Being a part of the community that saved the trees was one of the most rewarding events that has ever come along for me. When I go to the pool and see the trees I am so grateful and proud of all of us and Sara Hensley too. As time goes by the details of our success will fade away, but before they do I hope we will always remember that it was Bill Bunch and SOS that made it possible for us to be effective. They hired Don Gardner at a cost no one else could bear and without Don Gardner we could not have turned it around and the pool would have lost its shady haven for the next 100 years.

This little note may make Bill’s day, but that is not why it is being written. SOS Alliance has been the heart of the environmental community in Austin for as long as I can remember and they just demonstrated with the trees that they are who to turn to when the chips are down so I hope we will not forget what SOS did for us all and remember in our heart of hearts to give credit where credit is due and support where support is due.

Dan

———

9-8-09

Dan,

Thank you so very much for the kind words.  I’ll pass them along to our
board and staff.

What we did — all of us together — would not have mattered but for our
new PARD Director, Sara Hensley.

And she would not have been able to act if the community had not reacted
as they did.  It was a critical mass of Austin citizens who stood up for
the trees, and with heavy lifting from you, Abbe, Zoila, Guy LeBlanc,
Susan Bright, and several others, and Danette Chimenti and Linda
Guerrero on the Parks Board, we (all of us together) were able to save
the trees.

Now our challenge is to keep them saved, and to save the water too.  It
takes a community to save a community spring.

Bill
——–

Steve, at this point you had the hubris to chime in on the conversation and claim to have been a key player in saving the trees:

Dan,
The efforts of SOS to help save the trees is commendable and your note is worthy recognition for a job well done.

As past president of Friends of Barton Springs Pool(FBSP) I think some of the credit goes to the tireless effort by FBSP in raising the awareness to the issues at BSP that culminated in a $6.2M investment in short term projects(tree care being one of them) and a master plan that lays the ground work for developing solutions to a long list of issues that we all face at the pool.

Regards,
Steve Barnick

FBSP deserves no such credit!

You have been past president now for nearly a year. In fact, I don’t see your name listed on their site either as a board member or a committee leader.  Isn’t it time that you let the current (and unfortunately recurring) president Robin Cravey explain to the public what has motivated him to drive so many big construction projects that threaten the open use of the pool to the public, just as it was closed an hour early yesterday for your private press conference?

KK

And Peter Steinhardt added:To the conversation regarding who did what…….

There are some situations that are best served by saying no, some examples might be:

1.Add Ten inches of steel plate and concrete to the top of the bypass to keep it from floating

2.Cut down 30 of the largest and oldest trees surrounding Barton Springs Pool

3.Cut a slice diagonally across the hill on the south side to provide an ADA  compatible path

4.Provide access to the pool via an   500 foot path for folks who are disabled and don’t provide a toilet for them so they must go back up the 850 path to get in their cars and drive to a toilet

5.Close the pool early to make it easier for politicians to get some publicity.

6.Spend $1,000,000 on removing gravel from the pool when in all the years of discussion we have never committed to a plan that would solve the problem of deposits from flooding.

7.Spend  $1,000,000 on removing gravel from the pool when we have tried for years to rebuild the fauna in the pool and now is the most robust it has been in years and removing the gravel will remove the plants and risk the pool in the grandest way ever.

8.Stopping much of the maintenance at the pool while we wait for “master plan” improvements.

9.Prohibit the discussion of providing convenient toilets and hand washing at the playground in the master plan.

10.Prohibit the discussion of providing convenient toilets and hand washing at the theatre in the master plan.

11.Spend $200,000 on solar showers at Barton Springs and provide only the most minimum toilets and facilities for disabled folks.

12.Spend $200,000 on solar showers at Barton Springs when the city is mandating that we use less water.

13.Spend $$$$  for more facility when we need to reinitiate a maintenance plan for all the parks.

These are all schemes and ideas advanced and supported by FBSP and most prominently Robin Cravey.

Steve, I think you are interested in good stewardship regarding the pool and the springs.  I believe you are truly concerned about people and the quality of the parks we have.

Why and how can you endorse these things?  Why do you not call for real analysis and planning?  Why do you not say no, when Walter stands up and says he is going to cut down 30 trees?  Why do you not tell David Johns that the By Pass is in the same place it has always been and it is unnecessary to “keep it from floating”.  Why are you in a hurry to spend millions when we have such unfinished planning?

Considerations we need to make……

a. Figure out how to clean the pool without closing it a day each week.

b. Figure out how to remove the debris deposited by floods incrementally each year

c. Figure out how to accommodate folks of all needs at the pool

d. Figure out how to get the toilets and sinks clean all the time

e. Figure out how to keep the gates and parking lots available for use all the time

f. Figure out how to increase the ease of use and quality of use for the public

g. Figure out how to attract more quality guards and staff for all the parks

h. Figure out how to protect the water quality of the aquifer and the springs

i. Figure out how to explain to staff that being rude to the public is not productive…  I am referring to forcing folks to leave the pool at 9am, closing the pool early for a press conference, locking the gates before folks are gone, closing the entrances when the pool is open, blocking the flow of information, not providing information before meetings, spending city money for chairs, transportation, and whatever else for press conferences at the pool.. etc, etc.

The Master Plan was flawed almost from the start. I started as $500,000 for fixes at the pool and went to $6,000,000. It is operated as if it is autonomous and not part of the Parks Department.  This is not Your’s or Robin’s money.  This is Parks Department money and it needs to be spent in the context of what is needed, not what those who can lobby, can get.  You have never ever really considered what it would take to clean the pool efficiently.  You have never ever advocated for a restaurant that would be open and provide good service for the pool patrons.  You have never advocated for better facilities for the life guards.  You have never advocated for better emergency and elderly facilities.

New lights are a cool idea, but they are not necessary or even better.  New electrical service is a good idea, but at this time we have live wires hanging over the pool at great risk and because of the “master plan” no one is making a move to correct the way they are hung.

FBSP is an organization by charter that does not provide for its membership to vote on anything that makes a difference. The rank and file members of FBSP are not allowed to have copies of the membership list which totally defeats any possibility of their ever replacing Robin Cravey or replacing any board member chosen by him, especially considering the already top down structure of the organization set out in its by-laws. Open board positions are filled by a nominating committee controlled by the president and the issues and actions are dictated by the board and the president.  There are, no doubt, many wonderful folks that are a part of FBSP.  They are trusting that the board will use reason to guide the organization.  Step back for a moment and read the list at the top of this letter.  These are the things to say no to.  But, these are the things that FBSP has advocated for.

Peter Steinhardt

The following exchange between Peter Steinhardt, a BSP swimmer and Tom Nelson, head of the Aquatics Dept for Austin’s Parks and Recreation Department follows. Please read bottom up for correct chronology and to learn about the money interest that will be announced at the press conference on Thursday.

From: Nelson, Tom [tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us]

Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:12 AM
To: Peter Steinhardt
Cc: McNeeley, Kimberly
Subject: RE: safety signs

I understand your concerns.  However, the company performing the testing will be brining in equipment that morning.  We want to make sure that they have unimpeded space to mobilize the equipment.  I am sorry for the inconvenience, but we will resume with our regular schedule for the next Thursday clean. 

Have a great day.

Tom Nelson

Division Manager, Aquatics & South District
City of Austin, Parks and Recreation
(512) 974-9337
tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us

From: Peter Steinhardt [peter at steinhardt dot us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:08 AM
To: Nelson, Tom
Subject: RE: safety signs

Tom,

Is there a safety factor that affects swimmers that does not affect press conferences regarding the rock anchor testing?

My curiosity is active..  what is the deal about preparing for the rock anchor testing that would not allow swimming for the regular schedule?

P

Peter Steinhardt
Steinhardt & co
4518 Apache Pass
Austin, Texas 78745

From: Nelson, Tom [tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 10:56 AM
To: Peter Steinhardt
Cc: McNeeley, Kimberly
Subject: RE: safety signs

It is also to facilitate the rock anchor testing as well.

Division Manager, Aquatics & South District
City of Austin, Parks and Recreation
(512) 974-9337
tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us

From: Peter Steinhardt [peter at steinhardt dot us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 10:55 AM
To: Nelson, Tom
Subject: RE: safety signs

Tom,

Thanks for the info..  but why close the use of the pool an hour early…  it would make no difference to the press conference but a big difference to the public who use it everyday..  especially on Thursdays??

p

Peter Steinhardt
Steinhardt & co
4518 Apache Pass
Austin, Texas 78745

From: Nelson, Tom [tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us]

Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 10:46 AM
To: Peter Steinhardt
Cc: McNeeley, Kimberly
Subject: RE: safety signs

Peter

Thank you for your email.  We are closing the pool an hour early to facilitate both the council clean and to allow for setting up equipment for the rock anchor testing that will also occur on Thursday.  We are excited to be able to continue the testing on the bypass in order to develop the most appropriate repair.  During the event, Senator Kirk Watson will be presenting a check to the Friends of Barton Springs that will be utilized for the repair of the inlet grate on the bypass.  These funds will be held by Austin Parks Foundation. 

Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Thanks

Division Manager, Aquatics & South District
City of Austin, Parks and Recreation
(512) 974-9337
tom dot nelson at ci dot austin dot tx dot us

From: Peter Steinhardt [peter at steinhardt dot us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 9:53 AM
To: McNeeley, Kimberly
Cc: Hensley, Sara
Subject: safety signs

Kimberly,

Good morning..

As I was entering the pool today I saw a group of school children (Hates School District) who had come to swim with their coach.  Just as I entered I saw 3 kids and the coach standing on the “RED Painted Stripe” ( the one we talked about not having any lettering), they were moving over from where the “no diving” sign was to the red bar to jump into the pool.  I called to them to stop, just as another regular swimmer rushed up to them to stop them and to point out the submerged pipe.  We stopped them and they were glad we did.  It was obvious at that time that they had read the no diving but did not understand the “red bar” as meaning even more dangerous.

And a question…  why are we closing the pool an hour early on Thursday when it is already a short day and the pool is so busy in the morning?  It seems to me the press conference could wait an hour until the normal use of the pool is complete.  Many of the swimmers were taking notice of the announcement today and expressed irritation with the situation.  Why not just move the press conference to the 9:am pool closing time?



And another…  Are you aware that Senator Watson is giving the FBSP/City money for the “bypass”?  Where is this money from?  Will the money go to PARD or Watershed?

Thanks for your attention

Peter

Peter Steinhardt
Steinhardt & co
4518 Apache Pass
Austin, Texas 78745

On July 28, via the public discussion group email list, BartonSprings@Yahoogroups.com, City of Austin biologist Laurie Dries was questioned by Peter Steinhardt about why she isn’t screaming in protest of the plans to dig out the bottom of Barton Springs Pool. He has not received a response as of the date of this posting (8/9/2010) and sent repeated requests for one.

Laurie,
You have been swallowed by an egotistical, blind engineering trust.
The solutions are the problem.
Are these good ideas?
Dig out all the fauna in the pool now while it is at its most robust moment.
Remove the strata that it grows in.
Change the flow and force of the water.
Deliver the habitat to an engineering frenzy sponsored by a huge downturn in the economy.
Use the salamander to brand wasteful spending environmentally responsible.
Stall maintenance until there are less alternatives.
Trade common sense for political gain.
I offer you a much easier plan to protect the pool, the salamander, the budget, the swimmers and common sense.
Dont do anything regarding the gravel bar.  Leave it alone. Do not spend the money now.  Study the robustness of the pool.  Learn from the success of something.  Something you have not figured out yet.
The gravel bar can languish another five years and then be removed if the floods dont scour it out one year.  The pool does not need the trauma of construction about to be set upon it.
You seem to have been lulled by something that has a history of never being what it is represented to be.
What will happen if the crane or huge aggregate truck fall in the pool?
What will be the effect if you cannot keep the fauna alive or it does not transplant as you would like it to?
What if the dewatering causes catastrophic pollution, degradation or destruction of the salamander?
When will we have another time to study this robustness if they make a mess of it?
Has there ever been a construction project in Barton Springs that was completed on time and without significant unplanned difficulties?
Will you be the one we turn to when an explanation is needed because it just did not turnout as they told you it would?
You like to believe things will work out the way you want them to, but there is not enough caution in your words to warrant my trusting them.
Why are there so many secrets in the process?  There has never been an answer to the simple questions of;
Why not wait?
Why not go slowly and have the discussion about new or modified dams?
Why not vacuum again and not worry about the larger gravel?
Why not develop a solution that matches the problem  take some out every year?
Laurie,   please dont go along with this tasteless desire to do the project?
let’s not forget that Barton Springs is a precious natural
swimming hole, plants are part of that system. We humans didn’t create
the springs, we share the springs with Nature. Plants in Barton
Springs means life or death for a variety of wildlife; they are merely
an inconvenience for us who swim around them. Nature is dynamic,
always changing. Now there is a great abundance of plants; in the
future, floods will rip them out and carry them away. Anyone that
doesn’t want to swim with Nature has numerous swimming pools all over
Austin to choose from, where plants and other wildlife can be avoided.  [Peter Steinhardt] quoted from Lauries last email

__________________________
Peter Steinhardt

__________________________
Peter Steinhardt
Steinhardt & co
4518 Apache Pass
Austin, Texas 78745
office 512-443-2410
mobile 512-762-2646

PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD

Tuesday, July 27, 2010 – 6:00 p.m.

Boards and Commissions Room, Conference Room 1101, City Hall, 301 W. 2nd Street

3. Action Item Make a recommendation to the Director regarding morning charging

hours at Barton Springs Pool for fiscal year 2011

Location: 2201 Barton Springs Road

Request: To begin charging a fee at Barton Springs pool beginning at 8:00 a.m. instead of 9:00 a.m.

Committee Recommendation:  N/A

Staff: Jodi Jay:jody.jay@ci.austin.tx.us and Tom Nelson: tom.nelson@ci.austin.tx.us

PARKS BOARD MEMBERS

Linda H. Guerrero, Chair

Sara Hatfield Marler

Hill Abell

Carol Lee

Jeff Francell

Jane Rivera

Jerry Perales

The following was posted in bartonsprings@yahoogroups.com on 7/25/2010 by Laurie dot Dries at ci dot austin dot tx dot us:

The plants are a critical component of a healthy environment in the Springs. In fact, they are what has kept the floating nuisance algae at bay (currently less than 1% of the surface area of the water), and helped maintain the beautiful clear water we see now.  We have high discharge from the aquifer (~95 cfs), which in the past has been a time of murkier water because the flow would stir up the loose sediment and send it up into the water column. That combined with disturbance from us swimmers would decrease visibility to a couple of feet by evening’s end. However, since the plants have become established, the water is less murky because the root systems of the plants have captured sediment and keep it anchored to the substrate. Quite a contrast with the floating algae of 2006….The abundance of the plants is a beautiful reflection of the success of our efforts to nudge Barton Springs back toward a better, more resilient ecological condition, as it was once was decades ago.   Far more people have told me that they love the plants and don’t want any removed, than have complained to me.  Most swimmers that I have heard from prefer to swim in the deep channel not only to avoid emerging plants but also because the water current is less strong there. There is more than enough room for us to swim the length of Barton Springs and avoid plants; swimming in a straight line isn’t a requirement at Barton Springs, we don’t have lanes. Enjoy it.

That said, there is a plan for tending the plants, it’s just a good year and they are growing quickly.  We doing our best to keep up with their growth.   Actually, there are short- and long-term plans.  The short-term is trimming, trimming, trimming as often as we can. Barton Springs lifeguards are allowed to trim the columns of plants outside of salamander habitat as necessary.  Those plants in salamander habitat (the Beach and springs areas) are protected and must be tended by City of Austin staff listed on our USFWS permits, or under their direct supervision. The flexible plants whose columns bend in the flow of water need to be left alone (water stargrass, coontail, water primrose — stop by a check out the pretty little yellow flowers on some of them). They provide cover and food for salamander prey, and habitat for small fishes and aquatic insects.  They also tend not to have niusance green algae growing on them. The Salamander Conservation Program staff (Me, Liza, Mike, Todd) trim and manage these plants.  However, the vast majority of plants on the Beach are those with stiff, spiky stalks and leaves, with nuisance green algae around them.  This species, Sagittaria platyphylla, is native to this area, and it has spread like a virus in Barton Springs! So, this year, Barton Springs managers and lifeguards are also allowed to trim the stalks and leaves of these plants whenever they can.  Ultimately we will replace these plants with other species more suitable for the area.

This leads to the long-term plan for plants.  With the removal of the gravel bar, we could lose much of the plant life of the Springs unless we do something to counteract it. The plants on the gravel bar and on the Beach abutting that area will all have to be uprooted before the work area is isolated with a cofferdam and de-watered.  All of these except the Sagittaria are plants that we want to keep because they bend in the water flow, have small, isolated root balls, and don’t tend to have niusance algae captured within them. Instead of just losing these plants, My colleagues and I will be removing most of the plants and holding them in the water upstream.  Once most of the gravel is removed, we will use these plants to re-stock the area (a layer a gravel will be left on the limestone bottom for this). The exception is the Sagittaria.  Since this plant species is such a nuisance on the Beach and blocks flow, we will remove all of it there and re-stock with the other species of plants, some of which we already have in the Springs.

Here’s the cool part.  The Sagittaria plants are perfect native plants for bank stabilization and re-vegetation. So, those removed from Barton Springs will be used on other projects around the City, such as re-vegetation on Ladybird Lake.  This will save the cost of purchasing plants. This means there will be opportunities this fall to help uproot these plants. I will let you all know when you can help.

Ya’ll, let’s not forget that Barton Springs is a precious natural swimming hole, plants are part of that system. We humans didn’t create the springs, we share the springs with Nature. Plants in Barton Springs means life or death for a variety of wildlife; they are merely an inconvenience for us who swim around them.  Nature is dynamic, always changing. Now there is a great abundance of plants; in the future, floods will rip them out and carry them away. Anyone that doesn’t want to swim with Nature has numerous swimming pools all over Austin to choose from, where plants and other wildlife can be avoided.

Cheers,
Laurie

The note from Laurie prompted this response from Bill Bunch, a lawyer for the Save Our Springs Alliance, bill at sosalliance dot org.

Laurie,

Thank you so much for this summary and your observations.

I remain a bit concerned about labelling any of the native plants a
“nuisance,” although I understand the use of that word and that
perspective in light of how heavy the growth has become in some areas.
Certainly trimming and some removal makes sense — I’m just concerned
that we not go overboard.

I remain especially concerned about the dredging operation and how
revegetation will take place. If the bottom is scrapped, will a layer of
gravel provide sufficient substrate for plants to recolonize? Seems a
significant top layer should be cut and preserved and replaced, to the
greatest extent possible.

As you have described, the water quality and habitat benefits of the
plants far exceed any disruption to swimming.

Again, many thanks,
BillLaurie,

Thank you so much for this summary and your observations.

I remain a bit concerned about labelling any of the native plants a
“nuisance,” although I understand the use of that word and that
perspective in light of how heavy the growth has become in some areas.
Certainly trimming and some removal makes sense — I’m just concerned
that we not go overboard.

I remain especially concerned about the dredging operation and how
revegetation will take place. If the bottom is scrapped, will a layer of
gravel provide sufficient substrate for plants to recolonize? Seems a
significant top layer should be cut and preserved and replaced, to the
greatest extent possible.

As you have described, the water quality and habitat benefits of the
plants far exceed any disruption to swimming.

Again, many thanks,
Bill

The following was posted in bartonsprings@yahoogroups.com on 7/25/2010 by Laurie dot Dries at ci dot austin dot tx dot us:

Hi all,
It’s been awhile since I posted anything and, given the the frustration evident in some recent posts, it seems time for a little update on the bypass.  I understand it may seem as if there hasn’t been any progress with the bypass, but, in fact, there has been quite a bit.  In May we did have a preferred repair design and had submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for their review. However, at that time, some of you all (Dan, Peter, Roy, Elizabeth and others) contacted Watershed Protection Department director Victoria Li to express dissatisfaction with an aspect of the preferred design (increasing the thickness of the concrete slab that is both the roof of the bypass and the north sidewalk). In response, Ms. Li and City staff met with these folks and followed up on their suggestion that we get a second opinion on stability of the bypass and repair options.  The City has hired another engineering firm (AEComm) to acquire a second opinion.  One of the suggested repair options provided by this firm is to use small (3-4-inch diameter) metal cylindrical rock anchors to attache the bypass to the underlying bedrock.  To determine if using these anchors is possible, we are in the process of testing whether they will work on the bypass.  This examination consists of installing one anchor in three locations along the bypass and testing the resistance of each to movement.  If the underlying bedrock is strong enough and the anchors stay in place, we will be able to consider revising the previous repair design. Once AEComm has the results of the rock anchor testing, they will submit a final report to the City staff.  Once City staff have that report, there will be more information that can be sent out to you guys.

Review of the previous preferred option by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service halted when we decided to acquire a second opinion.  Once consideration of the second opinion is finished and a final design is chosen, my colleagues and I can begin to revise the assessment of biological effects on protected species and their habitat.  This biological assessment not only requires a final design, but also the detail and material methods to be used during construction as well as a numerical estimate of number of protected salamanders that may be harmed (known as “Take”). When this biological assessment is completed, it will be submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for review. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has 135 days for this review, after which we can continue with scheduling repair.

The first step of testing occurred couple of Thursdays ago and the next step will occur one of the Thursdays in August (hopefully the first couple of weeks, depends on schedules of AEComm and their subcontractors). The testing will be conducted while the Pool is closed for cleaning, so it will not alter access for recreation. Of course, anything disturbed will be restored by the end of the testing day. Their will be little if any visible evidence that testing occurred.

As soon as I know the exact date, I will post it here.
Also, updates on the bypass, hydrodynamic modeling, and pilot projects will be presented at the next Parks and Environmental Boards Subcommittee meeting in August.

That’s all about bypass.  I will post a separate message regarding plants in the Springs…..

Cheers,
Laurie

Barton Springs Pool Maintenance
Second Wednesday of each month
from 10:00 until 11:00 a.m.
at Barton Springs Pool
- This is a meeting between Parks and Recreation staff
and citizens interested in the maintenance practices at the pool. Come with your comments and questions.
Open to public.

Ask in the office who is managing the meeting and where to find them. It usually will be Wayne Simmons and it usually starts on the benches in front of the office, but will move around the site as needed.

Sent to Victoria Li, Director of Watershed Protection by Dan Crow:July 14, 2010

Victoria,

This morning at the twice a month maintenance meeting at Barton Springs Pool,  Wayne Simmons said that the flow of water from the pool through the bottom of the tunnel is causing more erosion and the holes covered by the plastic sheet on the bottom of the pool are getting bigger and had to be plugged with rocks .

The letter to Marc Ott explained that it might be the fall of 2011 before the bypass tunnel repairs can even begin. That is long time to keep all the temporary measures in place that are there only because water is getting into the tunnel from underneath. Plugging the holes would allow the ugly safety tape that is blocking access to the lawn to be removed and the lawn could again accommodate people who prefer shade on the north side. It would allow the pool ladder on the north side to be replaced and swimmers would no longer be roped off from the safety rail on the lower half of north bank. These things are merely a few by products of repairing the holes.

1. The project will almost certainly be delayed until fall of 2011 if for any reason the rock anchor solution should not prove to be feasible or appropriate.
2.Currently the holes in the floor are the only manifest, functional problem with the tunnel and they need to be fixed to stop erosion under the tunnel.
3.Plugging the holes is inexpensive and the first step for all future repairs including the joints and repaving the floor .
4 Plugging the holes will safely extend the life of the tunnel which is currently bypassing storm water 25% more efficiently than it will after the proposed $3.2 million dollars in repairs restricts the tunnel capacity.
5.Every year of service the city squeezes out of the bypass tunnel without major expenditures is a financial boon to the city that will save $150,000 a year just on interest costs.
6.Adding a gate at the downstream end of the tunnel would guard against the sudden loss of pool water even if larger holes should develop.

Plugging the holes in the tunnel floor will give you a way to control the water in the bypass tunnel that you do not now have, and this will open more options for testing and design and is the first step of any repair. Plugging the holes and adding the gate will take off the  pressure to make hurried repairs, and it will allow time to get the job done right and in a financially responsible way.

Dan

Austin’s City Council Place 4, our very own regular swimmer shared this news:

Hello All –

I’ve been following the free swim discussion with interest, since I’ve seen it offer real benefit in many ways.  As I understand it, PARD will be proposing the following:

Morning –

currently 5-9am free swim, they clear out pool at 9 and charge.

proposed change – 5-8am free swim, will start charging at 8, but will not clear pool, so if already there will not be charged to stay (starting March 2011)

Evening – no changes to free swim

PARD is hoping to get this to the Parks & Rec Board soon, perhaps this month.

Laura

Laura Morrison

Austin City Council, Place 4

512-974-2258

512-974-1886 (Fax)

Laura.Morrison@ci.austin.tx.us

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/morrison.htm