Comments on: Gannon: Marist can’t cut trees

By: flood safety

flood safety — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:35:37 +0000

[...] … Here is a video about flood safety for children and adults. There are many things one can …Reporter Newspapers Blog Archive Gannon: Marist can't cut …… a letter to Marist's attorneys in mid-February asking for the legal basis for the school's [...]

By: A Patterson

A Patterson — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:30:00 +0000

Ok, I'm confused. Commission Gannon has supported tree removal in other flood plains/wetlands, such as in the Mason Mill area so that a trail could be built to enhance the park and nearby neighborhood. Can someone explain how the Dekalb Commissioners can justify removing trees in one flood plain but not the other? Or is this more of a political issue that's been spun under an environmental one?

By: A Patterson

A Patterson — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:30:00 +0000

Ok, I’m confused. Commission Gannon has supported tree removal in other flood plains/wetlands, such as in the Mason Mill area so that a trail could be built to enhance the park and nearby neighborhood. Can someone explain how the Dekalb Commissioners can justify removing trees in one flood plain but not the other? Or is this more of a political issue that’s been spun under an environmental one?

By: Jim Smith

Jim Smith — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:54:00 +0000

What Ms. Zickert and Marist would like everybody to ignore is that net DBH, or the sum of the diameters of the replacement trees is a totally useless measure for replacing mature hardwood trees with regard to floodplain issues. To suggest that a scattering of 14 ft. tall saplings with minimal leafing, no matter the total diameter of trunks, could replace the water storage and flood water mitigation ability of a mature 60 or 80 foot tall hardwood with full canopy, is ridiculous. Sure, it's the standard replacement measure that most weak governments have agreed on to satisfy builder's lobbies and attorneys, but strong governments have followed Ms. Gannon's recent epiphany, "NO Building in Floodplains". Has nobody been reading the recent series in the AJC ? Yeah, permeable concrete is nice, but it's still concrete where water-absorbing AND RETAINING vegetation used to be.

By: Jim Smith

Jim Smith — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:54:00 +0000

What Ms. Zickert and Marist would like everybody to ignore is that net DBH, or the sum of the diameters of the replacement trees is a totally useless measure for replacing mature hardwood trees with regard to floodplain issues. To suggest that a scattering of 14 ft. tall saplings with minimal leafing, no matter the total diameter of trunks, could replace the water storage and flood water mitigation ability of a mature 60 or 80 foot tall hardwood with full canopy, is ridiculous. Sure, it’s the standard replacement measure that most weak governments have agreed on to satisfy builder’s lobbies and attorneys, but strong governments have followed Ms. Gannon’s recent epiphany, “NO Building in Floodplains”. Has nobody been reading the recent series in the AJC ? Yeah, permeable concrete is nice, but it’s still concrete where water-absorbing AND RETAINING vegetation used to be.