Nabil
Al-Hadithy, PhD
PO
Box 11734
Berkeley,
CA 94712
This
is a proposal that I have made as a Berkeley citizen. I have also suggested, as
a city employee, to EBRPD to consider the concept. There are a lot of questions
unanswered but also a lot of misinformation given to inhibit any discussions of
using the Berkeley Meadows as anything beyond leaving it as is, with no
improvements. This was a municipal dump, folks. It may have toxics in it. It is
not pristine. It is not natural. It needs improvements to keep the toxics from
migrating to the Bay. It also happens to be part of Berkeley’s coastline.
Finally, please this proposal calls for a feasibility study; that is, I don’t
claim to have all the answers.
Go
to the Arcata sewage treatment plant web site at: http://hometown.aol.com/erikschiff/municip.htm
and see the possibilities. Lets use our imagination and recreate a wetland fit
for digesting some of the pollution generated by Berkeley and fit for a
wildlife sanctuary, an education center, a place for public art.
After
making a presentation to CESP I heard criticism and I have tried to accommodate
some of the concerns voiced there.
I also
have heard a lot of misinformation and I have tried to address some of that
below.
Propose
that two major Berkeley creeks get day-lighted and re-routed to a filtration
mechanism at the Berkeley Meadows.
Filter to remove larger particles and perhaps oils. Filtered water then goes through a series of
engineered freshwater ponds and channels at Berkeley Meadows. The Meadows will have wetland fauna and
flora to digest organic pollutants and additionally filter particles from the
two creeks. Series of ponds can be
built into the Bay to the north of the Berkeley Meadows that provide additional
area for settling and bio-filtration. Gradually, as the waterway goes into
north basin, the water becomes saline. Percentage of Meadows which gets
converted into a wetland is not determined. Additional saltwater marshes can be
created to the north of current Schoolhouse Creek.
·
Daylighting
of two creeks
·
Pre-treatment
of two creeks
·
Meeting
Phase II of NPDES Permit
·
Ecological
Educational forum for City Schools
·
Ecological
preserve for wildlife
·
Public
Arts forum
·
Recreation
area
·
Improve
valuable land
·
Improve
cap over an old municipal landfill
·
Better
control of hydrology by placing an engineered cap on landfill
·
Control
and observe migration of toxic contaminants in Berkeley landfill
·
Remove
physical obstacles on the Berkeley Meadows
Berkeley
has four creeks directly entering the Bay directly, these are
at Potter St, University St, Virginia St and Gilman St. These creeks pour
untreated water directly into the Bay.
The creeks that pour into Aquatic Park get somewhat filtered inside the
park lagoons before being flushed into the Bay.
Phase
II of the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination Service (NPDES)
Permit will be more difficult to implement without taking direct action to
clean up the storm water outfalls into the Bay. The Second Phase of the Permit may require the City to put
filters into parking lots, pretreatment at 33% of storm drains and additional
controls on what is termed invisible pollution on construction sites. Taking the wetland pretreatment approach
will go a long way towards meeting such requirements.
Phase
II NPDES Permit requirements for larger municipalities will cost hundreds of
millions of dollars to implement. The
City of Los Angeles is looking at over a billion dollars if they are obliged to
pre-treat all outfalls that enter the river and ocean with a filter mechanism.
The
existing Berkeley Meadows is an uneven flat meadow that covers a former
municipal landfill. The landfill has
toxic waste identified by the RWQCB.
The meadow is covered with a poorly constructed impermeable cap. The cap has concrete and metal poking
through it creating a physical hazard.
The breaches in the cap can mobilize the toxic contaminants to migrate
to the Bay. Re-engineering the cap can provide a proper impermeable surface
that will stabilize the contaminants below the surface.
The
City is also required to maintain the shoreline at the Virginia Street
extension from subsidy and flooding.
Incorporating the shoreline into the wetland area could save these
costs.
Dogs
and people constantly go through this causing it to be of limited use for
wildlife. This proposal can create a fenced-off area with limited paths for
people and domestic animals. It can
also incorporate islands for greater benefit for wildlife.
Large
spaces like this Berkeley Meadows wetland project can also be used for large
public art exhibits.
The
wetland can be designed as a principal study area for school science and
environmental studies projects.
·
Loss
of Virginia Street frontage
·
Costs
While
costs are expected to be a significant impediment to this proposal, one should
look at the potential other benefits one can get out this project. First of all are the cost benefits from
stabilizing the hydrology and checking the migration of pollutants from the
Berkeley Meadows (subsurface toxic
contaminants) into the Bay. Second,
are the added benefits from stabilizing the shoreline by creating a
wetland. Thirdly, there are advantages
to creating wetlands in terms of availability of funding from private and
public sectors.
This
proposal has been discussed with various city staff as well as members of the
Community Environmental Advisory Commission, the Urban Creeks Council with
positive response. We envision widespread support for the proposal.
ALTERNATIVE
PLAN (TO ADDRESS SOME CONCERNS OF CESP)
The
idea could have many variations. For example, a smaller amount of the Berkeley
Meadows can be converted into freshwater marsh and it may serve Schoolhouse
Creek only. Strawberry Creek could be
opened up and channeled south through the Brickyard and salt marshes could be
created along the coastal strip and coastline.
Another
idea of using less Berkeley Meadows could be to use more shallow mudflat turned
over into a marsh.
MISINFORMATION
An
often-repeated criticisms:
a.
This meadow is pristine and
should not be messed up. Not so, it is a badly kept city dump and needs a lot of work to get
it up to spec. Thistles, off-leash animals have inhibited the full potential of
wildlife at the Meadow. The idea of
turning it into a wetland preserve would improve the quality.
b.
The meadow is a preserved
wetland.
Not so, it is only a wetland when it rains. Otherwise it is open space with
less than stellar ecological use. It is
only a wetland because some wetland plants are observed during a rain and the
rain puddles on the clay cap that was placed on top of the former city dump.
c.
The cost of converting part
of the Meadows into freshwater wetland is prohibitively expensive. Not so. The landfill is
mostly non hazardous but I expect we will find some hazardous materials. The
relocation of materials can be done on site or removed off site. Costs will be great but magnitude not
determined.
d.
To place a new cap on the
dump will destroy the existing bird and other wildlife sanctuary. I do not believe so.
People tend to believe the land does not have a cap. That is not so.
There is a cap, it is in bad condition, it has not been maintained and needs to
be improved. EBRPD differs in this opinion, feeling the cap is serviceable. I
do not believe there has been annual maintenance over the past 30 years and I
have observed concrete and metal poking through the cap. Not the entire Meadows needs to be
converted. It is possible to keep 50% or more of the site as a meadow.
e.
Replacing or improving the
cap is a regulatory nightmare and will cost a whole lot of money. No so. The regulators
would be happy to see the cap improved.
f.
Berkeley wants to use the
park as a sewage treatment plant. Marshes and wetlands naturally digest many oils
and other pollutants in a creek. Our
shorelines were largely marshes and wetlands. Now they are gone. This is a
small attempt to reintroduce these rich ecosystems. It is nothing new. The City
of Arcata has done the same thing with their sewage treatment plant effluent.
Go to Arcata web site and enjoy: http://hometown.aol.com/erikschiff/municip.htm Please note, the proposal here is to put a
filtration system before the creeks go into the Bay. This site should be a compromise between what is good for the
people of California and what is good for the people of Berkeley. To deprive
the people of Berkeley from the efficacious and proper use of their coastline
is grossly unfair. Allegations made that the marsh will pick up metals,
pesticides, etc from brake lining etc and become toxic for the marsh organisms
are fair questions and I do not have knowledge to answer such a question. I
would suggest that a feasibility study, which this proposal calls for, is the
proper venue for such questions.