Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Chostner wants more action on mill levy question

  1. #21
    Forum Troll Gershon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sandra View Post
    Colorado Springs was never really an industrial city like Pueblo - with the steel mill and all. There were some technical factories near Garden of the Gods that put together electronic equipment, but it wasn't the kind of operation that created pollutants and runoff.

    I don't recall there being any farms in Colorado Springs other than the turf farm. Out east are where you'd see the farms and ranches. Seems that back about 40 years ago they were prominent than today.

    Gosh, those were the days. Fresh air, peace and quiet - ahhhhh!

    Where I live, I can hear a rooster in the distance - maybe a couple of blocks away. Well, I haven't heard him lately, so maybe someone got in trouble for keeping him - but hearing that sound every morning to me is quite pleasant.
    Sarah,

    On the farming, I meant along the Fountain Creek on the way to Pueblo. A lot of areas have housing now. A lot of the land closer to Pueblo isn't farmed anymore.

    Maybe one day I'll go to the Historical Museum near the train station and see what I can learn.

  2. #22
    Forum Troll Gershon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sandra View Post
    Colorado Springs was never really an industrial city like Pueblo - with the steel mill and all. There were some technical factories near Garden of the Gods that put together electronic equipment, but it wasn't the kind of operation that created pollutants and runoff.

    I don't recall there being any farms in Colorado Springs other than the turf farm. Out east are where you'd see the farms and ranches. Seems that back about 40 years ago they were prominent than today.

    Gosh, those were the days. Fresh air, peace and quiet - ahhhhh!

    Where I live, I can hear a rooster in the distance - maybe a couple of blocks away. Well, I haven't heard him lately, so maybe someone got in trouble for keeping him - but hearing that sound every morning to me is quite pleasant.
    Sarah,

    On the farming, I meant along the Fountain Creek on the way to Pueblo. A lot of areas have housing now. A lot of the land closer to Pueblo isn't farmed anymore.

    Maybe one day I'll go to the Historical Museum near the train station and see what I can learn.

  3. #23
    Forum Troll Gershon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    438

    Default

    I've been researching some history of the Fountain Creek. I found this article in the Chieftain. It says the water was unfit to drink in the early 1900's.

    "Fountain Creek is not broken,Ē said Gary Barber, who will leave in January after nearly a year as interim director of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. ďItís acting like a river. There are times we donít like the way it acts, but that doesnít mean itís not acting like a river.Ē"

    The idea of a Greenway district bothers me. It sounds like they want a grass park along the Fountain Creek through Pueblo. It would probably attract a lot of people, but I'd hate to lose the natural beauty of the creek.

  4. #24
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gershon View Post
    I've been researching some history of the Fountain Creek. I found this article in the Chieftain. It says the water was unfit to drink in the early 1900's.

    "Fountain Creek is not broken,Ē said Gary Barber, who will leave in January after nearly a year as interim director of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. ďItís acting like a river. There are times we donít like the way it acts, but that doesnít mean itís not acting like a river.Ē"

    The idea of a Greenway district bothers me. It sounds like they want a grass park along the Fountain Creek through Pueblo. It would probably attract a lot of people, but I'd hate to lose the natural beauty of the creek.
    On the purity of water in the 1900's . . People were about half stupid about that up until the mid fifties, actually. Even though old Cowboy lore always spoke of "Drinking upstream from the herd" few thought much about it, or, apparently cared. I can remember, as a Kid, on my first trip up the Arkansas Canyon, seeing outhouses built out over the flowing river . . And few ever considered where they built/dug the outhouse in relation to the well . . .

    And we still fail to realize what all the contributing factors of stream pollution are . . Livestock concentrations, be it Cows, Horses or Hogs, contribute heavily to stream pollution, especially in a short and periodic drainage like the Fountain. Anything on the ground when we have one of our small but ferocious frog strangling thunderstorms, ends up in the creek as a concentration . .

    It just does what it's always done and washes all that crap down the flow line, which changes often itself. And that, in turn, leaves the E-Coli and all the other bacteria created by animal waste and trash where ever it is when the water goes down. Usually concentrating lots of it in the sands prevalent below the Fountain area into Pueblo . .

    And I have a problem with the "Greenway Concept" as well . . Because we're Human, and have this tremendous Human EGO to satisfy, "We know better than nature" . . We'll build a lawn covered creek bottom (flood plain), call it a "park" or better yet, "A GREENWAY" and of course, straighten out all those eroding meanders, clean up all those weeds, cattails, wild and uncontrolled elm trees and make it, on the whole, "Presentable" . . In the process, destroy the natural habitat for all those deer, foxes, birds and critters that some of us would miss were they not there . . .

    And then we'll rebuild it everytime there's a frogstrangler someplace upstream. Until some politician says "We've got to do something about all the water that comes down and destroys our beautiful Greenway. It's costing too much. We need to put a dam up the creek and control it" . . And Colorado Springs will jump on that because then, they would be absolved of "Stormwater" responsibility . .


    The beginning of the end . . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gershon View Post
    I've been researching some history of the Fountain Creek. I found this article in the Chieftain. It says the water was unfit to drink in the early 1900's.

    "Fountain Creek is not broken,Ē said Gary Barber, who will leave in January after nearly a year as interim director of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. ďItís acting like a river. There are times we donít like the way it acts, but that doesnít mean itís not acting like a river.Ē"....
    Basically new growth causes storm water to be put into drains and unnaturally dumped into the Fountain rather than soak into the ground. The SDS brings water from elsewhere and concentrates it into a single unnatural flow to the Colo Spgs area and it also goes into the Fountain. It is estimated SDS water will cause an unnatural increase of up to 40% Fountain flow.

    This subject has clearly been addressed in no uncertain terms that The Fountain has an unnatural flow increase due to Colo Spgs growth. Colo Spgs has refused to mitigate the problems caused by their ever increasing stormwater and wastewater they send down stream. Gary Barber's statements are either pathetic ignorance or outright slimey untruthfullness.

    "The Fountain Creek board got its first look at a regional stormwater study by Summit Economics ... The study, which will be finalized after the sponsors have a chance to review it, also points out that Colorado Springs pays only $4.63 per capita for stormwater protection, less than one-tenth of the Front Range average. Pueblo pays $25.81 per capita..." May 1, 2012 Pueblo Chieftain"
    Itís been estimated that SDS will cause a 40 percent increase in streamflow down Fountain Creek. With that new baseline, plus the increase in impervious surfaces due to growth of the Springs, a large cloudburst there could cause substantial flooding in Pueblo and towns to the east along the Arkansas River. September 23, 2012 Pueblo Chieftain
    The impressive care and concern for their downstream neighbors Colo Spgs so cheaply communicates with smoothie blah blah is made laughable by their refusal to physically perform.

  6. #26
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    A couple of things here . .

    First, Colorado Springs "Growth' has come to a screeching halt . . The developer who was going to develop the Banning-Lewis Ranch folded. It's been sold off in several parcels, with most of it going to a energy developer (Oil and Gas drilling) . . There is a parcel on the Southwestern end that is in the hands of a developer, but if completely developed, and sold, will be only about a fifth or less of the original master plan . . .

    Secondly, Colorado Springs can do what Pueblo has done for their "Stormwater drainage" and add the concrete and asphalt walks, drives and parking slabs to the user's water bills . . That doesn't become a "Tax" and need a voter's approval, it's a "Fee" . .

    As for their "Wastewater', they have a steeper hill to climb than Pueblo, simply because they don't have the flow to dilute, currently.

    But, IF . . they meet EPA regulated PPM into a slightly greater flow and recycle certain amounts of non potable water downhill from the higher elevations, including Palmer Lake and Monument (SDS Customers) they will assist in a much cleaner Fountain Creek, and keep a relatively steady flow in the flow line. That might also help maintain the same flow line when the Creek comes up from those thunderstorms in the basin . .

    You also have to understand that all the water pumped to Colorado Springs isn't going to come back down the river, as "Wastewater"on the same day, or ever . . It's estimated that up to 20% of it will be lost to evaporation, absorption, etc . . and . . If . . All those houses are built tomorrow, 75% of them are going to irrigate their front and back yards and grow grass, etc . . How much consumption that might actually be is anybody's guess, but in Pueblo, it's a bunch . . so that's water that "Ain't coming back" either . .

    On the "Stormwater" thing, your Pueblo County Commissioners and City Council already (and very unwisely) signed an "IGA" (Intergovernmental Agreement) with Colorado Springs and the County Commissioners granted the permit . . It's a done deal, unless we get some County Commissioners with some Cojones who'll jerk the permit because of Colorado Spring's failure to maintain the conditions of the initial agreement. Currently, the Colorado Spring's City Council and Mayor is telling us that part of the agreement is voided because it hadn't been voted upon by Spring's voters (who rejected the "Stormwater Tax") when the agreements were signed and the permits issued . .

    I think it's worth another look, simply because they broke the agreement. But, can we afford to have principles that cost that much . . ?

    I do have a question for anybody out there that's a "Water Expert" . .

    If . . It's illegal to catch and keep the water that runs off your roof (and it is, because that water's already spoken for) and the water that runs off my concrete slab (that costs me and extra $3 a month on my water bill) is somebody else's, how can we mandate that anyone build and keep a "Retention Pond" to catch "excess runoff"?

    How 'bout you, Dan? Any answers here . . they're non political . .
    Last edited by large; 10-03-2012 at 06:14 PM.
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •