Re: 83rd & Rosehill Public Meeting #1 - Project No. 04075
|
|
|
|
Photos from the July 13, 2005 Workshop
|
The following are the minutes taken at the first public meeting for residents of 83rd & Rosehill. The meeting was at City Hall in Lenexa from 6:00 p.m. to 7:10 p.m.
Ron Norris opened the meeting with introductions of city staff present (Tom Jacobs, Mike Beezhold, Mike Novak) and the consultants Patti Banks and Laurie Brown with Patti Banks Associates (PBA). The attendees (residents) were then asked to introduce themselves. Ron explained that there would be 2-3 meetings with the purpose of obtaining feedback from the residents regarding the stream restoration project in their back yards. The City understands:
• The project has not met all of the neighborhoods or the City’s expectations.
• There are some structural solutions needed which should cause minimal disruption/impact for the neighbors
• The greatest concern is related to the vegetation
The Goals of the stream restoration project are:
• Water Quality and Quantity
• Stream Stability
Meeting these goals was necessary in order for the City to get their permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. The City will continue in this direction however, they intend to address concerns of the residents in the process.
Ron described this second year for the project as being similar to the “Perfect Storm” – this was an ideal year for plant growth.
Ron then explained he was involving PBA as the facilitator and the process of the meeting. He stated that this initial meeting was to address concerns about the project and to leave discussions of solutions to the next 2 meetings.
Patti then laid the general ground rules for the meeting. She stated that the City’s desire for a stream restoration solution was not unlike the approach taken with the Whispering Hills neighborhood regarding Lake Lenexa. She then led residents through a discussion of the following:
What worked well?
• Drainage
• 99% of project goals achieved
• 1% problem with grasses and weeds
• Construction easement – contractor/City worked well with homeowners
There was a question related to the applicability of water quality – is there a goal and is it achievable?
What’s not working?
• Too much poison ivy (didn’t have prior to project implementation)
• Grasses obscure trees and shrubs
• Shrubs along creek shoulder have washed out (13213 83rd Ter.)
• Don’t like the coir logs – wish they were gone
• Wildflowers haven’t performed
• Grass is way too dense and too tall
• Predators hiding in grass (fox)
• Grass was green in the spring, then went brown and laid over in yards
What would they like to see?
• 6” grass that stays green all year
• More wildflowers
• No coconut mat/coir logs, if used, residents would prefer not to see them
• Nothing over 12”
• Want to be able to see and to access creek
• Separation between yards and riparian area – perhaps a rock wall
• Provided examples of sites they feel look better:
o 103rd & Rock Creek
o Village Presbyterian Church
• Beginning of spring the residents would like to be allowed to mow
• Consistent/uniform look
• Fewer signs (especially do not like the prairie restoration signs at each end of the project)
• Tree replacement – yes
• Want information on walnut trees and natives
• Area to be green into fall
• Have to be able to see the animals
• Property values to stay the same or increase do to the riparian corridor – no homes have been put on the market since the project was installed
• Didn’t like the Do Not Mow signs at back of lots a year ago.
• Access to creek using stepping stones from individual yards.
• No native grass on top of culvert
o Buffalo grass?
• If signs need to be present, shorten 2’
What have the homeowners been doing?
• Pulled weeds
• Weed whipping to 6”-8”
Additional Discussion
• Want rye grass to disappear – explained rye grass is 2-3 yr perennial that will be out competed as other natives establish
• Wildflowers are developing, need to manage rye grass to allow wildflowers to be more prevalent – mowing 1-2 times in spring
• Gabion baskets are being washed out – City will do grade control to resolve the problem of the stream down cutting.
• Johnson grass is a concern – need homeowners to help remove
• Area cannot go back to turf however, an acceptable solution can be reached
• In some areas project has over achieved restoration goals. In this case need to refine plantings so that they also work for the neighbors
• Part of the stream corridor that is level with the yards is the area that the neighbors would like changed
• Providing a consistent edge is important – helps define yards from restoration area
• Ground cover vegetation is generally not a good solution – often have poor root systems
• Home owners would like to be able to help manage area – also would like training/booklet on what are good plants and what are not as well as how to manage bad weeds (p. ivy, Johnson grass)
• Owners were told not to touch any of the plantings
• Timing – cannot do anything now with the vegetation. This is a good time to develop solutions and plans.
• Can neighbors expect change next spring?
o Management
o Plantings
• What can be done about cut, dead grass? Can remove and compost (put out with yard waste)
• City wants to maintain natives on culvert as a demonstration that they are moving away from turf grass as planting solution.
Ron explained that this is a learning project for both the City and the home owners. The City did not understand the level of maintenance this type of project would initially require. Will work on having:
• Maintenance Plan
• Border Shape – define project edge
• Plant Palette – accentuate good plants, remove less desirable ones
City will ask group to get back together in early January due to upcoming Christmas holiday.
View PDF Newsletter
View Plant Selection Graphic
View Homeowner Manual
|
