Creek District pollution report gets mixed reviews
By: DAVID GARRICK - Staff Writer | ∞
Lake San Marcos residents Keith Plank and Thomas McIndoe talk about their concerns about the pollution that might come from a new 200-acre mixed use development plan for the area east of the lake.
DON BOOMER Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
Visit our Photo Gallery
SAN MARCOS -- Lake San Marcos residents are giving mixed reviews to a new city report detailing how water quality in the lake would be affected by a multiblock development of shops and condos planned just north of San Marcos Creek.
Residents interviewed Wednesday said the three-page, illustrated report was not thorough enough and contained too much jargon. They conceded that the proposals might improve water quality, but said they doubted whether the city will actually implement many of the anti-pollution measures.
Since the city began planning the Creek District development about three years ago, residents near the lake have expressed concerns that the new buildings, parking garages and pavement would add pollution, sediment and trash to the already-murky lake.
But city officials have asserted that water quality in the lake would actually be improved by the levees, bridges, culverts and dams included in the Creek District Specific Plan, which will be presented to the city's Planning Commission on Monday night.
"It may seem counterintuitive, but this plan will mean a cleaner flow of water into the creek," said City Manager Paul Malone. "This development is going to be a model in stormwater management."
The report, mailed to 3,400 homeowners near the lake on Monday, is an attempt to explain exactly how those features would improve water quality, said Malone.
The report explains how the dams and bridges would slow the creek water down, reducing the amount of sediment that flows into the lake. It also outlines how filters would remove trash and pollutants that now make their way into the lake.
But the residents interviewed Wednesday said they were not impressed by the report.
"I feel better that they have put something in writing, but it's also showed me the shortcomings and fallacies of their plan," said Rex Edmonds, a 19-year resident of Lake San Marcos. "Check dams are overrated, and the filters in the flow-through planters will clog up after a year or two."
Edmonds said he would rate the report a "4" on scale from "1" to "10."
"The systems have a chance to work, but only if everything is put together and managed perfectly," he said.
Resident Keith Plank said the report is overblown and not specific enough.
"All the remedies and improvements they are talking about are just Band-Aids," said Plank, explaining that lake pollution is killing fish and curtailing recreational opportunities. "They have exaggerated how much the remedies will help."
Plank said the report fails to address an expected increase in the amount of water and sediment flowing into the lake, which would be caused by proposals in the development plan to pave over grassy areas that now absorb local runoff water.
"If they follow the practices in the report very diligently, there might be some improvement in water quality, but quantity will increase dramatically as they cover natural land with buildings, streets, parking lots and other hardscape," Plank said.
Tom McIndoe, another resident, said the report is filled with "gobbledygook," and that many key issues are not covered.
"Before you buy a new car, you need to see more than just a picture of it," said McIndoe. "The report is not thorough enough to make a good judgment."
Resident Cindy Torgison said, "Based on past experience with the city, my trust is not real high that this will be done right."
But Malone said the city is fully committed to making sure the Creek District development improves the health of the creek, and consequently the lake that it flows into.
"As far as the lake is concerned, there's no better place to put these stormwater measures than the tail end of the watershed, which is where we are planning the Creek District," said Malone. "Our plans would check the silt load at each of the two branches of the creek, which is no accident."
Malone said it is not the city's obligation to solve all of the pollution problems at the lake, where residents say that sediment has reduced the depth of the water from 50 feet to 28 feet in recent years.
"It's not the city's responsibility to clean up the lake, but we can improve the quality of the lake moving forward," said Malone. "The problems the lake is experiencing today require a management plan, which is beyond our reach."
Malone said he does not expect the new report to sway the many Lake San Marcos residents who oppose the Creek District development.
"I doubt this will change their minds, but at least they'll have more information," said Malone. "If nothing else, at least the folks who have not weighed in on the issue will know what we've planned."
A copy of the pollution proposal report is available at http://www.ci.san-marcos.ca.us/upload/images/Development%20Services/Planning/PDFs/whitepaper.pdf
-- Contact staff writer David Garrick at (760) 761-4410 or dgarrick@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Gringo wrote on Jun 28, 2007 6:52 AM:If the residents of Lake San Marcos are truly concerned about the health of the lake, then they will act immediately to remove the most apparent source of "pollution." Themselves. There is no hard data that shows anything coming into the lake from anywhere other than the residents on or near the lake shore. It seems obvious that the greatest benefit to the precious health of the lake would be gained if those selfish lake dwellers would stop polluting the man-made puddle and move away.
Storm-water? wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:20 AM: Storm-water management? what storm-water? give me the job of managing that stormwater. The whole thing smells, and that is what it will do while we wait for storm-water. In addition, Lake San Marcos is not in the city limits of the city of San Marcos. They should shut their mouths and sit down. When they contribute something worthwhile to the city then they can stand-up and talk.
Generous Lake San Marcos resident wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:27 PM:I had a lengthy retort written, but decided to not waste the energy in a war with the two idiots above whose comments are either wrong or irrelevant. But you have insulted this generous community, which has given over the years hundreds of thousands of dollars to your schools and residents, and supports its businesses. Wow, where did the anger come from! :)
City Responsibility wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:32 PM:Actually, the fact that San Marcos Creek runs through the City of San Marcos before dumping into the "lake" creates significant potential liability for the City. It's pretty clear SM has not controlled the flow of sediment, nutrients, and bacteria into the lake, and while they may not have caused they whole problem, they've definitely contributed to it. Either way, the EIR failed to provide enough detail and the City risks being sued over it.
come on wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:46 PM:I agree 100 percent with Gringo. Do something about it yourselves and quit crying and pull the community together and use your own money to fix the issue. Instead of pointing fingers elsewhere; look at your places first.
LSM RES : Generous wrote on Jun 28, 2007 4:15 PM:To Generous: the answer to your question about where the anger comes from regarding the two previous blogs is they are envious of our beautiful oasis in the mist of a San Marcos concrete jungle, which the city wishes to expand until they reach to inches of LSM and then in the future try to 'annex' us.
Peacemaker wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:07 PM:Become informed. Proceed to www.ci.san-marcos.ca.us, click Environmental documents, read the comment & response letters, starting with # 2, 3, & 8. Plans to channel the creek and develop 217 acres is a monumental challenge to all involved."Be careful what you wish for - you may get it." Lake San Marcos residents are your good neighbors and deserve your respect. Go in Peace!
Storm Water wrote on Jun 28, 2007 9:42 PM:What storm? If it rains again any water will be a blessing - dirty storm water or not!
What happened to nice ? wrote on Jun 29, 2007 6:57 AM:Is the NCT only printing the comments unkind to the Lake San Marcos residents ? It is unfair. What happened to the kind, nice comments which were written ? Is someone's plan to divide and conquer ?
Braemar wrote on Jun 29, 2007 8:32 AM:The understanding that i had was that Lake San Marcos is actually a damed up creek. As runoff from upstream flow down into the lake it pollutes it. The lake was in pristine coniditon till all the development up stream happened. Not sure how someone could say that the homes around the lake created the problem when the problem appears to be obvious. I think a very well designed and managed system up stream will benefit all. Am I missing something?
John wrote on Jun 30, 2007 9:30 AM:An increase in the amount of water entering the lake could have a beneficial effect as the water would be "cleaner" after going through the new storm drain systems that would be installed and maintained by the City. As everyone knows, the City is required by State water quality laws and the Federal Government for clean water to MAINTAIN the silt dams, collection basins and filter traps that are put in place by the new development. So, use your head. Why wouldn't more clean water entering the lake help to flush out the old pollution?
Hey Nasties... wrote on Jun 30, 2007 1:10 PM:What is wrong with you people who are attacking the residents of Lake San Marcos and calling them names? Whose payroll are YOU on? Lake San Marcos is in the City's Sphere of Influence, our General Plan includes a "Lake San Marcos Neighborhood Plan". The Lake is an asset to this community, a peaceful and lovely and, I might add, very well maintained area thanks to the residents of the Lake who take good care of their homes and community. How many of us took our children to Lake San Marcos to watch and feed the ducks? If the Lake is polluted it's because of all the pollution that has been allowed to spill into San Marcos Creek. Stormwater Management is State Law, every oil slick and spilled sticky sode contaminated dirt, pesticide etc. is washed from our streets when it rains and runs into the Creek and down into Lake San Marcos. I'm no environmentalist but I'm not stupid enough to think none of this is my problem! 95% of California wetlands have been destroyed. We have a beautiful little jewel in Lake San Marcos, defend it don't attack the people who don't want to see it destroyed.
Gringo wrote on Jul 1, 2007 11:13 AM:Where is the proof that pollution is coming from upstream? The water flowing down San Marcos Creek has been monitored by the City for over ten years. The monitoring has been conducted by a well-respected, independent, environmental engineering firm – not by agenda-driven activists attempting to invent a problem in order to support their no growth politics. A City monitoring station is located at the Discovery Street bridge, at the mouth of Lake San Marcos – it was located there for the specific purpose of documenting what goes into the lake. Those Monitoring results are reported annually to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. As the City has routinely been on the side of common sense versus the nonsensical storm water runoff rules, San Marcos isn't exactly a great friend of the regional Board and their "environmentalist" supporters. If ever there was a problem with the water flowing into the lake from the City, the RWQCB and friends would be all over the City of San Marcos like a cheap lawyer chasing a big environmental settlement. In fact, the entire history of the City's Dry-Weather Monitoring program can be easily accessed at the offices of the RWQCB. Good thing the NC Times does not allow these facts to get in the way of a good story! Sewer spills, on the other hand, are another issue. Sewer spills are point-source pollutants, obviously not storwmwater runoff - sewer spills are clearly the responsibility of the VWD, and don't have anything to do with the question of whether the creek project ought to go forward.
To Gringo wrote on Jul 2, 2007 8:35 AM:Where do you get your "facts". Polluted groundwater has been heading its way toward Lake San Marcos from SEVERAL locations in San Marcos. It is too bad when anyone doesn't look at the actual facts from these sites - they are SHOCKING ! Lake San Marcos has been the repository of many unwanted toxics. I hope that the citizens of Lake San Marcos are angry enough that they have stodies done themselves. Too bad that attempts are made to dissuade people from the actual issue. The San Marcos Creek "Project" and the impacts (changes) that will happen because of it !
Gringo wrote on Jul 4, 2007 4:46 PM:The facts stated in my post above are derived from actual data contained in required reports submitted annually to the regulatory authority and available to the general public. There is no evidence of pollution flowing from the creek into Lake San Marcos. Please cite the source of your comment that "polluted groundwater" is fouling Lake San Marcos. Sadly, it seems you have been duped by the so-called "environmentalists."
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement
Videos
Advertisement