Unfortunately, the results of the inspection were no more satisfactory for residents than their previous attempts to seek relief from WSSC and the Montgomery County Council, for problems ranging from flooding to dust and noise. Schwartz Jones wrote that the inspector found that stormwater had indeed flowed over the top of the staging area's perimeter silt fence. But, she added, that "is not uncommon during a significant rain event such as the one this morning. Given the storm and the fact that proper sediment controls were in place, there is not a code violation." The inspector found no other code issues, either, she reported.
One resident said clearing the contractor for a perimeter failure during a storm defeated the purpose of having stormwater runoff controls in the first place. If the controls fail during heavy rain, that resident said, "what is the point? None!"
Unless the County or County Council step in, it does not appear residents' concerns will be addressed anytime soon. The water main replacement project will not be completed until September 2018, until which time, the staging area will remain in place.
18 comments:
So how is WSSC supposedly responsible for the flooding from yesterday's torrential rains? You still haven't answered this.
5:04: They failed to control stormwater runoff from the staging area. They should at least clean up the mess after the water recedes. Again, do you want to put in a good word for Barwood cab and the County liquor monopoly while you're at it? You're very much like Bethesda Now ("Now" extinct), Bethesda Magazine and Greater Greater Washington - at war with your readers. Who the hell reads a story like this and says, "those villainous residents!!!!"? Is it your relentless Dan Reed animosity toward evil straw-man NIMBYs fueling your skepticism?
No wonder my website is the leading source for Bethesda news - I'm actually writing from the resident and taxpayer perspective, not a toady like you shilling for the MoCo political cartel.
You're becoming more and more incoherent with each passing day.
5:43: On the contrary, your projection issues worsen every day - projecting your issues onto others. Incoherent? Yes, you are. Most readers know you're up to no good when you side against the residents.
I don't remember you previously claiming that MoCo's silt fence regulations were too lenient, Dyer.
"Most readers" think you're a birdbrain, Dyer.
And I challenge to to provide any data that contradicts that.
I hope the county gives these folks some relief. That mudslide looks like a mess.
Dyer's puny little mind reads "how is this WSSC's fault?", and somehow makes the jump to "you're blaming the residents!"
"Do you want to put in a good word for Barwood cab and the County liquor monopoly while you're at it? You're very much like Bethesda Now ("Now" extinct), Bethesda Magazine and Greater Greater Washington - at war with your readers. Who the hell reads a story like this and says, "those villainous residents!!!!"? Is it your relentless Dan Reed animosity toward evil straw-man NIMBYs fueling your skepticism?"
Followed by...
"Your projection issues worsen every day!"
Who was the inspector? Patel or Bahrami or Wolfe?
I think I know what happened here. The silt fence and controls were in place properly and matched the permit, so the inspector can't fault them. The question then is, was the SCP (sediment control plan) sufficient? It's usually signed off by a third-party engineering company, so the next step is to complain to them and also the licensing board. That will get some action, as the engineering company doesn't want to lose their license over some stupid silt fence.
The residents should pull the permit (it's online on the DPS site) and look in the corner as it will show which licensed engineer signed off on it.
Dyer, do you have any pictures of relatively clear water entering the staging area from upstream? Otherwise it's rather hard to prove that the "mud" is actually coming from the staging area.
Looks like WSSC installed the required equipment, which (sadly) was insufficient to control the water volume generated by this storm.
I agree with 12:20. No code violation, but the sediment control plan was insufficient. Excellent comment, 12:20.
12:50: The mud is the proof, because that's coming from the area where the ground is disturbed by construction.
Where is the ground disturbed by construction? It is not obvious in the photos.
Continuing @ 4:28 PM
...especially since the only picture shown for this article shows a landscaped area that is next to a residence rather than a construction staging area.
How many properties were affected?
Did any homes experience flooding inside?
So what do you think WSSC should do, Dyer? You still are just whining without providing any answers, per usual. Sometimes it rains hard. Am I supposed to pay for WSSC to engineer and construct a 5 foot dam for every staging area so some silt won't run down a hill during heavy storms? How much will that cost ratepayers?
11:00: They sure can afford to pay it, after having illegally gouged their customers for several years before finally being smacked down by a judge. They should be required to refund customers all that money. Still dragging their feet on replacing the illegal rates now. But they can always count on a rubber stamp from our crooked County Council no matter how much they jack up rates. #LockThemUp
Post a Comment