Trees Replaced with Rock
![]() |
| All current SCVWD-proposed bridges include removing all trees (in fact all vegetation) from the creek channel for hundreds of feet on both sides of the bridge. |
| Approximate extent of tree removal for alternative 1 bridge. Includes street trees on four corner properties and upstream and downstream trees. |
Their survey shows that their current 100-year bridge alternatives would immediately destroy 25 to 35 creek-top trees around the bridge and if a 4-foot raised bridge (their preferred alternative) was built, all 31 trees at the four adjacent homes.
Staff has not addressed the removal of all in-creek vegetation and rock armoring the creek bank for hundreds of feet upstream and downstream as shown in all illustrations.

Sounds terrible. Surely this is not needed. need larger hole in bridge to let more water flow.
ReplyDeleteThese modifications should be paid for by those that bought in flood zones, not the general public.
ReplyDeleteHow about charging all those who go over the bridges? This problem is not just a creek problem but a roadway problem. btw I am not in a flood zone but do use the bridges(s)
DeleteNote that this was posted in 2014 plan. The 2019 plan is significantly different.
ReplyDelete