I'm glad that this study is happening, since toxic materials are already known to exist in the sediment under the Pen Dam Pond (reference previous studies). Let's be honest, though. Remediation cost estimates were never included by HRWC when this project was sold as a "cost save" to the community and to Ypsi City Council, let alone the environmental/ecological impact of releasing these sediments to the downstream river, parks, and drinking water for downriver communities. I look forward to seeing the results of this study and an impartial, peer-reviewed assessment. Thank you for sharing the video!
Thanks for showing interest in this river restoration project. To clarify, the State of Michigan previously inspected the dam and instructed the City of Ypsilanti, which owns the dam, to either repair it or begin preparations for its removal. HRWC did not provide the estimate of costs for removal or repair. Princeton Hydro, a qualified expert in dam removals and ecological restoration, conducted a feasibility study and provided the estimate for removing the dam. An estimate of the repair cost was provided to Ypsilanti by OHM, another engineering firm. The estimate for repair did not include the costs of ongoing maintenance and insurance. Dam removals are sometimes less expensive than repair, and removal is usually less expensive over time as the maintenance costs and insurance costs associated with repair continue to mount. That’s a major reason why so many dam removals are happening all over the country. Every dam removal is unique, and the estimated costs for removal could either increase or decrease as we learn more about this specific project. This video shows some of the planning work engineers are doing to determine how to safely remove the dam and understand what sediment management will be required. There are many steps to removing or repairing dams and we will continue to share information as we continue to support the City of Ypsilanti with this project. You can learn more at www.hrwc.org/what-we-do/programs/dams-and-impoundments-program/ypsilanti-peninsular-paper-dam/
@@HuronRiverWC If you actually read the Princeton Hydro study, you will know that these "facts" you are referencing, are not accurate. Your own website states: " Removing the dam will cost taxpayers less in the long run than repairing and maintaining it" and, "The cost to repair it is estimated at $807,000 ". These statements are simply not true. The $807K estimate *includes* the cost of demolishing the historic building, which is no longer included in the plans. Excluding the building demolition, the cost of dam deferred maintenance (or as you call it, repair) is closer to $585K, which can be spread out over 10 years. ** You are sharing inaccurate and misleading information on your own website, in your public presentations, and in your statements above. ** These inaccurate statements serve only to perpetuate the public perception that this is a cost save, which is simply not the truth. In case you were going to claim this was an honest error, here is one other example of mis-information on your own website: "Pen Dam is a high hazard dam". In fact, the Army Corps of Engineers classified the dam as being in "fair" condition. You cherry-picked a few words from a report and excluded pertinent information. Calling the dam "high hazard" serves only to alarm the public into supporting your stated goal. Am I seeing a trend here? You are misrepresenting facts here. Your organization has positioned itself as being an authority, yet you misrepresent information, such as the 2 examples above, to serve your own purpose. These are not the only 2 examples. This is such a disappointment and a true disservice to the communities that you claim to represent. I do still look forward to seeing the reports (actual data, not your summary) on the sediment study and thank you for sharing the video.
I'm glad that this study is happening, since toxic materials are already known to exist in the sediment under the Pen Dam Pond (reference previous studies). Let's be honest, though. Remediation cost estimates were never included by HRWC when this project was sold as a "cost save" to the community and to Ypsi City Council, let alone the environmental/ecological impact of releasing these sediments to the downstream river, parks, and drinking water for downriver communities. I look forward to seeing the results of this study and an impartial, peer-reviewed assessment. Thank you for sharing the video!
Thanks for showing interest in this river restoration project. To clarify, the State of Michigan previously inspected the dam and instructed the City of Ypsilanti, which owns the dam, to either repair it or begin preparations for its removal. HRWC did not provide the estimate of costs for removal or repair. Princeton Hydro, a qualified expert in dam removals and ecological restoration, conducted a feasibility study and provided the estimate for removing the dam. An estimate of the repair cost was provided to Ypsilanti by OHM, another engineering firm. The estimate for repair did not include the costs of ongoing maintenance and insurance.
Dam removals are sometimes less expensive than repair, and removal is usually less expensive over time as the maintenance costs and insurance costs associated with repair continue to mount. That’s a major reason why so many dam removals are happening all over the country.
Every dam removal is unique, and the estimated costs for removal could either increase or decrease as we learn more about this specific project. This video shows some of the planning work engineers are doing to determine how to safely remove the dam and understand what sediment management will be required.
There are many steps to removing or repairing dams and we will continue to share information as we continue to support the City of Ypsilanti with this project. You can learn more at www.hrwc.org/what-we-do/programs/dams-and-impoundments-program/ypsilanti-peninsular-paper-dam/
@@HuronRiverWC If you actually read the Princeton Hydro study, you will know that these "facts" you are referencing, are not accurate. Your own website states: " Removing the dam will cost taxpayers less in the long run than repairing and maintaining it" and, "The cost to repair it is estimated at $807,000 ". These statements are simply not true. The $807K estimate *includes* the cost of demolishing the historic building, which is no longer included in the plans. Excluding the building demolition, the cost of dam deferred maintenance (or as you call it, repair) is closer to $585K, which can be spread out over 10 years.
** You are sharing inaccurate and misleading information on your own website, in your public presentations, and in your statements above. ** These inaccurate statements serve only to perpetuate the public perception that this is a cost save, which is simply not the truth.
In case you were going to claim this was an honest error, here is one other example of mis-information on your own website: "Pen Dam is a high hazard dam". In fact, the Army Corps of Engineers classified the dam as being in "fair" condition. You cherry-picked a few words from a report and excluded pertinent information. Calling the dam "high hazard" serves only to alarm the public into supporting your stated goal. Am I seeing a trend here?
You are misrepresenting facts here. Your organization has positioned itself as being an authority, yet you misrepresent information, such as the 2 examples above, to serve your own purpose. These are not the only 2 examples. This is such a disappointment and a true disservice to the communities that you claim to represent.
I do still look forward to seeing the reports (actual data, not your summary) on the sediment study and thank you for sharing the video.
The music adds only noise pollution to this otherwise good video.
The silly music adds nothing to this video except noise pollution.