After reading two misleading articles about the proposed sewer separation
plan, I feel compelled to respond. In the last two Chronicle issues, Ellen
Mass and John Walker have painted a glorified picture of a spoiled MDC
Alewife Reservation restored to its natural splendor through the miracle of
stormwater rerouted from the Fresh Pond area.
The low-lying, flood-prone Fresh Pond area is grossly overdeveloped.
Rainwater doesn't soak into soil, but runs across pavement, gathering gas,
oil, pesticides, salt, and other contaminants. In light rains, it flows into
the sewer system and is carried to Deer Island. When heavy rains exceed the
capacity of the sewer system, stormwater floods the Fresh Pond area and flows
into Fresh Pond, contaminating Cambridge's drinking water.
As part of storm and sanitary sewer separation, Deer Island is to be for
sewage only. Stormwater must be routed elselwhere via a separate set of
pipes. But there is no elsewhere nearby. Cambridge has reserved Fresh Pond
for drinking water, and the land around it for private property and roads.
The Cambridge Department of Public Works and the Mass. Water Resources
Authority, under court order, have proposed a solution that simply transfers
the problem elsewhere: During severe storms, expected several times a year,
separated but contaminated stormwater from the Fresh Pond area will be piped
to the MDC's Alewife Reservation. Since dumping it directly into Little
River and Alewife Brook would worsen existing flooding in North Cambridge,
East Arlington, and Belmont, it will instead be piped into 3-acre hole in the
ground, dug just for that purpose, to gradually seep into Little River.
Despite the MWRA's claims, the hole will be ugly. Stretching in width from
the edge of the Reservation that borders Cambridge Park Drive all the way to
Little River, it will present an obstacle to walkers and bikers seeking to
enjoy the reservation. A bridge over it will be needed. Both construction
and maintenance with heavy equipment will damage the Reservation.
Ellen Mass' article mentions a "basin/bog which may have bacteria and
solids". Most of the year, the pit will be empty, save for the empty bottles
that partiers toss into it. The MWRA acknowledges that the shallow water at
its bottom will be a potential mosquito breeding ground, a new worry now that
the West Nile virus has arrived in the northeast. What kind of pesticide do
you want used on your nature reservation?
Ellen Mass' article says that nearby Arlington and Cambridge neighborhoods
will be "fairly safe" from flooding. John Walker's article doesn't even
mention it. The MWRA's computer model predicts that in a major storm, its
"retention pond" storage will raise the level of Little River and Alewife
Brook by "only" 0.6 to 1.4 inches. Can the MWRA translate that into feet of
water in a basement?
John Walker's article refers to the water being "much filtered" before being
released. In truth, the MWRA will rely only on catchbasins to filter out
contaminants prior to its arrival in the retention pond; it will make no
attempt to further clean it before releasing it to Little River.
This non-solution isn't the best, merely the cheapest. Alternate locations
to store stormwater include Jerry's Pond, retention basins installed under
the streets in the affected areas, retention basins along Cambridge Park
Drive (also being overdeveloped) and above-ground tanks near Fresh Pond.
Having decided on one option, the MWRA has rejected all others.
Both John and Ellen claim that the retention pond water will wet and restore
an "often-dried marsh". However, they both acknowledge that this will happen
only several times a year, and will affect only about 1.3 acres of a 115-acre
reservation. I fail to see how this will make that much difference.
Both Ellen and John hope that this additional water will restore the annual
Alewife herring run. Neither the frequency nor volume of excess stormwater
is sufficient to do so. At a minimum, dredging of 50 years worth of silt
that has reduced the depth of Little River will be necessary.
The proposed solution is a failure. It is expected to prevent flooding
around Fresh Pond only for "10-year" storms, those so severe as to be
expected only once a decade. Since the area was inundated with "100-year"
storms in 1996, in 1998, and again last week, this is truly an exercise in
futility and a waste of taxpayer money.
In short, this proposal is not the "win-win project for Cambridge, Arlington,
and Belmont" that John describes, but a license to transfer pollution from
one area to another within a watershed and a way to for Cambridge to comply
with a court order without solving the root problem - overdevelopment.
Aram Hollman is an Arlington resident and a member of the Coalition for
Alewife. His views here are strictly his own.
This opinion piece was sent to the Alewife Study Group by the author.
The text was published in the April 11 2001 Cambridge Chronicle; as of April 15
it was not on the Chronicle's website. There may be differences between the text
above and the published text.
Contact the Alewife Study Group, North Cambridge Massachusetts, by email at information@alewife.org