A well-pondered suggestion, Peter. I am not entirely clear on the
selling-point, which will need to be a powerful one. I can see 3 possible
ones:
1) A lake-like amenity for a new residential area, with sympathetic
environmental (wild-life) features.
2) A facility for retaining surface/storm-water runoff, that will improve
quality (eg as a silt-trap) and enable draw-off eg for sports fields and
perhaps some industrial use. Environmental benefits as in 1).
3) A true recycling facility that will process domestic waste-water from
either new or (wow) existing suburbs.
Give or take an environmental add-on here or there, one would expect
something like 1) or 2) to be designed into a large-scale development in any
event. 3) is the much more expensive and more contentious possibility.
Wouldn't the cost of a few nicely landscaped retention ponds be tiny
compared to the cost of domestic and mains plumbing and the processing
equipment? It might be easier just to shoot for 1) and 2), which represent
what Canberra's lakes and ornamental retention ponds are in any event. g
-----Original Message-----
From: Milburns
Sent: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 11:05 PM
To:
Subject: Pondering on the proposed Lower Molonglo Valley
Development
My initial response to the prospect of filling the Lower Molonglo
Valley with houses is to pose the question 'where will the water to
service this development come from?'. Secondly, I feel a sense of
loss with respect to avian habitat. One of my old ACT mantras is
"Wherever Singing Bushlarks go, houses will surely follow". This
could equally be applied to White-fronted Chats! My darker side
produces the notion that at least the new suburbs would make a good
fire break for Weston Creek! I am not totally against development
however.
I think that any development in the Lower Molonglo should minimally
include a series of descending wetlands with the explicit function of
improving the quality of water that flows out of the bottom end. I
cannot imagine a more ideal location for a project such as this. It
is below the level of the city and has ample acreage to achieve the
required outcome. I envisage a generous margin of transitional
grassy woodland (I am a bird watcher after all) , perhaps carefully
managed grazing and, if you must, some miserable, badly designed
housing developments somewhere in the mix. Does one reintroduce this
water into the ACT water supply or generously send it down the
Murrumbidgee? Perhaps one should let the circumstances of the moment
dictate this.
For a model of what I have in mind look at location number four at
http://www.lakecountyfl.gov/bird_watching/birding_spots.aspx
Emeralda Marsh in Lake County, Florida is reclaimed agricultural land
and is managed principally for improving water quality but also for
conservation and hunting purposes. The abundance of fauna is simply
staggering! I doubt that we would be attracting alligators and
crocodiles in such numbers into the Lower Molonglo but it would not
surprise me if this was raised as a counter argument by the
pack-the-houses-in brigade.
I belive that a large-scale water-harvesting and quality-improvement
scheme in the Lower Molonglo Valley would not only provide water
storage and high quality recycled water but also a magnificent
recreational and wildlife preservation amenity. I think that there
are a number of additional sites within the ACT boundary that could
be used in a similar fashion to capture run off and improve the
quality of recycled water in close proximity to the city, albeit on a
smaller scale.
I suppose that the initial investment may look a bit scary but we
cannot built a marine desalination plant and have already experienced
the problems associated with cross-border arrangements.
Milburn
--
The Milburns
8 Miller Street
O'Connor
ACT 2602
****************************************************************************
***************************
|
