"The use of mulch is a good temporary solution to several of our trail woes and is not seen as permanent...Nobody has actually determined that we have any "trail woes." There's just this ad hoc committee whose members talked to each other, but did no research. They took some photographs. That's pretty much all.
The Trail Committee is moving forward from their report at the April Bi-Annual Meeting in an effort to explore what support the City of Atlanta can provide to a trail project if requested. David Quillian has provided an update article in the newsletter."
Representing all of our members
Glenn Cartledge, President
-from the July 2008 MPCA Newsletter
What is this fiat from Mr. Cartledge ruling out organic mulch as the solution, if indeed there ever is determined to be some need for a "solution"? He does not serve on the committee anymore, nor does he have any business speaking out on this issue, as it is his responsibility to remain neutral, something he cannot seem even to pretend to do, except in that most ironic signature.
I boldfaced "their report" just for fun. As those of us who attended the April meeting recall, it was Mr. Cartledge himself who made the report, against strenuous advice. He was about to be installed as president "of all our members," yet he insisted on presenting the committee report, because it seems that showing off his PowerPoint skills was more important than being appropriate under the circumstances.
Mulching the walking path most certainly is a viable idea. It is attractive and healthy for trees, rather than killing them. Organic material is non-poisonous to the soil, water, humans and animals. It doesn't exacerbate flooding or cause air pollution. It is not likely to attract hundreds more cars every day to our streets, and thus more danger and crime.
Posts
3 comments:
Truth in the path/trail context is a relative thing, in that it is what Mr. Cartledge and Mr. Quillian say it is. The real truth is as follows: there is nothing wrong with the path the way it is; mulch is not required, but it probably wouldn't hurt anything; no public purpose will be served by putting in a surfaced path; no private purpose (other than building up certain egos) will be served either; there are no beneficiaries from the effort; people who live directly on the park will suffer greatly if a path is put in; and finally the misguided are forcing the path on those of us who want to preserve the park. These are the real truths, and if the path is installed, only then, when it is too late and the damage is done, will people in the association say, "what have we done"?
I am a member, but I was not at the Trail Committee's meeting on 6/30 at which they voted in favor of the rubber paving and to go to City Hall to discuss their plans. I had given that date a month earlier as the only one I could not attend. A vote was NOT on the agenda. If it had been, I would have tried to find a way to get there, if only for a short time. Only about half the committee members were in attendance. I had important information about the rubber paving material that if presented, might have affected some votes. I can only wonder.
The committee did already know, because Larry Rigdon from the rubber paving company told them at the previous meeting that the paving would last 25 years, and yet his company would only warrant it in writing for 3 years. That's some kind of confidence in your product!
The committee heard at the previous meeting the claim that no vegetation could grow through their surface, but if all you have to do is walk up there and look. There are weeds and moss growing all through it,not to mentin the holes in it. The committee heard the rep at that meeting say that the reason there was standing water on the surface was that it needed to have a French drain system. I believe the committee knows that this is not going to be in any path design in the park, and therefore, there will be drainage problems.
Both presentations from the concrete paver and the rubber paver had very big problems with them.
With all due respect Ms. Driebe, your earnest efforts would have been very much in vain.
As you can see by the recent communications, the facts are never allowed to get in the way of the conclusions.
Post a Comment