|
learn facts
|
Boater wrote: <quoted text>Our coastline was withstanding storms long before you or numb skull Kearney came along. Anyone that knows anything about storm patterns knows that this plan will not work. It is in fact just an attempt to divert water during a small storm. The problem is that the runoff coming from storm water drainage will back up as well. In the end this actually may cause nore damage than the water from the bay. While I appreciate the local panel that was formed to look into the problem I think we all know that legitimate experts need to be consulted. After all, 3 million dollars is a lot of money to throw around. Obviously, Ross Kearney knows nothing about the actual cause or the possible solutions. He is simply not qualified to make big decisions like this one./duh!!!! The people who researched this for over a year included on the committee were a combination of retired and current employees of Airforce, Navy, NASA as well as marine owners and people involved with boat and fishing in this area for many years. They got the reports from Corp of Engineers (who recommended it), VIMS, and companies that studied the area and wildlife in the area. It was not his decision he (and all council) listened to the presentation of the committee and read the reports submitted by the various agency's who recommended this action.
|
|
Amen
|
Judged:
1
learn facts wrote: But the fact that the breach is causing huge title surge to flood the houses in two cities along the back river should also be a consideration. <quoted text> Cite one study that even points to this being a "fact".
|
|
Amen
|
Judged:
1
learn facts wrote: <quoted text> The people who researched this for over a year included on the committee were a combination of retired and current employees of Airforce, Navy, NASA as well as marine owners and people involved with boat and fishing in this area for many years. They got the reports from Corp of Engineers (who recommended it), VIMS, and companies that studied the area and wildlife in the area. It was not his decision he (and all council) listened to the presentation of the committee and read the reports submitted by the various agency's who recommended this action. Ah...an obvious member of the "citizens committee". If the COE "recommended it" then why these type of questions now???
|
|
Are YOU kidding ME
|
Are you kidding me wrote: By restoring factory point they will be creating MORE habitat for these species. As it stands now their habitat has been slowly washed away and will disappear soon. I guess the Corps is too busy figuring out how to protect cities built below sea level to worry about protecting the homes of people in Foxhill and Poquoson. And as for Richard Harris's comment, not everyone that lives on waterfront property is "rich." Many of these people live in homes that have been in their families for many years and the flooding does not only affect homes right on the water. There are many homes in the Harris Creek area, Riverdale and Messick point that have taken a beating over the last 10 years since the City of Hampton decided to do nothing to protect Factory Point. By the Corps OWN POLICY they state that protecting and maintaining barrier islands is one of their missions. I can't for the life of me understand why they have thousands and thousands of pages of documents on the Internet stating this fact about barrier islands up and down the east coast but for some reason this does not apply here. You consider that little spit of land a "barrier island"????
|
|
Are YOU kidding ME
|
Hamptonian wrote: Boater, Boater,you sir are an idiot. Factory Pt acts as a natural breakwater, thereby reducing the flooding of Foxhill,Poquoson,and Newmarket Creek during hurricanes or nor'easters. Duh!!! That little itty-bitty spit of land ain't going to stop an ounce of flooding. Geeze... Seems common sense is in short supply when public money is involved.
|
|
Terry Morgan
|
Judged:
1
relax wrote: restoring factory point whould help keep the channel to langley clear. this channel is used to bring fuel for our fighter jets. Um ... as a person who used to fart around in the back river ... let me assure you that is not how fuel gets to Langley AFB! LMAO
|
|
Mark
|
Judged:
1
I'm amazed at some of the comments here. Is anyone paying attention to what's going on with the blue crab? Do we really need to (potentially) destroy seagrass in the area, upset the ecosystem and habitat of 11 types of fish? A restored point won't stop storm surge, it will only slow it down. How much will maintaining the point cost taxpayers? The Corps asked some good questions -- that's what they get paid to do!
|
|
Keep Laughing
|
Judged:
1
Terry Morgan wrote: <quoted text> Um ... as a person who used to fart around in the back river ... let me assure you that is not how fuel gets to Langley AFB! LMAO As a current employee of Langley, let me assure you that you are an idiot. That is the primary method of transport for JP-8 to the base. If its not, how do you suppose it gets there?
|
|
|
|
For the love of animals
|
Growing up in Fox Hill I have seen my share of flooding way before Factory Point was split in two. It would though be nice to see it replaced and the bird and fish habitat saved.
|
|
washed away
|
The federal government should start dredging and replenishing the beaches from here to Cape Hatteras.We should be fixing the USA not Iraq.
|
|
Are you kidding me
|
Are YOU kidding ME wrote: <quoted text> You consider that little spit of land a "barrier island"???? What is NOW a "little spit of land" was once a huge barrier island that reached halfway across the river. Hampton's "do nothing" policy has destroyed habitat and allowed increased flooding, filled in navigation channels and will end up costing millions of dollars in property loss. My question is this. Why does the Army Corps have a different opinion on Factory Point when they DEMAND that other barrier islands up and down the east coast be maintained to protect wildlife habitat and prevent flooding? By their OWN documents they state over and over the importance of maintaining dunes and barrier islands as a line of defense against flooding but for some reason it does not apply here. I want an explanation. Next, restoring the barrier will not prevent ALL flooding. What it will do is buy time. Surges don't happen in a matter of minutes. They come in with the tide. That's why they worry so much about the timing of a hurricane peaking with high tide. Will it stop flooding in a cat 5? No. But it will prevent much of the flooding in Foxhill, Buckroe, Riverdale, Harris Creek, lower Poquoson, Langly AFB, Newmarket Creek and King St. that has begun occurring since the breach occured 10 years ago. They city of Hampton should have addressed this YEARS ago but they were too busy pouring their money into shopping centers, convention centers and failing hotel developments downtown for political cronies. One of the functions of government is to protect and provide adequate infrastructure in the form of proper drainage and maintenance of the shoreline. Hampton has failed to do so and now it's affecting hundreds of properties that never had a history of flooding until that breach occurred. The city will pay one way or the other either through fixing the breach or through the loss of taxable waterfront properties in these areas.
|
|
Swamp Rat
|
Are you kidding me wrote: By the Corps OWN POLICY they state that protecting and maintaining barrier islands is one of their missions. I can't for the life of me understand why they have thousands and thousands of pages of documents on the Internet stating this fact about barrier islands up and down the east coast but for some reason this does not apply here. It does not apply because it is not a barrier island. Hatteras is a barrier island. Chincoteague is a barrier island. A piece of mud 20 yards offshore of Factory Point is not a barrier island.
|
|
Are YOU kidding ME
|
Are you kidding me wrote: <quoted text> What is NOW a "little spit of land" was once a huge barrier island that reached halfway across the river. Hampton's "do nothing" policy has destroyed habitat and allowed increased flooding, filled in navigation channels and will end up costing millions of dollars in property loss. My question is this. Why does the Army Corps have a different opinion on Factory Point when they DEMAND that other barrier islands up and down the east coast be maintained to protect wildlife habitat and prevent flooding? By their OWN documents they state over and over the importance of maintaining dunes and barrier islands as a line of defense against flooding but for some reason it does not apply here. I want an explanation. Next, restoring the barrier will not prevent ALL flooding. What it will do is buy time. Surges don't happen in a matter of minutes. They come in with the tide. That's why they worry so much about the timing of a hurricane peaking with high tide. Will it stop flooding in a cat 5? No. But it will prevent much of the flooding in Foxhill, Buckroe, Riverdale, Harris Creek, lower Poquoson, Langly AFB, Newmarket Creek and King St. that has begun occurring since the breach occured 10 years ago. They city of Hampton should have addressed this YEARS ago but they were too busy pouring their money into shopping centers, convention centers and failing hotel developments downtown for political cronies. One of the functions of government is to protect and provide adequate infrastructure in the form of proper drainage and maintenance of the shoreline. Hampton has failed to do so and now it's affecting hundreds of properties that never had a history of flooding until that breach occurred. The city will pay one way or the other either through fixing the breach or through the loss of taxable waterfront properties in these areas. I was walking that "spit" thirty years ago when it was less than 1/10 the size of Willoughby Spit. Just when was it a "barrier island"?
|
|
Boater
|
Replacing factory point will cause increased flooding. The fact of the matter is that the stormwater drainage will back up because the water will not be able to flow out. The very people that want this project done are the ones that will suffer the most because of it. I say let them have their cake but lets not allow them flood insurance because they are causing the flood.
|
|
Dontrel-T
|
tree hugging hippies wrote: i hate the piping plover Don't be so negative! I love the Piping Plover-preferably golden fried on a buttery bun with mayo and pickles.Try it yull like it.
|
|
Swamp Rat
|
Hamptonian wrote: Boater, This is a typical Ross Kearney B.S. project. He was trying to get re-elected and promised to rebuild Factory Point. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that this is like taking a thimble of water out of a swimming pool. But as our idiot ex-mayor did with everything else he just opted to spend tax dollars on an ignorant project that cannot possibly work. It would be far wiser to spend the money to increase the elevation of the affected homes than to throw 3 million dollars in the bay. Typical Boss Ross stupidity. Boater,you sir are an idiot. Factory Pt acts as a natural breakwater, thereby reducing the flooding of Foxhill,Poquoson,and Newmarket Creek during hurricanes or nor'easters. Duh!!! Sorry chief, you're confusing storm erosion, longshore erosion, and storm surge all at the same time. Nothing you could build except a 25' tall berm around the entire coast of NN and Hampton will do a single thing to prevent flooding. However, spits do work as excellent breakwaters to trap sediment from longshore erosion, and dissipate wave energy that causes storm erosion.
|
|
Jenny
|
Anything Kearney touches turns to crap. Thank goodness he is no longer in power!!
|