Snowshoe/Slatyfork Sewer News Update
7 posts
4 users
1k+ views
DavidFleming
March 28, 2007
Member since 09/28/2006 🔗
52 posts
Howdy folks,

News update from Eight Rivers Safe Development:

--------------------------------------------
"Groups Share Concerns with Lawmakers Over Sewage Plant Site"

http://www.8RiversSafeDevelopment.com/news/showChapter.php?chapter=concernsSharedWithLawmakers
--------------------------------------------

Thanks, and take care. :-)

DF
KevR
March 28, 2007
Member since 01/27/2004 🔗
786 posts
Upgrading the two existing plants HAS to be cheaper than building a new one -- this is in reference to the end of the article. Has anyone done a cost study on this?
skier219
March 28, 2007
Member since 01/8/2005 🔗
1,318 posts
Thanks for the update David!
DWW
March 28, 2007
Member since 03/11/2004 🔗
144 posts
Sounds like some reasonable people are starting to talk about sensible alternatives. Is it the PSD that ultimately decides whether or not to start over fresh? It also sounds like the PSD does not have the incentive to support the clustered approach, because it "competes" against thier own "business"?
DavidFleming
March 28, 2007
Member since 09/28/2006 🔗
52 posts
KevR, regarding your question about a cost study, I think most such estimates have been educated guesses to date; because those in charge weren't (yet) listening. But rough estimates look to be around half the cost or better than that which is currently proposed ($20M and climbing).

skier219, you bet. Glad to help get the word out.

DWW, I had never thought about it like that, but you're right. It makes perfect sense. The Pocahontas PSD, after all, only got into this to alleviate their debt problems; they saw this as a way out of debt (ironically, they're in the hole $400,000 in loans for this project already). And since the PSD wouldn't (normally) have jurisdiction or revenue from local, independent cluster systems, that would definitely hurt their revenue. So as you say, no incentive to pursue other options.

Officially, I think it would be the PSD who would have to say they essentially "give up" on the current plan; start over. Realistically, that action would likely be more in the form of a mandate from other, higher places. That's my guess, could be way wrong on that. If it could be handled such that the PSD still owns and operates the alternative approach (retrofit + cluster systems), they could save a ton of cash and still draw revenue. Hmm.

Thanks guys.

DF
KevR
March 30, 2007
Member since 01/27/2004 🔗
786 posts
$20M of "pork" flowing in -- assuming that's what would be happening is a lot of a cash and you'll get some support for it, even if it no one really wants the end result...

Fighting that sort of emotional argument probably won't be easy -- perceptions of jobs and so forth might outweigh in folks minds.

anyway -- i don't know the area, never been there, skied there, don't own an property of any kind there, don't know anyone that does in fact! And I'm not connected this project that i know of in ANY WAY
DavidFleming
April 2, 2007
Member since 09/28/2006 🔗
52 posts
Hi folks,

More "new news" from Eight Rivers Safe Development:

---------------------------------------------
"Isaak Walton League of America Endorses Eight Rivers, Snowshoe Retrofit"

http://www.8RiversSafeDevelopment.com/news/showChapter.php?chapter=iwlaEndorsesEightRivers
---------------------------------------------

As always, if you have any questions just email me at fleming42@gmail.com. Take care. :-)

DF
DCSki Sponsor: DCSki

Ski and Tell

Speak truth to powder.

Join the conversation by logging in.

Don't have an account? Create one here.

0.14 seconds