All CAll - do we have any lawyers???????

[loanwolf]

I have a question, do we have any lawyers on this board or does anyone have a dive buddies who is? We need to look at filing an injection against the continued removal of the wharfs and docks in the Puget Sound until a better environmental impact can be done on them. Most of these structures have been around for close to 100yrs in many cases. And as we all know a ecosystem that has developed their in the mean time. The Edmond's oil dock removal is slated to Begin on Dec 1 I talked with the guys in charge out their the other day when their were surveying it. Funny thing the engineers doing the work agree they should stay and it is a waist of money to remove them.

[Peter Guy]

Yes, there are some lawyers who are members of this Board.

Just what we need, MORE lawsuits.

Why is it that we the people elect officials to make policy decisions on various things and then whenever we don't like the policy decide that we the people must sue to stop the policy. Since we the people just re-elected those officials who have been making the policy, shouldn't we just let the democratic process proceed?

One of the reasons there is a "Seattle Way" (that is, all talk, no action) is that we the people seem to want to only have it my way and the majority be damned. Consequences should follow elections -- and if they did maybe people would pay more attention to whom and for what they were voting.

BTW, I am one of those attorneys (well at least I was, sort of one, once) who is a member of this Board.

[loanwolf]

I do not disagree with you but when talking is getting no where and this has been pushed thought for political reasons under a environmental hat without proper study. Then things need to be rechecked and unfortunately in our system of government checks and balances are done under legal terms. This is a less than ideal system but it is what we are stuck with. We have to work by the rules and the rules are under legal terms.

[H20doctor]

You need to read the edmonds oil dock thread already on this board.. We are all upset about the removal of the dock.. But it seems money and the ferry system is more powerful than us divers ... The good news is now we can dive EUP and not get fined for being blown in the ferry after the new dock is built !

[scottsax]

The good news is now we can dive EUP and not get fined for being blown in the ferry after the new dock is built !

Dry dock, anyone?

[Penopolypants]

The EIS process for this project has been going on for 10 years. During that time, the "bureaucratic red tape" that everyone is so fond of complaining about has also provided public comment periods so that you and I can have our input every step of the way. Notices are published at the site and in the paper describing the project, the documents you can review for comment, the comment period, and where you can find said documents.

Every time a draft of the EIS is published, the public has the opportunity to comment. Every there is a supplement to the DEIS or EIS, the public has an opportunity to comment.

Who took advantage of that? Anyone?

Comments received outside the comment period don't have to be reviewed or addressed. I am not going to say it's too late to complain now, because many agencies are willing to listen if public outcry is sufficient and reasoned (it's actually pretty easy for public agencies to ignore assholes.) It's pretty frustrating for them to have their bureaucracy slammed on all sides, though...either they're not doing enough or they're doing too much. Pretty much the only time they hear anything is when someone complains, usually after all the opportunities they were given to do so.

[CaptnJack]

this has been pushed thought for political reasons under a environmental hat without proper study

Bull crap. Exactly what kind of "study" would you consider adequate?

The Environmental Impact Statement for this (SR 104 EDMONDS CROSSING PROJECT) was started in the early 1990s and it was completed in 2004. 4 years ago. It was published in the papers, it was published in the Federal Register. You missed your (throughly democratic) chance to have your voice heard on this project. Unless you can prove that the decisions made were abitrary and/or capricious you will lose in court. Judges will otherwise defer to agency expertise and the very public process which already went on for greater than a decade.

Study study study. The ferry needs a new home. The dock is falling down, if it were a jungle gym with kids underneath it would already been removed eons ago. And lastly, very lastly, its contaminated wood, not "habitat".

Oh and what Ppants said!

[dsteding]

huh. I missed this.

It is an "injunction," not an "injection" and the standard needed to be met is a high likelihood of irreparable harm.

I read in NW Dive News that WSA is working for a mitigation fund for lost dive sites. The best thing we could have done (and it is probably too late now) is leverage the loss of dive sites such as these for, say, $$$$ and the political momentum for a prepared wreck like the ones in BC.

[loanwolf]

After talking with the engineers last week who are going to take it down. the dock is not falling down. their are only a few pilings on the thing that are not sound. They stated it should stay as habitat and it is a waist of money to remove it. Also if you look at the new ferry terminal site plan it is to the north of the oil dock. so in reality their is no reason to remove it. i know this is at a late point now. But their are other things that have passed this that have come to light just lately. As stated by the engineers, the pressure to remove it is form the top of the hill to take it out not the DOT.

[dwashbur]

Yes. The main reason I got from WSF was that some people (probably with money/influence) don't like looking at it. And for the record, there's no agreement on whether it's "contaminated wood" or not, but there's plenty of agreement on the fact that it's "habitat." Everyone who has been down there agrees that there's an incredible abundance of life there. The array of opinions about what, if anything, is still leaking from the pilings is confusing at best.

[loanwolf]

Yes. The main reason I got from WSF was that some people (probably with money/influence) don't like looking at it. And for the record, there's no agreement on whether it's "contaminated wood" or not, but there's plenty of agreement on the fact that it's "habitat." Everyone who has been down there agrees that there's an incredible abundance of life there. The array of opinions about what, if anything, is still leaking from the pilings is confusing at best.

It was the engineers who suggested that it be saved and cleaned up to be part of the park open to the public as we talked the other day. The only thing that would stop it would be a injunction would put it on hold for about 6 months or so to have things re-looked at and reevaluated. That is why I put this out their. they are also going to be removing many more. i believe that Fort Ward is already gone as well as stated the other day. How many have heard that all of them are to be removed now?

[CaptnJack]

Also if you look at the new ferry terminal site plan it is to the north of the oil dock. so in reality their is no reason to remove it.

Not exactly. Consider the safety (terrorism) security zone around ferries and their docks.

You are vastly better off working to improve the existing dive park in Edmonds. Including the reopening of the drydock area post ferry move.

[loanwolf]

That is good I am looking at this as a whole not just Edmond's.

Edmond's
1) the oil dock will be far enough away to still be drivable.
2) it is current and existing marine habitat
3) getting the dry dock will be great but the ferry terminal and all pilings are to be removed.

The rest of the sound
1) All existing wharfs and pilings are to be removed over the next year from the Puget Sound.

That will take away many dive sites.

[CaptnJack]

Be sure and let us know who you have on retainer.

[Gill Envy]

After talking with the engineers last week who are going to take it down. the dock is not falling down. their are only a few pilings on the thing that are not sound. They stated it should stay as habitat and it is a waist of money to remove it. Also if you look at the new ferry terminal site plan it is to the north of the oil dock. so in reality their is no reason to remove it. i know this is at a late point now. But their are other things that have passed this that have come to light just lately. As stated by the engineers, the pressure to remove it is form the top of the hill to take it out not the DOT.

this does seem to be the case. Both the city of edmonds and the WA state Ferries folks were quite forthcoming about the reasons... while every letter of the law was followed, the environmental benefits of removing it appear to be more a valuable source of funding dollars to have someone other than the city pay for it's removal. there appears to have been little assessment of the creatures living actually on the structure, particularly out in the shallows of the deep water portion.

Since I did not hear back from a mod, I printed my letter and official response here: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/pacifi ... -dock.html.

within this thread is a very interesting PDF called "Creosote treated piling
-perceptions versus reality- " it's worth a read.

It's valuable also to know that much of the nasty stuff can be removed, including the public safety hazard, while still leaving the deep water structure.

Funding seems to be a big issue for Edmonds as it could cost them a lot to remove it if they don't take this chance they have with the WA state ferries funding and it's on DNR land, and they charge the city a lease fee as long as it's there. I'd like to get some folks together and see if we can get the DNR to agree to allow a portion of it to stay in place as an artificial reef, be owned by the DNR and cost the City nothing... I do think there is small chance we can save this sight if we get creative.

if anyone is interested in mobilizing to see if there is anything we can do to find a comprimize, pm me!

george