Environmental concern not just for ‘tree huggers’ any longer

I’ve lived along the Delaware River for more than half my life now.

Not right along it, mind you, just in two towns that border it.

I have the utmost respect for those that are willing to pay “the price for the view,” but I will be the first to admit, I’m not hardy in that particular way. I love the river, though, and walk along it often. I’d like to think I have some knowledge of the river and its habits after all this time.

This week, I’ve seen a lot of water, and a lot of muddy, soggy residents. But remarkably, very few of them had bad things to say about the river, or their homes—even though this is the third time in less than two years that they’ve had to shovel the mud out of them and then refurbish almost everything.

Most of them did, however, have a bit to say about development, particularly in regions to the north.

Very few of these houses have had any flooding problems in the last 50 or so years, other than the last three floods in less than two years. That is making residents, as well as a whole lot of other folks, including me, wonder what’s going on.

Is this a really big anomaly for the history books, or the beginning of a very worrisome trend? Either way, none of the flood victims I talked with are taking any chances. They all said they expect to have to deal with flooding again soon.

I have to agree with them and the assessment that water runoff is the basis of the problem, with so much development going on.

At so many of the municipal meetings I’ve attended over the years as a reporter, when developers are before zoning boards, a main issue is “how much runoff will these 300-something houses/condos create?” Often, the developer spends a lot of time trying to convince dubious board members that whatever minimum plan (or no plan) they’ve come up with is just peachy-keen. But also, at those meetings, I’ve talked with municipal engineers, who express their doubts. Mind you, these engineers are not the tree-hugging type, but they all seem to agree that open space is necessary, that impervious surfaces such as roads and driveways are creating a huge impact.

Sometimes the plans are approved, sometimes they are sent back for modifications. But often, a compromise is reached. And often, it seems, the compromise still falls short of what’s necessary to keep problems from being created.

Now think of a vast stretch, over many counties and indeed, three states, all of which are fairly prosperous and growing in population. This stretch, to the north of us, is adding dozens upon dozens of residents daily, in condominiums, houses, “McMansions,” you name it. All those new houses have roads, many also new that connect them, which is just more impervious surface for water to run off of instead of soaking in. And then, once all those new houses are up, come the new malls and industrial parks, with more roads and usually huge parking lots.

To Easton’s immediate north, all of that runoff eventually, one way or another, ends up in the Delaware River flowing toward us. All the runoff we create, in Easton, Forks, Palmer, Lower Mount Bethel, etc., flows into the Delaware here, and heads eventually toward our downstream, southern neighbors in Bucks County.

No comprehensive study that I know of has ever assessed the whole river region in terms of “how much runoff from development can this river handle on a regular basis before serious flooding of river communities downstream becomes a regular phenomena?” Actually, such a study would definitely be a tall order. We aren’t used to thinking this way in our society. Up until now, what were “local” issues were local issues. But as we build on more and more land, we need to look at the bigger picture and find ways to satisfy local housing demands without furthering ecological damages building can wreak.

The Delaware is one of the last rivers in North America that is “untamed,” or substantially uncontrolled. It is also fairly healthy, as far as modern rivers go. Any modification plan of the river is likely to substantially change this dynamic.

What’s more necessary is a modification of us, the people. We need to get used to the idea that there are so many of us, that what we do has a ripple effect. We need to change the way we build, to lessen its impact, while still providing comfortable, safe shelter for a growing population. That may require a change in expectations.

What’s wrong, for instance, in requiring new parking lots to be made of permeable materials? Developers may complain they are more expensive, both to install and maintain, but should the ultimate victims downstream of their profitable centers of commerce and condominium pay the price with their homes instead?

We need to look more closely at the large picture when it comes to our environment. This past week has proven that scrutiny is not just the domain of “tree huggers” any more. Locally, now it’s everyone’s concern.

(Originally published in The Easton News, July 6, 2006)