Dear Ms. Kurtz:
Based upon the recent Loudoun Water communications to the residents of Raspberry Falls and the articles in the local newspapers, concerns have been raised by the residents of Raspberry Falls that Loudoun Water is moving in a pre-emptive manner to close the water issue by taking action without what we, the residents of Raspberry Falls, consider to be a proper evaluation of alternative options and giving consideration to long term implication of choosing any of those alternatives.
You'll recall that we had asked for information regarding the types of treatment and whether or not they test and treat for surface contaminants. Additionally, we must all be concerned about the development, construction costs of the alternatives, and the labor management costs associated with these options. An additional key element is any replacement parts that would be needed over a long-term period for maintenance of the system. A major concern in this area is the replacement of membranes, which have a limited lifespan of approximately seven years, and therefore necessitates consideration of a program lifespan of 30-40 years in order to evaluate whether or not such option would be prudent and cost-effective.
As with any program evaluation, the pros and cons should be considered, particularly with regard to risk of failure. One of the biggest concerns we have, given our karst environment, is that we will be constantly punching holes in the ground, further risking GUDI and other future contamination, as well as creating additional sinkholes, the very thing that the LOD is supposed to protect us against. We see too much conflicting information to be comfortable with the single-minded approach that is being mandated and forced upon us by Loudoun Water.
Although you may disagree with us on this next subject, it is important to acknowledge that Loudoun County is no longer a rural county and is now, and will continue to be, more highly urbanized. A simple review of population growth figures shows that the growth (in the fastest growing countyin the U.S.) is due to a great influx of highly talented people who were in search of good housing at reasonable prices. Loudoun also happens to hold the title of the highest median family income in the nation, and is also one of the most educated counties in the U.S. as well. Loudoun’s growth, however, is not due to the rural history of the county. I expect that a review of the number of farms and persons engaged in farming have greatly reduced in that same period, and it's time to acknowledge that the genetic makeup of Loudoun County has also changed--not always for the better, but certainly, we have changed. We can also agree that perhaps things were “too successful” in the county's prior efforts to encourage growth, thus the need to find ways to curtail that rate of growth. The attempt to curb this should not be done in a fashion that runs rough-shod over those who thought they would achieve a better quality of life away from the pace-of-life in cities.
We ask that a serious consideration of alternatives be conducted, in public, and with direct input from our community, looking at public water among other options. These REAL alternatives include Loudoun Water laying pipe up Route 15, either from their own network, or from Leesburg Water's network. In the case of the latter, Loudoun Water can buy the water from Leesburg Water and service the community as it has always done. We would hope this can be done in an expeditious manner to avoid permitting Van Metre Companies from escaping from their fiduciary and moral responsibilities due to bureaucratic delays or other reasons. We need to have a resolution to this matter now and in an open forum to satisfy the public need.
Regards,
Dallas J. G. Nash
