Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br /> APPROVED <br /> 78 Council Member Stoesz asked about water reuse, such as with developments that plan to <br /> 79 take irrigation water from surface water sources. Is that monitored? Mr. Johnson <br /> 80 confirmed that the State Department of Health monitors that water as well. Council <br /> 81 Member Stoesz asked if animal consumption(on farms) is monitored also and Mr. <br /> 82 Johnson wasn't familiar with that. <br /> 83 <br /> 84 Mayor Rafferty said that the Council will continue this discussion after the public <br /> 85 meeting at the end of the month. <br /> 86 2. Irrigation Controller Grant(Regular Agenda Item)—Community <br /> 87 Development Director Grochala and City Engineer Hankee noted their written report. <br /> 88 Mr. Grochala remarked that the matter was postponed at the last Council meeting. Last <br /> 89 year the City received a grant from the Rice Creek Watershed District to replace irrigation <br /> 90 monitors/sensors in City parks. The sensors would work to reduce water consumption by <br /> 91 50%annually. This project would assist in reducing consumption of water coming from <br /> 92 the ground, serve as a good example of the City being proactive, and provide a modern <br /> 93 system of monitoring certain elements of use. The grant provides up to 51% of the cost <br /> 94 of a system up to the cost of$41,000. Staff has been working toward implementation <br /> 95 since last year. Funding for the City share of the cost(one half of$76,500)would come <br /> 96 from the City's water utility. <br /> 97 Council Member Stoesz said he has been following this project and he expected the cost <br /> 98 would come in much lower. He has done more review and sees the costs are pretty clear; <br /> 99 but he still has sticker shock. He asked if funding this cost would impact funds available <br /> 10o for a treatment plant if that were a project in the future. Staff explained that this would <br /> 101 be funded from an operating account while the other(a treatment facility) would be trunk <br /> 102 funds. <br /> 103 Council Member Ruhland asked about the cost of the water saved? Mr. Grochala said the <br /> 104 savings would be about$16,000 annually assuming the fifty percent reduction. The <br /> 105 payoff considering the cost of the system would be about 4.6 years. <br /> 106 Council Member Stoesz said he still questions the need considering the cost. He noted <br /> 107 that the City does have staff that could manually turn off irrigation when appropriate. <br /> 108 Community Development Director Grochala added that the concept is something that <br /> 109 could be a model for the future and the community. <br /> 11 o The council and staff discussed the status of surface water reuse as part of addressing <br /> 111 future water needs. <br /> 112 Council Member Lyden noted that staff has pointed out the costs savings that cover the <br /> 113 cost in 4.6 years; he wonders if cost savings go past that time? Staff said yes. <br /> 3 <br />