Agenda Packets - 1982/11/08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

jw 16,6 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development DATE: November 2, 1982 SUBJECT:* STATUS REPORT ON WATER TREATMENT STUDY At the October 25, 1982 Council meeting it was requested that data be presented as to the current water usage and status of the treat- ment study be presented at the November 1st Council meeting. This memo summarizes the discussion presented to the City Council on November 1st. Two graphs were handed out at the Council meeting which illustrated the historical water production for the City of Mounds View on (1) an annual water production basis; and (2) a monthly water production basis. The annual water production basis also illustrated the projected water production as estimated in the Consulting Engineer's Diversified Report prepared in the late 1970's. It was apparent from the data that our water production rates have been increasing but appear to be increasing at a rate lower than forcast in 1978 by C.E.D. Review of the C.E.D. commants in their report indicate that certain things would be necessary as production levels grew in the City of Mounds View. It appears that the City of Mounds View water production rates may be reaching that point when upgrading and/or expansion of the water system should be seriously considered and phasing in of those proposed improvement be thoroughly discussed. Layne Minnesota was contacted to determine the costs of servicing the air injection equipment on our existing water treatment plants. That firm did the original installation work and currently represents the manufacturer of the air injection equipment. It was determined that to replace the equipment would cost an estimated $75 to $100 with a labor cost of $74 per hour with an estimated 4 to 6 hours to com- plete the work. Staff recommends the City Council authorize retain- ing Layne Minnesota to service the air injection equipment at Well #6 on a time and materials basis not to exceed $700. It is recommended that the funds be utilized from contractual repairs in the 1982 budget. It is further recommended that the water maintenance personnel observe the repair work necessary at Well #6 and then implement, using their own manpower and equipment, the servicing of the air injection equip- ment at Well #5 during the time the well is being serviced under a proposed contract to be submitted to the Council for their consideration later this month, naScd on the experiences obtained at Weiis #5 and #6, it is hoped that the City water maintenance personnel could then provide the necessary maintenance activities at Well #1 for the air injection equipment. The water sampling work has progressed and it is anticipated that a preliminary report might be available at the November 15th Agenda meeting. Preliminary evaluation and findings indicate that the exist-