My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016.08.25 CC Packet - Water Summit
Hugo
>
City Council
>
City Council Agenda/Packets
>
2016 CC Packets
>
2016.08.25 CC Packet - Water Summit
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2016 8:44:45 AM
Creation date
8/30/2016 8:44:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
8/25/2016
Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Minutes for the NE Water Summit on February 18, 2016 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Update <br />DNR Assistant Commissioner Barb Naramore talked about the White Bear Lake settlement <br />agreement, stating it was compatible with updates to the Water Supply Plan. They are receiving <br />comments and implementing ideas. The DNR is working with communities individually on <br />Comprehensive Plan updates. They are on target to set the protective Lake elevation by <br />November 2016. Barb explained this is not a guarantee lake level, but negative threshold reports <br />will alert the DNR to examine it and address concerns. The Ground Water Management plan <br />was finalized in 2015 and she talked about SF 1910 and explained where things were left off <br />stating she didn't expect any changes. Naramore provided information on the augmentation <br />study saying cost estimates to augment from the Saint Paul Regional Water Services chain of <br />lakes would cost between $55M and $67M with operational costs of $500-$660k annually. <br />Phosphorus levels and other contaminants were of concern, and advanced treatments would <br />increase the cost by $23-$40 million, with maintenance going to $900,000-$4M. The study <br />made no assumption on who would construct or operate the system. <br />Columbus Council Bill Krebs said it was unfair to expect taxpayers pay for augmentation of <br />White Bear Lake. <br />MN House Rep Peter Fischer stated that the models they are looking at right now show that the <br />lake will eventually dry up. The White Bear Lake Conservation District would be responsible <br />for operating the system. He said he felt the state should be responsible if it is shown that ground <br />water pumping is part of the problem. <br />RCWD Commissioner John Waller mentioned diverting JD #1 Ramsey County into White Bear <br />Lake because 1/2 of the water currently flowing through it would provide the 2 billion gallons <br />estimated for augmenting the lake. <br />Naramore replied to Krebs comment saying that the DNR is doing what legislation has directed <br />them to do. Senator Roger Chamberlain added that it is a legislative issue now. Representative <br />Matt Dean stated that augmentation of White Bear Lake is not new, and he thought the cost <br />estimates were high. Another study is being done by the residents on White Bear Lake <br />Metropolitan Council Update <br />Met Council Environmental Services Leisa Thompson talked about the Met Council's vision to <br />keep more water in the region by reusing it, and she highlighted some water reuse projects <br />related to wastewater effluent stating that 250 million gallons per day gets reclaimed. The Water <br />Resources Plan highlights creating a reclamation plant for groundwater recharge in lieu of <br />enlarging sewer pipes, and this would be needed by approximately the year 2030. It is being <br />suggested reclaimed water could be used to augment White Bear Lake, except phosphorus and <br />chlorides would be an issue, along with water temperature. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.