My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01/13/20
Ramsey
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
Minutes
>
2020's
>
2020
>
01/13/20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2020 10:46:17 AM
Creation date
6/25/2020 10:46:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
treatment system. He did not believe that the DNR would require an additional pilot study or deny <br /> the request of Ramsey to drill another well. <br /> Board Member Hiatt asked how many cities are currently drawing surface water from the <br /> Mississippi, other than Minneapolis and St. Cloud. <br /> City Engineer Westby stated that there are additional cities utilizing surface water treatment but <br /> was unsure if there were any located between St. Cloud and Minneapolis. <br /> Board Member Hiatt asked if there is a model of other cities along the Mississippi that work <br /> together on a regional surface water treatment system. He noted that the City could use that <br /> information for its study. <br /> City Engineer Westby stated that the consultant is reviewing governance models used by others <br /> that share a water treatment facility and noted that he would remind the consultant of those <br /> examples. <br /> Board Member Hiatt asked if there is potential to perhaps drill in the northern part of the City. <br /> City Engineer Westby explained that the aquafer disappears as you move north and west in the <br /> City. He stated that a well siting study will need to be done each time the City needs to drill a <br /> well. <br /> Board Member Fetterley asked if there are concerns that the surface water study would show <br /> favorable and that the DNR could then deny the City's ability to drill another well in 2023. <br /> City Engineer Westby stated that he does not have any concerns that the DNR would use the study <br /> results to pressure the City to switch to surface water but would instead show that the City has <br /> researched that option. He stated that he anticipates that the cost to change to surface water <br /> treatment would be prohibitive and therefore the DNR would not/could not force the City to take <br /> that route. He stated that the City has been collecting and saving funds for a groundwater treatment <br /> facility and therefore there are funds available in the water utility fund for that purpose. <br /> Board Member Covart stated that it appears the life of a water treatment facility is about 50 years <br /> and asked the lifespan of a well. <br /> City Engineer Westby stated that the City is getting good use of its wells. He noted that there are <br /> some maintenance items such as pump replacement,but the well itself lasts a long time. He stated <br /> that the City began punching wells in 1984 and they have served the City well and continue to do <br /> so. <br /> Board Member Moore stated that it appears the City is also looking for future potential <br /> contaminates in these studies and asked if the issue of manganese is also included as an issue, <br /> specifically how the City can treat that to open the other wells. <br /> City Engineer Westby confirmed that is a part of the second study the City is completing on its <br /> own. He noted that the City is attempting to identify as much as it can in terms of possible future <br /> contaminates to be prepared for the future. <br /> Environmental Policy Board/January 13, 2020 <br /> Page 3 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.