Minutes 07/08/1980 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'i'" 8 ~ -".~F TUESDAY JULY 8, 1980 The State Health Department has also cast a shadow over this element. This has taken two forms, as follows: (a) As a condition of approving the construction plans on this element, the Department mandated some additional plant improvements never originally contemplated not included in cost estimates. These improvements included some earthen lagoons, in which to capture all filtered materials and certain changes in the plant building proper to provide for improved handling of chlorination and flouridation. (b) Although we are assured of a construction permit from the Department, they are now suggesting that a new permit for the operation of the plant in excess of the currently permitted six MGD will be denied or delayed. We do not see these questions as insurmountable. This is so, because we can operate the plant at its new design capacity (eight MGD or ten MGD) for short periods during a day and still not exceed the six MGD permit constraint. In addition, we have the opportunity to appeal from the imposition of the basic six MGD permit constraint and feel that we have compelling arguments to support such appeal. Revised Estimated Cost: Alternate No. 1 - Changing filter media, making other changes originally planned, adding new features required by Health Department, but omitting additional flocculation and sedimentation basins-$1,872,000. Alternate No. 2 - Changing filter media, making other changes originally planned, adding new features required by Health Department, and including additional flocculation and sedimentation basins-$2,087,000. Element F. - Construct 1,000,000 gallon clear water tank Original Purpose: To provide additional water storage necessary to meet fluctuating water demand and to provide greater fire protection. Original Estimated Cost: $575,000 Current Status: Not finally designed, subject to decisions on capacity and location. Discussion of Current Status: Generally, a water system can benefit from as much storage capacity as it can possibly afford. Thus, there has been some sentiment for the expansion of this element from a 1,000,000 gallon tank to a 2,000,000 gallon tank. Unfortunately, the location of this tank (regardless of size) has become the source of controversy. After careful study, three sites (all fairly close to each other) have been selected. They vary in terms of size and cost, but each is opposed by neighboring residents/owners for one reason or another.