Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />November 14, 1989 <br /> <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />Council Business, continued <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />A Water Demand Study prepared by Barr Engineering supports the need <br />for additional new water supply. The study concluded, based on 1976 Request for Additional <br />water use patterns and current development, the city could expect Water Supply <br />water usage on peaks days of 10.2 million gallons. Report 89-279 <br /> <br />Since the discovery of the contamination in 1981, it has been <br />necessary to control water usage by lawn watering restrictions and <br />bans because of the i nabi 1 ity to meet an unrestri cted rate of <br />demand. <br /> <br />New developments will place additional demand on an already <br />deficient supply. Construction will begin on a 150 unit residential <br />deve 1 opment located north of I -694 and west of 27th Avenue NW. <br />Another residential development includes 130 units plus a commercial <br />development currently under study for a site located west of Silver <br />Lake Road and north of County Road E. The peak water usage from <br />these two areas would be about 1,400 gallons per minute. <br /> <br />Under the terms of the City's litigation settlement agreement, the <br />Army has to provide additional water supply to the City for growth. <br />Two options for pursuing additional water supply are: the <br />construction of another PGAC Facility or use of water from the Plume <br />Groundwater Recovery System (PGRS). <br /> <br />In the agreement, the Army is to pay the costs associated with <br />construction of another PGAC Facility, and the City would be <br />responsible for the installation of a new well. <br /> <br />The proposed PGRS would be constructed in the Rush Lake area. The <br />PGRS woul d produce about 1, 000 gallons per mi nute from 5 small <br />wells. The preliminary plan for the PGRS facility calls for piping <br />the water back to the TCAAP where it would be treated with an air <br />stripper. <br /> <br />If the capacity of the PGRS could be increased to 2,500 gallons per <br />minute and a PGAC treatment facility were constructed, the water <br />produced by the PGRS and treated by PGAC could meet the City's water <br />needs. <br /> <br />To pursue either option for additional water supply, staff <br />recommends meet i ng with the Army and the MPCA to determi ne the <br />feasible options. Staff would also need to meet with the City's <br />consultants to determine the quantity of needed water. <br />