Council Discussion Items - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

WIDSETH SNUM FAX NQLTING 2000 Industrial Park Rd S P.O. Box 2720 Baxter,MN 56425 Phone:218829-5117 Fax:218829-2517 Date: January 14, 2004 File#: 130B001 To: Nate Blanchard, SEH, 651-490-2150 Tony Hughes, MnDOT, via Email From: Tim Houle #of pages,including cover sheet:l NO Hard Copy To Follow Subject: Pequot Lakes—T.H. 371 Improvements Tony and Nate,this is a follow-up to some messages between us on the possible impacts to Pequot Lakes' wastewater treatment facility (WWTF)that the State might have to pay for with the proposed T.H. 371 improvements. While the WWTF's stabilization ponds are missed by the proposed bypass alignments,the WWTF's spray irrigation field south of Derkson Road and east of the Paul Bunyan Trail is detrimentally impacted. I suppose the State could buy the same amount of land as the bypass would take up and move the spray irrigation system,but there are several"ifs"and steps to take in this scenario. i i First, any change to the WWTF will require the MPCA to `sign-off on it. And for large changes such as this, they would first require a Facility Plan(study)be completed. With all the steps and items to look at in such a study, we estimate $35,000 for this task. One of the issues that the City has had to deal with in the past with their WWTF was nitrates in the groundwater. After studying this issue,the recommendations that the City has been using and have helped with the situation were to use as much land area as possible when spray irrigating and to spread the irrigating out over more time (increase the area and decrease the application rate). Thus, during the Facility Plan stage, any changes to the present system will need to address this situation(we don't want to decrease the application area nor increase the application rate). Depending on what the Facility Plan concluded as the best alternative, the next step is to start design,permits, and any needed land acquisition. When considering the alternative of purchasing more land and moving the spray irrigation equipment, issues such as is there even any appropriate land adjacent to the existing spray irrigation field that can be purchased(for example, wetlands are not appropriate), the cost of the land, and the cost for clearing and grubbing the land if it is timbered would need to be considered before this was the preferred alternative. For the purposes of this exercise, let's say that purchasing and clearing additional land to compensate for that taken up by the bypass was the preferred alternative. I will leave it to SEH/MnDOT to estimate these costs. As far as the cost of relocating the spray irrigation equipment,that is very difficult to estimate CADocuments and SettingSAdministratot\Local SettingiTemporary Inumet Files\Content.IE9H01KLVWRSEH&MnDOT-011404-input on reconfiguration of spray irrigation fiel4ax.doc