Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br /> Mr. Norris said it is more important to find out what more could be done in this <br />community’s water conservation efforts than whether RWSA or ACSA and the City <br />conducted this study. He asked that at least for now agreement is reached on moving <br />forward with this water conservation analysis and make a decision as to whether to adjust <br />the demand analysis at a later point. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rooker said he feels there needs to be clarification as to the type of analysis <br />to be conducted before an agreement could be reached. City Council’s resolution called <br />for the hiring of an outside firm to conduct this study, but what has been suggested today <br />is moving forward with efforts currently underway by the ACSA and the City to improve <br />water conservation efforts in this community and decreasing the amount of water loss to <br />leaks without hiring an expert. He said he personally is in favor of moving in this <br />direction rather than spending the money on an outside expert. <br /> <br /> Mr. Norris said he does not think it necessarily requires the hiring of an outside <br />consultant to approach this issue and believes that we have the internal ability to look at <br />some best practices and determine how to build on the programs already in place. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rooker suggested that the water conservation analysis could be removed as <br />an item to be undertaken by RWSA as a condition for moving forward with the water <br />supply plan and noted that this task would be accomplished by charging ACSA and the <br />City with this responsibility. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown said he would like to see the demand analysis promptly conducted and <br />then make a decision after the results are reviewed about the next course of action. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gaffney asked if all the board members were in agreement about requesting <br />the ACSA and the City to conduct a water conservation study and report its findings to <br />the four boards. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown added that he wanted those two agencies to specifically look at best <br />practices in other localities. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Gaffney, Ms. Thomas said that the assignment <br />given to the SFRR Stewardship Task Force by the four board chairmen was to be finished <br />by the end of this calendar year, which they are working very hard to accomplish. <br /> <br /> Ms. Thomas said there are many options being discussed by the Task Force in <br />addition to dredging that can be pursued to maintain the health of the Rivanna River, such <br />as the projects that the Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District (TJSWCD) <br />offers to farmers and the programs that the County has implemented for construction <br />activities. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gaffney said that it is his understanding that since there is money in RWSA’s <br />budget to conduct a dredging study if the four boards agree to pursue this option, then he <br />feels the dredging study can move forward as outlined in the City’s resolution. <br /> <br /> Mr. Huja asked if Mr. Gaffney’s comments mean that RWSA will proceed with <br />the dredging study now. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gaffney and Mr. Norris said a dredging study will be undertaken based on the <br />Task Force’s recommendations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Martin said he is a member of the Task Force and asked the four boards to <br />keep in mind that the Task Force is studying the question of “Why we should dredge,” <br />which may or may not lead to a decision with specific reasons for dredging. The Task <br />Force has also been assigned to address the question about when to dredge. A decision <br />could be made to dredge in order to maintain the SFRR for the University of Virginia’s <br />rowing programs. If dredging were to occur ten years from now, there would be no need <br />for a dredging feasibility study at this time due to results of the study becoming stale by <br />the time the project takes place. <br /> <br /> <br />