Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br /> Mr. Robert Tucker, County Executive, pointed out that RWSA has a deadline <br />from Dam Safety to have the dam repairs completed by June 30, 2011. The design work <br />is scheduled to begin in early 2009 with construction to be underway in 2010 and <br />completed in 2011. The project is already behind schedule. It is not certain what action <br />the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) and Dam Safety will take if the <br />work is delayed beyond the 2011 deadline. It has been eluded that RWSA might be <br />required to drain the Ragged Mountain Reservoir, but it is uncertain at this time if this <br />action will need to be taken. He asked the other board members to consider the DCR <br />deadline when considering additional steps in this process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Huja said the City does not intend to delay the process and suggested that the <br />additional studies can be conducted concurrently with the project work. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tucker said as long as the studies are done concurrently, he feels that DCR’s <br />deadline will not be an issue at this time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gaffney said Ms. Thomas put forth a proposal earlier in the meeting on the <br />pipeline study related to hire an engineering firm to provide a cost estimate on laying the <br />pipeline based on similar projects being undertaken throughout the country. He asked if <br />the other Board members are in agreement with this proposal or if a more in-depth study <br />is needed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Norris responded that he does not believe an in-depth study is needed. He <br />said he feels an expert review of the data that has already collected in order is adequate to <br />provide an objective analysis so that the public can be reassured about what would be the <br />best path forward. <br /> <br /> Mr. Boyd said he does not have a problem with that proposal, but he does not <br />know if this additional review would provide information that will be accurate five to ten <br />years from now when the pipeline is scheduled to be constructed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Norris asked if the pipeline analysis could be added to the scope of work for <br />the experts who would already be impaneled to review the costs of the Ragged Mountain <br />Dam project. He said he feels that the panel would be able to advise whether the project <br />is valid or suggest another alternative. The advantages would be that the pipeline study <br />could be undertaken concurrently with the Ragged Mountain Dam review process at no <br />large additional cost and could reassure the public that there are no major flaws that <br />would present problems ten years from now. <br /> <br /> Mr. Frederick said he believes that the two studies could be undertaken at the <br />same time, but he does not necessarily agree that the same experts should review both <br />projects. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wagner concurred with Mr. Frederick’s comments and added that the dam <br />experts might not be knowledgeable about pipeline work. He said he does not feel it is a <br />good use of money to undertake a pipeline study now. Pipelines can be built, and he <br />assumed there is some right that would allow the Sugar Hollow pipeline to be repaired <br />based possibly on some legal rights that have accrued to an easement due to the amount <br />of time that the pipeline has existed in that area. Mr. Wagner amended his comment by <br />stating that there is a recorded easement, but added that through eminent domain or some <br />other means there is a way to access land in order to build a pipeline if that is the decision <br />made by this community. He said he feels that obtaining an estimate on the project cost <br />through the number of feet and price per foot would be a waste of money. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown reiterated his earlier statement that a big issue for City Council, and <br />what is driving this resolution, is that City residents are becoming increasingly concerned <br />about the cost of the dam and the cost of the pipeline. He said he feels that City Council <br />has a responsibility to ensure that City residents have confidence in GF and the process <br />that is moving forward and that is it conducted in the most cost effective manner. For <br />those reasons, he feels it is important to have an expert panel review the work that has <br />been done on the pipeline to either confirm that the data is valid or point out methodology <br />concerns. <br /> <br />