Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-11-29 Board of Selectmen Handout' , Water Treatment Plant Siting Recommendations 74-r '9 ass 11/16/2005 -~04 11 2[D5 ROV 28 PH 12. 37 To: Board of Selectmen Cc: Peter Hechenbleikner n From: Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee Date: November 16, 2005 Subject: Water Treatment Plant Siting Recommendations This purpose of this memo is to confirm the oral recommendations given by the Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee at the November 8, 2005 Board of Selectmen's meeting and to explain in a little more detail the reasons for these recommendations. There are three main goals that the Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee have always generally consider in their deliberations of water subjects. 1. The citizens of the Town of Reading shall have an adequate and dependable supply of clean, safe drinking water. 2. The Town of Reading shall obtain and treat its water in an environmentally friendly manner. 3. The cost of water to the ratepayers shall be fair. Over time, the order has changed to what it is now. Formerly the three goals were the same but the order of the second and third items were reversed (cost before environment). After much discussion by the committee members, it can be summed up by three recommendations to the Selectmen, concerning future drinking water for Reading. 1. BUILD AND BUY The first recommendation is that the Town should build a new water treatment plant AND obtain supplementary water during the dry summer months from the MWRA. The main reason, following the guidelines of the Ad Hoc Water Supply Committee, is to help relieve some of the stress on the Ipswich River. This does not increase the quantity of water available to the Town. It is only using the MWRA as a source to provide what will NOT be taken from the Ipswich River Basin. It is, and has been, 91 Water Treatment Plant Siting Recommendations 11/16/2005 acknowledged that MWRA water is more costly than locally produced water. This is shown in the order of guidelines above. There are a number of reasons for not pursuing a 100% MWRA source: a. It is illegal at the present time to go totally to the MWRA when the Town has a local, viable source. This is covered by two statutes. 1) The MWRA enabling legislation 2) The Inter-basin transfer act Depending on changes in legislation to permit full MWRA use is problematic. There could be delays and delays, during which, continued repairs to an aging water treatment plant could be required. Then if a conclusion is that 100% MWRA is not permitted, Reading would find itself in a position that it has to immediately build a new plant. b. There is no guarantee of Legislation changing. C. Lawsuits could delay implementation for many years. d. The Town retains control over the water it produces, relative to quality, usage and rates. e. Source redundancy if there were ever a problem with either source. 2. FORMER COMPOSTING SITE It is advised that the Board of Selectmen revisit the consideration of building the new water treatment plant at the site of the former composting area. There are several benefits: National Heritage foundation has tentatively approved the site and the approach roadways as having no significant negative impact on endangered species. Continued operation of existing plant during construction - a significant savings. Continued operation of the presently used composting area. The cost of purchasing MWRA water (compared with reconstructing on the existing plant site) is avoided. 0 2 Water Treatment Plant Siting Recommendations 11/16/2005 It was reported that a major concern of some neighbors was the traffic on Grove Street going to the compost recycling area. If the new plant is put at the site of the existing plant, traffic to the compost recycling area will not be increased. It is recommended that before a decision is made, discussions be held with the neighbors to determine specific problems and how they can be solved. Odor has been stated as a concern. Odor control will be installed. Additional noise abatement control will be installed. 3. SITE PRIORITY The Committee recommends the following priority for siting the new Water Treatment Plant for a variety of positive and negative reasons. a. Former Composting Area b. Present Composting Area C. Existing Water Treatment Plant Site a. Former Composting Area + The Former Composting Area is a disturbed site + Tentative approval by National Heritage + Uninterrupted operation of existing plant during construction + Site is level, no major construction problems b. Present Composting Area Composting area has to be moved or contracted out Relocating composting to the rear of the site, may not be permitted, Contracting out will have increasing general fund costs + Present composting area is a previously disturbed site + Site is level posing no major construction problems + Uninterrupted operation of existing plant during construction A., I Water Treatment Plant Siting Recommendations 11/16/2005 C. Existing Water Treatment Plant site + At existing plant site, build on existing general area Water must be purchased from MWRA = BIG BUCKS Extra construction costs for complete demolition Temporary trailer for water administration and testing, at additional cost Whichever site for the new plant is chosen, the clear wells will remain where they are presently located, adjacent to the existing water treatment plant. GENERAL CONCLUSTIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Registration is scheduled to be renewed on January 1, 2008, for an additional 10 years. All communities taking water from the Ipswich River Basin have a registration, the quantity of water they can withdraw from the basin per day. Reading's present registration is 2.57 million gallons per pay (MGD). Many other communities drawing water from the Ipswich River Basin have a permit, which is the amount, in addition to their registration, that they are permitted to withdraw from the basin. READING DOES NOT HAVE A PERMIT! Communities that have had their permit revised by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) have challenged this revision (reduction) in court. There has been no decision made so the amount that they take has not been decreased. MWRA water rates have generally increased faster than Reading's rates. The rates proposed by MWRA in June increased due to unforeseen events of July and August. Nobody gives us water rights. If we abandon our water rights it is seriously questioned if they can ever be retrieved. The Water Sewer and Storm Water management Advisory Committee's primary recommendation to the Board of Selectmen is to build a new water treatment plant and buy "some" additional water when needed during summer months from the MWRA. end 0 Page 1 of 1 C Hechenblefter, Peter ~Z~ From: pwvolimar@comcast.net Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 8:36 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Public water Selectmen Short and brief Please consider abandoning the idea of building a new water treatment plant. It makes no sense to build a new treatment plant when the MWRA has already built all the required- facilities and does a very good job of treating and delivering water. It also tastes great Thanks Peter Vollmar 408 Pearl St 11/29/2005 91!~ TING x,~EN MF,E E cv S of -atv • ~ Ii ~ + ~ 111t rant) 1) U 1 t \-3-7 1