1 / 40

Beaver Lake Association Water Restoration

Beaver Lake Association Water Restoration. Tonight’s Process:. We are Here to Share Information View Presentation & Findings in Entirety Comments & Questions Held Until the End Take Notes Comments from Members in Good Standing starting with opponents.

adem
Download Presentation

Beaver Lake Association Water Restoration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Beaver Lake AssociationWater Restoration

  2. Tonight’s Process: • We are Here to Share Information • View Presentation & Findings in Entirety • Comments & Questions Held Until the End • Take Notes • Comments from Members in Good Standing starting with opponents

  3. WHY THE DISCUSSION?Members of Beaver Lake Association have: • Concern over lake levels • Concern for ability to obtain drinking water from the lake (intake depth) • Concern for water quality • Potential Contaminates • Toxic Algae (Currently Present in Low Levels) • Agricultural • Urban Pollution • Petroleum Pipeline • Terrorism • Concern for lake habitat • Concern for bank erosion • Dam Repairs • Shoreline Stabilization • Concern for the amount of time Real Estate is on the market • Concern for Real Estate Values • Concern for Sustained Recreational Activities

  4. LAKE LOSSES PER DAY2.2 MILLION GALLONS • Residential & BLA Use • Lawn Watering • Dredging (when in operation) • Evaporation • Other Losses • Seepage • Shoreline absorption • Water Production Silt Pond Losses due to Evaporation and Seepage did not exist at the today’s level 20 years ago Check 926 tom shows 942

  5. OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE FACING THE SAME ISSUES • CARTER LAKE • Low Water Levels • Toxic Algae due to lack of inflow • Currently in Design Phase • Lake Wa-con-da • Low Lake Levels • Currently Pumping • Exploring Feasibility of Second Well

  6. The Task Force: • Was Requested by the Board • Introduction of Task Force Members • Asked to Review Current Situation and Data • Determine Our Requirements • Analyze Short and Long Term Solutions • Make Recommendations to the Board

  7. Dam was built in the 1970’s Property was purchased and homes built on the promise of a full & beautiful lake. Skepticism arose and many doubted the lake would ever be realized. Land values were low and property was available via sheriffs sale.

  8. Lake filled in 1976. Property values increased & Beaver Lake was finally a good investment. An entire community grew as the result of the lake. The number of residents increased steadily after the lake filled.

  9. Population Trend 942

  10. Yearly Water Consumption 2006 Consumption is ahead of 2005 by 8% for the same date 2006 Year End Projected Consumption based on data

  11. Present water losses & usage are greater than gains from inflows and rain.

  12. LAKE LOSSES PER DAY2.2 MILLION GALLONS • Household Use • Lawn Watering • Dredging (when in operation) • Evaporation • Other Losses • Seepage • Shoreline absorption • Water Production Silt Pond Losses due to Evaporation and Seepage did not exist at the today’s level 20 years ago

  13. HOW DO WE OBTAIN WATER? Influx • Streams • Murray waste water treatment • Springs • Rain water

  14. 2006 FLOW INTO BEAVER LAKE

  15. JUNE 05 -.5 JUNE 04 -.75 5.07 “ Rain In Aug. 2006 Aug. 17 -26.13

  16. Precipitation • Important factors when analyzing Rainfall • When the rainfall occurs • How muchrainfall is received • Ground Saturation • Intensity and Duration • Too much at the wrong time goes over the dam • Too little at the wrong time contributes to low lake levels.

  17. 2003 Precipitation(-6.95)NWS @ Eppley Airfield

  18. 2004 Precipitation(+3.80)NWS Data @ Eppley Airfield

  19. 2005 Precipitation (-4.06)NWS Data @ Eppley Airfield

  20. 2006 Precipitation (-.2 to date)NWS @ Eppley Airfield Lake is -26”

  21. JUNE 05 -.5 JUNE 04 -.75 5.07 “ Rain In Aug. 2006 Aug. 17 -26.13

  22. Water Restoration Options • Option A –Transmission from Well to a Settling Pond Near Dam • Option B – Transmission from Well to Settling Pond at the North West Cove • Option C – Transmission from Well Directly Into the Lake • Option D – Connect to Rural Water District • Option E – Water Management

  23. Option A – To a Settling Pond Near the Dam Impacts • Water Temperature • Water Hardness • Cost to Construct Settling Pond • Cost to Dig Well and Run Construction Line Benefits • Alternate Source of Water in the Event of a Natural or Intentional Disaster • Shorter Transmission Line • Suspended Solids Removed • Lower Cost to Construct Transmission Line • Reduction in Water Contaminates in Lake • Algae Control

  24. Option B – North West Cove • Impacts • Cost to Dig Well • Cost of additional Transmission Line • Vegetation impact • Benefits • Alternate Source of Water in the Event of a Natural or Intentional Disaster • Temperature Moderation • Hardness Moderation • Suspended Solids Removed • Use existing settling pond • Follows Natural Flow of the Water

  25. Option C – Well Direct to Lake • Impact • Increased Suspended Solids • Increased Hardness • Decreased Temperature • Greater Impact on Water Treatment Process • Some Discoloration due to iron concentration • Benefit • Alternate Source of Water in the Event of a Natural or Intentional Disaster • Lower cost than providing settling pond

  26. Benefit Alternate Source of Water in the Event of a Natural or Intentional Disaster Available for Drinking Water Only Impact Minimal Use for the Lake. Blending Drinking Water Provides New Impacts? Does Not Address Evaporation and Seepage Losses Can Not Add to Lake Because of Chlorine Cost – Need to investigate Option D – Connect to Rural Water District

  27. Option E – Water Management Only • Water Rationing • Household Use • Lawn Watering • Limited Dredging • Enforcement of Policy • Wait Out the Drought • Limited Lake Use • Communication & Education of Water Management Policy

  28. Investment Considerations • Option A - $830,062.00, Anticipated O & M = 4K / Month • Option B - $1,215,132.00, Anticipated O & M = 4K / Month • Option C -$748,062.00, Anticipated O & M = 4K / Month • Option D – Investigation Required • Option E – Cost measured in losses to property and amenities

  29. Spread sheet of costs

  30. Lab Analysis

  31. Letter FromGame and Parks Troy, I checked in several water quality manuals concerning alkalinity and hardness.  The following statement should assure that your pumping operation will have no negative impact on the fish population in Beaver Lake.  The statement is as follows: "Fish grow well over a wide range of alkalinities and hardness, but values of 120 to 400 parts per million are optimum".  From that statement and the values you provided me you are good to proceed with the pumping.  You should be complimented on doing your research prior to any action as we usually are contacted after the fact and there is a problem. Best of luck filling the lake and hope we get more rain. Dave Tunink Assist. Admin. Fisheries Management Section

  32. HHS LETTER Troy, I had a couple people look at the numbers, and they don't see anything that should cause any problems.  To be really sure you should probably run this by your engineers that designed the plant.  They should be able to tell you what you will be able to handle. I hope that helps.  If you have any other questions.  Let us know. Andy Kahle, Drinking Water Program Specialist Environmental Health Services NHHS - R&L Phone:  (402) 471-2104 e-mail:  andy.kahle@hhss.ne.gov

  33. Public Hearing and Feedback Financing Engineering Contractors Permits Geo Technical Land Acquisition Easements Board Input Resource RequirementsNot in Order

  34. Financing Options • Grants • Consolidate $427,000.00 and the Well Investment Into One Long Term Loan • Assess Property for The Cost of the Well System. • Sale of Under Utilized BLA Property • Develop a Short Term Interest Only Loan for $427000.00 & the Well To Insure all Avenues are Understood. • Assess Well and other Improvements ( Rip Rap and New Docks for Access Areas) • Sub-Group to Evaluate the Options & Report at the September Meeting

  35. Time Line • Depends on Board Decision • If the Board Approves an Option – a 7 to 10 Month Process • Next Public Forum is the Sept. Board Meeting • If the Board Decides to Drill a Well Water Could be Available in Mid-2007

  36. Goals & Objectives • To Be Good Stewards of our Environment • To Do the Right Thing • To Provide a Long Term Solution with the Greatest Cost / Benefit Ratio • To Insure High Quality Drinking Water and Recreational Water for the Members • To Maintain Property Values • To Sustain Community Growth

  37. What is Next? • Board Decision on Direction of the Project • Isolate key decisions and issues that need immediate or near-term resolution • Financing • Isolate issues needing long-term resolution • Define consequences of decision postponement

  38. Send Questions or Comments to lakeofun@yahoo.com • September Meeting will continue with the results & updated information

More Related