Resolution 901 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

w1 METROPOLITA.'? CO►S1TC.L '�•.- .• Suite 3CO :Metro Sq -.:are Bui:din;, Saint Paul, N irresota 55101 29i-635? • MEMORANDUM TO: Physical Development Committee FROM: Elaine Stanley, Envi=onmental Planning Staff - .. i- V{L..LhG�s Cil July 27, 1976 SUBJECT: Addendum to the Preliminary Engineering Report for the Orono -Long Lake Interceptor, Project 71-13, Referral File No. 769 Metropolitan Council Districts le and 12 I. Introduction On June 15, 1976, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) submitted an Addendum. to e Prelimiaary Ea^ineerin^ Report for the Orono -Lona Lake Interce^tor. The recommended project consists " of c fcx2-ai-1`sq-3tem•that will phase out both the Orono and, Long Lake sewage treatment plants and connect to a metropolitan interceptor in Wayzata; sewage will be treated at the MWCC Blue Lake plant. The recommended facility has changed substantially from the one recommended in the onginai report - and the N'WCC has requested Council review -of the change and comment on the status of the Council's approval of the original project concept in relation to the present project concept. This project rias beer. programmed for federal and state grants and so.the lvPCA is also awaiting the Courcil's attic,.. t II. Bac_ kzr_ curd The Orono -Long Lake Interceptor was first initiated -as project 71-13 in the MetopoLtan Sewer Board's 1971 Capital Improvement Program and was approved 'in concept by the Metropolitan Council. The pnrci- pal reason for the project was and remains the elimination of effluent dischar,ed to Lake hiin:�etonl:a - by the local sewage treatment plants at Orono and Long Lake. The completion of this project will leave one source discharging to the lake, namely the Maple Plain plant which discharges to Pointers Creek which in turn discharges into Lake Minnetonka In early 1973 the M1NCC completed a engineering report on the capacity,P preliminary type -and route of the interceptor which recommended Alternate 1, a gravity facility having the lowest annual costa Other alternates investigated had lower initial construc- - • tion costs but were all or nearly all forcemain systems and provided for more limited amount of local service " ..�';;.•` than the gravity facility. OnApril:19, 1974, the'Council adopted the following two recon merdations: i. That the Sewer Board construct .an"interceptor sewer for Orono and Long Lake and discontinue the operation of the :Orono and Long Lake Sewage Treatment Plants and that Alternate No. 1 of trams Preliminary Engineering Report for interceptor service be provided in the place of these. two sewage treatment" plants. -Alternate No. i calls' -for gravity interceptors throughOroro and ung L- h e ane a ,pu.^:pirg station oral forcemain through Wayzata to the iffayzata interceptor. 2- 'That interim sewage flow capacity for Maple Plain and Lake Independence area be provided _Jr. the Orono -Long Lake Interceptor until the year. 2000. J. 3. That theproject be recommended for approval rot federal and state grant application. The plats and specifications 'forthe Orono -Long Lake project were approved by the Council on June 27, 1974, Finally, on September 25, 1975, the Metropolitan Council adopted the Waste Management Policy Plan which included the Orono -Long Lake project as an approved system improvement ,)sroject recommended for construction- in '1976. . However, despite the fact that the ;Orono -Lon; Lake project has received Council approval and tivzs certified for federal and state grants for planning and construction, the project has not progressed to the constructior. stage.. When the ,h-1WCC completed -its plans and specifications for the facility _..