2018_06-26_PWETCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

81 companies have a three-step treatment process for killing the algae and explained 82 that the costs varied from $1,500-3,000 dollars. He stated that he would want to 83 ensure thatthe treatments were safe and not going to cause problems in other nearby 84 water bodies. He stated that he felt these treatments would be a good short-term 85 solution to implement in conjunction with the overall long-term mitigation plans. 86 87 Kendra Godine 905 Transit Avenue 88 Ms. Godine stated that she has been a resident in her home for 24 years. She stated 89 that the pond was consistent with clarity up until 2015. She expressed her concern 90 that Frog Pond is losing its appeal to surrounding residents. She stated that she feels 91 that the City should be more active in budgeting nfs for solutions to the water 92 quality problems. 93 94 Cynthia White 2489 Churchill Street 95 Ms. White stated that she does not live on the pond but that she walks in that area 96 daily and stated that she has lived in her home for 22 years. She expressed that Frog 97 Pond has showed significant decline in the past couple years. She stated that she 98 understands funding is an issue but stated that she feels that water quality needs to 99 be high on the priority list. 100 101 Joe Inensen 875 Transit Avenue 102 Mr. Inensen stated that he is a new resident to the area and stated that he used to 103 live by Como Park and stated that water body was at one time very dirty and was 104 eventually cleaned up. He suggested that might be a good comparison to look at to 105 see what was done to clean up the water. 106 107 Chair Cihacek asked if there were any short-term solutions to improving the water 108 quality and asked what the appropriate steps would be. 109 110 Ms. Anderson Wenz questioned whether Chair Cihacek was asking about Frog 111 Pond or Lake Bennett. 112 113 Chair Cihacek replied that it seemed like more people were concerned with Frog 114 Pond but he would like to hear solutions for both water bodies. 115 116 Ms. Anderson Wenz stated that Frog Pond is not the focus of the TMDL for Lake 117 Bennett but all solutions mentioned in the presentation could also be applied to Frog 118 Pond. She stated that improving the water quality of Lake Bennett would in turn 119 improve the water quality of Frog Pond. She clarified that the TMDL study 120 although conducted in 2005 is only one piece of the many years of data that have 121 been conducted over years regarding the Lake Bennett Study. Ms. Anderson Wenz 122 explained that solutions, which are aimed at the source, take time to implement and 123 stated that things put into Frog Pond may end up getting flushed out. She stated that 124 the watershed aims at targeting the source of impairment, it does not focus on short - 125 term solutions that target internal loads. 126 Page 3 of 8