01-18-2018
Laserfiche
>
Public
>
Flood Diversion Board of Authority
>
Agenda
>
2018
>
01-18-2018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2018 1:48:09 PM
Creation date
11/28/2018 2:36:33 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
3 <br /> <br />Technical Committee Recommendation: The Tech Committee recommends this, as it <br />reduces upstream impacts. No Task Force members expressed opposition to the eastern tie- <br />back, though at least one member expressly reserved judgment regarding the correct <br />alignment. <br /> <br />4. How much water runs through town? <br />Technical Committee Recommendation: Design for a river stage of 37 feet through town. <br />Note: The Army Corps said they would be able to certify 100-year protection for a system <br />that runs 37 feet through town and also said this approach would likely work for the current <br />authorization. Over the past 100 years, a river stage of 37 feet through Fargo and Moorhead <br />was exceeded for 28 days. <br /> <br />5. Is there northern storage in the downstream area? <br />Technical Committee Recommendation: The Tech Committee was neutral. It would store <br />water in the northwest part of the project area; however, it reduces the staging area <br />elevations 0.03 feet. It does maintain natural floodplain acres, which is important overall for <br />Minnesota permittability. <br /> <br />6. Is there a change in the embankment structure? <br />For the purpose of identifying a potential alignment recommendation, the Technical <br />Committee considered different options for the dam alignment--- 7A, B and C were <br />presented to the Task Force. It was discussed how 7A would likely not be permittable by the <br />Minnesota DNR. The Army Corps of Engineers had concerns with 7B and maintaining <br />federal authorization. Option 7C maintained more floodplain than 7A and less than 7B, <br />DNR said that 7C would likely need some additional storage added to be permittable. The <br />combining of the options to maximize storage was suggested by some Task Force members <br />and DNR. Combinations of 7A, 7B, and 7C as well as 7C alone were discussed by the Task <br />Force. <br /> <br />7. Is there an increase in downstream water levels? <br />This is an issue related to dam operation, rather than constructed project features. The <br />Technical Committee considered an operational approach that would allow up to six inches <br />of stage increase downstream. This would occur at Climax, MN because of a narrowing of <br />the river. A six-inch stage rise at Climax would translate to less than 0.5 inches at the <br />Canadian border. The Task Force Charter called for more balanced impacts upstream and <br />downstream, which implies more flow to the downstream area. However, the impact on <br />water levels at the Canadian border and other downstream communities were significant <br />concerns for several Task Force members. Further determination of this issue can be <br />considered in the operating plan for the dam. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.