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
25 <br /> <br />is my hope that the state of Minnesota will act swiftly on conditional permitting and then help us as <br />we communicate the changes to the public. <br /> <br />Ron Bergan- Fargo Business Leader and Entrepreneur <br />I appreciated being part of the Task Force and all the work the MN DNR put forth working with <br />the Task Force. Also, thanks to Governor Dayton for attending every meeting. We learned a lot <br />about floods and flood protection for the F/M area. The 100 year protection consensus of the Task <br />Force is low compared to the 250, 500, 700, 1,000 and even larger floods that could occur. It was <br />reported that the Minot flood was about 10 times the 100 year protection they had in place. It was <br />reported that the storage dams also in place were full at the start of this flood. They probably <br />caused the flood to be much larger with the entire flood flow going over the dam. At some point <br />concerns of dam failure cause you to open the control gates and the flood becomes larger than <br />without the dam. See attached report showing the effect of dams on flooding. The ‘mean annual <br />flood’ is reduced by ½ while the size of the flood likely to recur every 50 years barely changed. The <br />risk of dam failure in 100 year and larger floods makes dams “dangerously deceptive”. Grand Fork, <br />Minot and Bismarck all have had floods greater than the 100 year level in recent years. <br /> <br />The Diversion will allow us to have a chance to win a 500 year flood fight. Looking at the 500 year <br />flood map, the flood extends west of Mapleton and looks more like a large lake. <br /> <br />The Diversion is designed to give us protection for 100’s of years. I am concerned that changes we <br />are considering will cause the risk of failure to increase significantly especially in the very long term. <br />Failures was one of the concerns of the DNR. We need to consider the Red River Basin <br />Commission recommendation that the population should grow in cities protected from flooding, <br />therefore we need adequate area for expansion in F/M. <br /> <br />The Task Force found that all reasonable alternatives were or had been studied and a Diversion is <br />the only alternative to give us the desired protection. I believe the Corps and the local engineers did <br />a very good job also of selecting the route for the diversion balancing the environmental concerns, <br />costs, etc. The western and eastern tie-back levies and allowing 37’ through town are acceptable <br />compromises to the Minnesota DNR. It should be noted that the 37’ flow affects 82 additional <br />homes in Fargo and adds significant costs. <br /> <br />The northern storage area is not acceptable to me. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.