Laserfiche WebLink
31 <br /> <br />there are fast track remedies to alter previous authorizations that would not significantly delay the <br />project. There was little discussion of the likelihood of full funding for the current or alternate <br />projects. <br />The Task Force never arrived at a flood solution that met the stated goals and could be permitted by <br />both states. The North Dakota State Engineer appears willing to permit any project the Diversion <br />Authority has proposed. The Task Force would not have been assembled if the same were true of <br />the DNR. The focus of the Task Force then becomes finding a project that meets the requirements <br />of Minnesota law. <br />DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr and Administrator Kent Lokkesmoe on several occasions <br />defined Minnesota statutes as requiring the project conform to federal and state floodplain policies <br />and have as little adverse impacts on population and the socioeconomic base as possible. Federal <br />directives say projects should not encourage flood plain development, and Minnesota rules require <br />governmental units to prohibit floodplain development. The task must be to find a flood control <br />project that removes as little of the natural flood plain as possible, and has the least amount of <br />negative impact on the surrounding region. <br />Identifying area to be protected. <br />The Task Force identified the area needed to be protected. Presentations from city engineers of <br />Fargo and Moorhead delineated areas that needed flood protection. That area was similarly <br />identified in technical committee modeling labeled Levee Only. <br />Level of Protection <br />The Task Force agreed on a level of protection of 33,000 cfs, or approximately 41.3 feet. City <br />engineers described current dikes and levees as being constructed to levels between 42.5 and 44.5 <br />feet. The State of North Dakota appropriated funds for Fargo to complete levees that would <br />provide certifiable flood protection of 39.4 feet. <br />Protection above a 100 year flood <br />It was generally agreed that a diversion structure could provide additional protection needed to the <br />100 year flood level of 33,000 cfs. Representatives of the DNR as well as many Task Force <br />members recommended Distributed Storage be constructed to provide protection beyond the 100 <br />year level. <br />Diversion Channel Alignment <br />The Task Force never developed a process for determining diversion channel alignment, and as a <br />result, did not make any recommendations. Several alignment options were reviewed at the Task <br />Force’s final meeting, with little time for critical evaluation or tracing the source of the proposals. <br />None of the proposals presented seemed likely to be permitted by the DNR. <br />