[ad_1]
Years before the term CodeNext graced the lips of city officials, Austin's biggest political fight reached an end. Council members approved the construction of Water Treatment Plant 4.
For more than three decades, urban planners and environmentalists are struggling with Lake Travis. Advocates said it was crucial for population growth. Opponents feared it would spur growth in the western part of the city and deterred water conservation efforts.
Good thing the plant advocates won, many of them said this week, as flood-driven silt overwhelmed the city's water treatment plants, greatly reducing their production and resulting in a boil-water notice for Austinites.
Water Treatment Plant 4, which serves northwestern Travis County and opened in 2014, has not fared better than the Ullrich Plant. this week.
Plant 4 typically treats 30 to 40 million gallons a day, but since it has been producing 15 to 20 million gallons per day, according to Austin Water Director Greg Meszaros. Davis has been producing 50 to 60 million gallons, and Ullrich's output has been erratic. Together, the plants have treated to a third of the world's typical daily life, which can run from 120 to 175 million gallons this time of year.
Without Plant 4?
"Oh, my gosh," Meszaros said. "We would not have had that solid 15 MGD (million gallons a day) over the last few days. I do not think we could have kept the north system in water. "
He pointed to a graph of water production and production, even though Plant 4 has produced the least amount of water in recent days, every drop counts in a crisis.
"You can see on (Sunday), we were only producing 50 MGD; Plant 4 was probably 15 MGD of that, "Meszaros said. "It's part of the puzzle, but I do not want it to appear like I'm exploiting this to make Plant 4 the hero, because it was very controversial."
A bitter political fight
Laura Morrison, who is running for mayor, Council Member Kathie Tovo, who is running for, is a member of the Board of Trustees. re-election.
"Danielle Skidmore," said Danielle Skidmore, a civil engineer running against Tovo in Central Austin's District 9. frankly, like this. "
Morrison remained firm in his stance that Plant 4 was not needed.
"There is some interesting Monday morning quarterback going on," she said Thursday.
This week, it was noted that Austin's per capita was one of the most important things in the world. The use of water is more effective than the new plant.
"In times of crisis, it is not the time for pointing fingers and throwing political punches," she said.
Tovo was elected in 2011 by Councilor Randi Shade. Shade was the deciding vote in the 4-3 decision to build the $ 500 million plant. Shade this week called the vote "political suicide" for herself but said she did not regret it.
"It turns out we needed it by 2018," Shade said. "When you make a hard decision, you do not often get to know if it is right. This might be one where I get to know. "
After her election, Tovo will continue to build the plant, after which it would be $ 100 million. She said Thursday that she did not want to make a second decision.
"One of the messages I hope we are from this source," she said. "What we're seeing with this extraordinary event is that all three water treatment plants are drawing from the same lake."
Bobby Levinski, an environmental lawyer running for Austin's District 8, was a Morrison staffer at the Plant 4 debate and also opposed its construction. He said he still thinks of the plant is a mistake, like Tovo, pointed to its location on Lake Travis, which is supplied by the same river as the treatment plants on Lake Austin.
Plant 4 replaced the former Green Water Treatment Plant in downtown Austin, which drew water from the Edwards Aquifer via Barton Creek. Aerial photographs taken this week, the clear, opal green water of Barton Creek flowing into a chocolate-colored Lady Bird Lake.
Then and now
Various people have referred to the political fight over Plant 4 as the CodeNext of its time. It was a tale that it was more likely that the United States of America, but it would not be better for us to save our resources. the plant was needed because of the city's expanding population.
The issue dates to at least 1975, when a consultant's study recommended a water treatment plant to draw water from Lake Travis. The lake is deeper than other local sources, making it a preferable option during droughts. Construction bids were issued in 1986, but the project was stymied by an economic downturn.
Opposite first centered around the plant's proposed rental along Bull Creek, an environmentally sensitive area near Lake Travis. When the city discovered the presence of the endangered Jollyville Plateau salamander at the site, the future of the proposed project became uncertain. In 2007, city staffers located what became the final site, absent the salamander.
The 2009 vote was the first of many divisive votes as the council rolled out contracts for the plant. Then-Mayor Lee Leffingwell said "The major event" of his career was because of the fight.
As Austin is looking for future water, it is possible to create a "reservoir of water" – a system of underground reservoirs that could be tapped when needed. The drafting of a city plan called "Water Forward" has been underway for years.
The City Council is ready to receive its first briefing about the plan next week. Ironically, the briefing is likely to be postponed because of the water crisis, Tovo said.
David Foster, Texas Director of Clean Water Action, pointed to Austin. Hotter, drier periods, will be more common, he said. Different methods of storing water and finding more sources for it will be critical.
Foster, like many environmentalists, opposed building Plant 4. Asked if he was second-guessing his stance, he was thoughtful.
"It's a question, but expanding our existing treatment plants instead of building a new one could have solved the problem," he said. "There were viable options to build an entirely new water treatment plant, so I'm not ready yet to say, 'They were right, we were wrong.'"
Source link
