The federal Environmental Protection Agency has mandated new protections for the nation's drinking water. And that has had Rochester's environmental services department looking for a way to do it without disturbing two beloved public spaces: the reservoirs at Cobbs Hill and Highland Parks.
Residents of the city and some suburbs get their drinking water from Hemlock and Canadice Lakes; water flows from those lakes to the city's three reservoirs - Rush, Cobbs Hill, and Highland. None of the three are covered, however, which leaves the water vulnerable to microbial or manmade contamination.
Under the federal regulations, the city has only four options for protecting the water. It can build new tanks, create new treatment facilities, decommission the reservoirs and not use them for drinking water, or cover them. Installing covers would dramatically change the look of the reservoirs.
Preserving the beauty of Cobbs Hill and Highland Parks was as important as meeting the EPA's requirements, says Paul Holahan, the city's environmental services commissioner.
His department's recommendation: keep the water in both the Cobbs Hill and Highland reservoirs, but not use it for drinking water. Instead, the city would store most of the drinking water at the Rush reservoir, which would be covered. That reservoir isn't accessible to the public, so its appearance wouldn't be an issue.
The Rush reservoir holds 35 million gallons, and the city would add a tank that would hold another 2 million gallons.
At Cobbs Hill, two new tanks with a combined capacity of 11 million gallons would replace existing old, unused tanks, which are located in a wooded area in the northeast part of the park behind the Monroe County Water Authority. A third, smaller, tank would be added nearby.
At Highland Park, a small, 4-million-gallon tank might be built below ground, although Holahan says that one may not be needed.
The changes would reduce the storage capacity for the city's drinking water to about 60 million gallons. Currently, the reservoirs hold 240 million gallons. That's a dramatic drop, and it drew concerns at a public meeting on June 27, where Holahan discussed his department's recommendations.
Holahan says the drop isn't as big as it seems. Only 150 million gallons are stored for drinking water. The rest is in the reservoirs to keep them filled. "You can't drain the reservoirs," he says.
Even that 150 is far more water than the city can use, says Holahan. The city uses only 30 million gallons each day - normal capacity for a city this size, says Holahan. In the 1970's, the city used 50 million; since then the city has not only lost population, but there has been a large drop in industrial use.
The city's system also has alternative sources built in to cover emergencies.
Residents at the June 27 meeting were also concerned about possible impact on the parks and whether the project is even needed. The following is a brief summary of some of those questions and Holahan's response. (Information and a comment link are available on the city's website, cityofrochester.gov.)
Does this have anything to do with the city-county discussions about a takeover of the city's water system?
No. "I can say that categorically," says Holahan.
Is the EPA's order an overreaction to 9/11? Is this really necessary?
The EPA began reviewing drinking-water storage in 1998, well before 9/11. Outbreaks of disease from drinking-water contamination have resulted in deaths in other communities.
The city's water system is more than 100 years old. Have there been health risks in the past?
The city's drinking water is excellent, but there have been some troubling incidents. Water in the Cobbs Hill reservoir tested positive for E. coli last year. When police divers went into the reservoir to examine the pipes and filters, they found a shopping cart, a street sign, and "a whole lot of bird feathers and bird stuff," says Holahan.
The reservoir tested negative for E. coli days after that incident, but gulls, ducks, and other birds regularly frequent the reservoirs.
If this is a public safety issue, why aren't we concerned about protecting the water's source, at Hemlock and CanadiceLakes?
The risk for microbial or human contamination is highest with the water stored in the reservoirs.
What are the advantages of this approach?
It best addresses the biggest issues. It protects the water. It preserves the historic Cobbs Hill and Highland Park reservoirs in their current state. It costs less than the other options to build and operate. And it will help increase water pressure on the west side of the city, where it is sometimes needed. Some improvements to the parks, such as landscaping and upkeep to the reservoirs, may also be included.
What are the disadvantages?
Storing the water requires aeration and keeping the water moving or it will stagnate and algae will grow, so the city will have to insure that there's no stagnation if the reservoir water isn't drawn off for public use.
The Rush site is of greater concern. Since the bulk of the water would be stored there, most of the city's water supply would be farther away from the majority of users.
Will we be able to see the tanks?
The three Cobbs Hill tanks would built above ground, so they would be visible - but not much more so than the two existing tanks. During the summer, the tanks are screened by trees. In the winter, the tanks are visible from I-490.
If a tank is built at Highland Park, it would be partially below ground. It would be located at the top of the reservoir area and wouldn't be visible from all points in the park.
The Rush site is not accessible to the public.
How much will this cost?
For all three sites: $40 million.
Since the federal government is requiring that the city do this, is it helping with the cost?
No; so far there's no indication that the federal government will underwrite the costs, except through loans. The state may offer a little help.
Who will pay for it, and how?
City residents could see a 4 or 5 percent increase in water bills. But the city will look for other funding sources to reduce the burden to residents. Whether county residents will see an increase in their bills is still being examined.
Are there other reservoirs in New YorkState? If so, what are those utilities doing to comply?
There are at least a dozen other drinking-water reservoirs in the state. Syracuse and the Mohawk Valley Water Authority are replacing their reservoirs with tanks. Growing and newer municipalities are not building reservoirs. Most are opting for tanks or a combination of such things as tanks and ultra-violet treatment.
When will the city make a decision?
Holahan says his department will probably present a recommendation to the mayor and City Council in August, but a firm date hasn't been established. The city will have to notify the EPA and the New York State Department of Health of its decision by April 2009.
When would work begin?
Work would begin in the summer of 2009 and be completed in phases by 2015, but the dates are not firm.