Steering Committee Minutes 12-17-2010

Mirror Pond Siltation Project, Phase 1A
Bend, Oregon

Steering Committee Meeting

SC Meeting: 001
Meeting Date: 12.17.10 @ 1:00 PM


Attendees: [x] denotes present
[X] Mel Oberst /MO
[ ] Eric King /EK
[X] Angela Jacobson /AJ
[X] Don Horton /DH
[X] Bill Smith /BS
[X] Matt Shinderman /MS
[X] Michael McLandress /MM

MM described Job Cost Report, a tool used to track job cost relative to progress, It will help highlight Tasks that may take more time than allotted.

OWEB reimbursement- no discussion.
Post-meeting note: after email correspondence with SC, MS from B2030 will coordinate and forward MPSC’s final response to Mike Riley, B2030 Treasurer, for decision on reimbursement.

MM provided 3-month overview showing intermittent TAC “work sessions” for refining the Alternative Analysis scope of work, and subsequent MPMB meetings for “final draft” presentation, discussions at key decision-making points in the process. Schedule anticipates possible early-March final draft submittal to MB.

1. #2A- Technical Advisory Committee (TAC):
MM presented proposed TAC members for Tasks 2, 3, 4. This list was also presented to SC members in rough draft form at the individual SC meeting sessions held over recent two weeks. Some names were added since then. MM described the concept of the TAC formation, which is based on a “long list” of members with technical expertise, and shall be resources for MM to draw from in refining scope and budget and eventual RFP during the Phase 1A process. A small “working group” from the TAC will be selected by MM to help complete
Task #3A&B – (“Review and Refine Scope of Services and Budget for SubK”).
Once the working group refines the draft scope, it will be issued to the TAC for iterative comment and refinement as called for. SC agreed no written invitations were necessary to “formalize” TAC candidates. MM will refine TAC list further based on this meeting’s discussions and submit to SC for final approval.

Oregon Regulatory Agency TAC:
It was discussed of the importance to begin building relationships with the
various permitting and regulatory agencies such as ODFW, DEQ, DSL,
ODWRD. MM will research key personnel and develop those contacts, adding
some to the TAC for agency representation.

#3A&B – Review and Refine Scope of Services and Budget for SubK:
MM noted first “working session” to begin refining scope and budget is set for Dec 22nd, with TAC members John Runyan of ICF, Ryan Houston of UDWC. DH felt using Runyon and Houston poses possible bias issues and suggested an outside consultant be selected to render a second review and opinion. MS agreed with DH. MM will provide second consultant to SC for approval. Schedule anticipates an approx. 7-week duration for the scope and budget refinement process

Local Stakeholders:
MM suggested pulling together a “local” Public Stakeholder meeting comprised of just the landowners adjacent to MP. It is felt this meeting is important to partner with and provide a voice to these key public stakeholders during the refinement process. SC agreed, and MM will arrange and inform SC of that meeting.

#4A – Write RFP for SubK for Alternatives Analysis:
It is anticipated that the RFP will resemble in style and format much like the recent RFP issued for the Colorado Street/Whitewater Park. Similarly, the MP RFP will not be prescriptive in context or format, and will be written based on desired outcomes necessary for an Alternatives Analysis process required of NEPA.


Document: MPSC-Minutes-2010-12-17

Citizens Committee Meeting 6-5-1981


June 5, 1981

In Attendance:

Bob Main – Watermaster
Tom Gellner – City Engineer
John Bossick – City Planner
Maury Clark – Clark & Joyce, Inc.
Harold Baughman – Pacific Power & Light Co.
Reed H. Nelson – Nelson, Trimble et al. C.P.A.
Gail Kinsey Hill – The Bulletin
Mark Whitson – DEQ – Bend
Neil Mullane – DEQ – Portland
Bob Bristol – Dentist
Rich Dornhelm – Winzler & Kelly
John Joyce -Clark & Joyce, Inc.

The meeting was opened by John Joyce, who stated the purpose of the meeting is to review the executive summary of the Mirror Pond Rehabilitation Study, and to afford another opportunity for input to the study before finalizing it.

Richard Dornhelm reviewed the Diagnostic Study phase of the report. The rate of sedimentation has not been determined because monitoring has not. been performed over the years. Removal of approximately five feet of sediment will ·make the pond more acceptable for recreational boating activities. This amount of deepening will reduce plant growth, but algae and free-floating plants will not be significantly affected.

There was· discussion on the merits of removing and/or constructing islands in the pond. Dornhelm pointed out .problems in controlling turbidity and satisfying DEQ requirements for tailwater return to the river. The scope of Phase II work is primarily dictated by the budget.

Tailwater discharge will be monitored and will have to comply with DEQ requirements before re-entering the river. Reed Nelson expressed concern about turbidity created by the dredge. Dornhelm st~ted the dredge acts similar to a vacuum cleaner in that all surrounding water is sucked into it. Bob Bristol pointed out that during the three month of dredging, the water flowing over the North Unit dam is at a minimum and any tailwater entering the river downstream from the dam will have the least dilution.

Bob Main stated there are stream flow gauges on some of the irrigation canals. Sedimentation in these canals is a problem, and it may be possible to determine the amount of sediment carried in the river by studying the sedimentation rate in the canal.

Federal funding for the project is no longer available, according to Neil Mullane. The Clean Lake program is not funded in this administrations budget. Funds from other projects are not available either, because any unused funds revert back to the federal coffers. Mr. Mullane stated he is unaware of any federal or state funds at this time that would be available for this type project.

Tom Gellner reviewed the status of local funds for the Phase II project. The original funds earmarked for this project have been transferred to other budget items. These funds may be re-budgeted in the 82-83 budget. Further discussion on funding included comments on a bond issue and Park & Recreation District tax rate increase to fund the project. Vince Genna suggested a presentation be made to the Park and Recreation Board on the study.

John Hassick stated that there may be an issue over ownership of the river bottom and the material deposited on it. The Bend Company heirs may still be the legal owners of the river banks. Mr. Hassick also stated there are budget election restraints that have to be considered when seeking local approval of funding for a Phase II project.

Rich Dornhelm stated that preliminary copies of the report will·be made for those wishing a copy. Comments should be returned within two weeks. The final report is scheduled to be printed at the end of the month.

The meeting adjourned at 1:30PM

Respectfully submitted

John Joyce

Citizens Committee Meeting 4-15-1981


April 15, 1981

In Attendance:
Bob Bristol – Dentist
Harold Baughman – PP & L
Reed Nelson – Nelson, Trimble et al C.P.A
Art Johnson – City Manager
Torn Gellner – City Engineer
John Hossick – City Planner
Rich Dornhelm – Winzler & Kelly
Maurice Clark – Clark & Joyce, Inc.
John Joyce – Clark & Joyce, Inc.

A meeting of the Mirror Pond Citizen’s Committee was held at the Trail Restaurant, Bend, to review and comment on the preliminary findings of the Mirror Pond Rehabilitation Study presented by Winzler & Kelly/Clark & Joyce, Inc. consulting team.

The Committee was advised of the quantity of material in the pond, the sources of sedimentation, water quality, types of plants and algae growth by Rich Dornhelm and John Joyce.

Rich Dornhelm presented various options for a scope each of which would remove a certain amount of within the two defined work areas. A cost for removal was presented for each option, (See attached report)

The most feasible method of removing the material is by hydraulically dredging it to one of two disposal sites. One site is located down river from the pond, on Clyde Purcell’s property. The second site is located upriver on Brooks Resources property. A decision has not been made at this time on the most desirable site, but it appears there won’t be much difference in disposal cost on the two sites.

After discussing the merits of the scope of work options and relative costs, Mr, Nelson suggested the City go for as large a project as possible, and then cut back if necessary. There was general agreement from those present that this should be the direction of the work scope.

Various slides were shown depicting areas of greatest sediment deposits in the pond.

The meeting adjourned at 1:15 PM

Respectfully submitted,

John Joyce

Mirror Pond Rehabilitation Meeting 1-15-1981

Subject: Mirror Pond Rehabilitation
Date: Jan. 15, 1981
Location: Clark & Joyce, Inc.

Participants: Harold Baughman – PP & L
Ted Fies – Fish and Wildlife
Tom Gellner – City Engineer
John Hassick – City Planner
Vince Genna – Bend Park & Rec. Dist.
Richard Dornhelm – Winzler & Kelly
Maury Clark – Clark & Joyce, Inc.
John Joyce – Clark & Joyce, Inc.

The purpose of the meeting was to review the initial steps of the study for the Mirror Pond Rehabilitation proj­ect, which is being performed by Winzler & Kelly/ Clark & Joyce, Inc. It also provided an opportunity for the rep­ resented agencies/firms to give information to the engineers regarding concerns and restrictions that have to be addressed in the study.

John Joyce recommended that a citizens advisory committee be formed to provide additional local input into the study. The committee should not include technical representatives of agencies/firms, because they will be routinely included in the review process. Vince Genna suggested the Park District Board appoint 2 members and the City of Bend appoint 3 members. The committee size was agreed to, and Tom Gellner and Vince Genna will ask the City and Park District to appoint these members.

John Hassick suggested the need to coordinate with the irrigation districts because of the concern they may have on water flows and turbidity. The irrigation districts have about one domestic run a month during the winter. The run may last a few days, and turbidity would be a con­cern if the pond water level had been lower just prior to the run. Harold Baughman stated that during the irrigation season the water level can’t be lowered sigficantly, because the river flow is greater than the dam by-pass capacity. If an adequate diversion at the dam is achieved PP&L will consider lowering the water level for a definite time.

The sediment samples previously analyzed don’t show the location of the samples. Tom Gellner will check to determine if the locations were recorded.

Vince Genna advised that the Batell Institute has conducted a study on types of plants in the Deschutes River.

This study should be available from the Forest Service. According to Ted Fies, most of the plants are the same as those in reservoirs. John Joyce will check with Central Oregon Community College to determine if they have analyzed plant life in Mirror Pond. If COCC provides future analysis and services on this project, the cost may be included in the local share for the project.

Vince Genna has photographs taken from the air that show the sediment buildup in parts of Mirror Pond. These photos. are available for the engineer’s use and review.

The siltation process is going to continue because of the severe bank erosion upstream, according to Ted Fies. The high volume and changing levels of the river, caused by irrigation flows, result in severe bank erosion. There have been studies performed on this problem, and they are available at the Forest Service office. Tod pointed out that turbidity will be of greatest concern from October through March, because of down stream spawning. Mirror Pond is not considered significant as a spawning area, rather it is a rearing area. There will probably be some advantages as a fish habitat if the capacity of the pond is increased by removal of some of the sediment.

Adding islands with trees may present additional problems, because of the view restrictions. The Park District won’t encourage  use of Mirror Pond for “in-water recreation.” Boating and canoeing will be encouraged when the water depth is increased. There should be a boat ramp provided for those activities. Harold Baughman recommended the ramp be located at a point whore the river is least apt to freeze, because there has been a need to rescue people from the thin ice on occasion.

Tho ice problem at Tumalo Bridge area was discussed. Ice forms .on tho bottom of the river (anchor ice), builds up and then breaks loose. This phenomenon has resulted in an ice jam at the bridge. Harold stated that they will open the by-pass gate at the dam to increase the velocity at the bridge, if they are aware of the problem soon enough. It is anticipated that the higher velocity will reduce the possibility of an ice jam. This problem should be considered if there are proposed changes to Mirror Pond as a result of the rehabilitation.

The City of Bend wip provide tho following data and information:

  1. Two copies of Mirror Pond X-Sections.
  2. Location of samples and basis for analysis.
  3. Data relative to types of plants, if available.
  4. Names of Citizens Advisory Committee.
  5. Copy of Storm drain maps.

Notes of Meeting by: John Joyce