HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 11-13-2007 SpecialAgenda
City of Plymouth
Special City Council Meeting
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
5:30 p.m.
Medicine Lake Room
1. Call to Order
2. Discuss Sanitary Sewer Plan of the Comprehensive Plan.
City of Plymouth. (2005050)
3. Discuss Preliminary Water Supply and Distribution Plan of
the Comprehensive Plan. City ofPlymouth. (2005050)
4. View draft plans for the Hilde Performance Center site (if
sufficient time is not available, this item can be deferred to
the November 27 study session)
5. Adjourn
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through Steve Juetten, Community
Development Director
FROM: Shawn Drill, Senior Planner (509-5456) through Barbara Senness, Planning
Manager
SUBJECT: City of Plymouth. Comprehensive Plan Update—Draft Sanitary Sewer
Plan (2005050)
DATE: Nov. 9, 2007 for City Council Study Session on Nov. 13, 2007
1. PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to forward the draft plan to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on December 5,
2007.
2. BACKGROUND:
In 2005, the City began the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan. All cities in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area are required to update their plan by the end of 2008. The goal is to
allow the City to adopt the update in 2007, contingent upon the required Metropolitan Council
review. This would also provide the time needed for neighboring cities to review and comment
on the update.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
On November 7, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft plan and subsequently voted
to forward it to the City Council. No one from the public wished to speak on the matter. A copy
of the Planning Commission minutes is attached.
4: SANITARY SEWER PLAN:
As part of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update, the northwest area of Plymouth (which is the
last remaining un -serviced area in the City) would be brought into the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area boundary. The improvements needed to extend the sanitary sewer system into the
northwest area are fairly minor, because most of that area will be served by the existing Elm
Creek Interceptor.
The Metropolitan Council has previously indentified Plymouth as one of the communities that
has excessive inflow and infiltration (I & I). I & I is when clear water gets into the sanitary
sewer system, primarily during major storm events. The plan addresses past and continuing
efforts to reduce I & I.
The City has a number of sanitary sewer lift stations that are critical to the system. Three of
these lift stations are scheduled to be replaced within 3-5 years, and another three lift stations are
scheduled to be replaced within 5-10 years.
Individual sewage treatment systems (private septic systems) are presently and will continue to
be managed through the Hennepin County Health Department.
5. APPENDICES:
The supporting analysis and documentation, including details regarding costs, funding, and
timing will be provided in appendices.
6. RECOMMENDATION:
Provide any comments and recommended changes regarding the draft plan, and then forward the
plan to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on December 5, 2007.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Minutes
2. Draft Sanitary Sewer Plan
2
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 2007
Page 18
D. CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE — SANITARY
SEWER PLAN (2007050)
Chair Holmes introduced the Comprehensive Plan Update — Sanitary Sewer Plan.
Senior Planner Drill indicated that the Planning Commissioners received a copy of the
draft plan at their places. He then provided an overview of the key elements of the plan.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Davis, to forward the
Sanitary Sewer Plan to the City Council. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved.
UPDATE — WATER
SUPPLY PLAN (2007050)
Chair Wmes introduced the Comprehensive Plan Update — Water Supply Plan.
Senior Plann\
aske
gave an overview of the November 1, 2007 staff report.
Chair Holmefor an explanation of the lawn emergency plan.
Public Works Directorto said the water emergency plan is required by the DNR in order
to obtain any permits to in 11 new wells. The plan is based on the city's water usage, and
overall per capita use decrease as a result of the daytime sprinkling ban and other specific
elements of conservation.
Commissioner Jaffoni noted the per apita demand has decreased, and asked when the
water restrictions were put into effect.
Public Works Director Cote responded that t restrictions were put in place in 2002 or
2003. .
Commissioner Jaffoni asked what usage is projected Nr 2030. She said if the per capita
demand is going down, how do we justify using popula 'on to extrapolate average daily
use.
Public Works Director Cote said the entire plan is conservatived designed to give the
worse case scenario..He stated if actual circumstances dictate a face 'ty is not needed, the
City would not build it. However, it is important to be aware at under certain
circumstances, a particular facility may be required.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Cooney, to f6rward the
Water Supply Plan to the City Council along with all the Commission's comment. Vote.
7 Ayes. MOTION approved.
Draft 11.01.07
Chapter 9.
Sanitary Sewer Plan
A CHAPTER PURPOSE
The Sanitary Sewer Plan provides an analysis of the City's existing sewer system
and a guide for the expansion and upgrading of the system to accommodate future
development and redevelopment. The plan and its appendices are intended to meet
the requirements in state law for a "comprehensive sanitary sewer plan" and
incorporate the requirements established by the Metropolitan Council.
Plymouth's wastewater is treated at the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES) Metropolitan Treatment Plant in St. Paul. The majority of the
wastewater collected in the city is conveyed through several trunk sewers to Lift
Station L-29 in the southeastern corner of the city. From there, it is pumped through
the City of Golden Valley in an MCES force main along Highway 55 and eventually
is conveyed to the Metro Plant. MCES also has an interceptor (Elm Creek) that
enters the northwest corner of the City from Medina and flows to the north through
Maple Grove. (Both facilities are shown on Figure 9-1.) Most of the development in
the Northwest Overlay District will ultimately be connected to Elm Creek
interceptor. There are some minor intercommunity flows to Minnetonka and
Wayzata, which are conveyed by the local systems in those cities.
This plan provides for the expansion of the urban service area to include all of
Northwest Plymouth, the only area of the city not currently served by public
infrastructure.
Page 1 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2008
FIGURE 9-1 Legend
MCES Interceptors
Serving Plymouth ® City of Plymouth
No- MCES Interceptor
Dated ******* 2007
rRity
0 5 0 20
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
Miles FROM CITY, COUNTY,STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
Of -
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIALSOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Plymouth, Minnesota
W
Orono Wayzala
SL Francis th I
st LakelandT p.
Linwood Twp.
ori/ St Loui St. Paul L II
East Bethel
Hollywood Twp. Watertown Twp. Minnefrista Mound
on eac
g a ephav nMinnetonka
Bums Twp. Oak Grove
L Ke/a
H kin
Andover Ham Lake Columbus Forest Lake Scandie
ni cius
Ramsey
Dori Lily d . Woodbury
St. M Point
Afton
Anoka
horewoo
ceG re
aauul ul
9Rogers
Ne any ay
Merin on Croix
lling (uno ota uth St. u
Dation
Weconia Tw . Victoria
Hassan Twp.
Richfield
Champlin Coon Rapids Blaine
Camden Twp.
Hugo
Chanhasse Eden Prairie
to 7/ g May Twp.
no
FSt. Paul rkver
Le ton Lino Lakes
Grove Height
Maple Grov it nes
Chaska
Corcoran
Cottage Grove
rBrooklyn Perk d Lak ark
undsV
ShoreviefVanals
a Bear T%
Greenfield
Grey Cl ud /sl d Twp.
Oaks I Stillwater TWp.
R rd Fridley
Nonvo ou
rv
erica „L,t-
Grant
Shakopee
klyn Cent r A den HisWhiWhi ar La
i
L o loop w Brigh on
Dahlgren Twp. a
Hei is em Lak
tom
clQv
di
Village
Nininger 7Wp.
ew ope C I bia H i s
Louisville TWp.
Stillwater
Medina
Rosemount
Hagg
is
Independence 0 " s ale St. ntl ony Li le Can a
Pr/or Lake
M Rin
Roseville NO h St. aul yp
Golden Dalley
Lau rd I
Minneapolis 1 on Hei
Maplewood Lake Elmo Baytown Twp.
L akdal
avenna Tw .
FIGURE 9-1 Legend
MCES Interceptors
Serving Plymouth ® City of Plymouth
No- MCES Interceptor
Dated ******* 2007
rRity
0 5 0 20
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
Miles FROM CITY, COUNTY,STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
Of -
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIALSOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Plymouth, Minnesota
W
Orono Wayzala st LakelandT p.
ori/ St Loui St. Paul L II haht d hones
Hollywood Twp. Watertown Twp. Minnefrista Mound
on eac
g a ephav nMinnetonka
L Ke/a
H kin Lake St.0 xBeach
St. ni cius
nka
Dori Lily d . Woodbury
St. M Point
Aftonhorewoo
ceG re
aauul ul
Ne any ay Edina lling (uno ota uth St. u
Weconia Tw . Victoria
Richfield dota He
Su sh ake ewP
Camden Twp. Chanhasse Eden Prairie
Laketown Twp. Bloomington
FSt. Paul rkverGroveHeight
Chaska Eagan Cottage Grove Denmark Twp.
Grey Cl ud /sl d Twp.
Nonvo ou
rv
erica „L,t- Shakopee
ac son
Burnsville
Benton Twp. Dahlgren Twp. a Savage
Nininger 7Wp. Young America Twp.
Louisville TWp. Apple Valley Rosemount
Hagg Hastings
Pr/or Lake
Hancock 7WP . San Francisco TWp.
oa
Vermillion Twp.
avenna Tw .
Sand Creek Twp. redit River Tw Lakeville Empire Twp. Ve mil 'on Marshan Twp. Ma Spring Lake Twp,
SL Lawrence Twp. Farmington
lie Plat
9••
H mpt n
New Market Twp. Ne'Y-rvQ r ies "
Blakeley Twp. Belle Plaine Twp. Helena Twp. Cedar Lake iWp. EI NEy1et Eureka Twp. Castle Rock Twp. Hampton Twp. Douglas Twp.
E/VMa ket
Pr e
Randolph Twp.
mgph
Greenvale Twp. Wz terford Twp Sciote Twp.
FIGURE 9-1 Legend
MCES Interceptors
Serving Plymouth ® City of Plymouth
No- MCES Interceptor
Dated ******* 2007
rRity
0 5 0 20
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
Miles FROM CITY, COUNTY,STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
Of -
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIALSOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Plymouth, Minnesota
B GOALS AND POLICIES
1 Provide a low maintenance and cost effective sanitary sewer
system that meets the long term needs of the City's residents
and businesses.
a Design and construct a sanitary sewer system that supports the
City's land use plan and its ultimate development.
b Establish assessments and connection charges to ensure that
development funds the construction of the initial system.
c Operate and maintain the system to ensure its long term function
with equitable user charges.
d Continue to address infiltration/inflow of clear water into the
sanitary sewer system.
2 Work with the Metropolitan Council and adjoining communities
to provide a mutually cooperative sanitary sewer system.
a Maintain existing arrangements for sanitary sewer with adjacent
communities.
b Provide a trunk system that meets the needs of Plymouth and
adjoining communities.
c Participate in cost sharing arrangements that result in mutual benefit
to participating communities.
3 Provide sanitary sewer service to undeveloped areas in a
planned manner.
a Develop a capital improvement program consistent with the sewer
staging plan.
b Require developers to pay the cost of off-site sewers required for
any development that occurs in a non -sequential order.
Page 3 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — , 2008
C PROJECTIONS
Table 9-1 presents projections of households, employees, total population and
sewered population for the entire city. The estimated total households and the
estimated sewered households are different because private, on-site treatment
systems serve part of the city and will continue to serve part of the city in 2030
primarily in areas guided LA -RT). .
TABLE 9-1
SEWERED HOUSEHOLDS, EMPLOYMENT AND POPULATION
PROJECTIONS
Year Population Sewered' Employees
sz Fouseh`olds'
r
2005 71,500 28,400 58,600
2010 73,000 29,000 59,900
2015 74,500 30,250 61,650
2020 76,000 1 31,500 63,400
2025 77,250 32,250 63,950
2030 78,500 33,300 64,500
HUJUJLCU Wr L11-11,1 ULAULIgU IIUL FUUMVIIIb SUMUC Uy LV.7V
Source: City of Plymouth
Table 9-2 presents the City's wastewater flow projections. Flows are based on the
proposed land uses in anticipated growth areas and industry standard flow
generation rates plus documented water usage in developed areas. These projections
were used for the design of the trunk sewer system presented in this plan. Regional
projections for the years 2010, 2020 and 2030 are from the Metropolitan Council's
Water Resources Management Policy Plan. Projections for intermediate years are
interpolated.
TABLE 9-2
WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS
t Ujubwu 1V1 Ll1-1\1 —cast LLUL I— VIlls JG V 1VG Vy LV JV
Sources: Metropolitan Council
City of Plymouth
Page 4 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan— 12008
MCES Projected Clty(Esiamated)
Year Flows:(mgd) Average Daily, Flow,;
m d'
2005 7.74 7.74
2010 8.20 8.16
2015 8.26 8.22
2020 8.31 8.26
2025 8.32 8.28
2030 8.33 8.31
t Ujubwu 1V1 Ll1-1\1 —cast LLUL I— VIlls JG V 1VG Vy LV JV
Sources: Metropolitan Council
City of Plymouth
Page 4 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan— 12008
The phasing of sanitary sewer extensions through the year 2030 is based on the
Development Staging Plan (see Figure 9-2). The 2030 Sewer System (Figure 9-3)
shows the existing and proposed sanitary sewer system for the entire city.
D SANITARY SEWER DESIGN CRITERIA
LAND USE AND FORECASTS
For the undeveloped portion of Plymouth, the Sanitary Sewer Plan is based on the
Land Use Plan contained in Chapter 3. In developed Plymouth, the Land Use Plan
identifies five areas that may undergo redevelopment during the planning period.
Sewer flows for these areas were based on water use typically associated with the
potential new uses. The population, household and employment forecasts are based
on the land use plan.
Total areas for each land use were calculated using the City's computer-based
geographic information system. Areas of each land use by sewer sub -district are
presented in Appendix 9A and exclude water bodies and rights-of-way.
Descriptions of each land use type are found in the Land Use Plan (Chapter 3).
2 ESTIMATED AVERAGE WASTEWATER FLOWS
Municipal wastewater is made up of a mixture of domestic sewage, commercial and
industrial wastes, groundwater infiltration and surface water inflows. With proper
design and construction, groundwater infiltration and surface water inflows,
typically referred to as infiltration/inflow (I/1), can be minimized. How the City will
address excess I/I is covered in later sections of this plan.
The existing sewer system was evaluated under future flow conditions. A hydraulic
computer model was used together with GIS data to assess the sewer systems
response to future flow conditions. This information was used to evaluate current
and future sewer capacities and improvements.
Page 5 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2008
Co RE) Np 47
FIGURE 9-2
Development
Staging Plan
61 ,
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota Dated **, 2007
Legend
Q City Limits Stage Identification
Lakes - A
A.1
B
c
D
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMAT(ON AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
PIPake`
ame t
ASO r r
merle u
Lake
C7 z
U7i"
Y
RD
O
O
mZ
wLL
FIGURE 9-2
Development
Staging Plan
61 ,
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota Dated **, 2007
Legend
Q City Limits Stage Identification
Lakes - A
A.1
B
c
D
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMAT(ON AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
FIGURE 9-3
2030 Sewer
System
Legend
Existing System Pipes
inches)
4 21
6 24
8 27
9 X30
Proposed Pipes (inches)
8
10
12
15
18
10 9- 33 ! MCES Interceptor (FOrcedmain)
12 .. 36 i Lift Stations
14 42, ` Sewer District Boundary
15 48 City Limits
16
Lakes
18
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
iiiii Mil
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
ONOWa
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
Dated ", 2007
Anticipated wastewater flows from the sub -districts were calculated using two ,
methods. For the Northwest Overlay, flow rates were based on proposed land use
and density within each sewer sub -district. This method used the City's current land
use planning data, the previous Comprehensive Sewer Plan prepared in 2000, MCES
recommendations and current industry standards. The land use flow calculation
table is presented in Appendix 9D. The second method, applied to the developed
portion of Plymouth, used the City's water records from winter months to simulate
average daily flows. Flows for this area are also presented in Appendix 9D. The
system will be capable of handling average daily flow rates. Areas with higher pipe
capacities are indicated by color shading in Figure 9-5.
There is a section of pipe just prior to the Bass Lake Lift Station showing a used
capacity slightly greater than 60 percent. If necessary, this condition can be
managed by adjusting pump controls in the Bass Lake Lift Station. Pipes down
gradient of the Bass Lake Lift Station and upstream of the Mission Farm Lift Station
show that they are flowing slightly greater than 60 percent, which is acceptable.
There are 12 -inch pipes located in sub -districts NW -4 and S-12 that show they may
become stressed under peak flow conditions. Temporary metering in these locations
could be used to determine whether I/I is an issue. The safety and acceptability of
the sewer in these areas to handle future peak flows could be increased by reducing
existing UI. The City has and will continue to undertake UI abatement efforts in
these areas.
3 PEAK FLOW FACTORS
The sanitary sewer system must be capable of handling the anticipated peak
wastewater flow rate, including any UI. The design peak flow rate can be expressed
as a variable ratio to the average flow rate. Curves used to describe this ratio, called
the peak flow factor (PFF), indicate a decreasing ratio of peak flow to average flow
with increasing average flow.
The peak flow factors applied in this plan are shown in Figure 9-4. These values are
generally conservative and widely used throughout the state for municipal planning.
They include a standard allowance for UI, which is typical of new sanitary sewer
Page 8 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — . 2008
construction as well as properly operating existing sewers. The design flows for
each subdistrict are presented in Appendix 9B.
Page 9 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2008
Figure 9-4
Peak Flow Factors
Peak Flow Factors
Peak Flow Factor
20
PEAK FLOW FACTORS
Peak Flow Average Daily Flow
Factor MGD 18
4.0 0 - 0.11
3.9 0.12 - 0.18
3.8 0.19 - 0.23
3.7 0.24 - 0.29 16
3.6 0.3 - 0.39
3.5 0.4 - 0.49
3.4 0.5 - 0.64
3.3 0.65 - 0.79 14
3.2 0.8 - 0.99
3.1 1 - 1.19 A
3.0 1.2 - 1.49
2.9 1.5 - 1.89 12
2.8 1.9 - 2.29
2.7 2.3 - 2.89 0
2.6 2.9 - 3.49 w
2.5 3.5 - 4.19 10 ai0
2.4 4.2 - 5.09
2.3 5.1 - 6.39
2.2 6.4 - 7.99 Q'
2.1 8 - 10.39 8
2.0 10.4 - 13.49
1.9 13.5 - 17.99 A
1.8 18 - 29.99
1.7 Over 30.00 6
4
1
t
2
0
4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0
Peak Flow Factor
FIGURE 9-5
Areas With Higher
Pipe Capacities
Dated ""`.2007
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2rpc)ety of
Siiiiiiiii Mlles
Plymouth, Minnesota
Legend
Average Daily Flow Used Capacity
Gess than 60%
60%-80%
greater than 80%
Lakes
THIS REPRESENTS A COIVPCLATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATICN SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORNGIAL SCURCE DOCUMENTS.
4 INFILTRATION/INFLOW
The Metropolitan Council has identified excessive infiltration/inflow (FI) as a major
regional problem. To address this problem, which is occurring in many cities in the
region, the Metropolitan Council has begun collecting a surcharge from affected
communities. The money collected may be used by these communities to remove
excessive I/I from their systems.
Based on regional criteria, Plymouth exceeded the allowable infiltration/inflow (FI)
amount during the period of June 2004 to June 2006. The I/I goal set by the
Metropolitan Council for the City is the allowable peak hourly flow rate as shown in
Table 9-3
TABLE 9-3
INFILTRATION/INFLOW GOALS
l ear = z 2010
10
X2020 2030
4s., . ,.. } ..I. . . R.e • W : l a..T`l ". ? iv ,..iii wG cT « ik. n%'6
Allowable Peak Hourly Flow (MGD) 17.22 17.45 17.49
Source: Metropolitan Council
Plymouth has been actively addressing I/I since 1995 when the City passed a code
provision 1) prohibiting the discharge of water from roofs, surface, groundwater
sump pumps, footing tiles and swimming pools into the municipal sewerage system
and 2) requiring anyone currently discharging into the system to disconnect (refer to
Plymouth City Code Section 740 in Appendix 9I1).
The City has more than 76 miles of vitrified clay pipe (VCP) that is over 30 years
old. The age of this pipe, the number of joints associated with it and its
susceptibility to root intrusion creates a situation that results in increased I/I. The
City has been undergoing maintenance of this VCP pipe through in-place lining.
The City will continue this maintenance effort. Plymouth also televises those areas
of its system where problems are likely to prioritize where maintenance occurs.
Page 12 of 18, Chapter 9 -Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan —_2008
Based on design engineering standards and the City's dry weather flows, during the
wet months of 2007, Plymouth did not have an event of excessive I/I over the
allowable amount.
5 LARGE SEWER USERS
The following sewer users discharge average daily sewage flows greater than 50,000
gallons per day (gpd) into the City's sewer system:
TABLE 9-4
LARGE SEWER USERS
Company; Sewer Distract Gallons per day (2007) 0
Circuit Science NW -11 101,000
Minntech Corp. NW -5 88,000
Aacron Inc. NW -5 83,000
Honeywelll S-3 77,000
6 HYDRAULICS AND PIPE MATERIAL
The trunk sewer system was designed to prevent surcharging and maintain a
minimum flow velocity of two feet per second at design flow. The existing and
proposed sewer system are shown in Figure 9-3. Pipe capacities were evaluated
based on current and future flows for each sewer sub -district and are included in
Appendix 9D. Sewer size and material type are included in Appendix 9C.
Plastic (PVC) pipe is recommended for all pipes of 18 inches diameter or less.
Above 18 inches, either plastic or reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) is recommended.
Plastic pipe is superior to concrete for several reasons. First, the joints require less
care and form an excellent seal, reducing potential UI. Second, plastic pipe comes in
greater lengths, resulting in fewer joints and therefore fewer opportunities for I/I.
Until full development of the system, some pipes will be oversized with regard to
interim flows. The City will continue an annual pipe -cleaning program to maintain
the hydraulics of the sewer system and prevent any build-up of sediment and sludge
in the oversized pipes.
Page 13 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 12008
E PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
GENERAL
The sewer system layout for the City of Plymouth is presented on the Sewer System
map (Figure 9-3). This map shows the main sanitary sewer districts, sub -districts,
existing and proposed trunk sanitary sewers and existing lift stations and force
mains. Trunk sewers are those identified as larger than 8 inches.
Most of the area in the Northwest Overlay will flow directly to the Elm Creek
Interceptor. The design of the 27 -inch Elm Creek Interceptor provides for multiple
points of connection for the sub -districts in the Northwest Overlay. However, as
shown on Figure 9-3, additional trunk sewers will need to be constructed west of the
interceptor in EC -3 and EC -4. A portion of the Overlay area will also flow north
through a Maple Grove trunk sewer and into the Elm Creek Interceptor in Maple
Grove. The southeast one-third of sub -district EC -13 will flow south and connect to
existing sewer pipe in sub -district NC -11.
Proposed alignments shown on the sanitary sewer system map generally follow the
natural drainage of the land and have been located to minimize the use of lift
stations to provide the City with the most cost effective locations. The location of
collection sewers and smaller laterals will be determined by future land development
plans. The northern portion of the trunk sewer connecting to the Maple Grove
system is complete and an extension has been provided to sub -district EC -11. There
is also the potential for an extension to EC -19. Minor adjustments in the southern
portion of this trunk sewer may be required, dependent on specific land use and
development conditions.
2 WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS
Currently, the majority of the wastewater in the City is conveyed through several
trunks and collected at the MCES lift station in the southeast corner of the city near
Highway 55. From there it discharges to the City of Golden Valley. There are some
minor intercommunity flows to Minnetonka and Wayzata that are conveyed by the
Page 14 of 18, Chapter 9 -Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan —.2008
local systems in those cities. The Elm Creek Interceptor will ultimately handle the
majority of flow from the Northwest Overlay.
Population and household projections for the city are presented in Table 9-1.
Wastewater flow projections are presented in Table 9-2.
3 INTERCOMMUNITY FLOWS
The majority of the sewer flow from the City of Medina has been removed from
Plymouth's system and redirected to the Elm Creek Interceptor. A small sub -district
17 units) and Holy Name Church near Plymouth's western border remains
connected to the City's system under a separate connection agreement.
The MCES force main from Medina is no longer in service, but remains in place.
This pipe may at some point in the future revert in ownership to the City and may be
of value to the City, depending on the density of future development.
The Northwest Overlay area will flow to the Maple Grove Interceptor under a
separate agreement with Maple Grove with ultimate connection to the Elm Creek
Interceptor.
Design flows for the individual sub -districts, including flows to Minnetonka and
Wayzata, can be found in Appendix 9D.
4 EXISTING INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Within the existing city limits, there are approximately 219 lots that currently have
individual sewage treatment systems (see Figure 9-6). They are located mainly in
the Northwest Overlay, much of which will receive municipal sewer by 2030. There
are also some lots around Gleason and Mooney Lakes in the southwest corner of the
city that have individual sewage treatment systems.
Page 15 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2008
FIGURE 9-6
Existing On -Site Sewage
Disposal Systems
Dated *******, 2007
0 0.25 0.5
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
1.5
Miles
Legend
On -Site Sewage, Disposal System
0 Lakes
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIALSOURCE DOCUMENTS.
The City of Plymouth is committed to the proper design, location, installation and
ongoing maintenance of individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS). It is also the
City's intention to eventually provide municipal sewer service to all ISTS users as
service is extended to new or redeveloping areas in the city
Plymouth requires that all individual systems be designed and constructed in
accordance with Minnesota Rule Chapter 7080. In 2000, the City delegated the
responsibility for permitting and inspection of individual systems to Hennepin
County, pursuant to Hennepin County Ordinance No. 19. A copy of the City
ordinance regarding individual systems is included in Appendix 9G.
F LIFT STATIONS
The City currently has 15 lift stations within the sanitary system. Table 9-3 ,
Appendix E, identifies the lift stations by location along with flow estimates for
each station on an average and peak flow per day basis.
Collectively, the 15 stations pump an average wastewater flow of approximately
12.6 million gallons per day (mgd). The average daily flow through the primary
discharge point at the MCES (7026) Interceptor Forcemain is 7.67 mgd. This
indicates that the average daily waste water flow is pumped multiple times by the
City's lift stations. The redundant pumping of the wastewater flow is indicative of
the importance of the City of Plymouth's lift stations to overall system performance.
Plymouth understands the importance of the proper functioning of its 15 lift stations
to the overall performance of the City's sewer system. Based on an analysis of each
lift station (refer to Appendix 9E), three stations are recommended for replacement
within the next 3 to 5 years and two more in the next 5 to 10 years. These include
the 28th Avenue, Pike Lake and Imperial Hills lift stations in years 3 to 5 and
Waterfront and Green Tree West in years 5 to 10.
Page 17 of 18, Chapter 9 - Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan — 12008
G NORTHWEST OVERLAY SEWER STAGING PLAN
Development staging for the northwest area will be dictated by five factors,
including 1) sanitary sewer trunk expansion; 2) water trunk extension; 3) street
construction; 4) proximity to existing infrastructure and 5) management .of land
development. The sewer trunk expansion will be based on extension of trunk
facilities from one parcel to the next during the development process. The remaining
factors are covered in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The staging plan
see Figure 9-2) takes all five factors into account. Development for Stage A, A-1,
B, C, and D is not tied to specific years, but rather is dependent upon development
activity and market forces.
H FUNDING MECHANISMS
The City uses three main sources of funding to pay for the sanitary sewer as follows:
Area charges are commonly used to cover the cost of trunk collection
sewers.
Connection fees are commonly used to cover the costs of trunk sewer
facilities, force mains and pumping stations.
Sewer rates are commonly used to cover the costs of maintenance and
enhancements to the system.
Appendix 9F provides additional detail on funding sources.
I IMPLEMENTATION
Preparation of the Implementation Section is in process. Much of the supporting.
information—including estimated costs and anticipated timelines for installation—is
provided in Appendix 9F.
Page 18 of 18, Chapter 0 -Plymouth Sanitary Sewer Plan —_2008
Appendix 9-A
Land Use Areas
MODEL INPUT DATA Land Use:Flow Rates 11/9(2007
by
Sewershed
APPENDIX 9A
Residential PubliclSemi- Commercial Commercial City Planned Northwest Development multiply previous by factors
Public Industrial from flow rate table to gelIMGDvaluesforthe
following columns
LA -RT LA -R1 LA -12 LA -R3LiftStationInletManholeSewerDistrictLA4ILA -2 LA -3 I LA -4 Institution Office Center TOTAL
Acres) (Acres) Acres Acres Acres Acres) Acres Acres) Acres) Acres) Acres) Acres) (Acres)
Bass Lake LS069 BL -1 156.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -RT
Bass Lake MH6670 BL -2 145.58 96.85 0.00 0.00 27.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -RI - (single family res.)
Bass Lake MH6654 BL -3 140.63 65.62 0.00 0.00 5.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -132 (townhomes, LA -1)
Bass Lake MH6654 BL -0 30.76 11.80 0.00 0.00 55.42 1.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -133 (apartments, LA -2)
Bass Lake MH6446 BL -5 97.89 92.88 34.17 0.00 3.01 0.00 73.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -1 - (single family res.)
Gravity Service MCES EC -1 0.00 153.21 2.09 0.00 19.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -2 - (townhomes, LA -1)
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -10 0.00 109.26 6.56 0.D0 7.05 7.94 0.00 0.00 D.DO 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 LA -3 (apartments, LA -1,2)
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -11 0.00 9.29 13.57 0.00 21.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.50 0.00 41.35 0.00 LA -0 (apartments, LA -2)
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -12 38.00 19.01 20.47 0.00 102.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 Public
Mission Farms MH6268 EC -13 0.00 38.46 64.71 37.09 30.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.55 0.00 65.58 0.00 Commercial
Autumn Hills MH4053 EC -16 112.25 99.86 0.00 0.00 14.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Commercial, Office
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -17 0.00 19.05 24.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 179.60 0.00 City Center
Gravity Service MCES EC -18 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 94.32 0.00 Planned Industrial
Gravity Service MCES EC -19 0.00 0.00 17.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 148.92 35.11
Gravity Service MCES EC -2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.46 0.00 76.20 0.00
Gravity Service MCES EC -3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.11 50.29 0.00
Gravity Service MCES EC -0 0.00 14.62 0.00 19.99 77.70 7.58 0.00 0.00 D.DO 80.19 0.00 19.22 0.00
Gravity Service MCES EC -5 0.00 8.82 0.00 0.00 129.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.86 0.00 0.00
Gravity ServiceMCES EC -6 0.00 12.26 0.00 0.00 23.57 0.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00 61.33 0.00 54.40 0.00 .
Gravity Service MCES EC -7a 0.00 34.22 0.00 0.00 50.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conner Meadows MH3828 EC -7b 0.00 84.57 0.00 0.00 18.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00
Gravity Service MCES EC -8 0.00 112.23 0.00 0.00 104.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.57 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MCES EC -9 62.19 131.89 0.09 17.56 0.00 4.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service LAKE LAKE 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service LAKE LAKE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service OUT M-1 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service OUT M-2 20.70. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service OUT M-3 0.01 8.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.02 0.00 0.00 42.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service OUT M-4 21.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MED LAKE MED LAKE 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH6307 NC -1 104.14 0.00 0.00 11.86 4.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5461 NC -11 67.06 17.88 0.00 0.00 47.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5865 NC -12 125.64 13.40 0.00 0.00 49.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH6073 NC -13 229.14 15.77 0.00 0.00 6.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH0265 NC -2 62.96 8.51 0.00' 0.00 75.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5963 NC -3 68.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 154.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5889 NC -0 23.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 232.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5860 NC -5 92.38 18.40 0.00 0.00 17.02 0.D0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.D0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mission Farms MH5819 NC -6 68.97 49.63 5.99 13.92 17.21 13.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.D0 0.00 0.00 0.00
MissionFarms MH5819 NC -7 21.66 132.74 0.00 0.00 94.00 46.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravi Service LS022 NE -1 0.02 0.00 38.17 0.11 2.33 20.51 56.74 0.00 103.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH5435 NE -2 42.26 0.00 0.08 0.00 12.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH5354 NE -3 66.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH7305 NE -0 11-.65 51.72 0.00 15.92 28.27 10.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lancaster MH5219 NE -5 228.74 6.10 0.00 98.64 51.78 16.43 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00, 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lancaster MH5062 NE -6 54.98 0.00 22.56 17.52 12.18 30.36 58.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lancaster MH5061 NE -7 94.26 0.00 0.00 17.17 20.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lancaster MH4873 NE -9 0.00 23.73 15.41 0.00 32.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 137.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH4814 NW -1 125.89 8.95 0.02 0.00 43.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH4676 NW -10 18.72 78.77 0.00 0.00 41.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravity Service MH4677 NW -11 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 54.01 11.80 9.41 86.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravily Service MH4677 NW -12' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.67 0.00 0.00 73.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
APPENDIX 9A
MODEL INPUT DATA Land Use:Flow Rales 11/912007
by
Sewershed
Station Ilnlet Manhole ISewer District
city Service MH4484 NW -13
rily, Service MH4448 NW -14
illy Service MH4283 NW -15
ity Service MH4175 NW -16
rily Service MH4080 NW -17
city, Service MH7320 NW -19a
rily Service MH3886 NW -19b
rfront LS033 NW -2
ity Service MH3890 NW -20
ity, Service
94.92
NW121a-_.. --
ilyService MH3681 NW -21b
ity, Service MH3681 NW -22
ity Service MH3682 NW -23
Ave LS023 NW -3
ity, Service MH3349 NW -4
ity, Service MH3221 NW -5'
ity, Service MH3186 NW -6
ily Service MH3150 NW -7
ity, Service MH3045 NW -8
ity Service MH2944 NW -9
Lake MH6447 PL -1
Lake MH2863 PL -2
Lake MH2863 PL -3
Lake MH2709 PLAa
Lake Plaza LS019 PLAb
ity Service MH2702 S-1
ily Service MH0413 S-11
ily Service MH2514 S-12
ity, Service MH2430 S-14
ity Service MH2539 S-15
ity Service MH2145 S-16
ity Service MH2127 SA7
Ity Service MH2O42 S-18
ity Service MH2O42 S-19
Ily Service MH7259 S-2
wood Farms MH2O37 S-20
1y Service MH2O34 5-21
as LS295 S -22a
late N LS095 S -22b
ly Service MH1603 . S-23
ly, Service MH1524 5-24
ly, Service MH1536 S-25
ly Service MH1574 S-26
ly Service MH1574 S-27
ty Service MH1065 S-28
ty, Service MH1022 S-29
ly Service MHO987 S-3'
tv Service MH1040 S-30
Public
101.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.66 0.00
420.16 38.71 0.00 0.00 31.17 0.00
87.68 122.36 0.30 0.00 44.70 19.56
49.89 0.18 0.00 0.00 157.25 0.00
24.14 91.99 38.54 0.13 94.92 14.71
116.70 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
21.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.36 0.00
15.70 0.00 21.47 0.00 29.40 0.00
0.00--36.05-58.70--41:81---16.74---
0.00 0.00 0.00
157.76
3.10
35.73 0.00 0.01 0.00 4.69 12.52
55.74 0.00 0.90 0.00 12.02 0.00
297.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.58 0.00
60.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.88
0.01 0.02 37.32 0.00 0.65 7.31
36.23 2.06 0.00 0.00 9.74 7.73
108.22 0.00 0.00 22.54 18.93 4.93
16.20 47.26 10.42 0.00 29.42 26.37
34.28 0.00 0.00 51.41 7.45 28.77
70.63 0.55 0.00 20.46 5.16 1.98
0.00 8.02 0.00 0.00 121.62 0.00
0.00 0.13 0.07 0.00 0.61 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
123.39 47.48 0.00 0.00
33.28 56.89 29.94 26.65
240.30 0.00 0.00 0.00
34.25 75,61 10.57 0.00
77.97 0.00 0.00 0.00
66.34 0.00 0.00 0.00
124.07 0.00 0.00 0.00
21.12 0.00 27.12 52.42
37.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
174.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
52.09 0.00 0.00 0.00
163.22 0.00 0.00 0.00
157.76 98.59 0.00 0.15
139.32 0.00 0.16 6.21
186.83 0.00 0.00 17.67
120.87 0.00 0.00 5.22
206.77 0.00 0.00 0.00
126.99 0.00 0.00 0.00
65.04 0.00 1.45 6.82
118.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
212.52 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.46
59.71
42.25
19.92
83.43
4.56
1.17
5.12
7.03
16.09
31.91
0.00
6.00
i-38-
43.26
9.20
85.82
31.20
3.28
0.00
25.09
9.73
2.44
17.55
49.13
1.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
13.27
0.00
0.00
0.D0
0.00
0.00
1.41
9.09
37.94
0.14
0.00
4.35
16.82
0.00
0.00
3wty ae-ce MHUSr/ 6-5 19.26 0.00
14.79 0.00
0.25 1.45
20.44 0.00
3.52 0.00
low accounted for from Circuit Science
109.55 0.01 34.42 0.00
3vily Service MH0444 S-7 108.05 11.62 0.00 0.00
3vily Service MHO446 S-8 130.14 25.82 0.00 0.00
nsel Hills LS005 S-9
avily, Service OUT W-1
22.41
19.29
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
flow accounted for from Honeywell
0.00 0.00
11.76 0.00
How accounted ior from AACRON Inc. and Minnlech Corp.
0.00 0.00 0.00
cull City I Planned
Industrial
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
17.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
11.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 52.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 216.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10.57 0.00 291.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 44.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
67.73 0.00 45.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.05 0.00 65.34 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
52.50 0.10 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
94.62 0.00 97.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00
11.70 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 17.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 176.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 143.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
7.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
9.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
37.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
U.uu u.0u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.12 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.29 0.00 66.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.03 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
APPENDIX 9A
2
from flow rate table to get
MGD values for the
following columns
Appendix 9-B
Average Sewer Flows
MODEL INPUT DATA Land Use:Flow Rates 11/9/2007
by
SUB -DISTRICT
APPENDIX 913
Residential PubIlclSaml- Commercial Commercial CIty Planned Northwest Development multiply previous by factors Average Peak Model
Public Industrial fmm Bow rale table to get Flow Flow ValueIMGDvaluesfortheDesign
following columns Flow
LA -1 1 LA -2 LA -3 LA4 LA -RT LA -R1 I LA -R2 LA -R3LiftStationInletManholeSewerDistrictInstitutionOfficeCenterTOTAL Flow Factor TOTAL
Acres) Acres) I (Acres) Acres) Acres) Acres) Acres) " Acres) Acres) I (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Acres 92 acre/day MGD MGD) m)
Bass Lake LS069 6L-1 156.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -RT d3;270"; 0.129 3.9 0.503 349.5
Bass Lake MH6670 BL -2 145.58 96.85 0.00 0.00 27.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -R1 - (single family res) t> 540 1 0.233 3.8 0.887 616.1
Bass lake MH6654 BL -3 140.63 65.62 0.00 0.00 5.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -R2 (townhomes LA 1) t;z5 748 - 0.189 3.9 0.737 511.5
Bass Lake MH6654 BL4 30.76 11.80 0.00 0.00 55.42 1.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -R3 (apartments, LA -2) y,=;.996-_, 0.052 4 0.208 144.5
Bass Lake MH6446 BL -5 97.89 92.88 34.17 0.00 3.01 0.00 73.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -1 - (single family res. 810 - 0.322 3.6 1.159 804.8
Gravity Service MCES ECA 0.00 153.21 2.09 0.00 19.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA -2 - (townhomes, LA -1) 1122 0.181 3.9 0.705 489.4
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -10 0.00 109.26 6.56 0.00 7.05 7.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 LA -3 (apartments, LA -1,2) 1875 0.137 3.9 0.533 370.3
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -11 0.00 9.29 13.57 0.00 21.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.50 0.00 41.35 0.00 LA -4 (apartments, LA -2) 2930 0.173 3.9 0.676 469.3
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -12 38.00 19.01 20.47 0.00 102.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 Public 250 0.116 4 0.465 323.0
Mission Farms MH6268 EC -13 0.00 38.46 64.71 37.09 30.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.55 0.00 65.58 0.00 Commercial 1000 0.395 3.6 1.421 986.8
Autumn Hills MH4053 EC -16 112.25 99.86 0.00 0.00 14.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Commercial, Office 1000 0.207 3.8 0.785 545.2
Gravity Service MH7632 EC -17 0.00 19.05 24.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 179.60 0.00 City Center 1000 0.201 3.8 0.765 531.0
Gravity Service MCES ECA 8 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 94.32 0.00 Planned Industrial 2000 0.071 4 0.284 197.1
Gravity Service MCES . EC -19 0.00 0.00 17.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 148.92 35.11 0.179 3.9 0.698 485.0
Gravity Service MCES EC -2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.46 0.00 76.20 0.00 0,146 3.9 0.571 396.8
Gravity Service MCES EC -3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.11 50.29 0.00 0.065 4 0.261 180.9
Gravity Service MCES EC -4 0.00 14.62 0.00 19.99 77.70 7.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.19 0.00 19.22 0.00 0.291 3.7 1.076 747.2
Gravity Service MCES EC -5 0.00 8.82 0.00 0.00 129.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.86 0.00 0.00 0.050 4 0.199 138.5
Gravity Service MCES EC -6 0.00 12.26 0.00 0.00 23.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.33 0.00 54.40 0.00 0.200 3.8 0.758 526.6
Gravity Service MCES EC -7a 0.00 34.22 0.00 0.00 50.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.051 4 0.204 141.8
Conner Meadows MH3828 EC -7b 0.00 84.57 0.00 0.00 18.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.100 4 0.399 276.9
Gravity Service MCES EC -8 0.00 112.23 0.00 0.00 104.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.242 3.7 0.895 621.5
Gravity Service MCES EC -9 62.19 131.89 0.09 17.56 0.00 4.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.250 3.7 0.925 642.3
Gravity Service LAKE LAKE 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.003 4 0.012 8.4
Gravity Service LAKE LAKE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 4 0.000 0.1
Gravity Service OUT M-1 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.015 4 0.058 40.4
Gravity Service OUT M-2 20.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.048 4 0.192 133.0
Gravity Service OUT M-3 0.01. 8.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.02 0.00 0.00 42.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.052 4 0.207 143.8
Gravity Service OUT M-4 21.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.017 4 0.070 48.6
Gravity Service MED LAKE MED LAKE 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.003 4 0.010 7.2
Gravity Service MH6307 NC -1 104.14 0.00 0.00 11.86 4.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.120 3.9 0.469 325.9
Mission Farms MH5461 NC -11 67.06 17.88 0.00 0.00 47.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.143 3.9 0.556 386.4
Mission Farms MH5865 NC -12 125.64 13.40 0.00 0.00 49.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.129 3.9 0.504 349.9
Mission Farms MH6073 NC -13 229.14 15.77 0.00 0.00 6.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.205 3.8 0.779 540.8
Mission Farms MH0265 NC -2 62.96 8.51 0.00 0.00 75.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.079 4 0.317 220.4
Mission Farms MH5963 NC -3 68.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 154.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.094 4 0.376 261.1
Mission Farms MH5889 NCA 23.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 232.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.077 4 0.307 213.0
Mission Farms MH5860 NC -5 92.38 18.40 0.00 0.00 17.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.100 4 0.399 277.0
Mission Farms MH5819 NC -6 68.97 49.63 5.99 13.92 17.21 13.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.168 3.9 0.655 454.6
Mission Farms MH5819 NC -7 21.66 132.74 0.00 0.00 94.00 46.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.190 3.9 0.741 514.5
Gravity Service LS022 NE -1 0.02 0.00 38,17 0.11 2.33 20.51 56.74 0.00 103.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.233 3.8 0.884 6119
Gravity Service MH5435 NE -2 42.26 0.00 0.08 0.00 12.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.091 4 0.365 253.7
Gravity Service MH5354 NE -3 66.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.058 4 0.231 160.4
Gravity Service MH7305 NEA 11.65 51.72 0.00 15.92 28.27 10.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.121 3.9 0.473 328.2
Lancaster MH5219 NE -5 228.74 6.10 0.00 98.64 51.78 16.43 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.498 3.5 1.742 1209.9
Lancaster MH5062 NE -6 54.98 0.00 22.56 17.52 12.18 30.36 58.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.200 3.8 0.759 527.3
Lancaster MH5061 NE -7 94.26 0.00 0.00 17.17 20.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.132 3.9 0.514 356.9
Lancaster MH4873 NE -9 0.00 23.73 15.41 0.00 32.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 137.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.201 3.8 0.764 530.3
Gravity Service MH4814 NW -1 125.89 8.95 0.02 0.00 43.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.123 3.9 0.480 333.1
Gravity Service MH4676 NW -10 18.72 78.77. 0.00 0.00 41.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.114 4 0.455 316.3
Gravity Service MH4677 NW -11 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 54.01 11.80 9.41 86.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.109 4 0.437 303.4
Gravity Service MH4677 NW -12' 0:00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.67 0.00 0.00 73.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.174 3.9 0.679 471.4
APPENDIX 913
MODEL INPUT DATA
Land Use:Flow Rales 11/9/2007
by
SUB -DISTRICT
Residential PubliWSemi- Commercial Commercial City Planned Northwest Development multiply previous by factors Average Peak Model
Public Industrial from flow rate table to gel Flow Flow Value
MGD values for the Design
following columns Flow
LA -1 LA -2 LA -3 LA -4 LA -RT LA -R1 LA -R2 L --R3LiftStationInletManholeSewerDistrictInstitutionOfficeCenterTOTAL Flow Factor TOTAL
Acres Acres) Acres) Acres Acres) Acres Acres) Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres) Acres gallacrelday (MGD) MGD m
Gravity Service MH4484 NW -13 0.00 72.31 19.99 38.47 33.22 0.00 0.01 50.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.290 3.7 1.073 744.9
Gravity Service MH4448 NW -14 101.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.083 4 0.332 230.5
Gravity Service MH4283 NW -15 420.16 38.71 0.00 0.00 31.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.392 3.6 1.410 978.9
Gravity Service MH4175 NW -16 87.68 122.36 0.30 0.00 44.70 19.56 17.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.237 3.8 0.901 625.7
Gravity Service MH4080 NW -17 49.89 0.18 0.00 0.00 157.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.080 4 0.320 222.0
Gravity Service MH7320 NW -19a24.14 91.99 38.54 0.13 94.92 14.71 11.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.231 3.8 0.877 609.3
Gravity Service MH3886 NW -19b 116.70 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.095 4 0.378 262.7
Waterfront LS033 NW -2 21.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.36 0.00 0.00. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.024 4 0.096 66.4
Gravity Service MH3890 NW -20 15.70 0.00 21.47 0.00 29.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.060 4 0.241 167.6
Gravity Service MH3741 NW -21a 0.00 36.05 58.70 41.81 16.74 3.10 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.284 3.7 1.052 730.6
Gravity Service MH3681 NW -216 35.73 0.00 0.01 0.00 4.69 12.52 0.00 0.00 52.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.083 4 0.332 230.6
Gravity Service MH3681 NW -22 55.74 0.00 0.90 0.00 12.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.050 4 0.199 138.5
Gravity Service MH3682 NW -23 297.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.249 3.7 0.920 639.2
28th Ave LS023 NW -3 60.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.049 4 0.197 137.1
Gravity Service MH3349 NW4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.88 0.00 0.00 216.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.217 3.8 0.823 571.5
Gravity Service MH3221 NW -52 0.01 0.02 37.32 0.00 0.65 7.31 10.57 0.00 291.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.543 3.4 1.848 1283.0
Gravity Service MH3186 NW -6 36.23 2.06 0.00 0.00 9.74 7.73 0.00 0.00 44.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.078 4 0.313 217.2
Gravity Service MH3150 NW -7 108.22 0.00 0.00 22.54 18.93 4.93 67.73 0.00 45.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.272 3.7 1.006 698.8
Gravity Service MH3045 NW -8 16.20 47.26 10.42 0.00 29.42 26.37 0.05 0.00 65.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.158 3.9 0.618 429.0
Gravity Service MH2944 NW -9- 34.28 0.00 0.00 51.41 7.45 28.77 52.50 0.10 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.233 3.8 0.885 614.7
Pike Lake MH6447 PL -1 70.63 0.55 0.00 20.46 5.16 1.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.119 4 0.476 330.7
Pike Lake MH2863 PL -2 0.00 8.02 0.00 0.00 121.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.039 4 0.158 109.5
Pike Lake MH2863 PL -3 0.00 0.13 0.07 0.00 0.61 0.00 94.62 0.00 97.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.193 3.8 0.733 509.0
Pike Lake MH2709 PL -4a 0.00 115.04 40.79 0.00 6.17 29.98 11.70 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.219 3.8 0.832 577.7
Bass Lake Plaza LS019 PL -46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 17.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.018 4 0.071 49.4
Gravity Service MH2702 S-1 75.48 0.00 0.00 52.23 53.03 24.29 5.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.233 3.8 0.884 613.7
Gravity Service MH0413 S-11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 176.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.176 3.9 0.687 477.0
Gravity Service MH2514 S-12 123.39 47.48 0.00 0.00 59.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.168. 3.9 0.656 455.4
Gravity Service MH2430 S-14 - 33.28 56.89 29.94 26.65 42.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 143.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.379 3.6 1.364 947.3
Gravity Service MH2539 S-15 240.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.200 3.8 0.759 526.8
Gravity Service MH2145 S-16 34.25 75.61 10.57 0.00 83.43 2.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.153 3.9 0.598 415.0
Gravity Service MH2127 S-17 77.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.064 4 0.257 178.6
Gravity Service MH2O42 S-18 66.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.054 4 0.216 150.1
Gravity Service MH2O42 S-19 124.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.102 4 0.407 282.7
Gravity Service MH7259 S-2 21.12 0.00 27.12 52.42 7.03 13.27 7.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.231 3.8 0.877 608.9
Kingswood Farms MH2O37 S-20 37.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.034 4 0.138 95.8
Gravity Service MH2O34 S-21 174.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.149 3.9 0.581 403.5
Villages LS295 S -22a 52.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.042 4 0.169 117.2
Ferndale N LS095 S -22b 163.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.134 3.9 0.521 362.1
Gravity Service MH1603 5-23 157.76 98.59 0.00 0.15 7.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.241 3.7 0.891 618.4
Gravity Service MH1524 S-24 139.32 0.00 0.16 6.21 43.26 1.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.142 3.9 0.554 385.0
Gravity Service MH1536 S-25 186.83 0.00 0.00 17.67 9.20 9.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.205 3.8 0.781 542.0
Gravity Service MH1574 S-26 120.87 0.00 0.00 5.22 85.82 37.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.135 3.9 0.525 364.7
Gravity Service MH1574 S-27 206.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.20 0.14 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.175 3.9 0.684 474.7
Gravity Service MH1065 S-28 126.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.104 4 0.415 288.0
Gravity Service MH1022 S-29 65.04 0.00 1.45 6.82 0.00 4.35 9.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.085 4 0.339 235.5
Gravity Service MH0987 S -3r 118.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.09 16.82 37.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.216 3.8 0.822 571.0
Gravity Service MH1040 S-30 212.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.175 3.9 0.681 472.8
Imperial Hills LS031 S-31 52.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.043 4 0.174 120.8
Greentree West L5053 5-32 44.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.041 4 0.163 113.0
Gravity Service MHO955 S-4 93.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.13 0.00 2696 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.115 4 0.461 320.2
Highway 73 LS009 S-5 26.24 0.00 0.00 0,00 1.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.022 4 0.086 60.0
Gravity Service MH0577 5-6 109.55 0.01 34.42 0.00 19.26 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.159 3.9 0.621 431.4
Gravity Service W10444 S-7 108.05 11.62 0.00 0.00 14.79 0.00 0.29 0.00 66.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.171 3.9 0.667 463.4
Gravity Service MH0446 S-8 130.14 25.82 0.00 0.00 0.25 1.45 0.03 0.00 47.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.181 3.9 0.708 491.5
Sunset Hills LS005 S-9 22.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.023 4 0.093 64.6
Gravity Service OUT W-1 19.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.017 4 0.066 45.8
1 - flow accounted for from Honeywell 3.8917
2 - flow accounted for from AACRON Inc. and Minntech Corp. APPENDIX gy p
3- Bow accounted for from Circuit Science 7U
Appendix 9-C
Inventory of Facilities
Existing Sanitary Sewer (Age, Type, and Size)
APPENDIX 9C - SEWER INVENTORY & LENGTHS
Page;\keUA-1LddnimC s.I%Temp\T,m ,qO—q]b, APPENDIX BzipUPPENOIX K E.Isnn S.n"-Sw WENTORY. TMLES,I
Existing Sanitary Sewer (Age, Type, and Size)
Fags; ynE-14dnIILLOCAL9-1\TemplTempo ary Wenory]f,, APPEN DIX9.ZIp%PPENOIX90 FaI,IInyS,,Iuq_Se INVENTORY. TABLESM,
Existing Sanitary Sewer (Age, Type, and Size)
Pag9:\3Da" -1 W IRLOCA 5-1\Tertp\Temporary DI -q 3 for APPENDIX 9.ipKPPENDI%SC E Mn Santlary_S- INVENTORY. TABLESM.
Asbuilt Year
Pipe
Type
Size
inch) 1960 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 UNKNOWN Grand Total
SDR 8 0.431 3.46 o.541 0.04 4.47
Total 0.431 3.46 0.54 0.041 4.47
SDR26 1 8 1 1 0.06 0.06
Total I I 1 1 0.061 1 1 0.06
SDR -35 PVC 1 8 1 1 1 0.101 1 1 0.10
Total 0.101 0.10
TPP 8 0.59 0.59
9 0.31 0.31
1.40101.40
Total 2.30 2.30
UNKNOWN UNK 0.08 0.28 0.11 1.01 1.48
6 0.01 0.01
8 0.64 0.26 2.42 2.21 2.80 2.21 0.32 0.06 10.92
10 0.14 0.00 0.14
12 0.04 0.04
15 0.05 0.05
16 0.00 0.00
24 0.00 0.00
Total 0.64 0.26 2.42 2.21 3.08 2.21 0.61 0.11 1.12 12.65
VCP UNK 0.13 0.13
6 0.42 0.42
8 1.35 7.05 6.15 1.48 0.10 0.04 0.10 0.04 16.33
9 0.06 45.71 8.58 1.08 0.17 0.10 0.77 56.47
10 0.22 0.21 0.58 0.02 1.03
12 0.46 0.29 0.57 0.07 1.39
15 0.03 0.03
18 0.14 0.14
21 0.06 0.06
36 0.02 0.02
42 0.17 0.17
48 0.05 0.05
Total 2.08 54.16 16.02 2.63 0.02 0.10 0.22 1 0.82 76.250.201
VSP 9 1 3.011 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.01
12 1 0.061 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.06
Total 3.07 3.07
Grand Total (All
Types) 1 5.38 82.59 27.31 55.68 33.86 34.88 28.87 15.47 13.45 0.06 2.93 300.47
Pag9:\3Da" -1 W IRLOCA 5-1\Tertp\Temporary DI -q 3 for APPENDIX 9.ipKPPENDI%SC E Mn Santlary_S- INVENTORY. TABLESM.
Appendix 9-D
Design Flows
Model Development
A. SYSTEM INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
1. EXISTING SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM
Portions of the City's sanitary sewer system were installed over 40 years ago with over half of the City's
system over 30 years old. Throughout most of the City the sewers appear to be adequately sized for the
areas they serve. Several areas will require additional study to determine if new trunk sewers or relief
sewers are deemed necessary to handle the future flow from their service areas. Preliminary system
hydraulic model evaluation has indicated frequent high pipe capacities at peak flow levels within these
areas. The areas include sewershed S-12 (Parkers Lake area), sewershed NW -4 in the southeast quadrant
of I-494 and Hwy 55, and the sewersheds Bl -4, NE -6 and NC -4, upstream of the lift stations LS069(Bass
Lake), LS214(Lancaster) and LS282(Mission Farms) respectively.
2. GRAVITY SYSTEM
The system contains over 75 miles of Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP). Aging VCP is notorious for I/I problems
due to the number of pipe joints in the system. The number of joints also adds to its susceptibility to root
intrusion. VCP pipe has not been installed in Plymouth in significant quantities since the mid 1970's.
However, the City spends an inordinate amount of time and money maintaining the existing VCP system
through the current lining and rehabilitation program.
3. SYSTEM ANALYSIS
a. Sewer System
Sanitary Sewer Capacity Assessment
In order to provide the City of Plymouth and the MCES with future planning information, the existing
sewer system was evaluated under future flow conditions. The structure and flow rate information were
used to populate input for a hydraulic flow simulation model using MWH Soft InfoSWMM, together with
City GIS data to assess the sewer systems response to future flow conditions. This model will also be
used to evaluate current and future sewer capacities and the impacts of completed system improvements.
Flow Structure
The City's existing GIS sewer structure data, as -built information from the City's sewer construction plan
sheets, lift station maintenance manuals and lift station inspections were used to construct an electronic
representation of the City's sewer system.
The City of Plymouth is divided into sewersheds as shown in Appendix 9A Figure 9-3. Primary inlet
manholes were assigned to each sewershed based on immediate up gradient flow boundaries. To be
considered for use in the flow model, the inlet manholes needed to be connected with trunk sewer lines
greater than 12 inches in diameter. This simulated sewer structure was used to route flows from each
sewershed through the southwest and the northeast service areas. Flow was then ulitmately directed to the
primary sewer discharge point from the City of Plymouth located south and west of Medicine Lake and
currently metered by MCES metering station M-118.
Flow Rates
Anticipated wastewater flows from the sewershed districts were calculated using two methods. One
method determined flow rates based on the land use within each sewer district. Information for this
method was obtained from the City's current land use planning data, the previous Comprehensive Sewer
Plan prepared in 2000, MCES recommendations and current industry standards. The land use flow
calculation table is presented in Appendix B. The second method utilized the City's water records from
winter months to simulate average daily flows.
Based on land use planning a large area of land referred to as the northwest overlay will be developed by
the year 2030. Future development areas were assigned flows based on anticipated densities and
development land use patterns in the area. The predicted flows were routed either to the MCES Elm
Creek Interceptor, to the City of Maple Grove or a small portion routed to the northeast portion of the
City of Plymouth sewer system.
Sewer Model
This model was used to route sewer flows through the developed sewer structure of pipes, manholes and
lift stations. The model calculates various hydraulic parameters during normal flow, surcharge, backflow,
flooding and pumping conditions. The results from the model were calibrated against MCES meters
installed within the City of Plymouth sewer system.
The flows obtained from each flow generation method were calibrated using two temporary MCES
meters, MCES 2.9.1 and MCES 2.9.2. MCES 2.9.1 is located at the downgradient end of the primary
trunk line leaving the -Southwest service area. MCES 2.9.2 is located at the end of the primary trunk
leaving the Northeas service area. The flows at each temporary meter location were then balanced with
the readings from the MCES M-1 IS meter.
Resultant flow rates for each flow method and meter were calibrated using average daily, and maximum
daily and hourly flow measurements for the last three years for the MCES Meter M-118, and for the
period from July 1, 2007 through September 26, 7007 for MCES Temporary Meters 2.9.1 and 2.9.2.
Appendix 9-E
Lift Station Data
Lift Stations
The City currently has fifteen lift stations within the sanitary system. Collectively the fifteen stations
pump an average wastewater flow of approximately 12.6 million gallons per day (mgd). The average
daily flow through the primary discharge point at the MCES (7026) Interceptor Forcemain is 7.67 mgd.
This indicates that the average daily waste water flow pumped multiple times by the City's lift stations is
164 percent of the current average total wastewater flow within the City of Plymouth. The redundant
pumping of the wastewater flow is indicative of the importance of the City of Plymouth's lift stations to
overall system performance.
Inspections were performed on each station reviewing the flow capacity, physical condition and electrical
components of each station to identify deficiencies and to establish a priority for improvements to the
stations. Appendix E contains the results of the inspections for each lift station.
The condition of each station, recommended priority and schedule for improvements are found below
Proposed improvements recommendations were based on findings in six categories:
1. Hydraulic Capacity - The criteria utilized for determining adequate hydraulic capacity is compliance
with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's capacity requirements as published in the Ten States
Standards. The information of primary importance is the detention time in the individual stations wet
well and the average number of starts per hour of operations for each pump.
2. Pumping Capacity - Adequacy of pumping capacity was based on whether the station is able to pump
the peak instantaneous flow with the largest pump out of service. The lift stations ability to reliably
handle the range of average daily flow rates to peak flow rates are also considered as park of the
sewer system hydraulic model.
3. Physical Condition- The physical condition of each station is a subjective analysis based upon a
visual observation of the concrete, steel components, piping and valves. The suitability of the station
location is a review of the stations accessibility and aesthetics.
4. Electrical Issues- The electrical condition of the pumps was reviewed by observing the amperage
draw of the pumps and the physical condition of the electrical components of the station.
5. Instrumentation/Control- Instrumentation control review consisted of identifying whether the station
alarms are being transmitted to the central control facility and adequate back-up systems were in
place.
6. Potential for Sewer Back-up- The potential for sewer backups include two items: one whether the
stations contain either a standby generator or a receptacle for plugging to a standby generator and,
second whether the wet well and influent sewer contain adequate storage capacity to allow a response
by the sewer utility staff in the event of a power outage.
Of the fifteen (15) sewage lift stations in the city, three (3) stations are recommended for replacement
within the next 3 to 5 years. All stations have recommended improvements of varying degrees that are
included in future planning.
b. Station Hydraulic Capacity
The criteria utilized for determining -adequate hydraulic capacity is compliance with the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency's capacity requirements as published in the Ten States Standards. The
information of primary importance is the detention time in the individual stations wet well and the
average number of starts per hour of operations for each pump.
Table 9E-1
Lift Station Capacities
Station Name
Peak
Avg. Daily Max. Daily Hourly
W/W Flow W/W Flow WNW Flow
Firm
Pump
Capacity
Pump
Starts per
total run
eriod
Wet Well
Volume
Wet Well
DT
Ten States
Standards
Requirement (30
Min Max
mgd) mgd) mgd) mgd) gal) hr) DT
28th Avenue 0.14 0.15 0.55 0.14 39037 1480 0.24 Yes
Autumn Hills 0.22 0.84 0.84 0.36 79972 1268 0.04 Yes
Bass Lake 3.02 3.02 7.85 4.80 83603 10146 0.08 Yes
Bass Lake Plaza 0.18 0.18 0.70 0.18 6096 1268 0.17 Yes
Conner Meadows 0.22 0.22 0.84 0.36 86431 1268 0.14 Yes
Cty Rd 73 Basset Crk 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.23 167818 1173 0.70 NO
Ferndale North 0.36 0.40 1.30 0.36 75918 3171 0.19 Yes
Greentree West 0.22 0.16 0.84 0.22 88995 1057 0.16 Yes
Imperial Hills 0.18 0.14 0.70 0.18 256388 592 0.10 Yes
Kingswood Farms 0.20 0.26 0.76 0.20 34082 1057 0.10 Yes
Lancaster 3.40 3.40 8.84 5.18 40683 22440 0.16 Yes
Mission Farms 2.59 6.35 6.99 7.04 91757 37071 0.14 Yes
Pike Lake 1.44 1.44 4.32 1.44 90333 3523 0.06 Yes
Sunset Hills 0.20 0.15 0.76 0.20 8973 3523 0.56 NO
Villa es Hunter Blu Lift Station Abandoned September 2007
Waterfront 0.22 1 0.11 0.84 0.65 22889 1268 0.28 Yes
Lift station detention time calculations are presented in Table 9E-2 below:
Table 9E-2
LIFT STATION DETENTION TIME CALCULATIONS
Lift Station Detention Time Calculations
Station Name
Avgerage Max
Daily Flow
Rate Depth Diameter
Wet Well
Floor to Influent
Sewer Invert
Volume Detention
Time
Diameter
Sewer Line
Length Volume
Total
Detention Detention
Time Time
d ft ft ft al hr in ft al hr hr
28th Avenue 0.15 24 6 7 1480 0.24 6 400 587 0.09 0.33
Autumn Hills 0.84 19 6 6 1268 0.04 8 1200 3132 0.09 0.13
Bass Lake 3.02 31 12 12 1 10146 0.08 1 16 800 8351 1 0.07 0.15
Bass Lake Plaza 0.18 18 6 6 1268 0.17 0 0 0 0.00 0.17
Conner Meadows 0.22 19 6 6 1268 0.14 8 0 0 0.00 0.14
Cty Rd 73 Basset Crk 0.04 25 6 5.55 1173 0.70 4 60 39 0.02 0.73
Ferndale North 0.40 29 6 15 3171 0.19 0 0 0 0.00 0.19
Greentree West 0.16 28 6 5 1 1057 0.16 1 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.16
Imperial Hills 0.14 18 3 11.2 592 0.10 0 0 0 0.00 0.10
Kingswood Farms 0.26 20 6 5 1057 0.10 0 0 0 0.00 0.10
Lancaster 3.40 31 0 10 22440 0.16 0 0 0 0.00 0.16
Mission Farms 6.35 33 0 11.8 37071 0.14 0 0 0 0.00 0.14
Pike Lake 1.44 27 10 6 3523 0.06 1 0 0 1 0 1 0.00 0.06
Sunset Hills 0.15 15 10 6 3523 0.56 0 0 0 0.00 0.56
Villages Hunter Bluff) Lift Station abandoned Se tember 20'07
Waterfront 0.11 1.8 6 1 6 1268 0.28 0 0 0 0.00 0.28
C. Safety
Safety issues affect both the permanent constructed facility and operational procedures. Construction
items address ladders, fall protection devices, presence of safety harnesses, safety grating, railings, the
need to access subsurface structures during operation, and whether service vehicles and operating
personnel can remain off the public streets during maintenance activities.
The operational procedures which the City employs do not necessarily require construction of permanent
facilities, but may include use of portable equipment.
d. Potential For Sewer Back -Up
The evaluation of the potential for sewer back-ups include three items: one is a review of the history of
problems at the station, two is whether the stations contain standby power capability (either a generator or
a receptacle for plugging to a standby generator) and, three whether the volume of the wet well plus the
influent sewer contains adequate storage capacity to allow the sewer utility staff time to connect an
emergency generator before wastewater would back-up into houses, in the event of a power outage.
e. Pump Review and Capacity
Pump review is a review of pump capacity, pump age, maintenance record, and amperage draw. Pump
capacity is a determination of whether the station has capacity to pump the peak hourly flow with the
largest pump out of service.
Pumps are typically designed to operate for a period of fifteen years. Any pumps older than 15 years are
subject to failure due to age. Maintenance review is a summarization by the City staff of the amount of
maintenance required on each pump. Amperage draw is a comparison of the measured draw to
theoretical draw required for the particular motor.
f. Wet Well Physical Condition
The station physical condition evaluation addresses the physical condition of each station's concrete,
hatches, and miscellaneous metals. Steps into wet wells are considered unacceptable because they can
become rusty and are not capable of being retrofitted with fall restraints.
g. Valve Vault or Dry Well, Physical Conditions
The physical condition of the valve vault addresses the condition of the concrete, the steps, access into the
station, piping and valves, and the overall cleanliness of the structure.
The physical condition of the dry well addresses the condition of the steel access tube and/or concrete
chamber, the ladder, access into the station, piping and valves, and the overall cleanliness of the structure.
h. Electrical Components
The electrical review evaluates the adequacy of the electrical service to each station, the adequacy of
standby power; and the condition and accessibility of the pump control panel. Adequacy of electrical
service considers the number of power outages and whether operation of the pumps causes dimming of
lights in neighborhood. An unacceptable rating (rating of 5) is given to any station which requires an
operator to enter a below ground structure to operate the.pumps.
Table 9E-3
LIFT STATION ELECTRICAL REVIEW
Lift Station Electrical Review
Lift Station
Voltage/
Phase
Type of
Control
Pump
Controller
Backup
Controller Pump 1
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase
Current
Pump 2
A Phase B Phase C Phase
Pump 3
A Phase B Phase C
28th Avenue 240/1 Floats Y Y
Autumn Hills 480/3 Floats Y Y 20 20 20 17 17 17
Bass Lake 480/3 1 Floats/TRD Y Y 92 90 95 90 90 92 88 89 90
Bass Lake Plaza 240/1 Floats Y Y 6 6
Conner Meadows 480/3 FloatslrRD Y Y 12 12 11 10 11 10
Cty Rd 73 Basset Crk 240/3 Floats/TRD Y Y 11 12 12 11 13 12
Ferndale North 240/3 Floats Y Y 39 39 38 39 38 38
Greentree West 240/3 Floats Y Y 1 11.5 11 12 11 10 11
Imperial Hills 230/1 Floats/TRD Y Y
Kin swood Farms 240/3 Floats Y Y 13 12 1 13 1 16 15 16
Lancaster 460/3 Floats/TRD Y Y vfd vfd vfd vfd vfd vfd
Mission Farms 460/3 FloalsrrRD Y Y 98 97 98 1 82 83 82 93 94 94
Pike Lake 460/3 Floats Y Y 59 58 57 52 53 52
Sunset Hills 240/1 Floats Y Y 11 11
Villa es Hunter BI Lift Station Abandoned September 2007
Waterfront 1 230/3 1 Floats I Y I Y 14 13 14 12 11 12
Instrumentation/Control/SCADA
For this parameter, each station was reviewed against the following criteria:
Whether the station has alarms for station high and low levels, pump motor over temperature,
and pump seal failure
Whether back-up pump controllers exist
Whether SCADA transmits to the central control station
j. Suitability of Location
The suitability of location addresses each station's service area, maintenance accessibility, aesthetics,
visibility and proximity to adjacent homes, potential for damage by the public, and its position within
right-of-ways, easements or City owned property. Accessibility from a public street is considered very
important. The potential for public damage is a consideration of whether the station is susceptible to being
struck by an automobile or to vandalism.
A private driveway to the stations is deemed important to allow operation and maintenance staff to
function without being threatened by passing traffic.
For the visibility to neighbors and proximity to homes criteria, it is assumed that a lift station detracts
from value or desirability of an adjacent home, and aesthetic treatment at the left station mitigates this
detriment.
A review of whether a station exists within a Utility Easement or public right-of-way was not completed
because it would require an extensive legal search of property records plus property survey of each
station. This type of investigation was beyond the scope of this study.
k. Acceptability Ratings
Table 9E-4 ranks the condition of each station against the nine general parameters
TABLE 9E-4
LIFT STATION ACCEPTABILITY RATING
LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS
The previous Table 9E-4 contains acceptability ratings for each sewage lift station in the City. Six stations
have an overall rating of less than industry average of greater than 3.00:
28th Avenue 3.56
Autumn Hills 3.89
Greentree West 3.33
Imperial Hills 3.69
Pike Lake 3.56
Waterfront 3.22
These stations should have the highest priority for correction. Individual parameters in each of the other
fifteen stations also contain a range of moderate to unacceptable ratings. Such deficiencies can most likely
be corrected individually at each station. The decision of which to pursue depends upon the severity of the
individual deficiencies. The following is a summary of the evaluations and recommended improvements
for each station.
Of the six stations above are 28th Avenue and Imperial Hills are vet well/dry well or dry compartment
stations in excess of 30 years old. It may be desirable to replace each station with submersible stations, as
Lift Station Acceptability Rating
Station Name Hydraulic SafetyCapacity
Potential
Backup Pump
Station Condition
Electrical
Wet Well valve Well
I/C Location Total
Average
Acceptability
PointsPoi
Points
Ranki ng
Suggested CI
Priority
Ranking
28th Avenue 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 2 4 32 3.56 12 12
Autumn Hills 4 •3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 35 3.89 15 15
Bass Lake 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 13 1.44 3 6
Bass Lake Plaza 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 21 1 2.33 5 1 4
Conner Meadows 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 12 1.33 1 2
Cty Rd 73 (Basset Crk) 1 4 1 1 5 5 1 1 4 23 2.56 8 8.
Ferndale North 2 4 2 2 3 3 4 2 4 26 2.89 9 9
Greentree West 2 5 3 3 3 3 5 2 4 30 3.33 11 10
Imperial Hills 2 5 4 4 5 3 3 3 4 33 3.67 14 13
Kingswood Farms 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 22 2.44 6 5
Lancaster 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 13 1 1.44 2 1 1
Mission Farms 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 1, 1 14 1.56 4 3
Pike Lake 3 53 3 3 3 5 5 2 32 3.56 13 14
Sunset Hills 3 3 2 3 3 . 3 2 2 2 23 2.56 7 7
Villages (Hunter Bluff) Lift Station Abandoned September 2007
Waterfront 3 4 1 3 1 2 1 3 13 3 1 4 4 29 3.22 10 11
Keynote - Acceptability Rating = 1 to 5
1 = Excellent
2 = Better than Average
3 = Average
4= Below Average
5 = Unacceptable
Address
Highest CIP
First
LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS
The previous Table 9E-4 contains acceptability ratings for each sewage lift station in the City. Six stations
have an overall rating of less than industry average of greater than 3.00:
28th Avenue 3.56
Autumn Hills 3.89
Greentree West 3.33
Imperial Hills 3.69
Pike Lake 3.56
Waterfront 3.22
These stations should have the highest priority for correction. Individual parameters in each of the other
fifteen stations also contain a range of moderate to unacceptable ratings. Such deficiencies can most likely
be corrected individually at each station. The decision of which to pursue depends upon the severity of the
individual deficiencies. The following is a summary of the evaluations and recommended improvements
for each station.
Of the six stations above are 28th Avenue and Imperial Hills are vet well/dry well or dry compartment
stations in excess of 30 years old. It may be desirable to replace each station with submersible stations, as
an alterative to performing multiple improvements. The remaining four stations are submersible stations
with reliability, access safety, electrical or hydraulic deficiency ratings. These stations should be
evaluated for replacement or significant rehabilitation because of the multiple deficiencies.
At new lift stations, Bass Lake, Mission Farms and Lancaster the utility staff is experiencing continuous
scum mat buildup in the wet wells, even after development of program cycling of pump controls for a
regular "cleaning. cycle". Asa result, frequent wet well cleaning with jetting and vactor equipment is
scheduled for each station on a routine basis. Modifications to each well well should be investigated to
mitigate the scum mat build up and the unwarranted cost for frequent cleaning.
The following is a summary of the evaluations and recommended improvements for each station.
Autumn Hills Station (LSO43)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Capacity, Potential Backup, Pumps, Station Condition, Electrical and I/C
Replace Station
M. Connor Meadows Station (LS106)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Clear vegetation from safe free zone in front of control panel
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Normal maintenance
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Replace pumps
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
n. Greentree West Station (LS053)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Replace wet well hatch
Remove wet well steps
Replace pump control panel
Replace Instrumentation and Controls
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
Provide drive -up service access
Based on significant needs the station should be scheduled for complete replacement.
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
o. Imperial Hills Station (LS031)
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Replace wet well
Replace pump control panel
Replace Instrumentation and Controls
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
Provide drive -up service access
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Normal maintenance
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
p. Ferndale North Station (LS095)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two .
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Service air relief located in easement and clear away vegetation from access structure.
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Replace pumps
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
q. Kingswood Farm Station (LS035)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Lower wet well operating set points in control panel to adjust pump frequency to minimize
scum mat build up.
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Replace pumps
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
r. Sunset Trail Station (LS005)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Replace pumps
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
S. County Road 73 Station (LS009)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Provide drive -up service access
Raise wet well, valve vault and control panel to surrounding grade to eliminate surface water
from entering structures.
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Normal maintenance
Any parameters which received a rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
t. Waterfront Station (LS033)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
The following items are rated poor in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Add pump motor temperature/seal failure monitor
Replace wet well hatch
Remove wet well steps
Replace pump control panel
Replace Instrumentation and Controls
Replace the piping and valves
Provide drive -up service access
Replace pumps
Based on significant needs the station should be scheduled for complete replacement.
U., 28th Avenue North Station (LS023)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add pump motor temperature/seal failure monitor
Replace wet well hatch
Remove wet well steps
Replace pump control panel —
Replace Instrumentation and Controls
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
Improve. drive -up service access
Replace pumps
Based on significant needs the station should be scheduled for complete replacement.
V. Mission Farm Station (LS282)
The following items are rated marginal in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Lower pump control panel Lead/Lag Pump ON set point elevations based hydraulic model
simulation to optimize sewer peak flow condition performance.
Wet well scum mat build-up
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Normal maintenance improvements
W. Lancaster Station (LS214)
The following items are rated marginal in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Lower pump control panel Lead/Lag Pump ON set point elevations based hydraulic model
simulation to optimize sewer peak flow condition performance.
Wet well scum mat build-up
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Normal maintenance improvements
X. Bass Lake Plaza Station (LS019)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
The following items are rated poor in Station 1 and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Provide normal maintenance
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Replace pumps
Any parameters which received a•rating of above average quality are not listed as requiring improvement
during the next 10 years in the capital improvement plan.
Y. Pike Lake Station (LS013)
The following items which are rated unacceptable in Station should be addressed within the next two
years:
Replace wet well hatch
Remove wet well steps
Replace pump control panel - Note: Updated panel installed 07/06
Replace Instrumentation and Controls
Add safety railing around wet well or provide safety grating on wet well
Install a concrete valve vault to contain the station's valves, require an access hatch on the
structure
Replace the piping and valves
Provide drive -up service access
Adjust wet well and control panel to surrounding grade
Replace pumps
Engage in discussion with electric utility regarding electrical service
Upgrade reliability of station forcemain discharge piping from station to gravity discharge
location
Based on significant needs the station should be scheduled for complete replacement.
Z. Bass Lake Station (LS069)
The following items are rated marginal in Station and should be corrected within the next 3 to 5 years:
Lower pump control panel Lead/Lag Pump ON set point elevations based hydraulic model
simulation to optimize sewer peak flow condition performance.
Wet well scum mat build-up
The following items which are rated average will likely require correction within the next 6 to 10 years:
Normal maintenance improvements
Appendix 9-F
Cost Funding and Timing
Trunk Sewer Costs
Lift Station Costs
SEWERS
Rehabilitation of sewers in disrepair improves flow through the sewers and reduces
maintenance expenditures on the system. The continued maintenance and
rehabilitation of existing sewers extends the life of the sewer and reduces costly
reconstruction of the system.
VCP Sewers
The VCP portions of the sewer system will monopolizes a large portion of the
maintenance time and budget. It is estimated that in excess 60 percent of the
maintenance work effort, and budget, will be spent on 25% of the sewer system, most
of which is the VCP portions of the system. It is recommended that the City continue
the program to rehabilitate VCP sewers. Plymouth has repaired areas of VCP that are
in extreme disrepair and will continue the rehabilitation program as a whole City-
wide. Most VCP sewers can be successfully rehabilitated through in-place lining..
Excavations are seldom necessary. The liner typically provides minimal increase in
structural strength of the pipe. More importantly, the liner seals joints and removes
points of access for roots and I/I. The installation of a liner typically does not affect
the flow through the sewer or reduce the capacity of the pipe.
The current VCP sewer rehabilitation should continue at a rate consistent with the
schedule available budgets. It is recommended that televising be concentrated in
VCP areas for the first three years to develop a prioritization for the continued
rehabilitation program. This program would be prioritized following the year after
the first areas are televised. Once a prioritization is developed, the City may complete
larger portions of the program annually to accelerate the rehabilitation program.
aa. VCP Sewer Rehabilitation Cost
It is estimated that two-thirds of the City's 30-40 year old clay pipe is experiencing
significant root intrusion. A rehabilitation program to line two-thirds (48 miles) of the
City's 12 -inches diameter and less clay pipe lines results in a total cost of
approximately $8.0 million. Lining the entire clay system would cost approximately
12 million. A budgetary number of $150,000-165,000 per mile was used to estimate
the cost of lining VCP sewers.
Developing a schedule to rehabilitate the VCP sewer depends on the annual budget
dedicated to the project. Below are examples of the timefraine the City can expect
based on annual expenditures for the rehabilitation:
500,000 per year achieves 3 miles per year (16+ year program)
1,000,000 per year achieves 6 miles/year (8+ year program)
0 $1,500,000 per year achieves 9 miles/year (5+ year program)
Reconstruction of sewers often result in costs that approach 5-6 times the cost of
lining. The amount of reconstruction cannot be determined without a review of
televising records. Areas that are scheduled for street reconstruction or major
rehabilitation should be reviewed to determine if reconstruction of the sewer would
be a feasible addition to the street project.
ESTIMATED COST FOR TRUNK SEWER OVERSIZING
The City should expect that over sizing of trunk sewers will be required with the
development in the Northwest Overlay District. It is recommended that the following
over sizing costs be included in fixture budgeting. The actual costs and timing will be
based on development planning, staging and final design.
The City should also expect the need for over depth installation of trunk sewers in
several portion of the .Northwest Overlay District. Over depth costs should be
considered as an alternative to temporary lift station phasing.
The following table includes the recommended costs for the Northwest Overlay
District:
ESTIMATED COST FOR LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS
The costs are presented for each individual station and are separated for
improvements recommended to be performed in 1-2 years, 3-5 years, and 6-10 years.
No costs are presented for improvements which are anticipated after 10 years.
Table 9E-7 contains a summary of the cost estimates for addressing the deficiencies
to each of the lift stations. The total "Alternate" cost represents the cost of replacing
all four wet well/dry well stations with submersible stations.
Oversized quantities in the ECI
diameter legnth
upsize $4.50
inches /Inch dia.
Upsize
cost
10" 6425 2 $9.00 57,825
12" 16760 4 $18.00 301,680
15" 5500 71 31.50 173,250
18.. 2830 10 $45.00 127,350
Total 1 660,105
Overdepth Excavation
18.. 1540 120 184,800
15" 1295 120 155,400
Total City Adder 1,000,3051
ESTIMATED COST FOR LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS
The costs are presented for each individual station and are separated for
improvements recommended to be performed in 1-2 years, 3-5 years, and 6-10 years.
No costs are presented for improvements which are anticipated after 10 years.
Table 9E-7 contains a summary of the cost estimates for addressing the deficiencies
to each of the lift stations. The total "Alternate" cost represents the cost of replacing
all four wet well/dry well stations with submersible stations.
TABLE 9E-7
RECOMMENDED LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT COSTS
Station 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 6-10 Years Total
Autumn Hills Station (LS043) 700,000 700,000
Connor Meadows Station (LS 106)
Greentree West Station (LS053) 700,000 700,000
Imperial Hills Station (LS031) 800,000 800,000
Ferndale North Station (LS095)
Kingswood Farm Station (LS035)
Sunset Trail Station (LS005)
County Rd. 73 Station (LS009)
Waterfront Station (LS033) 700,000 700,000
28th Avenue Station (LS023) 675,000 675,000
Mission Farms Station (LS282) 20,000 20,000
Lancaster Station (LS214) 5,000 5,000
Bass Lake Plaza Station (LS019)
Pike Lake Station (LS013) 1,000,000 1,000,000
Bass Lake Station LS069 20,000 20,000
General Station Maintenance 400,000 600,000 1,000,000 2,000,000
Total 2,075,000 2,845,000 1,700,000 8,600,000
TABLE 9E-8
ANNUAL EXPENDITURE
O&M AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
YEARS 2008 - 2017
ear
Parameter 2008 1 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Annual O&M
Cleaning/Jetting Sewer 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000
Televising Sewer 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000
Lift Station Inspection 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
Annual O&M 324,000 324,000 324,000 324,000 324,000 234,000 234,000 234,000 234,000 234,000
Capital Imrovements
VCP Sewer Rehab 500.,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 500,000
Lift Station Improvements 875,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 900,000 900,000 1,000,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000
Total Annual Expenditure of
Capital Improvement 1,375,000 2,200,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 1,900,000 2,000,0001 1,200,000 1,200,000 700,0001 700,000
Total Annual Cost to City 1$1,699,0001 $2,524, 0001 2,324,0001 2,224,0001 2,224,0001 2,224,0001 1,434,0001 1,434,0001 934,0001 934,000
4. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
a. Service Availability Charges
Service Availability Charge (SAC): The service availability charge is a onetime fee imposed by MCES
for new connections or increased volume discharged to the metropolitan wastewater system. The SAC fee
is similar to fees used by many wastewater utilities and municipalities and is generically known as an
impact" or "connection" fee. One SAC unit equals 274 gallons of maximum potential daily wastewater
flow volume. A freestanding single-family residence is charged one SAC unit. Other types of buildings
pay a prorated SAC fee, based on the estimated volume of wastewater they will generate.
Service Availability Charge
2007 SAC 2008 SAC
Base Unit Fee: Single -Family Dwelling $1,675 $1,825
Apartment (without individual laundry facilities) $1,340 $1,460
Multi -Dwelling Public Housing (without garbage disposals or $1,256.25 $1,368.75
dishwashers)
Multi -Dwelling Public Housing (without individual laundry $1,005 $1,095
facilities, garbage disposals or dishwashers)
Area Charges
Area charges include the cost of collection facilities. These charges are assigned based on land area to
reflect service needs, which are more cf-losely tied to land area, and which create a need for additional
upgrades (trunk mains). Table 99 shows recommended area charges to cover estimated facility costs.
TABLE 9F-1 AREA CHARGE DETERMINATION
Facility Improvements
2007 Estimated
Project Cost
Trunk Main Oversize(l) 1,000,305
Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Maintenance ($1,324,000 X.08) 105,920
Total Cost 1,106,225
Developable Acreage (2) 1100
Cost per Developable Acre 1005/Acre
1) Includes difference in cost for sewer mains over 12 inches in
diameter
2)
2)Includes area not currently served by sewer, subtracting wetlands, 25%
Right of Way, and Public -Institutional Land Use
b. CONNECTION FEES
Connection fees are commonly used to cover the costs of sewer collection facilities. As shown in Table
9F-2, the connection fees are assigned based on the number of residential equivalency units (REU) of a
particular customer. An REU is defined for the purpose of this study as the use of 225 gallons per day
gpd), which is typical of a single family home. In this way, facility costs are distributed among
customers based on the amount of water that they use. For example, if an industrial customer uses 450
gpd, they will pay twice the connection fee of a typical single family home.
It should be noted that these calculated costs are for full recovery of facilities and over -sizing of trunk
water mains. This assigns all costs of new sewer system components and upgrades to new customers and
new development. While the proposed facilities will be constructed mainly to serve growth, in some cases
they also provide benefit to existing customers. The City can decide how much cost to assign to existing
customers, and then recover a portion of these costs through sewer rates or other means.
TABLE 9F-2 - CONNECTION FEE DETERMINATION
2007 Estimated
Facility Improvements Project Cost
Maple Grove Sewer Improvements $ 1,700,000
Lift Station Improvements $ 8,600,000
Total Cost 10,300,000
Total Cost for future connections(') 2,388,000
Future Additional REUs('-) 6222
Connection Fee per REU 384
Cost allocation based on future connections at 8% of total lift station improvements at build out plus Maple Grove
upgrades
2) Residential Equivalency Units, based on water use assumption of 225 gpd/REU and ultimate projected average
day demands
C. SEWER RATES
The current City sewer rate $4.20 per month plus $2.47 per 1000 gallons. It is important to regularly
review these rates and adjust them annually to accommodate inflation, aging infrastructure, and changes
to the Cities' Capital Improvement Plans (CIP). Based on adjustments to the 20 -year plan and changes in
the annual operating and maintenance costs these rates should be projected forward on a 2-5 year basis.
The impact of capital improvements proposed in this plan on sewer rates was examined. If 50 percent of
the proposed capital improvements are funded by area charges and connection fees, with the remaining
debt service by the general operating fund (assuming a 5 percent inflation rate, and 10 -year bonds with an
interest rate of 5 percent), to fund each year's proposed improvements, the average water rate increase per
year is estimated at 7 percent from 2008 to 2030.
Since the capital improvement plan discussed in this report is a function of water demand and sewer
capacity, an alternative to adding sewer capacity would be to reduce sewer flows in the City. Water
conservation and I/I is strongly encouraged by the Metropolitan Council.
Appendix 9-G
Individual Sewage Treatment Ordinance
Plymouth City Code
Section 740 - Prohibiting Discharizes
into the Sanitary Sewer System
740.01
740.01. Purpose. The discharge of water from roof, surface, groundwater sump pump,
footing tile, swimming pool, or other natural precipitation into the City sewerage system results
in flooding and overloading of the sewerage system. When this water is discharged into the
sanitary sewer system it is treated at the sewage treatment plant. This results in very large and
needless expenditures. The City Council, therefore, finds it in the best interest of the City to .
prohibit such discharges.
740.02. Discharge Prohibited. Except as otherwise expressly authorized in this Section,
no water from any roof, surface, groundwater sump pump, footing tile, swimming pool, or
other natural precipitation shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. Dwellings and.
other buildings and structures which require, because of infiltration of water into basements,
crawl spaces, and the like, a sump pump discharge system shall have a permanently installed
discharge line which shall not at any time discharge water into the sanitary sewer system,
except as provided herein. A permanent installation shall be one which provides for year round
discharge capability to either the outside of the dwelling, building, or structure, or is connected
to City storm sewer or discharge through the curb and gutter to the street. It shall consist of a
rigid discharge line, without valving or quick connections. for altering the path of discharge, and
if connections for altering the path of discharge, and if connected to the City storm sewer line,
include a check valve and an air gap located in a small diameter structure as shown in the City's
standard plates.
740.03. Disconnection. Before August 1, 1995, any person, firm, or corporation having
a roof surface, groundwater sump pump, footing tile, or swimming pool now connected and/or
discharging into the sanitary sewer system shall disconnect or remove same. Any disconnects
or openings in the sanitary sewer system shall be closed or repaired in an effective,
workmanlike manner.
740.04. Inspection. Every person owning improved real estate that discharges into the
City's sanitary sewer system shall allow an employee of the City of Plymouth or a designated
representative of the City to inspect the buildings to confirm that there is no sump pump or
other prohibited discharge into the sanitary sewer system. In lieu of having the City inspect
their property, any person may furnish a certificate from a licensed plumber certifying that their
property is in compliance with this ordinance.
740.05. Future Inspections. Each sump pump connection identified will be reinspected
periodically.
740.06. New Construction. All new dwellings with sumps for which a building permit is
issued after August 1, 1995, shall have a pump and shall be piped to the outside of the dwelling
before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
Plymouth City Code 740.07
740.07. Surcharge. A surcharge of One Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($100.00) per
month is hereby imposed on every sewer bill mailed on and after October 1, 1995, to property
owners who are not in compliance with this ordinance or who have refused to allow their
property to be inspected to determine if there is compliance. All properties found during yearly
reinspection to have violated this ordinance will be subject to the $100.00 per month penalty
for all months between the two most recent inspections.
740.08. Winter Discharge. The City Manager is authorized to issue a permit to allow a
property'owner to discharge Surface Water into the sanitary sewer system. The permit shall
authorize such discharge only from November 15 to March 15 and a property owner is required
to meet at least one of the following criteria in order to obtain the permit:
a) The freezing of the surface water discharge from the sump pump or footing
drain is causing a dangerous condition, such as ice buildup or flooding, on either
public or private property.
b) The property owner has demonstrated that there is a danger that the sump pump
or footing drain pipes will freeze up and result in either failure or damage to the
sump pump unit or the footing drain and cause basement flooding.
c) The water being discharged from the sump pump or footing drain cannot be
readily discharged into a storm drain or other acceptable drainage system.
Following ten (10) days written notice and an opportunity to be heard,. the City
Manager may require a property to discharge their sump pump into the sanitary sewer from
November 15 to March 15 if surface water discharge is causing an icy condition on streets.
Ord. 95-36, 06/20/95)
i
Agenda Number I
CITY .OF PLYMOUTH
CITY .CQVNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through Steve Juetten, Community
Development Director
FROM: Shawn Drill, Senior Planner (509-5456) through Barbara Senness Planning
Manager
SUBJECT: City of Plymouth. Comprehensive Plan Update—Draft Water Supply and
Distribution Plan (2005050)
DATE: Nov. 9, 2007 for City Council Study Session on Nov. 13, 2007
1. PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to forward the draft plan to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on December 5,
2007.
2. BACKGROUND:
In 2005, the City began the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan. All cities in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area are required to update their plan by the end of 2008. The goal is to
allow the City to adopt the update in 2007, contingent upon the required Metropolitan Council
review. This would also provide the time needed for neighboring cities to review and comment
on the update.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
On November 7, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft plan and subsequently voted
to forward it to the City Council. No one from the public wished to speak on the matter. A copy
of the Planning Commission minutes is attached.
4. WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN:
The Water Supply and Distribution Plan (Chapter 8) of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
assesses the City's ability to provide ample reliable water. The plan accommodates expansion of
the water system into the northwest area of Plymouth, and addresses improvements needed
Within the existing urbanized area.
The plan identifies capital improvements needed through 2030 to meet future water demands,
consisting of:
1) construction of three new municipal water wells, each with a capacity of 1,000 to 2,000
gallons per minute,
2) construction of a water treatment plant with a capacity of 3-6 million gallons per day. on
the site of the Vicksburg Reservoir,
3) installation of roughly 50,000 lineal feet of trunk water main, and
4) maintenance of existing water storage facilities.
5. APPENDICES:
The appendices include an inventory of existing storage and demands, an inventory and analysis
of the water system, an analysis of the future system, information regarding costs, funding, and
timing for capital improvement planning, and the water emergency and conservation plan;
6. RECOMMENDATION:
Provide any comments and recommended changes regarding the draft plan, and then forward the
plan to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on December 5, 2007.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Minutes
2. Draft Water Supply and Distribution Plan
3. Draft Plan Appendices
2
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
November 7, 2007
Page 18
E. CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE — WATER
SUPPLY PLAN (2007050)
Chair Holmes introduced the Comprehensive Plan Update — Water Supply Plan.
Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the November 1, 2007 staff report.
Chair Holmes asked for an explanation of the water emergency plan.
Public Works Director Cote said the water emergency plan is required by the DNR in order
to obtain any permits to install new wells. The plan is based on the city's water usage, and
overall per capita use decreasing as a result of the daytime sprinkling ban and other specific
elements of conservation.
Commissioner Jaffoni noted the per capita demand has decreased, and asked when the
water restrictions were put into effect.
Public Works Director Cote responded that the restrictions were put in place in 2002 or
2003.
Commissioner Jaffoni asked what usage is projected for 2030. She said if the per capita
demand is going down, how do we justify using population to extrapolate average daily
use.
Public Works Director Cote said the entire plan is conservative and designed to give the
worse case scenario. He stated if actual circumstances dictate a facility is not needed, the
City would riot build it. However, it is important to be aware ' that under certain
circumstances, a particular facility may be required.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Cooney, to forward the
Water Supply Plan to the City Council along with all the Commission's comments. Vote.
7 Ayes. MOTION approved.
T EN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN (2007050)
Chair Holmes introduced the hensive Plan Update — Parks, Trails, Open Space and
Recreation Plan.
Superintendent of Recreation Evans gave an overview of the er 1, 2007 staff
report. She said an e-mail from Mark Kraemer, 4715 Yuma Lane N., has bee d as
part of the public record.
Chapter 8
Draft 11.08.07
Water Supply -and.
Distribution Plan
A CHAPTER PURPOSE
The Water Supply and Distribution Plan examines the City's water system to assess
the capability of the system to provide safe, reliable drinking water and meet current
and future water demands. To accomplish this, an analysis was undertaken of the
capacity and hydraulic properties of storage, supply, treatment, and distribution.
Capital improvement recommendations have been developed to address the facilities
and improvements needed to maintain or improve existing water system
infrastructure, while ensuring an adequate supply of safe water is available in the
future.. The capital improvement recommendations provided later in this chapter
indicate system needs through 2030 based on population projections.
The 2008 Comprehensive Plan update plan brings the currently undeveloped
northwest area of Plymouth into the urban service area. That major change was
accounted for in the analysis of future water system needs. In addition, the 2030
Land Use Plan includes minor changes from the 2020 Land Use Plan for the
currently urbanized area of the City. Those minor land use changes were also
accounted for in the analysis of future water system needs.
B GOALS AND POLICIES
1 Provide residents and businesses with affordable potable
water that is safe and high quality.
a Meet or exceed all Federal and State drinking water standards.
b Inform customers of maintenance practices that may affect water
quality.
Page 1 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — , 2008
Draft 1 1.08.07
2 Provide a low -maintenance, cost-effective water system
that meets the long-term needs of residents and
businesses.
a Design and construct a water system that supports the City's land use
plan at ultimate development.
b Establish assessment rates, fees, and connection charges to ensure
that new development pays for construction of the initial system.
c Require developers to pay the cost of off-site water necessary for any
development that occurs in a non -sequential order.
d Operate and maintain the system to ensure the long-term function of
the system with equitable user charges.
3 Provide adequate water supply and pressure for residents
and businesses.
a Design and construct a water system that meets demands for fire
protection.
b Require that new structures with a ground elevation of 1,040 feet or
higher above sea level install booster pumps if static pressure is 35
pounds per square inch (psi) or lower.
c Work with residents to find solutions for low-pressure.
4 Continue working with adjacent communities to provide a
cooperative water system for emergency service.
5 Provide water service for developing areas in a planned
manner by constructing new mains, wells and a water
treatment plant.
6 Protect the City's sustainable water supply through
conservation by reducing the demand for water, improving
the efficiency of water use, and reducing loss and waste of
water.
a Conform to the Water Emergency and Conservation Plan.
b Continue a tiered system of charges that increase charges with
mcreasmg use
Page 2 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Draft 11.08.07
Inform customers of individual water conservation practices.
d Evaluate a program to provide homes with no flow water fixtures.
7 Protect the groundwater source from contamination by
conforming to the Wellhead Protection Plan.
C OVERVIEW
Current development and planned growth in the City requires improvements to the
water system in order to meet projected water demands. The need for water system
improvements is determined by analyzing 1) available storage capacity, supply, and
treatment, 2) available flow rates and pressures throughout the distribution system,
and 3) system demands. For this purpose, a computer model of the water distribution
system was prepared. Water demand from planned growth was identified, together
with water system improvements required to meet the expected demand. The future
improvements identified include increasing water supply and treatment capacity
through the construction of new wells and an additional water treatment plant. The
computer model can be used for hydraulic analysis of the water system and scenario
planning. The model can also be built -upon in the future if needed, in order to
analyze water quality throughout the distribution system. Some of the uses of this
analysis include the following:
Identify future locations of.critical supply and storage facilities so land
can be purchased and/or set aside before development begins in the
designated area.
Provide a long range plan for water system upgrades/expansion so that
proposed construction projects include properly sized water mains to
allow for future development needs.
Identify deficiencies in the water system and corresponding
improvements to reduce or eliminate these deficiencies.
EXISTING FACILITIES
The City's current water system consists of storage, supply, treatment, and
distribution components as described in the. following paragraphs. Figure 8-1 shows
the locations of existing storage, supply, treatment, and distribution facilities.
Appendix 8A-1 provides a complete listing and description of these facilities.
Page 3 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — , 2008
FIGURE 8-1
Existing Distribution
System
Legend
Existing Pipes 16
Existing Pipe Diameter([nches) 18
4 — 20
6 _- _:-, 24
8 30
10 36
12 50
Existing Facility Points
Water Facilities
Reservoir
Tower
WTP
Well Lakes
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COh1PILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FRO%I CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIEDAND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
Dated **, 2007
Draft 11.08.07
a Storage Capacity
The distribution system presently includes six water storage tanks. Four of these are
elevated tanks (Zachary, Central, MIP, and Hwy. 101), one is an above -ground
standpipe (CR 6), and one is a below -ground reservoir (Vicksburg). The total
useable capacity of these water storage facilities is 12.5 million gallons (MG).
Appendix 8A-2 provides background information regarding the elevated storage
tanks and above -ground standpipe.
b Supply
Untreated water is currently supplied from sixteen (16) groundwater wells. These
wells utilize the Prairie Du Chien — Jordan Sandstone aquifer. Of these sixteen wells,
six pump into the Zachary Water Treatment Plant (Wells 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15),
and eight pump into the Central Water Treatment Plant (Wells 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, and
13). Well 1 and the Four Seasons Well pump groundwater directly into the
distribution system for emergency use only.
Firm capacity" is defined as the well pumping capacity that is provided when the
largest well pump for each treatment plant is out of service. It is important to know
how much treated water can be reliably provided into the distribution system during
maintenance activities and emergencies. Firm capacity is used for design and
planning purposes because it generally represents a worst-case scenario. The City
needs to ensure that pumping capacity is adequate to meet peak day demands under
firm capacity conditions.
During the peak water use season, the water supply wells are not always able to
pump water at their design rate due to fluctuating water levels in the aquifer. This
lowers the pumping capacity of each well to roughly 90 percent of its rated capacity
this is known as "seasonal reliable capacity"). In addition, Wells 4 and 11 are
performing significantly below their design levels, and Well 5 is not presently being
used due to ongoing sand problems. A detailed discussion of future water supply
needs is provided laterin this chapter.
c Water Treatment
The Central Water Treatment Plant and Zachary Water Treatment Plant remove iron
and manganese by chemical precipitation and filtration. Chemical precipitation is. -
accomplished with aeration, chlorine and sodium permanganate addition. Fluoride is
Page 5 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Draft 11.08.07
added at each plant for dental care. Orthophosphate is also added at each plant to
control lead and copper and improve water quality in the distribution system.
The Central Water Treatment Plant was placed into service in 2006, and has a rated
treatment capacity of 13 million gallons per day (MGD). The Zachary Water
Treatment Plant was expanded in 2006, and currently has a rated treatment capacity
of 15 MGD. That plant is capable of treating 17 MGD when future wells are added
to the Zachary well field. A detailed discussion of future water treatment needs is
provided later in this chapter.
2 FLOW RATES AND PRESSURES
The City's water system is comprised of water mains ranging in size from 6 inches to
30 inches in diameter. The system has been designed with larger trunk main loops
and smaller branch mains. Figure 8-1 shows the layout of the existing distribution
system. Appendix 8B-1 provides detailed information regarding flow rates and
pressures of the existing system. Appendix 8C provides detailed information
regarding flow rates and pressures for the future system.
The ground elevation in Plymouth ranges from roughly 880 feet to 1,050 feet above
sea level. The system is designed to serve those ground elevations. Water pressures
in the distribution system are correlated with elevations, with properties at lower
elevations receiving higher pressure and vice versa. .
With the exception of the Vicksburg Reservoir, all of the tanks listed above have
their high water elevation set at 1,130 feet above sea level. That elevation establishes
the highest hydraulic grade (pressure) in the system.
The Vicksburg Reservoir uses large pumps to transfer water from the lower hydraulic
grade of the reservoir to the higher hydraulic grade of the distribution system. Water
is pumped from the reservoir into the distribution system by three pumps, each with a
capacity of 2,400 gallons per minute (GPM). Pumping from the reservoir typically .
takes place during daytime hours when water demands are highest. The reservoir is
filled by drawing from the distribution system at night when system demands are
lowest.
3 CURRENT WATER DEMANDS AND TRENDS
Water utility records indicate that, in 2006, the average daily (AD) water demand for
the complete system was 9.7 MGD (or roughly 6,700 GPM). The maximum day
Page 6 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 2008
Draft 11.08.07
MD) demand for 2006 was 24.6 MGD (or roughly 17,100 GPM). Table 8-1 shows
water demands from 1997 through 2006. The average day demands over this period
are also provided in graphic format in Appendix 8A-3.
TABLE 8-1
RECENT WATER DEMANDS AND MAXIMUM DAY PEAKING FACTORS
Year Total
Population
Population
Served
Total Water
Pumped (MG)
Average Day
Demand
MGD)
Maximum
Day Demand
MGD)
Per Capita
Demand
gpd)
MD Peaking
Factor
1997 61,620 61,120 3218.70 8.82 25.28 144.3 2.9,
1998 62,979 62,479 3527.52 9.66 23.49 154.6 2.4
1999 64,313 63,813 3324.09 9.11 21.69 142.8 2.4
2000 65,894 65,394 3596.63 9.85 20.16 150.6 2.0
2001 66,675 66,175 3362.11 9.21 26.70 139.2 2.9
2002 67,824 67,324 3128.43 8.57 18.20 127.3 2.1
2003 70,238 69,738 3812.42 10.44 27.68 149.7 2.7
2004 70,682 70,182 3436.44 9.41 21.97 134.1 1 2.3
2005 71,500 71,000 3334.25 9.13 24.42 128.6 2.7
2006 70,676 70,176 3540.62 9.70 24.56 138.2 2.5
a Peaking Demand Factors
Peaking factors are ratios to the average daily demand rate that are used in analysis of
water systems. They are representative of temporal. variation in water demands. A
maximum day peaking factor for a water system is the ratio of the maximum day
MD) demand rate to the average daily (AD) demand rate. It normally indicates the
magnitude of seasonal differences in water demands. MD peaking factors are
provided in Table 8-1. This historical information is used to assess the capacity of
existing water system facilities, and to estimate future needs. For future demand
projections, a MD peaking factor of 2.9 was assumed in this report, which was the
highest of the previous ten years.
b Demand Distribution
Water demands are variable throughout the day and year. On an annual basis, the
heaviest demand conditions (maximum day demands) typically occur during the
summer, when lawn irrigation and other outdoor water use activities increase. Water
demand also varies over the course of a given day. Demand distribution for
Page 7 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan - 2008
Draft 11.08.07
residential water use during the 2006 maximum day is provided in graphic format in
Appendix 8A-4. The graph depicts low water demand during the early morning
periods. It shows increasing demand during the day with a slight decrease between
11 a.m. and 4 p.m. By late afternoon and early evening, when lawns are being
irrigated, the demand peaks at what is considered the peak hour demand rate. The
demand lessens considerably into the late evening hours. Commercial and industrial
water uses are generally more constrained and predictable.
C Population Trends
Population projections through 2030 are shown in Table 8-2. These population
projections are taken from the Metropolitan Council.
4 PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS
The future average daily water demand was calculated by multiplying the projected
population by the average.per capita demand. The average per capita demand over
the past ten years was 141 gallons per day. Table 8-2 shows a projected average
daily demand of 11.1 million gallons per day (MGD).for 2030.
The maximum day water demand was calculated by multiplying the future average
daily demand by 2.9, which is the highest maximum day peaking factor experienced
over the past ten years. Table 8-2 shows a projected maximum day demand of 32.1
MGD for 2030.
In order to meet the projected water demands, improvements will be required to
increase the capacity of the City's water supply and distribution system.
TABLE 8-2
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREAS AND ESTIMATED WATER
DEMANDS
Page 8 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Projected
Projected AD Projected MD
Year Population
Demand (MGD) Demand (MGD)
Served
2006 70,176
2010 73,000 10.3 29.8
2020 76,000 10.7 31.1
2030 78,500 11.1 32.1
Page 8 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Draft 11.08.07
D' SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT NEEDS
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The 2030.Distribution System Plan is shown on Figure 8-2. Water main
improvements are indicated where needed to expand the system to serve'development
growth and improve fire flow capabilities on the existing system.
Dead-end (or branched) water systems are less reliable because water is provided
from only one direction—resulting in loss of water service during repairs or
maintenance. Dead-end water systems also. experience lower water pressure than
looped water systems—resulting in decreased flow rates which negatively affect fire
protection activities. Looping of the water distribution system is needed to provide
residents and businesses with a reliable water supply. The existing water distribution
system could be improved by eliminating long dead -ends or dead-end pipes that are
less than 8 inches in diameter. Where possible, these improvements should be
coordinated with future street replacement projects to reduce costs.
2 WATER SUPPLY
Firm capacity (the water that can be reliably supplied with the largest well out of
service at each treatment plant) should be equal to or greater than the maximum day
demand. When projected maximum day demands reach firm capacity, it is an
indication that additional water supply capacity is needed.
Appendix 8B-2 shows annual projected demands along with supply and treatment
improvements necessary to meet the increasing demands (this information is also
presented graphically in Appendix 8B-3). The supply capacity shown is based on the
firm capacity and seasonal reliable capacity. Seasonal reliability capacity equals
roughly 90 percent of Finn capacity because wells produce roughly 90 percent of
their rated capacity when aquifers are drawn down during summer months. The Finn
capacity is the total capacity to the Central Water Treatment Plant with Well 6 (2000
GPM) out of service plus the total capacity to the Zachary Water Treatment Plant
with Well 14 (2000 GPM) out of service.
Page 9 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 2008
l__I P Re
uture well #19 ,'s l I I !' '1
1 r,
ir LLt _,/ } l / r Z ! L__ _ I L J _ti _fir , ,
1 I CrfrlcCrgReerSlrrY` L)r
L s l trlu?e Wel4.#lr tdrre Well #18 _ r
I /~e • } 'I 1 - f '1
I
t ! rY I is -I~
r - - r -
Jr— __
rr-
Future Vickst"urg Water Treptrdent lantt , r_ i / -
1
J ti ti ` t -.•SII __L ! r I_ \ _ J I r._ I -'ter 1
l t ry J ,-,1 C ! , L L L. -r
r
L , I Cu aie
a J ' !
Cyt .
r ' l_L -ler iA (> -' t 7
I ,\ '
L 'rrr"
r` '
r ell#151CARDR3— —
j
1 \ ( rr acharyTa erJr !
i I IA
t r r 11 J /C' ] IyVell#10 We #9 NI_
I -
WeH#14
f s -
Iy J } r
1 ;
I 1 ? f
I
c(Fiery 111e1Or6t WTT.L.
t
aHwy101Towet- , _ L` 1 - . _ 1.G L Y \ `,r LIr
Future e l # " l FQu easons Vl(ell
1-
3 ''J,
j,
t
11 i
i I ~ j i F' ri r r `
r
I_ - _, X
i T - _ 1 Y I
t f
j I (- \z _j
I J 101 t I ;.
1r - `wdu#2' wens L rbc' _L^t I I) .''
r 1 I - 1 f t CenyW firer Central Vater Ir*atrrtWt giant !" II,
J - L I
I \/ V11et# welly#6 1-
t (
I r d- Well #7L
71I #1
I I 1 I A 11 11
I
I J _
I MI(XTovieer \,I
CR -t 3tandpipeA O - 11, NDI 11 J
v}-
I 4
AW- tr l I.- - 1 I
I
L'
LL
I `- 10
QI
I
t ,r ; ` il.f '. _ t'` --i III "it t_ `
r E " r' r
j
FIGURE 8-2
2030 Distribution
System Plan
Legend
Future Pipes Existing Pipe Diamter(Inches)
Future Pipe Diameter(Inches) 6
g
8
10
12 12
16 16
18
26
20 24
uture Facility Points
30
36
Ater Facilities Future Pipe Upgrades
8 Reservoir
Lakes
Tower
WTP
i Future WTP
Well
I- Future Well
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
Dated **, 2007
Draft 11.08.07
The seasonal reliable capacity should be greater than the projected maximum day
demands. Appendix 8B-1 shows treatment plant capacity. The water treatment plant
capacity should also be greater,than maximum day demands. Supply, capacity could
fall short of daily demand if the City experiences a peak demand similar to those in
1997 and 2001 (refer to Appendix 8B-2).
Construction of Well 16 and rehabilitation of the Four Seasons Well is planned for
2008 to increase supply capacity. (Well 16 is to be constructed in the Zachary well
field, at a location west of the Zachary Water Treatment Plant.) With these supply
improvements, the water system will be close to meeting the potential maximum day
demand for 2008. However, with expected increases in demand, additional supply
capacity is recommended in the near-term to meet the projected water demands.
Wells 17 and 18 will be needed in a new well field on the site of the Vicksburg
reservoir in 2009. This location has been chosen based on land availability. An
additional supply source near the Vicksburg Reservoir would help to alleviate some
of the pressure problems experienced in the area while the reservoir is filling.
Preliminary reports estimate that wells drilled in this area would be able to produce
approximately 1,000 gallons per minute (GPM) each. Test pumping of the aquifer
should be conducted at this site to determine aquifer properties and sustainable
production capabilities with a test well.
With the construction of Wells 17 and 18, the City should have sufficient supply
capacity until 2018. At that time, it is anticipated that.Well 19 would be needed.
Water conservation measures implemented by the City will help to alleviate future
peak demands, and may slow the need for additional capital improvements. The
City's Water Emergency and Conservation Plan is provided in Appendix 8-E.
3 WATER TREATMENT
The water treatment plant capacity needs to be increased in order.to provide a safe
water supply in the firture. The combined rated capacity of the Central and Zachary
Water Treatment Plants are 28 MGD. As previously noted, the Zachary Water
Treatment Plant may be capable of treating an additional 2 MGD when future wells
are added to the Zachary well field. Therefore, the combined capacity of these two
water treatment plants could be 30 MGD in the future. The maximum day demand is
projected to surpass 30 MGD in 2012 and reach 32.1 MGD in 2030. Constructing
Wells 17 and 18 near the Vicksburg Reservoir would likely require a third, smaller
water treatment plant to treat those wells. The minimum treatment capacity would be
2.9 MGD to treat two 1,000 GPM wells constructed on opposite sides of the
Page 11 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Draft 11.08.07
Vicksburg Reservoir site. This improvement would increase the City's total
treatment capacity to roughly 32.9 MGD—which is above the projected maximum
day demand in 2030.
A water treatment plant could be constructed in the northeast portion of the
Vicksburg Reservoir site. This treatment plant should be designed to be expandable
to roughly 6 MGD in the future. This would allow fixture Well 19 to be treated at this
plant if a feasible well site is located nearby.
4 STORAGE
In planning for water storage needs, consideration must be given to average daily
demands, peak demands, and emergency needs. Fire protection is an important factor
when calculating iequired storage capacity. To provide adequate fire. protection,
3,500 GPM must be available for 3 hours—while simultaneously meeting system
equalization needs (assumed to be 25 percent of the maximum day demand). System
equalization is the storage necessary to balance demand fluctuations experienced
throughout the day. The existing water storage facilities have adequate capacity to
supply proper fire flow for the required length of time during peak demands.
Furthermore, design standards suggest that a city's total storage capacity should be
sized to provide one average day of water demand for emergency reserve. The City's
current total storage volume of 12.5 million gallons is more than the 2030 projected
average day demand of 11.1 million gallons.
E NORTHWEST SERVICE AREA STAGING PLAN
Development staging for the northwest area will be dictated by five factors, including
1) water trunk expansion, 2) sanitary sewer trunk extension, 3) street construction, 4)
proximity to existing infrastructure, and 5) management of land development. The
water trunk expansion will be based on extension of trunk facilities from one parcel
to the next during the development process. The remaining factors are covered in
other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The staging plan (see Figure 8-3) takes
all five factors into account. Development for Stage A, A-1, B, C, and D is not tied
to specific years, but rather is dependent upon development activity and market
forces.
Page 12 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — 12008
Co RD NQ 47
A.1
m
x'
Y
0
RD
IA
M
FIGURE 8-3
Development
Staging Plan
reaw)
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota Dated ••, 2007
0
Lake
Legend
City Limits Stage Identification
Lakes A
A.1
B
C
D
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Draft 11.08.07
F FUNDING MECHANISMS
The City uses three main sources of funding to pay for the water supply and
distribution system, as follows:
Area charges are commonly used to cover the cost of trunk distribution
facilities.
Connection fees are commonly used to cover the costs of trunk distribution
facilities, water supply wells, pumping facilities, reservoirs, and treatment
facilities.
Water rates are commonly used to cover the costs of maintenance and
enhancements to the system.
Appendix 8D provides additional detail on funding sources.
G IMPLEMENTATION
The Implementation Section is presently being worked on. Much of the supporting
information—including estimated costs and anticipated timelines for installation—is
provided in Appendix 8D.
Page 14 of 14, Chapter 8 - Plymouth Water Supply and Distribution Plan — , 2008
Appendix 8A
Draft 11.08.07
Inventory of Facilities/
Water Demands
Appendix 8A-1 — Existing Facilities
Appendix 8A-2 — Storage Tank Information
Appendix 8A-3 — Historical Water Demands
Appendix 8A-4 — Typical Hourly Demand
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 1 of 6, Appendix 8A
Wells
Well Name Unique # Yr. Installed Depth/Casing Depth ft Diamter (in) Capacity (pm) Capacity MGD Aquifer Status
1 204617. 1961 505/442 16 1000 1.4 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active (Emergency)
2 204619 1970 409/280 20 1800 2.6 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
3 204618 1972 448/276 16 1500 2.2 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
4 112202 1975 470/274 20 1200 1.7 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
5tlt 160023 1979 437/252- 20 0 0.0 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
6 449814 1980 417/260. 18 2000 2.9. Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
7 184882 1982 455/271 18 1700 2.4 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
8 432026 1987 416/192 18 1900 2.7 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
9 432024 1987 420/225. 24 ' 1900: 2.7 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
10 439796. 1988 353/199 18 1900 2.7 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
11 481659 1993. 380/230 30 1300 1.9 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
12 508300 1990 302/255 24 1600 2.3 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
13 - 462918 1991 473/270 18, 2000 2.9 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
14 655943 2004 405/225 24 2000 2.9 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
15 705459 2004 405/255 24 2000 2.9 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active
Four Seasons 204272 1966 390/301 16 1000 1.4 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Active (Emergency)
Capacity ( pm) Capacity (MGD) Treatment Plants -
Total Well Capacity 24,800 35.7
First Well Capacity 22,800 32.8
Total Capacity to Zachary Plant - 11,000 15.8
Finn Capacity to Zachary Plant 9,000 13.0
Total Capacity to Central Plant 11,800 17.0
First Capacity to Central Plant 9,800 14,1
Firm Treatment Plant Supply Capacity assumes largest well out of service ateach treatment dant 18,800 27.1
Actual Peak Season Supply Capacity 90% of First Treatment Plant Supply Ca acity 16,920 NA
Facility Maximum Production Rate (MGD)
Zachary WTP 17
Central WTP 13
Storage Facilities
Facility
Total
Volume
MG
Useable
Volume (MG) Style
Zachary Water Tower 2.0 2.0 Elevated
Central Water Tower 1.0 1.0 Elevated
MIP Water Towert2)0.5 0.0 Elevated
CR6 Standpipe 1.0 0.5 Standpipe
IIigh ,ay 101 Water Tower 3.0 3.0 Elevated
VicV,,r Reservoir 6.0 G.0 Below -ground Stora e
Total 13.5 12.5 .
Notes -
1) The capacity of Wcll 5 has been significantly reduced, and is currently only used inlennittcntly. per the purposes of this study, it assumed that this well will not be a rcli.blc wale, soumc for the City in the future. -
2) The MIP To-.swble volume is 0.5 AIG, but due to potential plans to decommission this facility, its volume was not considered to contribute to the overall storage capacity of the system -
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan - Page 2 oCG, Appendix 8A - - - - -
Appendix 8A-2
1 Central 1.0 MG Elevated Last Painted 2002
Built 1970
Painted 1987 (Color) Beeswax
Painted 2002 (Contractor) Lead -con — KLM Eng. Bid was $242,000
2 Zachary 2.0 MG Elevated Last Painted 1991
Built 1975 (Color-) White .
Painted 1991 (Color) Beeswax
2001 Inspected Interior Liquid Eng.
2003 Exterior Washed
3 MIP .5 MG Elevated Last Painted: 1986
Built 1959
Painted 1973 (Color) White
Painted 1986 (Color) Beeswax Tenyer Coatings
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 3 of 6, Appendix 8A
4 C.R. 6 1.0 MG Standpipe Last Painted: 2006
Built 1976
Painted 1986 Spot painted exterior, total interior
Inspected Interior —Liquid Eng.
2006 -"Complete Rehab - SEH Eng - MK Painting
5 Hwy 101 3.0 MG Hydropillar Last Painted: 2006
Built 1990 — Painted by Tenyer
Inspected Interior, some peeling of exterior roof area seen.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 4 of 6, Appendix 8A
Appendix 8A-4
Typical Hourly Demand Curve as Applied to Plymouth Water System
Residential Water Use During 2006 Maximum Day
170%
160%
150%
140%
130%
E 120%
m
110% 01
CIO 100%
E 90%
x 80%
ca
2 70%
60%
c
v 50%
a 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
P iz P liz P liz
Time of Day
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 6 of 6, Appendix 8A
25000
E
CL
20000 E
D
fA
A
N
15000 c
z
a
C
10000 .°
c
ca
E
m
0
5000
n
I
Draft 11.08.07
Appendix 8B
System Inventory
and Analysis
Appendix 813-1 — Existing Water Supply
and Distribution System
Appendix 813-2 — Future Supply Capacity
Requirements
Appendix 813-3 — Water System
Improvements Trigger
Chart
Water'Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 1, Appendix 8B
Appendix 8B-1
EXISTING WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
All City -owned pipes 6 inches in diameter and larger were included in the computer
model of the distribution system. Water pumping records from 2006 were used to
represent current demands on the system. These demands were geographically
distributed in the model by using individual billing records associated with a parcel
data set. Each parcel's water use was assigned to the nearest node in the distribution
system model. Storage and supply facilities were modeled based on specifications
and construction as built drawings.
The distribution system model was calibrated through the use of hydrant flow test
data collected in September 2007. Hydrant flow tests provide flow rates and residual
pressures at various points on the distribution system that can be replicated in the
model. Model parameters were adjusted until calibration meeting or exceeding
industry standards was attained, and model results reflected observed flow results.
SYSTEM PRESSURE CALCULATIONS
Water pressures in the existing system under average day demands and maximum
day demands were calculated by the computer model. Model pressure results are
presented in Figures 1 and 2 of this Appendix 8B-1. The model calculates pressures
in the range of 32 to 105 pounds per square inch (psi) throughout the existing water
system under average day conditions. Under simulated maximum day demand
conditions, the pressure range is 30 to 102 psi.
There is not a great fluctuation in water pressure across the distribution system.
There is a general trend from lower to higher pressure from west to east across the
City due to elevation changes.
Industry standards recommend that the normal working pressure in water distribution
systems be in the range of 60 to 80 psi, and not less than 35 psi'. In addition,
pressures in excess of 100 psi are not recommended in the distribution system. The
Minnesota Plumbing Code requires that building plumbing systems not exceed 80
psi.
Recommended Standards for Water Works. 2003 ed., Great Lakes — Upper Mississippi
River Board of State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers, Albany, NY,
2003, pp. 109,112.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 2, Appendix 8B
Many of the areas with pressures greater than 100 psi are localized on the system
they are limited to the eastern edge of the City and in localized low lying areas
around lakes). Where pressures exceed 80 psi, individual homes or businesses
should use pressure reducing valves on the service line near the entrance to the
building, as recommended by the Minnesota Plumbing Code.
LOW PRESSURE AREAS
Properties located at relatively high elevations (over 1,040 feet above sea level) in the
western portion of the system may be experiencing lower water pressure under
certain system conditions. This is a result of slightly lower water levels in the City's
water towers during peak water use, which results in an overall drop in system
pressures. The portions of the system with pressures below 40 psi are modeled in
Figures 1 and 2 of this Appendix 8B-1. The area most susceptible to low pressures
occurs along the western border of the City. An area surrounding the Vicksburg
Reservoir (Vicksburg Lane N and Schmidt Lake Road) also cannot achieve ideal
operating pressures under high demand conditions. This area is also at a relatively
high elevation. The filling of the Vicksburg reservoir also contributes to this
problem. When this reservoir fills at a rate of approximately 3,000 gpm, this causes a
significant pressure drop in a localized area around the reservoir.
PIPE VELOCITIES AND FRICTION LOSS
The hydraulic model of the distribution system does not detect any areas with
excessive velocities under normal operating conditions. This includes peak demand
periods with treatment plants at full production.
AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW
Available fire flows were calculated using the computer model with a residual
pressure of 20 psi. According to the American Water Works Association (AWWA),
the minimum fire flow available at any given point in a system should not be less
than 500 gpm at a residual pressure of 20 psi. This minimum criterion represents the
amount of water required to provide for two standard hose streams on a fire in a
typical residential area for residential dwellings with spacing greater than 100 feet.
The distance between buildings and the corresponding recommended fire flow for
residential areas is summarized below.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 3, Appendix 8B
RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL FIRE FLOWS
Distance Between Buildings (ft)
Needed Fire Flow
WPM)
More than 100 500
31-100 750
11-30 _ 1,000
Less than 11 1,500
For commercial and industrial buildings, the needed fire flow rate varies
considerably, and is based on several characteristics of individual buildings such as:
Type of construction
Type of business that is using the property (occupancy)
Proximity and characteristics of nearby properties
Presence or absence of a fire sprinkling system
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 4, Appendix 8B
FIGURE 1, Appendix 8E-1
Existing Average
Day Pressures
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2r;
C),ty
Miles
of
Plymouth, Minnesota
Legend
Existing Average Day Pressure
30-00 Psi LaICS
40-50 psi
50-60 psi
60-70 psi
70-80 psi
80-90 psi
90-100 psi
100+ psi
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
FIGURE 2, Appendix 813-1
Existing Maximum
Day Pressures
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
City of
Miles
Plymouth, Minnesota
Legend
Existing Maximum Day Pressure
30-40 psi Lakes
40-50 psi
50-60 psi
80-70 psi
70-80 psi
80.90 psi
90-100 psi
100+ psi
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH OR€NGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
While the fire flow requirements of commercial and industrial properties should be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis, a general rule of thumb is that a municipal water
system should aim to provide 3,500 gpm to this type of land use. The Insurance
Services Office (ISO), in determining a City's fire insurance classification, only
considers flow rates up to 3,500 gpm.
Fire flow modeling results are shown in Figure 3 of this Appendix 813-1. Available
fire flows appear to be robust throughout most of the distribution system. There are
local areas where the computer model predicts restricted flow. This occurs on
smaller branched and dead-end mains, where'friction losses become a significant
factor in reducing pressure at high flow rates. There are a few areas that are listed
with a commercial or industrial land use, where available fire flow is modeled at less
than 3,500 gpm. Notable among these are:
The two commercial parcels on the northwest corner of the intersection
at Hwy. 55 and Rockford Rd. may have less than 2,500 gpm on the
branch main serving the properties. The computer model shows that fire
flows could be increased to greater than 3,000 gpm if the lateral line
serving these properties is increased to 12 inches.
Some of the branched lines serving the industrial properties in the
southeast quadrant of Vicksburg Lane and Hwy. 55 may provide less
than 2,500 gpm in isolated locations. If that area redevelops, the City
should consider increasing the size of mains along 32nd Avenue between
Vicksburg Lane and Ranchview Lane, and also along Ranchview Lane
between 31 st Avenue and 32nd Avenue, at that time if deemed necessary
to provide greater than 2,500 gpm for this property. An analysis of this
area while upgrading these main segments to 12 -inch shows that
available fire flow is increased to greater than 3,500 gpm at all of the
hydrant locations in the area.
The hydrants along 12th Avenue east of West Medicine Lake Drive have
available fire flow less than 1,500 gpm. These hydrants serve a high
density residential development, and are located on a 6 -inch dead end
main. This main should be increased if greater fire flow is needed from
those hydrants. With a 12 -inch main replacement, the model shows fire
flows increase to approximately 3,500 gpm.
The hydrants serving commercial properties along Hwy. 55 in the east
side of the City (between South Shore Drive and Nathan Lane), and
along Nathan Ln. south of Hwy. 55, currently have available fire flow
less than 2,000 gpm. This available fire flow can be increased to greater
than 3,500 gpm by creating a 12 -inch connection on Revere Ln. between
10th Ave. and the current water main stub north of 6th Ave. and
upgrading the main in Nathan Ln. south of Hwy. 55 to 12 inches.
These proposed watermain improvements are shown on the 2030 Distribution System
Plan.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 7, Appendix 8B
4d
04
OAP
Ilk,
4L
01
a.
Itlw #
41
7U pr
17
hot,
1.494
13
EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATION AND TOWER BALANCING
An extended period simulation (EPS) was conducted using the model to analyze
system operations during several days of maximum day demands. The primary
purpose of this simulation was to check for cumulative system imbalances that are
not evident in standard simulations and to verify if system operations can be
maintained under high demand conditions.
The locations of supply and storage facilities, and the sizes of distribution system
pipes, contribute to imbalances. Considerable distances between supply and storage
locations and inadequately -sized water mains can contribute to a reduced storage -
replenishment rate and the ability to refill the towers at night during low demand
periods.
A 72 -hour period with three consecutive maximum day (MD) demand conditions has
been simulated. This time period was chosen since most supply and distribution
system deficiencies will be exposed in three days of operations with MD demands.
For example, if tanks are unable to refill daily under high demand conditions, a trend
will emerge in tank level data produced by the EPS.
The EPS analysis shows that the Hwy. 101 elevated tank and C.R. 6 standpipe lag
behind Central, Zachary, and MIP water towers. The model predicts that MIP also
drains much faster than Central and Zachary during peak demands. This is caused by
the proximity of the Central and Zachary Tanks to the treatment plants and the
relatively small volume of the MIP Tank. It is likely contributing to the reduced
pressures experienced in the western portion of the distribution system at high
elevations during peak demand days. Under an average day demand scenario, it
appears that the situation corrects itself (the tanks are more in balance with one
another across the system).
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 9, Appendix 8B
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan
Notes - - - - - -
1) Population projections are interpolated from Metropolitan Council projections - - - -
2) Finn Supply Capacity is the capacity with the largest well serving each treatment plant out of service. In order to achieve this capacity, all voliune above 20,833 gpni (30 MGD) would bypass existing treatment facilities and enter
the system without iron and manganese removal
3) Seasonal Reliable Capacity is 90% of the Firm Supply Capacity, based on operations experience
4) Needed storage volume calculation assumes seasonal reliable capacity of supply pumps, plus 4,000 gpm high service pumping capacity at the Vicksburg Reservoir. Also assumes that an additional storage volume equal to 25% of
the maximum day demand is needed for equalization storage.
Page 10, Appendix 8B
Appendix 813-2 Future Supply Capacity Requirements
Year
Projected
Population
Served 1,1
Projected
AD
Demand
MGD)
Projected
MD
Demand
MGD)
Projected
MD
Demand
gpm).
Treatment
Plant
Capacity
MGD)
Treatment
Plant
Capacity
gpm)
Firm
Supply
Capaci; y
MGD)12
Firm
Supply
Capacity
gpm)hl
Seasonal
Reliable
Capacity
MGD)t'.
Seasonal
Reliable
Capacity
gpm)ta
Elevated
Storage
Needed for
Fire( otection
Total
Storage
Reserves
MG)
2006 70,176 9.70 24.56 17,056 30.0 20,833 27.1 18,800 24.4 16,920 0 12.5
2007 70,882 10.0 29.0. 20,L12 . 30.0 20,833 27.1 18,800 24.4 16,920 490,000 12.5
2008 71,588 10.1 29.2 20,312 30.0 20,833 31.4 21,800 28.3 19,620 40,000 12.5
2009 72,294 10.2 29.5 20,513 33.0 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2010 73,000 10.3 29.8 20,713 33.0. 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2011 73,300 10.3 29.9 20,798 33.0. 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2012 73,600 10.4 30.1 20,883 33.0 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2013 73,900 10.4 - 30.2 20,968 33.0 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2014 74,200 10.5 30.3 21,053 33.0 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2015 74,500 10.5 30.4 21,138 33.0 22,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2016 74,800 10.5 30.6 21,224 33.0 22,917 34.3. 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2017 75,100 10.6 30.7 21,309 33.0 22,,917 34.3 23,800 30.8 21,420 0 12.5
2018 75,400 10.6 30.8 21,394 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2019 75,700 10.7 30.9 21,479 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2020 76,000 10.7 31.1 21,564 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2021 76,250 10.7 31.2 21,635 33.0 22,917 37.2 _1 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2022 76,500 10.8 31.3 21,706 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2023 76,750 10.8 31.4 21,777 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2024 77,000 10.9 31.5 21,848 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 1 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2025 77,250 10.9 31.6 21,919 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2026 77,500 10.9 31.7 21,990 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2027 77,750 11.0 31.8 22,061 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2028 78,000 11.0 31.9 22,132 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2029 78,250 11.0 32.0 22,202 - 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 0 12.5
2030 78,500 1 11.1 32.1. 22;273 33.0 22,917 37.2 25,800 33.4 23,220 A 12.5
Notes - - - - - -
1) Population projections are interpolated from Metropolitan Council projections - - - -
2) Finn Supply Capacity is the capacity with the largest well serving each treatment plant out of service. In order to achieve this capacity, all voliune above 20,833 gpni (30 MGD) would bypass existing treatment facilities and enter
the system without iron and manganese removal
3) Seasonal Reliable Capacity is 90% of the Firm Supply Capacity, based on operations experience
4) Needed storage volume calculation assumes seasonal reliable capacity of supply pumps, plus 4,000 gpm high service pumping capacity at the Vicksburg Reservoir. Also assumes that an additional storage volume equal to 25% of
the maximum day demand is needed for equalization storage.
Page 10, Appendix 8B
27 nnn
2E
E
CL
cM
r 21
U
Appendix 8B-3
Water System Improvements Trigger Chart
1
11
1;
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Year
Water Supply and
Distribution Plain Page 10, Appendix 8B
Draft 11.08.07
Appendix 8C
Analysis of Future
System
1 BACKGROUND
The computer model of the distribution system was used to calculate pressures and
available fire flows for the proposed water system as done for the existing water
system. The results presented in this Appendix 8C represent the future system with
all recommended improvements as shown on the 2030 Distribution System Plan.
2 FUTURE SYSTEM PRESSURES
Average day and maximum day pressures for the future system with all
recommended improvements are shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively, of this
Appendix 8C. Pressures in the northwest area of Plymouth are expected to be in the
range of 50 to 90 psi, which is acceptable for distribution system pressure.
Customers located where pressures exceed 80 psi may need a pressure reducing valve
on their service line pursuant to the Minnesota Plumbing Code. Under maximum day
conditions, the pressures in the future service area do not change significantly based
on the system layout shown.
3 FUTURE SYSTEM AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW
Based on the modeling results, the distribution system shown on the 2030
Distribution System Plan should supply adequate flow for fire protection. The
distribution system upgrades have been incorporated into the model to produce the
improvement in fire flow, as shown in Figure 3 of this Appendix 8C.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 1 of 4, Appendix 8C
FIGURE 1, Appendix 8C
Future Average
air Pressure
Source: SEH, Inc,, 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2r9c),ty of
Mmes
Plymouth, Minresota
Legend
Future Average day Pressure
i-, 30-40 psi O Lakes
40-50 psi
50-60 psi
60-70 psi
70-80 psi
80-90 psi
90-100 psi
100+ psi
THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOTBEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
FIGURE 2, Appendix 8C
Future Maximum
Day Pressure
Source: SEH, Inc., 2007
Dated November 2, 2007
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2ribcityof
Miles
Plymouth, Minnesota
Legend
Future Maximum Day 'Pressure
30-40 psi = Lakes
40-50 psi
50-60 psi
60-70 psi
70-80 psi
80-90 psi
90-100 psi
100+ psi
THIS REPRESENTS ACOMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA
FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS
NOT BEEN FIELD VFRIFIED_ INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD
VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
Draft 11.08.07
Appendix 8D
Cost, Funding, and
Timing Information
Appendix 8D-1 — Cost and Funding
Information
Appendix,8D-2 — Capital Improvement
Planning
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 1 of 8, Appendix 8D
Appendix 8D-1
ESTIMATED COSTS FOR NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS
Improvements to the water supply and distribution system are needed in order to
provide reliable and ample water to meet future needs. These improvements include
expansion and upgrading of water mains and construction of a new water supply and
treatment facilities. The recommended improvements include:
Construction of three new municipal water wells, each with a capacity of
1,000 to 2,000 GPM
Construction of a water treatment plant with a capacity of 3-6 MGD on
the site of the Vicksburg Reservoir
Installation of roughly 50,000 lineal feet of trunk water main
Coating system rehabilitation (maintenance) of existing water storage
facilities
The above items have been identified as necessary improvements in order to
effectively serve existing and future residents and businesses with potable water and
fire protection services. The cost for these improvements and an estimated timeline
has been included for capital improvement planning.
The estimated costs (in 2007 dollars) for the water system capital improvements
listed above are shown in Table 1.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 2 of 8, Appendix 8D
TABLE 1
COST ESTIMATES FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Facility Improvements
2007 Estimated
Project Cost
New Well No. 16 (2000 gpm) and Connect Four Seasons Well to Zachary
WTP 1,200,000
New Well No. 17 1000 m) 1 663,000
New Well No. 18 (1000 gpm) 1 663,000
New Well No. 19 2000 m and Watermain 1,150,000
Vicksburg Water Treatment Plant 3 MGD)2 5,625,000
Trunk Main Oversize 1,904,625
MIP Tower Maintenance 348,000
Zachary Tower Maintenance 889,000
Hwy. 101 Tower Maintenance 987,000
Central Tower Maintenance 99,000
CR -6 Tank Maintenance 49,000
Total for Recommended Facility Improvements 13,577,625
1 Assumes wells with pitless units (no pumphouse) on the Vicksburg site
z Estimated cost would increase by $3,250,000 to expand plant capacity from 3 MGD to 6 MGD
in the future to treat Well No. 19
Recommended Main Upgrades for Fire Protection
2007 Estimated
Project Cost
Branch Main Upgrade at NW Quadrant of Hwy. 55 and Rockford Road 137,000
Branch Main Upgrade at SE Quadrant of Hwy. 55 and Vicksburg Lane 384,000
Branch Main Upgrade on 12th Ave. East of Medicine Lake Road 205,000
12 -inch Connection on Revere South of 10th Ave. and Upgrade of Nathan
Ln. South of Hwy. 55 579,000
Total for Recommended Main Upgrade for Fire Protection 1,305,000
The proposed time frame for the recommended capital improvements is provided in
Appendix 8D-2. Costs have been summarized according to 5 -year planning horizons.
2 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
An economic analysis was conducted to assist in establishing area charges and
connection charges for the estimated costs associated with supply, treatment, trunk
water main over -sizing, and storage tank coating system rehabilitations. Although
some of these costs could be recovered through water rates, the analysis assumes that
all recovery of facility costs will be through a combination of area charges (for
distribution and storage) and connection charges (for supply and treatment). The cost
figures represent an approximate estimation of costs, and are not a guarantee of
maximum cost. The estimates are based on 2007 construction costs and should be
adjusted in the future for inflation.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 3 of 8, Appendix 8D
a Area Charges
Area charges are used to cover the cost of distribution facilities. These charges are
assigned based on land area to reflect pressure and fire protection needs, which are
r
more closely tied to land area, and which create a need for additional storage
facilities and distribution system upgrades (trunk mains). Table 2 shows
recommended area charges to cover estimated facility costs.
TABLE 2
AREA CHARGE DETERMINATION
l) Includes difference in cost for water mains over 8 inches in diameter
2)Includes area not currently served by water subtracting wetlands, 25%
Right of Way, and Public -Institutional Land Use
b Connection Fees
Connection fees are commonly used to cover the costs of water supply and treatment
facilities. As shown in Table 3, connection fees are assigned based on the number of
residential equivalency units (REU) of a particular customer. For this purpose, an
REU is defined as the use of 225 gallons per day (GPD), which is typical of a single-
family dwelling. As a result, facility costs are distributed among customers based on
the amount of water that they use. For example, if an industrial customer uses 450
GPD, they will pay two times the connection fee of a typical single-family dwelling.
There are two separate connection fees shown in Table 3. The City may have
separate funds and fees for water treatment plant improvements and water supply
improvements.
These calculated costs are for full recovery of facilities and over -sizing of trunk water
mains. This assigns all costs of new water system components and upgrades to new
customers and new development. While the proposed facilities will be constructed
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 4 of 8, Appendix 8D
Estimated
Project
Facility Improvements Cost (2007)
Trunk Main Oversize(l) 1,904,625
Water Tank Maintenance 2,372,000
l) Includes difference in cost for water mains over 8 inches in diameter
2)Includes area not currently served by water subtracting wetlands, 25%
Right of Way, and Public -Institutional Land Use
b Connection Fees
Connection fees are commonly used to cover the costs of water supply and treatment
facilities. As shown in Table 3, connection fees are assigned based on the number of
residential equivalency units (REU) of a particular customer. For this purpose, an
REU is defined as the use of 225 gallons per day (GPD), which is typical of a single-
family dwelling. As a result, facility costs are distributed among customers based on
the amount of water that they use. For example, if an industrial customer uses 450
GPD, they will pay two times the connection fee of a typical single-family dwelling.
There are two separate connection fees shown in Table 3. The City may have
separate funds and fees for water treatment plant improvements and water supply
improvements.
These calculated costs are for full recovery of facilities and over -sizing of trunk water
mains. This assigns all costs of new water system components and upgrades to new
customers and new development. While the proposed facilities will be constructed
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 4 of 8, Appendix 8D
mainly to serve growth, in some cases they also provide benefit to existing
customers. The City can decide how much cost to assign to existing customers, and
then recover a portion of these costs through water. rates or other means. Table 4
shows REU fees based on various percentages of the cost being assigned to new
development.
TABLE 3
CONNECTION FEE DETERMINATION
Facility Improvements
Estimated
Project Cost
2007)
New Well No. 16 (2000 gpm) and Connect Four Seasons Well to Zachary
WTP 1,200,000
New Well No. 17 1000 m 663,000
New Well No. 18 (1000 m) 663,000
New Well No. 19 (2000 m) 1,150,000
Vicksburg Water Treatment Plant (3 MGD) 5,625,000
Total Supply Cost $ 3,676,000
Total Treatment Cost $ 5,625,000
Future Additional REUs(I) 6222
Supply Connection Fee - per REU $ 591
Treatment Connection Fee per REU $ 904
Residential Equivalency Units, based on water use assumption of 225 gpd/REU and ultimate
projected average day demands
TABLE 4
PROPORTIONAL ASSIGNMENT OF THE COST OF NEW
FACILITIES TO NEW DEVELOPMENT
Percent Assigned
to Development
Area Charge
per Acre)
Supply
Connection
Fee ($ per REU)
Treatment
Connection
Fee $ per REU)
100 3,888 591 904
90 3,499 532 814
80 3,110 473 723
70 2,721 414 633
60 2,333 354 542
50 1,944 295 1 $ 452
C Water Rates
The impact that capital improvements indentified in this plan would have on water
rates was examined. If 50 percent of the listed capital improvements are funded by
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 5 of 8, Appendix 8D
area charges and connection fees, with the remaining debt service by the general
operating fund (assuming a 5 percent inflation rate, and 10 -year bonds with an
interest rate of 5 percent), to fund each year's proposed improvements, the average
water rate increase per year is estimated at 7 percent from 2008 to 2030. Because
these capital improvements are a function of water demand, an alternative to adding
supply and treatment capacity would be to reduce water demands in the City. Water
conservation is strongly encouraged by the Minnesota Department of Resources due
to the finite nature of Minnesota's groundwater resources.
According to Plymouth's 2006 Water Emergency and Conservation Plan, the average
per capita residential water use is 88 gpd. This is above the average of 75 gpd for the
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. This per capita water usage will determine the total
volume of water use for the City in future years. The peak day multiplier used for
maximum day projections (2.9) could be reduced by lowering water demand during
peak summer water use periods.
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 6 of 8, Appendix 8D
The City began strictly enforcing water conservation ordinances in 2006 in order to
assist with reducing water demand. The City is also considering a revised water rate
structure to further discourage excessive water use. Below are examples of rate
structures from other Metropolitan Area municipalities. There is a lot of variation in
rate structures. Increasing water rates would encourage conservation and generate
additional income for the City to meet future water system capital improvements and
maintenance needs.
Minnetonka .
Base Charge 0
Gallons Used Price per 1000 gal
0-25,000 1.60
25,001-40,000 1.80
40,001-70,000 2.10
70,001+ 2.50
Edina
Base Charge 11.29
Gallons Used Price per 1000 gal
0-26,178 1.24
26,179-48,616 1.64
48,616+ 2.58
Woodbury
Base Charge 10.4
Gallons Used Price per 1000 gal
0-8,000 0
8,001-30,000 0.88
30,001-60,000 1.88
60,001-90,000 2.88
90,001-150,000 3.88
150,000+ 4.88
Plymouth
Base Charge 2.89
Gallons Used Price per 1000 gal
0-12,500 1.05
12,501-35,000 1.20
35,000+ 2.25
Water -Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 7 of 8, Appendix 8D
Appendix 8D-2 - Capital Improvement Planning
Water Capital Improvement Plan 20011.21130
Pa in: MIP Tower (Option 2-Overccal) 3 210000 f 210,000
Pat.PT (Opt 1 Total ReObdtbban
2019
Paint Zachary Tower (Option l- Total Rehabilitation 689,,000
2025 2026
S 669
2029 2030
Pain: MIP Tower (0plton 2- OvmcoaQ
Pain: Zachary Tower(Option 2 -Overcool; S 518,00 S DDD516,000
Paint Hwy. 101 Tower (Option 1 -Total Rehabilibtkm S 907,00
Paint Zachary Tow, (Option 2 -Overcoat;
S 987,000
Pain: Hwy. lou t To -(Option 2 -Ozer -t: 5 604,00 S- 604,00
Patel Hwy. 101 Tower (Option2 -Over®t;
Paint Central Tower(spot Repatrl Touch.' 99.00 99,000
Patel Central Toner (Spot Repair I Touchup;
Paint Co. Rd. 6 Took (Spot Repair /Teurhap:
New Well No. 16 (200 gpm)
5 49,00
1,010.000 S 1.010,000
Paint Co. Rd. B Tank (Spot Repair / Touchup;
S 48,000
Raw Wale, Main to Connect Well 16 and Four Seasons Well to Zachary 10,00 5 190,000
New Wed No. 16 (200 gpm)
New Well No. 11(1000 gpm) - S 663,000 5 66],00
New Well No. 111 (100 gpm) S 66].000 683,000
Naw Well No. IB (100 gpm)
Naw Well No. 19.(200 gpm) 51,150,00
New Well No. (200 gpm)
Vicksburg Wale, The. lmenl PMnl 13 MGD) S 5,625.00 S 5.625,000
S 1,150,000
Tmnk Main Oversize Phase wl"' S 568,76] S 71,098 f 71,098 $ 71,098 S 71.098 f 71,098 S 71,098 S 71.096 $ 71.098ThinkMainOversizePhaseal'1 S 518,063 S 103,773 S 10,773 S 103,773 S 10,773 $ 10,77]
Tint Main Oversize Phase d11 S
Trunk Main Oversize Phase de 5 199,627
Think Main Oversize Phase 0'1
39.955TrunkMainOversizePhaseGlnS424,333
Tmnk Main Oversize Phase d'1
S 39,965 S 39.955
Tmnk Main Oversize Phase d'1 S 590,124
Branch Main Upgmdo of NW Quadrant of Hwy. 55 and Rockford Roar
Branch Main Upgrade al NW Quadrant of Hwy. 55 and Rockford Roar S 137,00S 137,000
ch Main Upgrade a1 SE Quadrant ofHwy. 55 and Vicksburg tam 3384,000 384,00
Connection on Revere South 0110th Ave._and UpBalde 01 than Ln. South 0f HwY.5
Branch Main Upgrade on 121h Ave. East of Medicine Lake Roar 5 205.000 S 205,000
Yearly 'Gals I 5 39,965 f 39,965 S 04,067 S 84,867 $
l bench Con neclien on Revere South of t11m Ave. and Upgrade of Nalhan Ln. Soup, ofHM.5 S 579.00
118,025 f 118,025 S 118,025
S 579.000
Yearly Tb 13,947,929 S 1,408,098 S 2,126,098 S 6,79¢,098 E 1,740,870 _f 275,870 S 223,870 $ 174,870 S 174,870 E 9,965 S ]9,965 3 1,189,965
l'ICosl for hypothetical layout shown In Figure 7111 serve future areas. and includes difference In cost between
Wnk main and 8 -Inch main in0stallan. The ball cost for all water main fmprwmeenb is equally dis0ibulad
aver the life of the plan (1a 2030).
Appendix 8D-2 - Capital Improvement Planning
Water Capital Improvement Plan 2008-2030
Pat.PT (Opt 1 Total ReObdtbban
2019 2020 2021 2022 2022 2024 2025 2026 2027 2020 2029 2030
Pain: MIP Tower (0plton 2- OvmcoaQ
Pain: ZacharyTower (Option 1 -Total Rehabilitation
Paint Zachary Tow, (Option 2 -Overcoat;
Paint Hwy. 101 Tower (Option 1 -Total Rehabfiilalion
Patel Hwy. 101 Tower (Option2 -Over®t;
Patel Central Toner (Spot Repair I Touchup;
Paint Co. Rd. B Tank (Spot Repair / Touchup;
New Wed No. 16 (200 gpm)
Raw Water Main to Connect Well 16 and Fart Seasons Well to Zachary
New Well No. 17 (100 gpm)
Naw Well No. IB (100 gpm)
New Well No. (200 gpm)
WaterVicksbufgWater Troalment Plant (3 MGD)
TrunkMain Oversize Phase 9n
Think Main Ovefstze Phase 01
Tint Main Oversize Phase d11 S 39,965 f 39.965
Think Main Oversize Phase 0'1 S 04,0117 f 84,867 S 84,067 f 04,867 S 61,867
Tmnk Main Oversize Phase d'1
S 116,025 f 118,025 S 118,025 SBranchMainUpgmdoofNWQuadrantofHwy. 55 and Rockford Roar 118,025 f 118,025
Banch Main Upgrade al SE Quad -1 al Hwy. 55 and Vicksburg Lam
Branch Main Upgrad0 on 12th Avp. East d Median Lake Ron'
12-inch Connection on Revere South 0110th Ave._and UpBalde 01 than Ln. South 0f HwY.5
Yearly 'GalsI 5 39,965 f 39,965 S 04,067 S 84,867 $ 84,867 $ 84,867 S 04,867 S 118,025 $ 118,025 S 118,025 f 118,025 S 118,025
r'ICosl far hypothetical layout shown In Fgure 7lo serve (inure areas, and includes dd0emnce in cost between
hunk main and 0 -Intl, main installation. The total cost for all water main improvements is equally distributed
eve, the life of the plan (to 2030).
Draft 11.08.07
Appendix BE
Water Emergency. and
Conservation Plan
To Be Inserted)
Water Supply and
Distribution Plan Page 1 of 1, Appendix 8E