Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
89-105; ; 1990 Final Water Master Plan; 1990-06-29
FINAL WATER MASTER PLAN CMWD Project No. 89-105 prepared by MacDONALD-STEPHENS ENGINEERS, INC. 11770 Bernardo Plaza Court, Suite 213 San Diego, CA 92128 (619) 487-7877 June 29, 1990 Table of Contents Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Summary of Findings and Recommendations Water System Demands General o o •• Land Use Classifications Demand Assumptions Average Daily Demands Peak Month Demands Peak Day Demands Peak Hour Demand Sources of Water Water Distribution System Minimum Distribution Parameters Water Storage System General .... Minimum Storage Parameters Storage Requirements by Reservoir Service Area Review of Existing Facilities Review of Ultimate Facilities Cost Estimates General . . ........ . Calculation of Estimated Costs Summary of Estimated Costs Connection Fees . Phasing Considerations 2 2 3 3 4 12 12 12 12 15 16 16 17 24 27 27 29 29 30 32 34 35 54 54 54 56 61 62 List of Tables Table 1 -Input Land Use Demands 13 Table 2 -Actual Average Day Land Use Demands 14 Table 3 -Demand Input Data 15 Table 4 -Monthly Water Purchases 16 Table 5 -Existing Demands 18 Table 6 -Ultimate Demands 19 Table 7 -Required Connection Flow Rates 25 Table 8 -Source Assumptions 26 Table 9 -Actual Reservoir Capacity 29 Table 10 -Total Required Storage 31 Table 11 -Existing Required Reservoir Capacity (mg) 32 Table 12 -Ultimate Required Reservoir Capacity (mg) 32 Table 13 -Fire Flow Analysis 45 Table 14 -Water Line Unit Prices 55 Table 15 -Water Facilities Cost Summary 57 Table 16 -Connection Fee Calculation 61 Table 17 -Projected Capital Improvement Income 63 Table 18 -Proposed Phasing 64 List of Figures Figure 1 -Peak Day Flow Rate 20 Figure 2 -Peak Day Demand Curve 21 Figure 3 -Actual Demand Multiplication Factors 22 Figure 4 -Design Peak Day Demand Curve 23 Figure 5 -Service Range Elevations 28 Figure 6 -Extended Period -255 Zone 50 Figure 7 -Extended Period -318 and 330 Zones 51 Figure 8 -Extended Period -384, 446 and 490 Zones 52 Figure 9 -Extended Period -700 Zone 53 3 Summary of Findings and Recommendations The results of this analysis of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District water distribution system, indicate new improvements totalling $80,600,000 will be required for ultimate development of the District. Of this total amount, $18,200,000 is shown to come from the District's General Fund, $6,300,000 from the fund for Fixed Asset Replacement, and $56,100,000 from the Capital Improvement Fund. With a current Capital Improvement Fund balance of $8,000,000 and an expected increase of approximately 23,000 EDU's, a new connection fee of approximately $2,100 would be required to generate the funds necessary for the required capital improvements. The cost estimates used to determine this connection fee are based on the January, 1990 Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index of 4,672. The recommended connection fee should be adjusted annually to the then current Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index. Proposed phasing for the required improvements are shown on Table No. 18. This phasing is based on estimates of when and where future development may occur. Actual project scheduling will depend on the actual development trends within the District. The project phasing should be reviewed annually and adjusted to match the demands current and anticipated at that time. The following is a summary of the improvements recommended for the District's water distribution system for ultimate development of the District in accordance with the current General Plan for the City of Carlsbad. Only improvements for which the District is responsible are listed. Developer responsibility improvements are shown on the base maps and are included in the computer runs. However, it is assumed these improvements or similar improvements will be 4 constructed in order to create the demands for which the District responsibility improvements are required. Upon submittal of development plans for approval, the distribution system should be analyzed to determine if the proposed development has an effect on these recommendations for ultimate improvements or if certain improvements are required prior to complete build-out of the proposed development. The construction costs are estimated for the required improvements and connection fee based on these costs is recommended. Improvements required for current level of development within the District are listed separately. The construction costs associated with these . improvements and with developer responsibility improvements are !1Q.t included in the costs used to determine the recommended connection fee. New lines reguired for existing condition: 1) Replace the existing 10 inch 490 line in El Camino Real from Chestnut to Elm with 16 inch. 2) Replace the existing 27 inch 490 line from Squires Reservoir to El Camino Real with 33 inch. New lines reguired for ultimate condition: 1) Construct a 12 inch 255 line in Jefferson Street from the existing 12 inch 255 line at Pico Drive to the existing 12 inch 255 line at May Company. 2) Construct a 12 inch 446 line in Elm Avenue from the existing 10 inch 446 line at Celinda Drive to the existing 8 inch 446 line at Donna Drive. 5 3) Construct a 14 inch 330 line in future Marron Road from the existing 12 inch 330 line at Avenida de Anita to the Oceanside City Limit with a pressure regulating station (446 to 330) at the proposed 14 inch 446 line from Village Q, a pressure regulating station (330 to 255) at Avenida de Anita, and an interconnect with the City of Oceanside including metering station and plug valve. 4) Construct a 14 inch interconnect with the City of Oceanside from the existing 446 and 580 lines in College including metering station and plug valve. 5) Construct a 16 inch 490/446 line in College from proposed 18 inch at Cannon to existing 446 line at Elm with pressure regulating sta- tion (490 to 446). 6) Construct a 14 inch 318 line in future Cannon Road from Car Country Drive to College Avenue with pressure regulating stations at Car Country (318 to 255), El Camino Real (490 to 318), and College (490 to 318), 12" from College Avenue to Oceanside with pressure regulating station at proposed 16" (700 to 490), and interconnect to Oceanside with metering station and plug valve. 7) Construct 12 inch 430 line in Camino Hills from the existing 18 inch 550 line in Faraday Avenue to the existing 12 inch 430 line. Remove temporary pressure regulating station in Camino Hills and construct permanent pressure regulating station (550 to 430) at Faraday, close valve west of Faraday to separate 430 and 384 zones. 8) When needed for water reclamation purposes, abandon Cannon Reservoir and construct pressure regulating station to 392 zone at College and Cannon. 6 9) Construct pressure sustaining station (680) at Cannon Road and Oceanside and 16 inch 580 line to the existing 21 inch 580 Tri- Agency Pipeline. 10) Construct a 16 inch 680 line from Squires Reservoir along the Oceanside boundary to Cannon Road with pressure regulating station (1019 to 680) at Squires. 11) Construct 18 inch 490 line in College Avenue from proposed 33 inch 490 line to Cannon Road. 12) Construct 14 inch 430 line in El Camino Real at College and pressure regulating Station (550 to 490) in College at Faraday. 13) Construct a 16 inch 700 line from the existing 16 inch 700 line north of Loker to the proposed 680 line at Squires Reservoir with a pressure sustaining station from the proposed 16 inch to the 33 inch 490 line and connections for a temporary pump installation at Squires Reservoir. 14) Construct a 12 inch 550 line in Faraday from El Fuerte to Orion Way with pressure regulating station (700 to 550) at El Fuerte. 15) Construct a 12 inch 550 line at Palomar Airport north of Owens Avenue. 16) Construct 24 inch 550 line in Carrillo Way from El Camino Real to Black Rail Road, i.e. "D" reservoir. (Operates in parallel with existing 18 inch 550 line). 17) Construct a 12 inch 550 line from the existing 12 inch 550 line in Camino Vida Roble to the existing 18 inch 550 line at "D" reservoir. 7 18) Construct a 12 inch 384 line in future Carrillo from the existing 384 line at "D" Reservoir east to the existing 10 inch crossing Carrillo. 19) Relocate existing pressure regulating station (550 to 384) south of the proposed 24 inch in Carrillo. Tie upstream side of station and existing 10 inch 550 line to the proposed 18 inch 550 line in Carrillo, and tie downstream side of station to proposed 12 inch 384 line in Carrillo. 20) Construct a 16 inch 550 line in El Camino Real from the end of the existing 16 inch 550 line south of Camino Via Roble to the existing 16 inch 550 line with connections to the existing 18 inch line to "D" reservoir. 21) Construct a 30 inch 700 line in Carrillo Way from El Fuerte to El Camino Real with pressure regulating station (700 to 550) at El Camino Real. 22) Construct a 24 inch 700 line in El Fuerte from Carrillo Way to Palomar Airport Road. 23) Construct a 30 inch 700 line in El Fuerte from Alga to Carrillo Way with a flow regulating station at Alga. 24) Construct a 12 inch 318 line in Poinsettia Lane from the existing 14 inch at Paseo Del Norte and to the existing 10 inch in Carlsbad Boulevard. 25) Construct 12 inch 318 line in future Kelly Drive from the existing 16 inch 384 line at "E" Reservoir to the proposed 14 inch in Cannon (318 zone) with pressure regulating station (384 to 318) at "E" Reservoir. 8 26) Construct 12 inch 318 line in Faraday from the existing 12 inch 384 line in Faraday to the proposed 14 inch 384 line in Cannon Road, with a pressure regulating station (384 to 318) at the connection to the existing 12 inch 384 line. 27) Construct a 12 inch 255 line from the existing discharge line from "E" reservoir west to Car Country Drive. 28) Construct a 10 inch 255 line in Carlsbad Boulevard at Manzano Drive to Avenida Encinas. 29) Construct a 10 inch line in Carlsbad Boulevard south of Palomar Airport Road to existing 10 inch 318 line with pressure regulating station (318 to 255). 30) Construct a 16 inch 384 line from "E" Reservoir east to College through the proposed subdivision. This line replaces the abandoned crossover line and 16 inch to "E" Reservoir. 31) Construct a 12 inch 384 line in the future Kelly Drive right-of-way from the existing 16 inch 384 line in Camino De Las Ondas to the proposed 16 inch south of Palomar Airport Road, continuing with a 16 inch 384 line in Kelly to the "E" reservoir. 32) Construct an 18 inch in College Ave from the proposed 24 inch in Poinsettia to the existing 16 inch in Palomar Airport Road with a connection to the existing 12 inch crossover line to "E" reservoir south of Palomar Airport Road. Close valve in the existing 12 inch east of College to separate the 550 and 384 zones. 33) Construct a 16 inch 384 line from "D" reservoir to existing 16 inch in Palomar Airport Road at Palomar Oaks. 9 34) Replace and relocate the existing 12 inch 550 line west of "D" reservoir to the future Poinsettia right-of-way. Replace the line with a 16 inch from the reservoir to College Boulevard and reduce to 12 inch west of College. 35) Replace and relocate the existing 18 inch 384 line west of "D" reservoir to the future Poinsettia right-of-way, replace the line with 24 inch from the reservoir to future College Blvd, and reduce to 18 inch west of College. 36) Construct 14, 12 and 8 inch 384 lines in the future College right- of-way from the 14 inch 384 line in Alga south to the proposed 14 inch in Batiquitos with connections to the existing 384 lines at Tulip Way and Daisy Avenue with two proposed pressure regulating stations at Batiquitos Drive. 37) Construct a 14 inch 318 line in Batiquitos Drive from the existing 14 inch west of Blackrail to the proposed 12 inch. 38) Construct a 12 inch 318 line south of Batiquitos Drive south to Linden Lane, with a 16 inch crossing the freeway to Navigator Circle. 10 Reservoir Improvements 1) Construct a total of 17 mg of reservoir capacity at "D" reservoir in two 8.5 mg phases, replacing the two existing 1.25 mg reservoirs. 2) Line and cover the existing 600 acre-foot Squires Reservoir. 3) Construct connection facilities for temporary 2000 gpm pump at proposed pressure sustaining station on feed secondary line to Squires Reservoir for emergency supply to 700 zone. 4) Increase Squires I to Squires II pump station capacity to a total of 15,000 gpm. 11 Water System Demands General -The water system demands were determined by multiplying each different land use area times a corresponding "input" demand per acre value for the existing land use times the existing percent developed as shown on the aerial photographs. The demand for each area was totaled and compared to the actual water usage reported by the District. Multiplication factors were determined to obtain existing average day, peak day and peak hour demands from the "input" demands. Ultimate water system demands were then determined by multiplying each land use area by the corresponding "input" demand per acre value for the ultimate land use times the ultimate percent developed. These demands were then totaled and multiplied by the factors determined from the existing demands to obtain the ultimate average day, peak day and peak hour demands. Land Use Classifications -The land use classifications shown on the latest City of Carlsbad -General Plan Map as revised November 1988 were used for this study. The aerials used for this report were obtained from the City of Carlsbad and were flown in September and October 1988. Existing percent developed was determined as shown on the aerials. Ultimate percent developed was determined in accordance with the City's development on slope criteria. Demand Assumptions -The following table, Table 1 -Input Land Use Demands, is a summary of the demand factors used to determine the flow rates for each node. Demand multiplication factors of O. 652, 1. 088 and 2. 000 were determined to obtain average day, peak day and peak hour demands. 12 Table 1 -Input Land Use Demands LAND USE CODE LAND USE RESIDENTIAL RL LOW DENSITY (0-1.5 DU/ac) RLM LOW -MEDIUM DENSITY (0-4 DU/ac) RM MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8 DU/ac) RMH MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY (8-15 DU/ac) RH HIGH DENSITY (15-23 DU/ac) COMMERCIAL RRI INTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL RRE EXTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL RS REGIONAL SERVICE C COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TS TRAVEL SERVICES COMMERCIAL RC RECREATION COMMERCIAL CBD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS E ELEMENTARY SCHOOL J JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL H HIGH SCHOOL HC PRIVATE SCHOOL P PROFESSIONAL & RELATED PI PLANNED INDUSTRIAL G GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES U PUBLIC FACILITIES OS OPEN SPACE OS-I OPEN SPACE -IRRIGATED ROW RIGHT-OF-WAY ROW-I RIGHT-OF-WAY -IRRIGATED NRR NON-RESIDENTIAL RESERVE 13 DEMAND gpd/ac 2,000 2,100 2,350 2,900 4,200 1,000 1,440 1,440 1,440 3,000 1,440 1,440 1,800 1,900 2,200 2,200 1,900 1,440 3,000 1,440 1,440 0 2,230 0 2,230 4,320 DEMAND gpm/ac 1.4 1.5 1. 6 2.0 2.9 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.1 1.0 1.0 1. 3 1. 3 1.5 1.5 1. 3 1.0 2.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 1. 5 3.0 Multiplying the "input" demand values by the average day multiplication factor produces the following actual average day demands for each land use classification. Table 2 -Actual Average Day Land Use Demands Land Use Code Land Use Description RESIDENTIAL RL LOW DENSITY (0-1.5 DU/ac) RLM LOW -MEDIUM DENSITY (0-4 DU/ac) RM MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8 DU/ac) RMH MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY (8-15 DU/ac) RH HIGH DENSITY (15-23 DU/ac) COMMERCIAL RRI INTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL RRE EXTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL RS REGIONAL SERVICE C COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TS TRAVEL SERVICES COMMERCIAL RC RECREATION COMMERCIAL CBD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS E ELEMENTARY SCHOOL J JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL H HIGH SCHOOL HC CONTINUATION SCHOOL P PRIVATE SCHOOL 0 PROFESSIONAL & RELATED PI PLANNED INDUSTRIAL G GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES U PUBLIC FACILITIES OS OPEN SPACE OS-I OPEN SPACE -IRRIGATED ROW RIGHT-OF-WAY ROW-I RIGHT-OF-WAY -IRRIGATED NRR NON-RESIDENTIAL RESERVE 14 Avg Day Demands gpd/ac 1,304 1,369 1,532 1,891 2,738 652 939 939 939 1,956 939 939 1,174 1,239 1,434 1,434 1,239 939 939 1,956 939 939 0 1,454 0 1,454 2,817 Avg Day Demand gpm/ac 0.9 1.0 1.1 1. 3 1. 9 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 The total area of each of the District's base maps is divided into sub-areas and assigned to the individual nodes for use in the computer model of the distribution system. These areas are delineated on the base maps. Attributes for each sub-area containing the area, percent developed and land use classification are stored in the AUTOCAD file for each base sheet. These values are automatically extracted and totaled using a Symphony spreadsheet data file. The following table represents the total "input" assigned to each pressure zone. Table 3 -Demand Input Data Zone Existing (gpm) Ultimate ( gpm) 700 1,415.7 3,124.0 580 380.2 1,087.2 550 2,649.5 3,662.0 490 602.4 1,556.1 446 1,586.8 1,778.8 430 237.4 1,126.8 384 555.4 2,729.2 330 1,320.8 1,718.5 La Costa 318 2,687.2 4,315.3 Evans Pt 318 771.3 1,144.8 255 North 2,269.1 2,562.6 255 South 1,103.4 1,333.5 Total 15,579.2 26,138.8 Average Daily Demands -The actual average daily demand was obtained from actual water purchase information provided by the District. The following table lists the District's water purchases for the period of July 1988 through June 1989. 15 Table 4 -Monthly Water Purchases Month July '88 August '88 September '88 October '88 November '88 December '88 January '89 February '89 March '89 April '89 May '89 June '89 Total Water Purchases (ac-ft) 1,886.3 1,797.4 1,674.9 1,517.3 1,003.4 893.5 897.7 847.9 1,140.8 1,409.8 1,651.2 1,667.5 16,387.7 From this information the existing average daily flow for the District is computed to be 14.63 mgd (22.64 cfs). Peak Month Demands -From the monthly purchase information the average flow rate for the peak month, July 1988, was determined to be 19.83 mgd (30.68 cfs). This value is 1.36 times the existing average daily flow. This value assumes 1) a 31 day month and 2) the reservoir levels at the beginning of the month were approximately the same at the end of the month, i.e., no change in storage. Peak Day Demands -The District provided system inflow and reservoir level information for the two week period of August 14 -28 1989. During this period, peak day demands occurred. Using the relationship; Demand -Inflow -Change in Storage, the daily demand was calculated for the two week period. A peak day demand of 16 24.4 mgd was found to·occur on August 21, 1989. Figure 1 is a bar graph showing the daily demands for the period analyzed. Dividing the peak day demand value, 24.4 mgd, by the average day demand 14.6 mgd results in a peak day demand multiplication factor of 1.67. Peak Day Demands -1.67 x Average Day Demands Peak Hour Demand -The change in storage was computed for each hour from 4 a.m. August 21 to 10 a.m. August 22. This information was used to compute the system demand each hour. Inflow rates were assumed constant over the period. Since hourly changes in storage were not obtainable for the Squires Reservoir, the following assumptions were used to estimate the change in storage: 1) Based on the data from the other reservoirs, the reservoirs have their highest water surface levels between 3 and 6 a.m. and the lowest between 9 a.m. and 12 noon. 2) Two water surface level readings were made at 10 a.m.; 494.42 on the 21st and 494.25 on the 22nd, these level readings were assumed lowest. 3) Highest water surface elevation assumed at 5 a.m .. 4) No outflow occurs during the 19 hour period 10 a.m. to 5 a.m. 5) At 1 cfs inflow, the maximum rise in water surface elevation from 10 a.m. to 5 a.m. would be 0.1 feet. Therefore, the water surface elevation at 5 a.m. on the 22nd would be 494.52 feet (494.42 + 0.1), 6) Assuming the same 0.27 feet change in elevation from the 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the 22nd occurs on the 21st, the water surface elevation at 5 a.m. on the 21st would be 494.69 feet, (494.42 + 0.27). 17 These assumptions result in the demand curve shown in Figure 2. The values shown on this figure are in million gallons per hour and represent the actual peak day demands of the District on August 21, 1989. The total area of this graph, 24.4 mgd, and represents the total peak day demand. Dividing the values shown on this bar graph by the average peak day flow of 1.02 mg/hr results in the actual demand multiplication factors shown in Figure 3. Thus, peak hour demands are determined to be 1.84 times peak day demands. Peak Hour Demands -1.84 x Peak Day Demands; and thus, Peak Hour Demands -3.07 x Average Day Demands Correlating the actual demand data to the total demands obtained from the land use demand assumptions results in the following demand multiplication factors to be used in the computer analysis. Existing Average Day demand equals .652 times input data, i.e., 15,579.2 * 0.652 -10,157 gpm -14.63 mgd -22.64 cfs Existing Peak Month Average Day demand equals .884 times input data, i.e., 15,579.2 * 0.884 13,768 gpm -19.83 mgd -30.68 cfs Existing Peak day demand equals 1.088 times input data., i.e., 15,579.2 * 1.088 -16,944 gpm = 24.4 mgd -37.76 cfs Existing Peak hour demand equals 1.84 times peak day demands which equals 2.00 times input data, i.e.; (1.84)(1.088) -2.00 15,579.2 * 2.00 -31,158 gpm -44.9 mgd = 69.43 cfs The following table summarizes the demand multiplication factors used to multiply times the demand input data to obtain various flow conditions for the existing condition. 18 Table 5 -Existing Demands Condition Factor (gpm) (mgd) (cfs) Average day .652 10,159 14.63 22.64 Peak Month Average Day .884 13,772 19.83 30.68 Peak Day 1.088 16,944 24.40 37.76 Peak Hour 2.000 31,158 44.87 69.43 Using these factors times• the total input demand for the ultimate condition, (re: Table 3), results in the following ultimate demands: Table 6 -Ultimate Demands Condition Factor (gpm) (mgd) (cfs) Average day .652 17,042 24.54 37.97 Peak Month Average Day .884 23,107 33.27 51.49 Peak Day 1.088 28,439 40.95 63.37 Peak Hour 2.000 52,278 75.28 116. 48 Figure 4 shows the demand multiplication factors recommended for use in the extended period simulations. These values simplify the calculations involved in performing the extended period simulation while providing the peak hour demand multiplication factor of 2 times the input data and an average peak day flow rate of 1.088 times the input data. In addition, this design demand curve provides required storage volume slightly greater than the actual demand curve, 5.071 times the average flow rate verses 3.8 determined from the actual flow data. 19 ..._,, 0 z <( ~ w 0 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CARLSBAD tv1UNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PEAK DAY FLOW RA.TE 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 AUGUST 1989 Figure 1 2 1.9 1 .8 1.7 1 .6 1.5 1.4 ....... 1.3 I,.. .c. 1.2 ' O'l 1 .1 E ..___. 1 0 z 0.9 -<( ~ 0.8 w 0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 1.87 PEAK DAY DEMANDS EXISTING CONDITION Shaded Area= Required Storage= 3.86 mg Total Area= Peak Day Demand= 24.4 mg 1.02 mR/hr = Peak Day Average Rate 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 .e..UGUST 21 , 1 989 Figur<e 2 2 1.9 1 .8 1.7 ..... 1 .6 u.. ~ 1.5 0 ..,_,, 1.4 I,... 0 1.3 ... 0 ~ 1.2 C 1 .1 0 ... 1 0 0 0. 0.9 ... 0.8 :J ~ 0.7 1J C 0.6 0 E 0.5 () 0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 1.84 ACTUAL DEM.AND MULTIPLICATION FACTORS Actual Demand= AverageDay Demand x DMF Required Operational Storage= 3.80 x Average Demand in mg pe hour Existing= 24.4 (3.8)/24 = 3.9 mg Ultimate= 40.95 (3.8)/24 = 6.5 mg 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 AUGUST 21, 1989 Figure 3 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT DESIGN DEMAND CUR\IE * 2.6 2.4 Required operational storage= 5.071 x average demand in mg per hour 2.2 2.00 2.0 !,.. 0 ... 1.8 0 ~ C 1.6 0 ... 0 1.4 0 a. ... 1.2 :::l ~ "O 1.0 C 0 E 0.8 V 0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 *Adjusted for use w/input data TIME Figure 4- Sources of Water The District currently has three sources of water: 1) Palomar Airport Road -Connection to the Second SDCWA Aqueduct 2) Connection to Tri-Agency Pipeline (College at Elm). This connection also serves portions of the following agencies: City of Oceanside Vista Irrigation District 3) South Aqueduct Connection. following agencies: This connection also serves portions of the Olivenhain Municipal Water District San Marcos County Water District From these connections the District currently receives a total of 34. 3 cfs: 22.3 cfs from the Palomar Airport Road connection; a total of 7 cfs from the Tri-Agency Pipeline (6 cfs to TAP reservoir and 1 cfs to Squires reservoir); and 5 cfs from the South Aqueduct connection. The District indicates for the ultimate condition the flow rate from the Tri-Agency pipeline can increase to the required 23.41 cfs (6.69 to TAP reservoir and 16.72 to Squires reservoir); the South Aqueduct connection increases to 13 cfs; and the Palomar Airport Road connection increases to 27.55 cfs. The following table shows the demands served by the various aqueduct connections and the peak day flow rates required for both the existing and ultimate condition. 24 Tabie 7 -Required Connection Flow Rates Peak Day Peak Day Existing Demands Ultimate Demands (gpm) (cfs) (gpm) (cfs) Areas Served by the TAP Connection 580 zone 413.7 0.92 1,182.9 2.64 446 zone 1,726.4 3.85 1,935.3 4.31 Sub-total 2,140.1 4. 77 3,118.2 6.95 Areas Served by the Sguires Connection 490 zone 655.4 1.46 1,693.0 3. 77 330 zone 1,437.0 3.20 1,869.7 4.17 Evans Point 318 zone 839.2 1. 87 1,245.5 2.78 255 North zone 2,468.8 5.50 2,788.1 6.21 Sub-total 5,400.4 12.03 7,596.4 16.93 Areas Served by the Palomar Air11ort Rd and S. Agueduct Connection 700 zone 1,540.3 3.43 3,398.9 7.57 550 zone 2,882.7 6.42 3,984.3 8.88 430 zone 258.3 0.58 1,226.0 2.73 384 zone 604.3 1. 35 2,969.4 6.62 La Costa 318 zone 2,923.7 6.51 4,695.0 10.46 255 South zone 1,200.5 2.67 1,450.8 3.23 Sub-total 9,409.7 20.97 17,724.4 39.49 Total 16,950.2 37. 77 28,439.0 63.37 The following table summarizes the source assumptions used in the computer model. For the existing condition, the flow rates were provided by the District and represent the actual flow occurring during the reported peak day event. For the ultimate condition, the source flow rates were set equal to the required peak day demand as shown in the previous table, with a maximum of 13. 0 cfs available at the South Aqueduct connection. 25 Table 8 -Source Assumptions SHEET EXIST ULTIMATE NODE _#_ DESCRIPTION CFS GPM CFS GPM 1121 CB-13 Tap Reservoir 580-446 Zone 6 2,692.8 6.95 3,119.2 1110 CB-49 Squires Reservoir 1 448.8 16.93 7,598.2 301 CB-33 Santa Fe 22 9,873.6 26.49 11,888.7 14 CB-45 La Costa _5_ 2,224.0 13 .00 5,834.4 TOTAL 34 15,259.2 63.37 28,440.5 26 Water Distribution System Minimum Distribution Parameters -Water lines are selected to maintain a minimum dynamic pressure of 40 psi at all service connecti-ons during peak hour conditions and a minimum dynamic pressure of 20 psi during peak day plus fire flow conditions. Both of these conditions are calculated with the reservoir water surface elevations and pressure regulating station settings at the bottom of the tank. Lines are sized to maintain velocities less than 8 feet per second. Line sizes are also selected to provide sufficient flow to the reservoirs to ensure that they are filling during peak day demands. Pressure Zones -The recommended service range elevation of a reservoir, pump station, or pressure regulating station is based on maintaining a minimum static pressure of 60 psi (138 feet) and a maximum static pressure of 150 psi (346 feet) for reservoirs, pump stations and pressure regulating stations. Based on this criteria, Figure 5 shows the service range elevations for the District's various pressure zones. 27 ..... N (,I _,,. c.n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ol 255 I~ ELM, SKYLINE, "E" I\J I 31E I~ L A COSTA LO, EV, \NS :; I ~30 I~ ELLERY c..il 349 I~ TAMARACK F RV I~ TWIN " D" (EXISTING) ~I 384 (/) rT7 ~I 375 I~ TWIN "D" (ULTIMATE) -...J ::::tJ I~ "CAN \JON" ~I 392 < _,,. 0 ~I 430 q FARADAY PRY rT7 u1 vi "TAP" ,, 446 0 -'• 0 ()) '° C N ..... I~ "SQUI RES" """l -...JI 490 CD _,,. <.Tl 0 - z :::j I 520 I~ L) COSTA PRV _,,. rT7 l ~ I 550 1± EL CAMINO REAL 500 PRV .. I\J ' ~I 575 I~ FLAMEN( 0 PRV rT7 <O < T, ~p HI PRESSURE PSV ~I 580 I~ _,,. rT7 ~I I~ ' LA COSTA HI PF V 680 _,,. (\.) (./) ~ANTA FE 11, LA ( ~OSTA HI ~I 700 I~ _,,. N 30' iYP I MINIMUN I I MINIMUN I ~ SER\IJCE ZONE I I PRV ,ER\IJCE ZONE I Ll RESERVOI lC PRESSURE I 111 STP TIC PRESSURE :::0 STA < I 178 I 6( PSI = 138' I I 208' I 6) PSI = 138' Cf) fTl I I I I ' ~ M A.X STATIC PRESSURE 150 PSI = 346' ~ AX STA TIC PRESSURf 150 PSI = 346' I z I I G) Water Storage System General -The District currently operates 11 reservoirs with capacities and pressure zones as shown in the following table. The bottom elevation of the reservoir is used as its pressure zone designation. The 10.0 mg reservoir under construction at Squires Dam is considered existing and the two existing 1.25 mg "D" reservoirs are planned to be replaced with two 8.5 mg reservoirs for the ultimate condition. Cannon Reservoir is considered eliminated for the ultimate condition. The 600 acre-feet Squires I reservoir is not considered usable until it is lined and covered. Table 9 -Actual Reservoir Capacity Capacity (mg) Pressure Reservoir Existing Ultimate Zone 1) TAP 6.0 6.0 446 2) Ellery 5.0 5.0 329 3) Cannon ("C" Res) 1.5 0.0 349 4) Skyline 1.5 1.5 241 5) Squires II 10.0 10.0 490 6) "E" 1.5 1.5 264 7) "D" 2.5 17.0 384 7) Sante Fe II 9.0 9.0 700 8) La Costa -Hi 6.0 6.0 700 9) La Costa -Low 1.5 1.5 318 10) Elm 1.5 1.5 255 Sub-total 44.5 59.0 11) Squires I 0.0 195.5 490 Total 44.5 254.5 29 Minimum Storage Parameters The San Diego Water Authority recommends maintaining a total storage capacity equal to ten times the average day usage. Using an average day demand of 14.63 mgd (re: Table 5) for the existing condition and 24.54 mgd (re: Table 6) for the ultimate condition, total required storage is 146.3 mg and 245.4 mg, respectively. This total required stora~e is the sum of what will be referred to as "daily" storage and "emergency" storage. The daily storage capacity is calculated as the sum of operational requiremFnts, fire demands and a reserve capacity of one peak day usage. This storage is contained in the various above ground reservoirs located throughout the District. These reservoirs typically operate with an inflow rate equivalent to the average daily demand of its service area and provide the additional flow needed for peak hour and fire demands. The remaining portion of the recommended total ten day storage is the emergency storage capacity. This storage is contained in the Squires I reservoir. This storage is required in the event the supply from the SDCWA aqueduct is unavailable for an extended period oft _me. Required operational storage is that amount of water used at flow rates greater than the average peak day rate. Figure 2 shows the District's actual peak day demand curve, as determined from actual inflow rates and reservoir level information. Total operational storage is represented by that area above the average demand line, 3. 86 mg for the existing condition and 6. 5 mg for the ultimate condition. Existing storage requirements are based on a combined fire flow of 10,000 gpm for 10 hours, for a total of 6.0 mg. Ultimate fire storage requirements are based on a combined fire flow of 12,000 gpm for 10 hrs for a total of 7.2 mg. 30 Reserve storage requirements equivalent to one peak day demand are included in the event the reservoir temporarily loses its supply from the upstream system. Based on information provided by the District, total peak day demands were calculated to be 24.4 mgd for the existing condition and 41.0 for the ultimate condition (re: Tables 5 & 6). The following table summarizes the "daily" total storage required for the District. and "emergency" portions of the Table 10 -Total Storage Needed Existing (mg) Ultimate (mg) Operational 3.9 6.5 Fire 6.0 7.2 Reserve 24.4 41.0 Total 34.3 54.7 Emergency 112.0 190.7 Total 146.3 245.4 With the current storage at Squires unusable, the District does meet the minimum storage criteria as recommended by the San Diego County Water Authority. It is recommended the Squires I reservoir be lined and covered to provide a minimum capacity of 192.9 mg (592 acre-feet). Assuming the aqueduct is lost during a peak day event, after the operational storage has been depleted, a total storage of 251. 9 mg should be provided. Subtracting the total ultimate reservoir capacity, 59 mg, results in the 192.9 mg recommended capacity for Squires I reservoir. 31 Storage Requirements by Reservoir Service Area -The service area of the District is divided into various distinct pressure zones. These zones and their service range· elevations are shown graphically in Figure 5. The peak day demands associated with each zone are shown in Table 7. Splitting the total operational, fire and reserve storage requirements, as discussed in the previous section, among the reservoirs based on service area demands, results in the following minimum capacity requirements for the various reservoirs. Table 11 -Existing Required Reservoir Capacity (mg) Reservoir/System Operational Fire Reserve Total Tap and 580 zone 0.49 0.76 3.08 4. 33 Ellery 0.33 0.51 2.07 2.91 Skyline and Elm 0.57 0.87 3.56 5.00 Squires 0.34 0.53 2.15 3.03 E" 0.28 0.42 1. 73 2.43 ·D" 0.14 0.21 0.87 1. 22 Sante Fe II & La Costa "Hi" 1.08 1.66 6.74 9.48 La Costa "Lo" 0.67 1.03 4.21 5.92 Total 3.90 6.00 24.41 34.31 Table 12 -Ultimate Required Reservoir Capacity (mg) Reservoir/System Operational Fire Reserve Total Tap and 580 zone 0. 71 0.79 4.49 5.99 Ellery 0.43 0.47 2.69 3.59 Skyline and Elm 0.64 0. 71 4.01 5.36 Squires 0.67 0.74 4.23 5.65 "E" 0.33 0.37 2.09 2.79 "D" 0.68 0.75 4.28 5. 71 Sante Fe II & La Costa "Hi" 1. 97 2.18 12.40 16.55 La Costa "Lo" 1.08 1.19 6.76 9.02 Total 6.51 7.20 40.95 54.67 32 Typically, the reservoir·s supply the additional flows needed for peak hour demands or fire flows for their service areas. However, through the use of pressure regulating connections to the upstream systems, peak hour demands can be transferred to the upstream system. In comparing the required reservoir capacities of Tables 11 and 12 with the actual reservoir capacities shown in Table 9, it appears the 255 Zone, the La Costa 318 Zone and the 700 Zone reservoirs lack sufficient capacity. It is recommended that source demands for "E" reservoir and portions of the 430 Zone be transferred to the 384 zone to resolve this deficiency. The shortages of the 255 North Zone will be supplied through pressure regulating station connections with the 330 and 490 Zones. 33 Review of Existing Facilities The existing system was modeled using the University of Kentucky Pipe Network Analysis Program (Kypipe) Version 3.3 -1600 pipes. Computer runs were made for peak day demands, peak hour demands, and peak day demands plus fire flow. The results of the runs indicated the existing 10 inch line in El Camino Real should be increased to 16 inch to provide adequate fire protection to the May Company-area. The results also indicated the existing 27 inch line from Squires Reservoir to El Camino Real is not sufficient for the existing flow rates. It is recommended that the 27 inch 490 line be replaced with the 33 inch distribution line required for the ultimate condition. Portions of the 27 inch could possibly be utilized as a distribution line for the 700 zone as described in the section concerning emergency events. 34 Review of Ultimate Facilities The ultimate system was modeled using the existing model, increasing the node demands to their ultimate values, increasing the source flow rates to the values shown in Table 8, and adding the pipes needed for ultimate build-out of the District. Computer runs were made for peak day, peak hour, peak day plus fire, emergency event and peak day extended period reservoir analysis. Peak day -This run was used primarily to determine the pressure sustaining settings to obtain the proper inflow rates to reservoirs for the peak hour and extended period simulations. The inflow rate for each reservoir was set such that the net flow to the reservoir would be zero at peak day demands with the reservoirs three-quarters full. Peak hour -The peak hour condition represents the maximum flow rates for the major lines. This run was used to select line sizes for pipes 18 inch and larger. The problems encountered when increasing the demands from existing to ultimate were 1) flow from the South aqueduct connection and the La Costa "Hi" reservoir was unable to get around the La Costa "Lo" system; 2) the 27 inch line from the aqueduct connection in Palomar Airport Road limited the maximum flow available at this connection, and 3) the required reservoir capacity for the 700 zone exceeded the capacity of the existing reservoirs. These problems were resolved by adding major transmission mains through the 700 zone around the La Costa "Lo" area, balancing the inflow rates between the three aqueduct con- nections, and adding the required additional reservoir capacity at the "D" reservoir site and associated distribution system improvements. These solutions 35 depend on the ability of the District to increase the source flow rate at Squires Reservoir to the 17 cfs level. Thus, allowing the Palomar Airport Road connection to stay below 28 cfs. The following is a detailed discussion of the problems and recommendations associated with the reservoir capacity and primary supply and distribution lines for each system beginning with the lowest pressure zone and continuing to the highest. The discussion is divided between those reservoirs and systems served by the Palomar Airport Road and South Aqueduct connections and those served by the Tri-Agency Pipeline Connection. Palomar Airport Road & South Aqueduct Service Area In summary, the deficiencies in the reservoir capacity for the 255 North Zone and La Costa 318 Zone are supplied by the proposed "D" reservoir. Source requirements for most of the 430 Zone was transferred from the 700 zone to the 384 Zone, which is supplied by the "D" reservoirs. "E" reservoir (255 south zone) -The 2.4 and 2.8 mg capacity required for the existing and ultimate conditions exceed the existing 1.5 mg reservoir. Addi- tional capacity requirements of 0.9 and 1.3 are transferred to the "D" reservoir (384 Zone) for the existing and ultimate conditions through the PRV (384 zone) in Palomar Airport Road. Certain pipeline improvements, the 10 inch in Palomar Airport Road, the 12 inch to Car Country, and the 10 inch in Carlsbad Blvd are required to maintain higher pressures at the PRV in Cannon Road (Evans Point 318 zone) and the PRVs in Carlsbad Boulevard (proposed) and Avenida Encinas (La Costa 318 zone). These PRVs are set at a pressure that will provide no flow 36 under normal conditions but will provide an emergency source of water, if needed (stand-by mode). La Costa "Lo" (La Costa 318 zone) -The 5.9 mg (existing) and 9.0 mg (ultimate) required capacities for this zone exceed the existing 1.5 mg La Costa "Lo" reservoir. Additional capacity requirements are provided by the upstream "D" reservoir (384 zone) through the three existing pressure regulating stations: De Las Ondas, Poinsettia, and Blackrail Road and two proposed pressure regu- lating stations in Batiquitos Drive. Stand by sources to the La Costa 318 zone are available from the 700 zone at the existing pressure regulating stations in Alicante Road and Bolero Street. The existing pressure regulating station from the 550 zone in El Camino Real currently provides an active source but should be adjusted to a stand-by mode upon buildout of the 700 zone. Certain pipeline improvements are required to improve flow in the La Costa 318 zone and complete loop within the system. These improvements consist of completing the 14 inch loop in Batiquitos Drive, the 16 inch loop from Batiquitos Drive across the freeway to Navigation Circle, and tying the 12 inch in Poinsettia to 12 inch Carlsbad Boulevard. 430 zone -The 430 zone is currently supplied by three pressure regulating stations from the 550 zone and a temporary pressure regulating station from the 490 zone. After relocating the temporary pressure regulating station to the 550 line in Faraday, all flows for this zone would be supplied by the 700 zone reservoirs. The required reservoir capacity for this zone is 0.5 mg for the existing condition and 2.4 mg for the ultimate condition. Once the 8.5 mg "D" reservoir and 384 lines to Palomar Airport Road are completed, it is recommended 37 a portion of the 430 zone reservoir demand be diverted to the 384 service area. Natural ground elevations in the 430 zone are well within the service range of the "D" reservoirs. By closing the valve at Camino Hills Drive and EL Camino Real, relocating the temporary pressure regulating station to Faraday and Camino Hills Drive, closing a valve in Faraday west of Camino Hills Drive, connect 1 ng the 430 line in Camino Hills Drive with the 430 line in College, the service area of the 430 zone is reduced to that portion northeast of Faraday. This transfers approximately half of the required reservoir capacity to the 384 zone. The reservoir demand for the new 430 zone is 0.2 mg for the existing condition and 1.2 mg for the ultimate condition. The remaining portion of the 430 zone is converted to 384 zone by opening the valves currently closed between the two zones, bypassing the pressure regulating station in Palomar Airport Road west of Palomar Oaks, and adjusting the pressure settings on the existing pressure regulating stations at Palomar Airport Road and Camino Vida Roble and College west of Palomar Oaks. "D" reservoir (384 zone) -In addition to the reservoir capacity required for the 384 zone (1. 2 mg -existing, 5. 7 mg -ultimate), the "D" reservoir also provides the additional reservoir capacity for the 255 South zone (0.9 mg - existing, 1.1 mg -ultimate), the La Costa 318 zone (4.4 mg -existing, 7.5 mg -ultimate), and the portion of 430 zone converted to 384 zone (0.3 -existi~g, 1.2 ultimate). A total reservoir capacity of 6.5 mg for existing condition ~nd 15. 5 mg for the ultimate condition is required. Allowing for 10 percent increase due to zone changes and unforeseen demands, a total capacity of 17 mg is required. Since portions of the 384 zone are supplied from 550 zone pressure regulating stations, the existing reservoirs are probably sufficient for the 38 existing demands. However, any substantial development in the "D" reservoir service area would exceed the capacity of the existing reservoirs. It is recommended that design and construction of the first 8.5 mg phase reservoir improvement be initiated if development in this area is expected to continue. The service area supplied by the "D" reservoir (255 South, La Costa 318 and 384 and 430 zones) has a peak day demand of 9841 gpm less 1557 gpm supplied to the La Costa 318 zone from the 700 zone, for a total peak day demand of 8284 gpm. Distribution lines supplying the "D" reservoir should be sized to provide the ultimate peak day flow rates. Assuming half this inflow is required to supply the first 8.5 mg phase reservoir, construction of the following improvements are recommended: a) the 12 inch tie from the existing 12 line in Camino Vida Roble south to the existing 18 inch "D" reservoir supply line, b) the 16 inch line in El Camino Real from Camino Via Roble to the existing 16 inch in El Camino Real, and c) completion of the 12 inch 550 loop at the Palomar Airport property north of Owens Avenue. To provide adequate source flow for completion of the second 8. 5 mg phase construction of the following proposed improvements is recommended: a) the 24 inch in Carrillo (operates in parallel with the existing 18 inch), b) the 30 inch in Carrillo (El Fuerte to El Camino Real), c) the 24 inch in El Fuerte (Palomar Airport Road to Carrillo), d) the 30 inch in El Fuerte (La Costa to Carrillo) , and Carrillo. e) the pressure regulating station at El Camino Real and 39 Other pipeline improvements required for ultimate development of the 384 zone consist of the following: 1) To provide a source of supply to the 318 zone and provide a loop to the subdivision south of Poinsettia a 12 inch line from the existing 384 line in Alga Rd to the proposed 318 line in Batiquitos Drive with two pressure regulating stations and ties to the existing 384 lines in Tulip and Daisy Avenue is proposed. 2) To provide 384 source to "E" reservoir, replace the existing 12 inch crossover line south of Palomar Airport Road and convert portions of the 430 zone to 384 the following lines are required: a) a 12 inch in the future Kelly Drive from Camino de Las Ondas to "E" reservoir, b) a 24 inch in College Drive from Poinsettia to Palomar Airport Road, and c) a 16 inch from the existing 384 zone 18 inch in Poinsettia to the existing 12 inch in Palomar Oaks. 3) To relocate the existing 12 inch crossover line north of Palomar Airport Road and the existing 16 inch "E" reservoir supply line from the existing 430 zone pressure regulating station, construction of an 18 inch from the existing 16 inch line in College to "E" reservoir is required. 4) To provide a second source to the 384 lines east of "D" reservoir, construction of a 12 inch 384 line in Carrillo Way from the "D" reservoir to the existing 10 inch 384 line, relocation of the temporary pressure regulating station north of Carrillo, west of El Camino Real to a point on the 10 inch south of Carrillo Way. The relocated pressure regulating station can then be adjusted to operate in a stand-by mode. 40 Santa Fe II & La Costa "Hi" (700, 550, & 430 zones) -These reservoirs have a total required capacity of 9.5 mg for the existing condition and 16.6 mg for the ultimate condition. Transferring a portion of the 430 zone capacity requirements to the 384 zone reduces required capacity to 9.2 m-g and 15.4 mg. The amount in excess of the actual capacity does not warrant construction of additional reservoir facilities in the 700 zone. Tri-Agency Pipeline Service Area -In summary, the District's current reservoir capacity, plus the 10 mg reservoir under construction at Squires Reservoir, appears sufficient for the expected "daily" demands. However, the Squires I Reservoir should be lined and covered to provide the required "emergency" storage. Skyline and Elm Reservoirs (255 North Zone) -The 255 North zone has a required reservoir capacity of 5. 0 mg for the existing condition and 5. 4 mg for the ultimate condition and a total existing reservoir capacity of 3. 0 mg. The additional 2 .4 mg required reservoir capacity is available from Ellery and Squires reservoirs delivered through pressure regulating stations off the 490 zone line in El Camino Real and the 330 zone at Pine and McKinley. Construction of a 12 inch line in Jefferson St from Pico Drive to May Company is necessary to provide a second source of water to the area south of Buena Vista Lagoon. Evans Point 318 zone -The reservoir capacity for the Evans Point 318 zone is included in the Squires service area. Primary sources for this zone consist of the pressure regulating stations from the 490 zone at College Avenue and Cannon Drive and El Camino Real and Cannon Drive. Distribution lines from the 490 zone 41 are sized for the peak flow rates in lieu of constructing excess reservoir capacity. Secondary sources are pressure regulating stations from the 384 zone in Kelly at the "E" reservoir site and in Faraday Avenue. This zone can provide stand-by service to the 255 south zone through a proposed pressure regulating station in Cannon Drive at Car Country. Distribution main improvements for this zone consist of: a) a 14 inch line in Cannon Drive from College Avenue to Car Country, and b) 12 inch lines in Faraday and Kelly. Ellery (330 zone) -The 5.0 mg reservoir at Ellery exceeds the 2.9 mg required for existing and the 3. 9 mg required for ultimate conditions. The 1.1 mg additional capacity is available for the 255 North zone through the pressure regulating station at Pine and McKinley. Distribution improvements required for ultimate development of this zone consist of: a) providing a secondary supply to the 330 zone and the 255 zone by constructing a 14 inch line in Marron Road from the existing 330 line in Avenida de Anita east to the proposed 446 zone line with a pressure regulating station to the existing 255 line and a pressure regulating station from the 446 line. TAP 446 and 580 zones -The 6.0 mg ultimate requirement for this service area matches the existing TAP reservoir capacity. Thus, no reservoir improvements are required. Since the peak hour flow rates for the 580 zone are provided by the Tri-Agency Pipeline and not the reservoir, the pressure regulating station in Elm east of Santa Clara should be set such that no flow from the Tri-Agency Pipeline goes to the 490 zone. The peak day flow provided by the 446 zone to the 330 zone at Ellery reservoir and the pressure regulating station south of Elm Reservoir is provided from the 490 zone through pressure regulating stations 42 at the intersection of El Camino Real and Chestnut and the intersection of El Camino Real and the 12 inch south of Tamarack. The pressure regulating station at the intersection of El Camino Real and Elm should be set to operate in a stand-by mode. When receiving the proposed 6.95 cfs (3119 gpm) from the Tri-Agency Pipeline, fire demands in excess of 1935 gpm during peak day demands would need to be pumped from the TAP reservoir. The 1183 gpm peak day demand of the 580 zone leaves 1935 gpm excess flow available from the Tri-Agency Pipeline. Squires Reservoir (Evans Pt 318, 392 & 490 zones) -The Squires reservoir service area requires an ultimate capacity of 5.7 mg. Adding the additional 1.1 mg required for the 255 North zone increases this requirement to 7. 0 mg. Additional capacity is available for peak flow to the 446 zone when required. Improvements necessary for the 490 zone consist of extending a line up the future College Avenue and Cannon Drive to provide primary service to the 490 zone service area east of College, the Cannon reservoir 392 service area, Evans Point 318 service area and secondary supply for the 446 zone. Construction of this line will reduce the demand on the 490 line in El Camino Real. The Cannon reservoir requirements will ultimately be met by the Squires reservoir. As the area around the existing Cannon reservoir develops, Cannon reservoir can be abandoned and used for water reclamation purposes. pressure regulating stations off the 490 zone lines will provide service to the 392 zone. Specific improvements consist of: a) an 18 inch line from the 33 inch in College Ave to Cannon Drive, b) pressure regulating station to the 392 zone, c) 14 inch in 43 Cannon Drive to a normally closed connection at the proposed interconnect with the City of Oceanside, d) a 16 inch in College from Cannon Drive to the existing 446 line in College at Elm, and e) a pressure regulating station from 490 to 446 zone located on the proposed 16 inch in College. A small portion of the area west of Squires reservoir will require a 680 HGL service zone. Construction of a 16 inch line from the Squires reservoir supply line and a pressure regulating station (1019 to 680) is recommended. This line can also connect to the proposed interconnect with Oceanside in Cannon Drive and continue north from a proposed pressure regulating station (680 to 580) to the Tri-Agency Pipeline, thus providing a secondary source for the 580 zone. Fire Flow Analysis -The peak day plus fire computer run verifies the ability of the distribution system to provide fire flows in various locations through- out the District. Fire demand locations were selected in each major pressure zone where minimum residual pressures were expected to occur. The fire flows were modeled during the peak day condition in two separate runs. The first run included all fire flows except the 5000 gpm fire flow placed in the vicinity of the May Company. The second run included only the 5000 gpm fire demand. The following table summarizes the results of the analysis of both the existing and ultimate systems. 44 Table 13 -Fire Flow Analysis Sheet Residual Pressure Zone Node _#_ Flow Exist Ultimate 330 1886 CB-5 1500 18.4 22.7 255 1994 CB-1 5000 69.2 71. 8 318 156 CB-55 1500 29.5 29.4 384 655 CB-47 1500 42.9 65.2 550 883 CB-36 1500 65.4 60.9 550 630 CB-47 1500 114.4 113.4 580 1561 CB-11 1500 61.8 64.5 446 1891 CB-5 1500 22.9 50.2 700 1014 CB-25 3000 36.5 56.7 The fire flow in the vicinity of Elm reservoir (Node #1886) resulted in the lowest residual pressure for both the existing and ultimate conditions. The location selected is high point in Elm Avenue. The houses in the vicinity are served from a dead end 8 inch 446 zone line in Donna Drive. Residual pressures slightly below 40 psi were experienced in the 330 zone in this vicinity. It is recommended that a 12 inch line be extended in Elm Avenue from the existing 10 inch at Celinda Drive to the existing 8 inch at Donna Drive. Emergency Event -This run verifies the adequacy of the distribution system during periods of no source flows. During the event of total loss of supply from the three aqueduct connections, the District would be totally dependent on its current water storage volume at the time of the disaster. Assuming the public would be notified and demands reduced to average day, the District would have sufficient reservoir capacity for at least 10 days with the exception of the 700 zone. The pressure regulating stations from the 700 zone to the 580 zone and the La Costa 318 zone should be closed. The total ultimate average day 45 demand in the 700 zone is 3. 34 mgd. The Santa Fe II and La Costa "Hi" total reservoir capacity of 15.0 mg would last approximately 4.5 days at average day demands. Approximately 1300 gpm would need to be continuously pumped from the Squires reservoir to the 700 zone. This may be done with a temporary pump located at the proposed pressure sustaining station on the secondary feed to Squires. The remainder of the District would also be supplied from the Squires I reservoir. Water would be pumped from Squires I to Squires II. Total expected average day demand for the District at ultimate build-out is 17,042 gpm. Deducting the 700 zone demand of 2320 gpm results in a required pump rate of 14,722 gpm. The distribution lines in El Camino Real south of the connection of the main line from Squires reservoir would be utilized to deliver water to the southern half of the District. The 550 zone would be reduced to the pressures available from the 490 zone. The computer analysis of this ever. c indicated the pressures in the 580 zone were all above 20 psi. The proposed ultimate reservoir capacities and distribution systems are capable of providing average day demands for 10 consecutive days with no source flows. For this analysis, the following changes were made to ultimate condition computer model: 1) The Demand Multiplication Factor was set at 0. 652 to convert the input data to average day demands. 2) Flow to the reservoirs was assumed at rate equal to the reservoir capacity times 85 percent divided by ten days. The reservoirs are assumed 85 percent full at the beginning of the emergency event. This assumption 46 required a flow rate of 1000 gpm to "D" reservoir. At this flow rate, the available pressure at the reservoir was barely adequate. Any additional flow would begin to cause pressure problems. 3) Flow from the 700 zone to the 550 zone is eliminated. This is accom- plished by closing valves at the intersections of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real, Carrillo Way and El Camino Real, El Fuerte and Faraday. The 700 zone does not have enough reservoir capacity to last 10 days at average day demands without supplemental flows from Squires reservoir. This storage deficiency plus the average flow rate to the La Costa "Lo" reservoir was pumped from the 490 zone. 4) The proposed pump station at Squires reservoir provides source flows for 580 zone. 5) The setting of the pressure regulating station at El Camino Real and the 14 inch south of Tamarack was adjusted from an HGL of 455 feet to a HGL of 481 feet to provide the source flow for the 446 zone. The results of this analysis indicated the distribution system could provide adequate pressure during this emergency event. Additional facilities needed for this condition consist of: a) covering and lining of the Squires I reser- voir, b) construction of connection facilities for a temporary pump at Squires reservoir, c) increasing the capacity of the Squires I to Squires II pump station to a total of 15,000 gpm, and d) construction of a 16 inch line from the existing 16 inch north of Loker Avenue to the temporary pump facilities at Squires reservoir. A portion of the existing 27 inch could be utilized for the required 16 inch, if the pipe class is sufficient. 47 A second emergency event was considered assuming a source was made available at the South Aqueduct connection. The above conditions were repeated with the following exceptions: 1) flow from the 700 zone to the 550 zone was not restricted, 2) a-temporary pump for the 580 zone was not required, and 3) flow to the 490 zone was divided between the PR Station in El Camino and the 16 inch north of Loker. The results of this analysis indicated: 1) a 30 inch line is required in El Fuerte from La Costa Ave to Carrillo, 2) the 16 inch line north of Loker to the 33 inch line from Squires would be adequate, and 3) a pressure sustaining station is required between the 16 inch 700 line and the 33 inch 490 line to regulate the flow to the 490 zone. The results also indicate the 700 zone could provide emergency service to the Squires service area at average day demands. Emergency Interconnections -The District currently maintains one interconnect with the City of Oceanside in El Camino Real. The HGL elevation at this connection is 255 for Carlsbad and 320 for Oceanside. Emergency interconnects with the City of Oceanside are recommended at three additional locations: a) future Marron Road, b) College Ave, and c) Cannon Road. Costs for a metering station were included for each interconnect. The HGL elevations at the Marron interconnect are 511 for Oceanside and 330 for Carlsbad. Pressure at this interconnect could be regulated manually with a plug valve. Construction of a portion of 14 inch 330 line in Marron Road is required for this interconnect. 48 The HGL elevations at the College Avenue interconnect are 511 for Oceanside and either 446 or 580 for Carlsbad. The interconnect could be designed to flow in either direction with pressure regulated manually with a plug valve. Con- struction of a portion of 12 inch line in College Avenue is required for this interconnect. The HGL elevations at the Cannon Road interconnect are 627 for Oceanside and either 680 or 580 for Carlsbad. This interconnect could also be designed for flow in either direction with pressure regulated manually with a plug valve. Extensive development in the Navigation Circle area, prior to construction of the proposed loop across the freeway, could require an interconnect with Olivenhain Water District for additional flows for fire protection. This connection should include a metering station and utilize a pressure regulating station, set to operate in a stand-by mode. Extended Period Simulation -This run demonstrates the expected reservoir activity during a peak day event. The demand multiplication factors shown in Figure 4 -Design Peak Day Demand Curve were used for this simulation. Flow rates to the reservoirs were controlled using pressure sustaining valves at the reservoirs. Pressure settings were established in the peak day run to provide a zero net flow with the reservoirs at three-quarters full. Figures 6 through 9 graphically represent the results of this analysis. The results indicate each reservoir fills during the peak day event. 49 z 0 I-~ ~ _j w 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 6 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 10 14 255 ZONE 18 TIME + "E" Figcre 6- 22 26 ◊ ELM 30 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 318 AND 3~ ZONES 370 360 350 z 0 .... <( 340 ~ _J . w 330 320 310 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 TIME □ ELLERY + LA. COSTA "LO" ii"igure l z 0 f= ~ ~ ..J w 520 510 500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 6 □ TAP CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 384, 446 AND 490 ZONES 10 14 18 22 26 30 TIME + SQUIRES ◊ TWIN "D" l?igure 8 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 700 ZONE 730 728 726 724 722 720 718 z 0 I-716 <{ ~ 714 ..J w 712 710 708 706 704 702 700 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 TIME D LA. COSTA "HI" + Se..NTE FE 11 Cost Estimates General -Cost estimates for the required existing and ultimate improvements are calculated using estimated unit prices per linear foot of pipe and estimated lump sum prices for special appurtenances such as pump stations and pressure regulating stations. The construction cost for the grading, covering and lining of Squires I reservoir was estimated at 12 cents per gallon. The costs included represent total construction costs, and do not include engineering fees or contingencies. Engineering fees and contingencies are added at a lump sum of 25% of the total construction cost. The costs are represented in today's dollars and correspond to the January 1990 Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index of 4,672. The connection fees recommended in this report should be adjusted to the current ENR Cost Index on an annual basis. Calculation of Estimated Costs The estimated unit price used for the construction of water line improvements are shown in the following table. The construction costs associated with these unit prices include all excavation, materials, labor, backfill, testing, street repair and appurtenances necessary for installation of the complete water line project. Since all water lines are to be constructed in either existing or future rights-of-way, no costs are included for land acquisition. 54 Table 14 -Water Line Unit Prices Diameter .linl 12 14 16 24 30 33 36 42 Unit Cost ($/ft) 115 130 150 200 215 230 250 285 The lump sum cost used for pressure regulating stations is based on the cost of recent projects completed for neighboring cities. The estimated construction cost of $250,000 includes construction of a concrete vault located within the right-of-way, pressure regulating valve, all necessary piping and appurtenances, telemetry, electrical, landscaping and site grading. Since the stations are assumed to be located within the street rights-of-way, no additional cost was assumed for land acquisition. The construction cost for the expansion of the existing pump station at Squires reservoir was estimated at $300 per gpm of additional required capacity. This cost includes all construction costs necessary for a complete operating pump station. Since the existing pump station is located at the Squires reservoir on District property, no additional cost was assumed for land acquisition. The expansion of this pump station assumes an existing capacity of 10,000 gpm and a required additional capacity of 5000 gpm. Construction cost for connection facilities for a temporary pump at the Squires secondary feed are included in the cost of the pressure regulating station. 55 Summary of Estimated Costs -The following table swnmarizes the estimated cost for the improvements the District needs to construct for the existing and ultimate conditions. Item numbers shown in this table correspond to the items listed in the Summary of Findings and Recommendations. improvements are not shown. 56 Costs for Developer Table 15 -~ater Facilities Cost Sl.lllll8ry Unit Total Dia Cost Length Cost General Fixed Asset Capital 1 inHSlft2 {ft2 {$2 Fund Reelacement I!!J2rovements New Lines Reguired for Existing Condition: 1 El Camino Real C 10) 16 150 2,800 420,000 280,000 140,000 2 Squires Reservoir to El Camino Real (27) 33 230 8,500 1,955,000 1,866,136 88,864 Total -All Existing Improvements 2,375,000 0 2,146, 136 228,864 New Lines R~uired for Ultimate Condition: 1 Jefferson Street (Pico to May Co.) 12 115 1,860 213,900 213,900 2 Elm Ave (Celinda Or -Ooma Dr) 12 115 1,600 184,000 184,000 3a Marron Rd (Ave de Anita· PR Station) 14 130 5,450 708,500 708,500 Pressure Regulating Station (446 -330) 250,000 250,000 Pressure Regulating Station (330 -255) 250,000 250,000 3b Marron Rd CPR Station to Oside connection) 14 130 3,000 390,000 390,000 0 0 Interconnect with Oceanside 150,000 150,000 0 0 4 College (North to Oside) 14 130 2,000 260,000 260,000 0 0 Interconnect with Oceanside 150,000 150,000 0 0 5 College Avenue (Cannon to TAP area) 16 150 5,560 834,000 834,000 Pressure Regulating Station (490 -446) 250,000 250,000 6a Cannon Rd (Car Country Dr to El Camino Real) 14 130 10,100 1,313,000 1,313,000 Pressure Regulating Station (318 -255) 250,000 250,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 6b Cannon Rd (El Camino Real to College) 14 130 3,800 494,000 494,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 6c Cannon Rd (College to Oside) 12 115 5,950 684,250 684,250 Pressure Regulating Station (680 · 490) 250,000 250,000 Interconnect with Oceanside 150,000 150,000 0 0 7 Camino Hills at Faraday 14 130 750 97,500 97,500 Pressure Regulating Station (550 · 430) 250,000 250,000 57 Table 15 -Water Facilities Cost Sllllllary -continued Unit Total Dia Cost Length Cost General Fixed Asset Capital linHSlft2 lft2 iS2 Fund Reelacement l!!J2rovements 8 El Camino Real at Cannon Pressure Regulating Station (490 -392) 250,000 250,000 9 580 zone Secondary Supply Line 16 150 1,750 262,500 262,500 Pressure Sustaining Station (680) 250,000 250,000 10 680 zone Supply Line 16 150 5,700 855,000 855,000 Pressure sustaining Station (680) 250,000 250,000 11 College (33 inch to Cannon) 18 175 3,850 673,750 673,750 12 EL Camino Real at College 430 zone 14 130 1,140 148,200 148,200 Pressure Regulating Station (550 -430) 250,000 250,000 13a El Fuerte Ave (N of Loker to Faraday) 16 150 2,300 345,000 345,000 Pressure Sustaining Station (700) 250,000 250,000 13b EL Fuerte Ave (Faraday to Squires) 16 150 8,800 1,320,000 1,320,000 14 Faraday (EL Fuerte -Orion Way) 12 115 4,850 557,750 557,750 Pressure Regulating Station (700 -550) 250,000 250,000 15 Palomar Airport North of Owens 12 115 625 71,875 71,875 16 Carrillo Way (El Camino Real -11011 Reservoir) 24 200 5,550 1,110,000 1,110,000 17 South of Camino Vida Roble (550 zone) 12 115 1,000 115,000 115,000 18 Carrillo Way ("D" Reservoir to exist 1011) 12 115 2,800 322,000 322,000 19 Relocate Pressure Regulating Station 250,000 250,000 20 EL Camino Real south of Camino Vida Roble 16 150 1,300 195,000 195,000 21 Carrillo Way (El Fuerte -EL Camino Real) 30 215 7,250 1,558,750 1,558,750 Pressure Regulating Station (700 -550) 250,000 250,000 22 El Fuerte (Carrillo -Palomar Airport Rd) 24 200 4, 100 820,000 820,000 23 El Fuerte (Alga to Carrillo Way) 30 215 5,050 1,085,750 1,085,750 Pressure Regulating Station 250,000 250,000 58 Table 15 -~ater Facilities Cost SlnlllBry -continued Unit Total Dia Cost Length Cost General Fixed Asset Capital 'inHSLft2 'ft2 ,s2 Fund Reelaceinent l!!!!roveinents 24 Poinsettia (Paseo d Norte to Carlsbad Blvd) 12 115 3,150 362,250 362,250 25 Kelly Dr ("E" Reservoir -Cannon) 12 115 4,000 460,000 460,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 26 Faraday (Existing 1211 -Cannon Rd) 12 115 4,000 460,000 460,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 27 E" Reservoir to Car Country 12 115 2,400 276,000 276,000 28 Carlsbad Blvd (Manzano to Ave Encinas) (6) 10 110 2,500 275,000 150,000 125,000 29 Carlsbad Blvd (south of Palomar Airport Rd) 10 110 2,500 275,000 275,000 Pressure Regulating Station (318 -255) 250,000 250,000 30 East of "E" Reservoir replaceinent ( 16) 16 150 2,850 427,500 427,500 0 31 Kelly Dr (Camino De Las Ondas to 1611) 12 115 4,400 506,000 506,000 Kelly Dr (1611 to "E" Reservoir) 16 150 3,150 4n,5oo 472,500 32 College Ave (Poinsettia -Palomar Airport Rd) 18 175 5,650 988,750 988,750 33 11D" Reservoir to Palomar Oaks 16 150 3,300 495,000 495,000 34 550 zone relocate to Poinsettia (12) 16 150 2,700 405,000 310,500 94,500 C 12) 12 115 1,000 115,000 115,000 0 35 384 zone relocate to Poinsettia C 18) 24 200 2,700 540,000 472,500 67,500 ( 18) 18 175 1,000 175,000 175,000 0 16 150 550 82,500 82,500 36 College ROW (Alga south to Batiquitos) 14 130 2,800 364,000 364,000 12 115 1,600 184,000 184,000 8 100 2,500 250,000 250,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 Pressure Regulating Station (384 -318) 250,000 250,000 37 Batiquitos Drive 318 zone loop 14 130 4,500 585,000 585,000 8 100 500 50,000 50,000 59 Table 15 -~ater Facilities Cost Sllffllllry -continued Unit Total Dia Cost Length Cost General Fixed Asset Capital {inHSlfq {ft2 ,s2 Fund Reelacement l!!llrovements 38 Freeway Crossing the Navigation Circle 16 150 1,250 187,500 187,500 12 300 1,350 405,000 405,000 Subtotal -New Lines Required for Ultimate Condition: 28,910,725 1,100,000 1,650,500 26,160,225 $/gal MG Total or or Cost General Fixed Asset Capital Sl!!i!!! !II!!! ,s2 Fund Reelacement l!!llrovements Reservoir l1rprovements 1a 11011 Reservoir (8.5 mg -Replaces Exist 2.5 mg) 0.50 8.5 4,250,000 1,250,000 3,000,000 1b 11011 Reservoir 0.50 8.5 4,250,000 4,250,000 2 Line and Cover Squires Reservoir (Existing -112 mg) 0.12 193 23,160,000 13,440,000 0 9,720,000 3 Increase Squires P~ Station to 15,000 gpm 300 5,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Subtotal Reservoir l1rprovements 33,160,000 13,440,000 1,250,000 18,470,000 Subtotal -Construction Cost 64,445,725 14,540,000 5,046,636 44,859,089 Subtotal -Engineering and Contingencies at 25% 16,111,431 3,635,000 1,261,659 11,214,n2 Total -All l1rprovements 80,557,156 18,175,000 6,308,295 56,073,861 Less Current Funds Available (11,230,000) (3,230,000) (8,000,000) Total Funds Required 69,327,156 18,175,000 3,078,295 48,073,861 60 Connection Fees • Recommended connection fees are calculated by dividing the total cost of the water facilities required for the ultimate condition by the expected increase in demand. The following table summarizes the values used to determine the recommended -connection fee. Table 16 -Connection Fee Calculation Existing Average Day Flow 10,159 gpm Ultimate Average Day Flow 17,042 gpm Total Cost for Ultimate Facilities $48,073,861 Flow Increase from Existing to Ultimate 6,883 gpm Ultimate Cost per Average Day Flow $6,984 per gpm Assuming a typical household would use approximately 0.5 acre feet of water on an annual basis, the average daily demand for one equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) would equal 0.3 gpm. The cost of the proposed improvements per EDU could be determined by multiplying 0.3 gpm per EDU times ultimate cost per average day flow of $6,984 per gpm. Thus, the recommended connection fee is determined to be $2,095 per EDU. 61 Phasing Considerations The proposed capital improvement projects were prioritized based on the order of development as indicated by the District. Complete build out of the District is assumed to occur in 20 years. This would project a build out rate of approximately 1100 EDU connection per year. Based on this build out rate and the recommended connection fee, Table 17 shows the projected cumulative income available for capital improvements. Table 18 shows the prioritized list of improvements and their cumulative costs. The scheduled completion dates shown on Table 18 are based on the availability of funds as indicated in Table 17. This phasing is an estimate based on anticipated development and should be updated periodically. The actual development within the District should be added to the distribution system model on an annual bases. Project phasing should also be review on an annual bases using the updated model and revised development projections. 62 Table 17 -Projected Capital Improvement Income Beginning Ending Year Year Year Balance Income Balance 1990 8,000,000 2,400,000 10,400,000 1991 10,400,000 2,400,000 12,800,000 1992 12,800,000 2,400,000 15,200,000 1993 15,200,000 2,400,000 17,600,000 1994 17,600,000 2,400,000 20,000,000 1995 20,000,000 2,400,000 22,400,000 1996 22,400,000 2,400,000 24,800,000 1997 24,800,000 2,400,000 27,200,000 1998 27,200,000 2,400,000 29,600,000 1999 29,600,000 2,400,000 32,000,000 2000 32,000,000 2,400,000 34,400,000 2001 34,400,000 2,400,000 36,800,000 2002 36,800,000 2,400,000 39,200,000 2003 39,200,000 2,400,000 41,600,000 2004 41,600,000 2,400,000 44,000,000 2005 44,000,000 2,400,000 46,400,000 2006 46,400,000 2,400,000 48,800,000 2007 48,800,000 2,400,000 51,200,000 2008 51,200,000 2,400,000 53,600,000 2009 53,600,000 2,473,861 56,073,861 2010 56,073,861 63 Table 18 -Proposed Phasing Clffl.llative General Fixed Asset Capital Capital Rank Item Description Fund Replacement lnprovements lnprovements 1 E1 El Camino Real 0 350,000 175,000 175,000 2 R1a 11011 Reservoir (8.5 mg -Replaces Exist 2.5 mg 0 1,562,500 3,750,000 3,925,000 3 20 El Camino Real south of Camino Vida Roble 0 0 243,750 4,168,750 1990 4 E2 Squires Reservoir to El Camino Real 0 2,332,670 111,080 4,279,830 1991 5 R2 Line and Cover Squires Reservoir (Existing -16,800,000 0 12,150,000 16,429,830 6 1 Jefferson Street (Pico to May Co.) 0 0 267,375 16,697,205 7 2 Elm Ave (Celinda Or -Donna Dr) 0 0 230,000 16,927,205 8 34 550 zone relocate to Poinsettia 0 531,875 118,125 17,045,330 9 35 384 zone relocate to Poinsettia 0 809,375 187,500 17,232,830 1993 10 18 Carrillo IJay (11011 Reservoir to exist 1011) 0 0 402,500 17,635,330 11 17 South of Camino Vida Roble (550 zone) 0 0 143,750 17,779,080 12 15 Palomar Airport North of Owens 0 0 89,844 17,868,924 13 28 Carlsbad Blvd (Manzano to Ave Encinas) 0 187,500 156,250 18,025,174 14 29 Carlsbad Blvd (south of Palomar Airport Rd) 0 0 656,250 18,681,424 15 27 E" Reservoir to Car Country 0 0 345,000 19,026,424 1994 16 6.1 Cannon Rd (Car Country Dr to El Camino Real) 0 0 2,266,250 21,292,674 17 26 Faraday (Existing 1211 -Cannon Rd) 0 0 887,500 22, 180, 174 1995 18 25 Kelly Or <"E" Reservoir -Cannon) 0 0 887,500 23,067,674 19 11 College (33 inch to Cannon) 0 0 842,188 23,909,861 20 6.2 Cannon Rd (El Camino Real to College) 0 0 930,000 24,839,861 21 12 El Camino Real at College 430 zone 0 0 497,750 25,337,611 22 7 Camino Hills at Faraday 0 0 434,375 25,n1,986 23 32 College Ave (Poinsettia -Palomar Airport Rd) 0 0 1,235,938 27,007,924 24 30 East of "E" Reservoir replacement 0 534,375 0 27,007,924 25 33 11011 Reservoir to Palomar Oaks 0 0 618,750 27,626,674 26 R1b 11011 Reservoir 8.5 mg 0 0 5,312,500 32,939,174 27 6.3 Cannon Rd (College to Oside) 187,500 0 1,167,813 34,106,986 2000 64 Table 18 -Proposed Phasing -continued Cuwlative General Fixed Asset Capital Capital Rank Item Description Fund Replacement lnprovements lnprovements 28 8 Pressure Regulating Station (490 -392) 0 0 312,500 34,419,486 29 5 College Avenue (Camon to TAP area) 0 0 ~,355,000 35,774,486 30 4 College (North to Oside) 512,500 0 0 35,774,486 31 36 College ROW (Alga south to Batiquitos) 0 0 1,622,500 37,396,986 32 37 Batiquitos Drive 318 zone loop 0 0 793,750 38,190,736 33 38 Freeway Crossing the Navigation Circle 0 0 740,625 38,931,361 34 24 Poinsettia (Paseo d Norte to Carlsbad Blvd) 0 0 452,813 39,384,174 35 16 Carrillo Way (El Camino Real -11011 Reservoir) 0 0 1,387,500 40,771,674 36 23 El Fuerte (Alga to Carrillo Way) 0 0 1,669,688 42,441,361 37 21 Carrillo Way (El Fuerte -El Camino Real) 0 0 2,260,938 44,702,299 38 31 Kelly Dr (Camino De Las Ondas to 1611) 0 0 1,223,125 45,925,424 39 19 Relocate Pressure Regulating Station 0 0 312,500 46,237,924 2005 40 13.1 El Fuerte Ave (N of Loker -Faraday) 0 0 743,750 46,981,674 41 14 Faraday (El Fuerte -Orion Way) 0 0 1,009,688 47,991,361 42 10 680 zone Supply Line 0 0 1,381,250 49,372,611 43 9 580 zone Secondary Supply Line 0 0 640,625 50,013,236 44 R3 Increase Squires P1.1113 Station to 15,000 gpm 0 0 1,875,000 51,888,236 45 22 El Fuerte (Carrillo -Palomar Airport Rd) 0 0 1,025,000 52,913,236 46 13.2 El Fuerte Ave (Faraday to Squires) 0 0 1,650,000 54,563,236 47 3.1 Marron Rd (Ave de Anita -PR Station) 0 0 1,510,625 56,073,861 48 3.2 Marron Rd (PR Station to Oside) 675,000 0 0 56,073,861 2010 Total -All l111)rovements 18,175,000 6,308,295 56,073,861 This phasing is based on estimates of when and where future development may occur. Actual project scheduling will depend on actual development and should be reviewed annually and adjusted to match demands current at that time. 65 HWY IB ~ [ill ~~ u ms u [p u.\ 1L \~VJ t~~ u~[m uDu~uG°Jul~[lY "----.. --, ~•-·--· -------~VJ &u~~J ~~ iPr/t"'""'~c;, ~,,r;@m\ ,~ " 0 r-l (_ 1::--v' ./\ .) I~ . l E,-:\tf;l ~~ ~:il li£oo@©@~J,ib©0 @'fr'Gll?CiJGll~@, Gi:~~Olt'lGl§!!i1@, Dlt'l@, ~NJ[] ~w ~tc~W4?f::'l'/,1/,;:;;:::p½{f%'{1'.t"M½Y:f~;7ff§'.i¥@P;'.'·%W~if%071?'J%7401 11770 Bernardo Pl,na Court, Suite 213, San Diego, CA 92128 Telephone: (619) 187-7877 1-16-'.}0 ,ti \ T/ _r .. ' 1 ~ t}-, G) ___ _ \ _ _r: - 8 ~ ' 'F"'"__ 1_ : -,.T" -,t:; ~ KYLI NE ( 1. MG) . ~~ fff& f:fffi A,' ~@¼~~ ~-' i I 11--+-==-----------------, ~~w (€:) fil ~. , '0,,, '<-~~ t) @ ~~-,ffj« -----t ~"---1,f--=-f"~------~___:,'\-:-~--"'-\!.,,=-------/-----~ =--------,.L---\_,----r--1-~? t--------------t-~-----------~ "E" (1.5 MG) '\(: @ 1-2·· @ ~ '◄ J\ ~31 · ® ~,;~,,~OR~T=='---R()_Ao ___ ~-(_ '?--?-L. , ---------------SA~JTA FE II (9.0 MG) 1~~ f: ----------# ~ ~) 1,,<-✓ ,;-.-t-,\-: ::;;;::----'<c-------------~. f--il, ----l.., \c----t----rr~~ ---------11,~,~0 ________ \,'1,.,,,";,c--,--t-@-::c7;;::-g--j-''~===-------"-" ___ , _ €:'1 ___ 1-"'-"'fo·l·' ______ _ r- \ \ I \\ . \ I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ ', \@ ·_ ® -' _________ [__,,,' ~. -- 1 --- N ' ~ (o -__y,~:-~J ~ E~ @) __ J--=:c-7, 1;) ·. , 2f' . &,Jj~@tl ~. LA COSTA H CH COSTA ~&[filu~rnJ rP[L&~J PRESSURE ZONES ........,,._. £5-5 430 700 8-30 ~ 316 ~ 3.34) 34'3 B20 1013 ___,_ -3d4 Jn H6 680 ............. 430 .............., ,::,_50 5 'l .5 ~80 ~) RECC~,MENDED 1!,IPRO\tF..MENT'S-~ 1 Dl'STPICT RESP0NS181UTi RE.QUIR.ED FOR ULTIMATE CONDITION <9PECC.MMENCED ,t...iPRO\l[!,iENlS- 2 Dl':)TRICT RfSP0NSt81LJTi RE'2L1\RED FOR EXISTING GONDITI0N PRQJE.CT SCHEDULE ~ 1990 -1995 W//l 'z1/_Ld 1 ·;96 -2000 ~ 2001 -20<)5 [%':l 20C6 -2010 BASE MAP LFGEND AREA A TTR!BIJ IE FFEFEF] 1 -NOOE NIJ1.iBER AREA iS AS'$I(,NE0 l -10fAL PJ<EA (ACR£S) 3 -EX15TiNG LAND L1SE 1--ULTl!.AAlE L.At>!D IJSE 5 -PE.RU.NT 0f C-E:VELOFED LAND 6 -PE.RC.ENT OF UL TI!..IA TE OE'./ELOPE_D LAl~D NOOE Af1RIB\J1E EB 7 -NOC-E NIJMBE.R 8 -ELEVATION P:PE A TlRiGIJ TE Cf'J:J 11 '3 -LENGlli OF PIF"E (1NCHES) 10 -PIPE NL I..IBE:..R 11 -DIA1...iE1ER OF PIPE (FEET) F'RE.SSIJRE REGULA llNG STA 110N ~ 12 13 ·"'?: 12 -F'RESSURE SETTING (HGL) ~ 13 -Z0t,E L-·P SffiEA~ OF F"RESSURE Q REDUCING STA T10N OR: ZGNE DO/IN SrREMA 1;-/' OF PRESSLRE SIJSfA1NING STAll(!N )- '%.: 00 '0 --~ 9c✓• 'I.) '-(1 ,>, - .. - -.. - • .. .. --- - - -.. - - -.. ... --.. - - --- CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRIC'r MASTER PLAN PROPOSAL CMWD Project No. 89-105 JUNE 1. 1989 MacDONALD-STEPHENS ENGINEERS. INC. 11770 Bernardo Plaza Court. Suite 213 San Diego. CA 92128 (619) 487-7877 .. • • • • -.. .. • • - - .. - -.. ... --- - MacDonald-Stephens, Engineers, Inc . A CIVIL ENGINEERING COMPANY June 1, 1989 Mr. Robert J. Greaney, P.E. Carlsbad Municipal Water District 5950 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Master Plan -CMWD Project No. 89-105 Dear Bob: MacDONALD-STEPHENS, ENGINEERS, INC. is pleased to submit this proposal to provide professional engineering services in response to your May 16, 1989 request • MSE proposes to provide Carlsbad Municipal Water District with a Master Plan of their water supply and distribution system. The Master Plan will identify the improvements required for u1 tima te development of the District in accordance with the City's current Zoning Plan. The Master Plan will be prepared in such a manner as to be easily up-dated and adjusted for changing conditions. The University of Kentucky Pipe Network Analysis Programs, AutoCAD and Symphony Spreadsheet software will be utilized in the preparation of this Master Plan. The attached proposal is divided into following five sections. Section 1 -Schedule of Tasks Section 2 -Scope of Work Section 3 -Computer Applications Section 4 -Manhour Projections, Task Budget and Timing Section 5 -Project Staff It cannot be over emphasized that the key to the Master Plan proposed by MSE will be its ability to be easily updated for changing conditions. This Master Plan is designed to be a dynamic tool for the District. Section 3 of this proposal explains how we intend to utilize the capabilities of your current software and hardware to automatically produce database files of the information necessary for the hydraulic analysis of the District's water distribution system. Specific examples of the product we intend to provide will be available for review at the interview • 11770 Bernardo Plaza Court, Suite 213, San Diego, California 92128 (619) 487-7877 ------ - • - - .. -------.. ------- Mr. Robert J. Greaney. P.E. Carlsbad Municipal Water District June 1, 1989 Page 2 We appreciate the opportunity to offer our services for this project. We strongly feel that MSE's resources. together with our commitment to provide the best engineering product possible, is the right combination to meet the needs of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. We look forward to working with you and your staff on this important project. Sincerely. MacDONALD-STEPHENS, ENGINEER, INC. Robert W. Coates Regional Manager ... - .. .. .. .. -.. .. .. -.. .. .. -- 111111 - - -- ---- SECTION 1 -SCHEDULE OF TASKS The Master Plan is divided into following five major tasks: I. II. III. IV. v . MODEL EXISTING SYSTEM CALIBRATE MODEL SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR ULTIMATE DEMANDS SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR EXISTING DEMANDS PREPARE FINAL MASTER PLAN REPORT The following is a detailed explanation of the work involved in each task: I. MODEL EXISTING SYSTEM 1) Obtain Base Maps of Existing System. The District shall provide copies of all completed base maps in AutoCAD format. 2) Research District files for pipe network information not on currently on base maps • 3) Obtain Aerials of City with Topographic information included • 4) Identify land uses and prepare Master Plan Data AutoCAD Layers. 5) Meet with District operation personnel to determine operation characteristics of existing system; ie; pressure zones, reservoirs. pressure reducing valves and settings. pressure sustaining valves and settings. pumped zones; pump characteristics; source agreements, connection points, supply agreements with adjacent cities, reservoir level vs time information. The District shall furnish peak day and average yearly usage figures over the last five years • 6) Assign average daily flow demands to nodes. Flow demands will be assigned by land classification on an acreage basis, taking into account the city's slope requirements, i.e •• no credit for slopes greater than 40%, 50% credit for slopes between 25 to 40%. Land classifications will be as designated on the City's current Zoning Plan. 7) Identify all large users by reviewing usages for all meters 3 inches and above. These meters will be identified on the Master Plan Data Layer. 8) Adjust flow demand assumptions to match actual District usages. 9) Input data and prepare KYPIPE model of the existing system. II. CALIBRATE MODEL 1) Obtain fire department flow tests. 2) Utilizing calibration information, adjust pipe friction coefficients. 3) Set peaking factors based an actual usages. • • .. -... - • -.. .. -- -.. .. .. - .. ---------- --- III. SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR ULTIMATE DEMANDS 1) Solve existing system using ultimate demands (i.e., 100% build-out of all developable areas) as per the City's current Zoning Plan and the City's minimum fire flow requirements • 2) Determine required storage for ultimate system, using peak day operational demand plus three times the total average day demand plus a 10 hour fire flow at 5000 gpm for each zone. Reservoir operation will be verified using 24 hour extended period simulation. 3) Locate reservoir sites required for ultimate build-out • 4) Show flow and HGL results of hydraulic analysis on 24 by 36 inch computer plot for each zone. 5) Prepare overall District map at a scale of 1" = 1000' showing all required improvements. IV. SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR EXISTING DEMANDS 1) Determine the deficiencies in the existing system. 2) For each zone, show deficient flow and HGL results of hydraulic analysis on 24 by 36 inch computer plot • 3) For each zone, show flow and HGL results of hydraulic analysis replacing deficient lines with ultimate lines on 24 by 36 inch computer plot • 4) Prepare overall District map at a scale of 1" = 1000' showing all required improvements. • -.. - .. .. .. -.. -.. .. .. - .. ... ------------ V. PREPARE FINAL MASTER PLAN REPORT 1) Prepare final Master Plan report including following the topics of discussion: Summary of Findings and Recommendations Distribution System Reservoirs Land Use General Demand Assumption Water Distribution System General System Calibration Minimum Distribution Parameters Water Storage System General System Calibration Minimum Storage Parameters Site Investigation Cost Estimates General Calculation of Estimated Costs Summary of Estimated Costs Connection Fees 2) Prepare program documentation showing a) use of AutoLSP programs for inserting and updating "AREA". ''NODE" and "PIPE" attributes; b) use of ATTEXT command to generate database files; and c) use of Symphony macros to import database files and generate the summary reports. MSE will also provide all Pipe Network Analysis Programs. complete with diskettes. documentation and licensing agreements. 3) Provide training for specialized software and spreadsheets developed specifically for this project. 4) MSE will hold periodic meetings to discuss project status and preliminary findings. - • ... • - --- --- • .. .. .. - ---- -- ------- SECTION 2 -SCOPE OF WORK MSE will furnish the following items upon completion of the project: 1) Required water supply and distribution improvements. listed in order of priority from those improvements required for the current existing level of development through those required for ultimate development of the District. This information will be described in the report and shown on a separate overall District map at a scale of 1"=1000' for both the existing and ultimate required improvements. 2) Identify replacement lines which may be utilized for non-potable water distribution. This information will be listed in detail in the report and shown on a separate overall District Map at scale of 1"=1000'. 3) Estimated construction cost of the required improvements. adjusted to the current Engineering News Record Cost Index. This information will be summarized in a Symphony spreadsheet. The spreadsheet will contain a database of unit pipe cost by size. The pipe length. size and unit cost can be easily changed. added or deleted and new totals automatically obtained. Costs will be summarized for both existing and ultimate improvements • 4) Recommended water connection fees necessary to fund the cost of the improvements required for future development. This information will be detailed in the report and summarized in a Symphony spreadsheet which will calculate the required connection fees based on the costs of the ultimate improvements and the remaining acreage to be developed. Connection fees will be based on the acreage. land use and flow rates. i.e •• the average daily flow rates for which the improvements were sized ($ per gpd of average daily demand). 5) AutoCAD Master Plan Data Layer for each base map as described in Section 3 -Computer Applications. For base maps not yet completed. the AutoCAD layer shall be drawn to overlay the aerial of the area to be included in the future base map. The District shall provide a copy of all base maps completed on diskettes in AutoCAD format. MSE shall prepare and add the Master Plan data layer to the diskette and provide the District with the source file and vellum plot for each of the 54 base maps. 6) Overall system map for each pressure zone. University of Kentucky PIPEPLOT program. The a 24" by 36" vellum sheet. generated and plotted by plots will be presented on 9) All University of Kentucky Pipe Network Analysis software used in the Master Plan licensed in the District's name and all Symphony data files. 10) Provide training and documentation of all specialized software developed for this Master Plan. including; University of Kentucky Pipe Network Analysis Programs. AutoLSP programs and Symphony spreadsheets macros. Up to three District personnel will be trained in he use of the software used specifically for the Master Plan. Training will include three -four hour sessions of instruction and a total of eight hours of phone support. .. .. .. .. - -.. - -.. -.. - .. ----- --- --- SECTION 3 -COMPUTER APPLICATIONS All information required for the Pipe Network Analysis Programs will be contained on the AutoCAD base maps in a Master Plan Data Layer. This information will be automatically transferred to database files for conversion to input data for the Pipe Network Analysis Programs. Information used to determine specific demands at each node will be contained in an "AREA" attribute. This attribute will contain the Node Number Supplying the Area, Land Use Classification, Area in acres and the Percent Developed. On each of the 54 base maps, the total area of each map will be assigned to various nodes. Of the area assigned to each node, a polyline will be constructed around each separate land use and the "AREA" attribute inserted. The ATTEXT AutoCAD command will create a database file of all "AREA" attributes for each base map. This database file will be imported into Symphony and sorted by Node Number and Land Use Classification. Node numbers will be assigned such that pressure zones are group by thousands. The Symphony file will contain the average daily demand for each land use classification in gpm per acre. The product of the Area, Land Use Classification Demand and Percent Developed will be totaled for each node. The result will be the existing average daily demand for each node. Ultimate average daily demand will be obtain by setting the percent developed to 100%. Information used to define node data will be contained in a "NODE" attribute. This attribute will contain the Node Number and Natural Ground Elevation at the node. The attribute will be inserted at the actual pipe junction. The ATTEXT AutoCAD command will generate a data file containing this information plus the coordinates of the insertion point, i.e., the actual pipe junction. These coordinates will be on the base map coordinate system and used as input data to the PIPEPLOT program • Information used to define pipe data will be contained in a "PIPE" attribute. This attribute will contain the Pipe Number, Length and Size. Each pipe will be represented as a polyline to automatically obtain its length. Pipe numbers will also be group by thousands corresponding to the different pressure zones • The ATTEXT AutoCAD command will generate a pipe database file containing this information. This database will be used to organize input data for the Pipe Network Analysis Programs. This database could have other uses beneficial to the District. If desired the attribute could contain information on line type and date of construction. This data could be sorted by date, oldest to newest, for maintenance and replacement scheduling. Totals by line sizes and type could be easily obtained. Once the data is input, summary reports, to the Districts specification, can be generated. The effects of changing specific data can be easily observed. .. .. - - - .. --- -.. -.. - ---- -------- --- SECTION 4 -MANHOUR PROJECTIONS. TASK BUDGET AND TIMING The Manhour Projection Table on the following page is a detailed listing of the projected m.anhour requirements for each task. These projections and the attached hourly rate schedule were used to determine the proposed budget. The following is a summary of the MSE's proposed budget for this project: I. II. III. IV. v • MODEL EXISTING SYSTEM ••••••••••• CALIBRATE MODEL • • • • • • • • • • • • • • SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR ULTIMATE DEMANDS SOLVE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR EXISTING DEMANDS PREPARE FINAL MASTER PLAN REPORT TOTAL BUDGET $37.590 • •• $1.640 • $7 .560 • • • $4. 480 $18.480 $69.750 The attached Project Schedule is a bar chart indicating submittal of the final Master Plan Report in 18 weeks after receiving authorization to proceed. Assuming a start date of June 27th. the final report would be submitted October 31. 1989. ... ... MAtfflJR PROJECTION TABLE • -Bob Wally Mark Coates Grabbe Schmidt -..,. SUPERVISING STAFF DRAFTS-SUPPORT MISC PRINCIPAL ENGINEER I ENGINEER I PERSON SERVICES EXPENSES TOTAL -------------============-----------=========--------------============:========== -$90 $70 $50 $40 $30 • I. MODEL EXISTING SYSTEMS ·• 1. Obtain Base Maps 2 $1(1(1 2. Research District Files 8 16 $1,360 • 3. Obtain Aerials 2 ·,so S15(1 4. Prepare MP Data Layer (54 Sheets} 4 108 432 $29,520 11 5. Obtair, Operation Infor111ation 4 16 $1,480 6. Assign Fl0111 Rates 4 8 $32(} .. 7. Identify Large Users 2 8 $740 ... 8. Adjust Fl0111 Deltand Asswaptions 2 8 $740 9. Prepare Hydraulic Analysis Model 2 20 2(1 $2,580 • • 18 176 472 0 0 $50 $37,590 -II. CALIBRATE MODEL 1. Obtain Fl0111 Tests 2 $100 .. •j Collpute Adjustllent Factors 16 $890 "-• 3. Set Peaking Factors 8 $650 • -2 8 18 0 0 $0 $1,640 .. III. SOLVE SYSTEM FOR lLTIMATE DEJIIANDS l. Solve Hydraulic Analysis Model .::, 24 20 $2,860 .. -2. Detel"lline Storage Requireaents -::, 8 $740 .. .. 3. Locate Reservoir Sites 2 2(1 $!, 580 4. Plot Results 4 $200 -5. Prepare Overall District Map 4 4 40 $10(1 $2,180 --6 55 28 40 0 $100 t7,560 ,. IV. SCX.VE SYSTEM FOR EXISTil'E DEMANDS -1. Determine Deficiencies 16 1(1 st,800 2. Plot Results Showing Deficiencies 5 $250 -3. Plot Results as Solved s $~! "· ... Prepare Overall District Map 4 4 40 $100 $2,180 .. 2 20 24 '10 0 $100 $4,480 .. V. PREPARE FINAL MASTER PLAN REPORT -1. Prepare Final Report 4 &O 20 50 1200 $8,960 2. Prograa Docuaentation 4 15 8 16 $1,200 SJ,560 • 3 • Training 20 $1,400 4. Status Meetings & Presentation 24 24 24 $4,560 .. 32 140 i:'.8 0 100 $1,400 $18,480 • =----------------===========================--··-------=====-======================= -60 400 570 80 100 $1,650 $69,750 • - " " I " .... I ' ... I .. .. I. MODEL EXISTING SYSTEMS 1. Obtair, Base Maps 2. Research District Files 3. Obtain Aerials -4. Prepare MP Data Layer <~ Sheets) 5, Obtair, Operatior, Inforisation 6. Assign FION Rates 7. Identify Large Users 8. Adjust Flow Deund Asst111ptions 9. Prepare Hydraulic Analysis Model I I. Cil.IBRATE fl!ODEL 1. Obtain Flow Tests 2. Compute Adjust.ent Factors 3. Set Peaking Factors III. Sil.VE SVSIDI FOR ll.TIMATE DEMANDS 1, Solve Hydraulic Analysis Model 2. Detert1ine Storage Require11ents 3. Locate Reservoir Sites -4. Plot Results 5. Prepare Overall District Map IV. SOLVE SYSTEM FOR EXISTit«; DEMANDS 1. Detmaine Deficiencies 2. Plot Results Sh01ting Deficiencies 3. Plot Results as Solved 4. Prepare Overall District Map V. PREPARE FINAL MASTER PLAN REPORT 1. Prepare Final Report 2. Progra. DocWAentation 3. Training 4. Status Meetings & Presentatior, WEEK fUfBER ==} P~JECT SCHEDULE 2 3 5 7 9 10 u 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 IIJ:I ••• f •••••• I •••••• f •••••• I •• , ••• I •••••• I •• , ••• j •••••• I •••••• t. , •••• , •••• , • 1. , •••• I •••••• t •••••• 1 •••••• I •••••• I •••••• t •••••• I •••••• I •••••• t,,. ••••• I I •.•• c::ttlm .. I •.••.• I •.•••• I •.••.• I .•••.• l ....... I ........ i ....... I .••.•• I ......... I ....... I ......... I ....... I ......... l ........ I ..... , , I •• , ••• I ........ , I .. , ••• , I. , ... , .. I tm ..... I ......... I ......... I ........... I .......... I ........ I ......... I .......... f ........... f ......... f .......... I ......... f ..... ,, • f .......... I ......... I ........ I ........... I ....... ,,, .. I .......... l .......... I ........... I I ..... I i I 11 ii I ii I I I I I "' I I I I 1111 t I I II I I I ·1111 I i i I i Ii 11 I 11111111 I I J ••• " •• t ........ , ........ , •••••• f •••••• I ........ I ....... , ........... I ...... , 1 ........ i .......... I ......... I t ............ l ....... iii iilll ■l ........... 1 ............ ~ ............ 1 ........... 1 ............ 1 ............ 1 ........... t ............ 1 ............ 1 ............ t ........... J ........... 1 ......... 1 ........... i .......... l ............ 1 ............ 1 ........... I 1 ............ f ............ 1 ............ 18fllillllilll1 .......... 1 ......... t ......... 1 ............ 1 ............ , .......... , ....... t ........ 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 ....... 1 ....... 1 ......... 1 ......... t •••••• 1 .......... 1 I ....... f ....... f ....... I ....... I ........ lamD I ........ I •••••• l •••••• i ........ 1 •••••• J ....... J •••••• i •••••• i ....... I ....... I ........ I ....... f •••••• I •••••• I ....... I I ......... t ....... I ........ I ......... I ........ f ....... I mm I ....... I ....... I ....... I ........ I ........ I ••.... I ........ I ....... l ......... I ••.••. I ........ I ........ I ........ I ........ I ' ......... t ........ I ......... f •••• I .. t ..... I .. I ...... I • I, ........ 11 11 i I 'j I ' ' i I I i I f I I '' f ........ f ....... ' ......... f ........ I ......... I .......... I ........ I .......... I .......... I ........ I ............ I I ........ I ......... I ......... tl::J:E:E::l:ll ....... 1 ....... 1 .......... l ......... 1 ....... I ......... I ......... 1 .......... t ......... 1 ......... 1 .......... 1 ....... t ........ I ......... 1 ....... 1 ......... 1 ........... 1 I ...... I ...... I ...... I •••••• I ••••.• I ...... I •••••• I ...... I ...... I ...... 11'.I!Cll •••.•• I ...... l ...... 1 •••••. 1 ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... 1 ...... 1 •.••.• I ••••.• I I ........ I ........ 1 .......... 1 ......... I ......... I .......... I ........ 1111 j 'Iii ii I JI, ......... 1 ........ , ....... 1 ........... t ......... 1 ....... 1 .......... 1 .... I .... , ......... , ........ I ......... 1 ......... 1 f •••••• f ........ I ....... J ........ t ........ I ....... ! .. , ..... l ........ l ......... i ........ ' ......... il:II:ID i ........ I ........ 1 ......... 1 ....... I ......... I ••• , ... J ....... I ....... I •••••• f I ........ I ....... I ........ I ........ I ........ I ........ t ........ I ....... J ........ J ......... l ....... l ......... I CD .. J ....... I ....... I ....... t ......... I ........ I ........ t ........ I ........ I l •••••• 1 ........... 1 ........ 1 ....... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 ....... 1 ....... J ........ 1 ........ J ....... 1 ....... 1 ..... D1 ....... 1 .......... 1 ....... t ....... 1 ........ l ........... 1 ....... 1 ....... I 1 ........ i ........ 1 .......... 1 ......... • •••••• 1 ........... 1 ......... 1 ......... , ....... , ........ , ......... , ........ 1 ........ 1 mm 1 ........ 1 ......... 1 ......... 1 ......... 1 ........ 1 ........ , ....... ,, 1 J ........ J ......... 1 ........ , ......... f ........ 1 ........ 1 ....... 1 .......... , .......... t ....... , ........ J .......... 1 ........ 1 .......... ,,,1111111111 ......... 1 ........... 1 ........... 1 ....... 1 •••••• 1 l .......... l ........ 1 ......... 1 ......... t ........ 1 ....... 1 ......... 1 ....... f ........ f ........ f •••••• f ....... tiltlllflltilil •• , ••• 1 ....... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 .......... 1 ........ 1 .......... 1 1 ........ i ........ l .......... I ....... l •••••• I •••••• J ........ I ........ t ......... t ........ J ....... t ........ I ....... I •••••• 11:I:Cml •••••• I ......... I ........ I ....... I ......... I ........ I 1 ......... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 ....... 1 ....... t •••••• 1 ......... 1 •••••• 1 ........ 1 ......... 1 ......... 1 ....... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1mm1 ....... 1 ......... 1 •••••• , ....... 1 ........ 1 .......... 1 f ........ f ......... 1 ......... 1 ........ ! ....... 1 ....... l •••••• 1 .......... , ......... , ................. 1 ....... 1 .......... j ......... 1 ......... tilfffiilflllil ........ , ........ f ........ 1 ....... 1 I .......... I ......... I, ........ I ........ I ......... I ........ I .......... I .......... 1 ........ 1 ....... I ....... I ........... I ........ l ....... I •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 ........... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 l ........ ,fflffiiilillil .......... t .......... t ........ 1 ......... i ........ t ........ t ........ i .......... , ........ 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 .......... 1 ........ l ....... 1 ........ J .......... J ....... 1 ........ 1 J .......... J .......... 1 .......... 1 ........ t ......... 1 .......... 1 ......... 1 ........... i ......... 1 ........ 1 ........ 1 ........... 1 •••••• J ........ 1 ........ I ........ I ........ f ....... 1 ........ tl:£:l:CDI ......... I 1 ........ 1 ....... , ........ 10 ••••• , •••••• t ....... HJ ... , ... t •••••• 1 ......... 10 ....... t •••••• 1 ....... 10 ....... 1 •••••• 1 ....... 11, ..... 1 ........ 1 ........ 10 ...... 1 .......... 1 •••••• , .. • ... .. .., • .. • .. • .. .. --- -.. -.. ---- ---- March 13, 1989 MACDONALD-STEPHENS, ENGINEERS, INC. STANDARD SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION Classification Principal Managing Engineer Construction Administrator Supervising Engineer II Construction Specialist II Construction Specialist I Supervising Engineer I Senior Engineer II Senior Engineer I Operations Specialist II Operations Specialist I Staff Engineer II Staff Engineer I Inspector Supervising Designer Senior Designer Designer Draftsperson Support Services CADD Specialist Billing Rate $90.00/hr 85.00/hr 85.00/hr 75.00/hr 65.00/hr 60.00/hr 70.00/hr 65.00/hr 60.00/hr 70.00/hr 55.00/hr 55.00/hr 50.00/hr 55.00/hr 55.00/hr 50.00/hr 45.00/hr 40.00/hr 30.00/hr 65.00/hr The schedule includes salary costs, ordinary overhead and profit. Expense for travel, subsistence, incidental out-of-pocket costs, communications, equipment rental, report preparation, printing and outside services are reimbursable at invoice cost plus 15%. Mileage is reimbursed at twenty-five (25} cents per mile. • -------- • • • • - • • .. • .. .. .. • • • • • • • -.. -.. ... SECTION 5 -PROJECT STAFF The project team consists of highly qualified and experienced professionals whose abilities encompass all the disciplines required for this project. Key members of the project team and their major responsibilities are listed below. The Manhour Projection Table indicates each members responsibility on each task. This staff stands ready to execute the assigned project tasks and will be dedicated to the project for its duration. PROJECT MANAGER Robert W. Coates -Managing Engineer. San Diego Office As Project Manager. Mr. Coates will provide overall direction of the engineering services and administrative control of the project staff. He will interpret and determine project requirements. maintain project schedules. budgets and coordination with CMWD staff • PROJECT ENGINEER Wally Grabbe -Supervising Engineer I Mr. Grabbe has over 13 years of experience in the design and analysis of water and wastewater facilities. As Project Engineer. Mr. Grabbe will be responsible for the overall design and completion of the project and coordination of all technical information. Utilizing Symphony and AutoLSP programs. he will develope and maintain the databases used in this Master Plan. He will be responsible for interpreting the usage information provided by the District and setting the per acre demand for each land use classification and calculating actual peaking factors. He will prepare the final report for presentation to the District • CIVIL DESIGN Mark A. Schmidt Staff Engineer I Mr. Schmidt is a recent addition to the MSE staff and has over three years experience in the design and analysis of water and wastewater systems. His experience in these areas will be a valuable asset on this project. He will be directly responsible for obtaining all information on the existing system. adding this information to the base maps. preparing the input files for the University of Kentucky Pipe Network Analysis Programs. running these programs and plotting of output information • ... ... " .. ... ... .. ... ... .. • .. .. .. .. .. ... .. Education Biographical Data ROBERT W. COATES B.S. in Civil Engineering, 1965, California Polytechnic University, Pomona Certifications Registered Professional Engineer (California No. 019928) State of California Department of Health ''Water Treatment Operator" Grade 4 (1974) -Certificate No. 7584 American Water Works Association "Water Distribution Operator" Grade 4 (1974) -Certificate No. 544 Professional Affiliations American Water Works Association Association of California Water Agencies Water Pollution Control Federation American Public Works Association Experience Record 1986-Date 1983-1986 San Diego Regional Manager, MacDonald-Stephens, Engineers, Inc. Responsible for all water, wastewater, and small hydroelectric design, as well as assessment district engineering and project administration. BSI Consultants, Inc., San Diego, California Vice President, Civil Division (1985-1986). Responsible for project development and planning in all areas of civil engineering, including water and wastewater projects . Vice President. Water Resources Division (1984-1985). Responsible for design and administration of all water and wastewater projects. Projects included a hydroelectric power generating facility, water pump stations, sewer lift stations, reservoirs, water master plans, and sewer master plans . Project Manager (1983-1984). Supervised various projects including design of a concrete lining for an existing water system and project administration of a water assessment district including a concrete reservoir, major transmission main, and chlorination facilities . ... .. - ... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ... -.. ... .. .. .. • .. .. - Robert W. Coates Page two 1978-1983 1969-1978 1966-1969 1965-1966 General Manager, Rainbow Municipal Water District, Fallbrook, California Responsible for the management and operation of the 76 square mile District, including administration of a Bureau of Reclamation Small Loan Project consisting of a 650-acre concrete lined open reservoir, various transmission pipelines, pump stations ranging from 5-250 hp, chlorination facilities, and several tank projects . Water Superintendent, City of Downey, California Managed the total operation of Downey's 23,000 water services including administration, construction, maintenance, engineering, production, billing, budget preparations, and project coordination with other departments . Assistant Water Superintendent, City of Redlands, California Involved with the construction of a 20 MG water treatment plant and five 3 MG steel reservoirs. Other projects included installing concrete lining in existing steel and iron water mains in place, and installation of new pipelines ranging in size from 6" to 36" diameter . Junior Civil Engineer, City of Garden Grove, California Served as Engineer-in-Charge for the takeover of the Dyke water system including tying the Dyke system into the existing Garden Grove system and replacing deteriorated lines. Developed atlas sheets for the new system. Also established new wells to replace wells abandoned for high nitrate levels. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. - -.. .. .. .. -.. Education Biographical Data WALLY T. GRABBE B.S. in Civil Engineering, 1975, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas Graduated with Honors, Member Tau Beta Pi, Chi Epsilon President ASCE Student Chapter Junior Year Certifications Registered Professional Engineer (Texas No. 59525) Professional Affiliations American Society of Civil Engineers Experience Record 1988-Date 1986-1988 1984-1986 Supervising Engineer I, MacDonald-Stephens, Engineers, Inc. Responsible for supervision of engineering projects and day to day operation in the San Diego office. Recent projects include preparation of water master plans, utilizing the University of Kentucky Water Distribution System Analysis program (KYPIPE), for the City of Oceanside (entire system) and for Rincon Del Diablo Municipal Water District (Improvement District A) . Project Manager, Haynie Kallman & Gray, Inc., Austin, Texas Responsible for project management, engineering design, and construction administration of water, wastewater, and drainage facilities for several municipal utility districts in Williamson and Travis Counties. Also responsible for preparation and obtaining approval of bond issue engineering reports. Projects included management and design of water supply facilities for Barton Creek Planned Unit Development, a 1400 acre multi use development. Water supply facilities for this project included a 9 mgd water intake structure on Lake Austin, 3 miles of transmission main, concrete surge tank, 2 mgd water treatment plant (first phase of 6 mgd ultimate water treatment plant), and storage reservoirs totaling 2.3 mg. Other projects included preparation of water system analysis and design of water distribution lines for several other municipal utility districts in the Austin area. Project Manager, Grabbe-Jacobson, Inc., Houston/Austin, Texas Responsible for providing project management services for land development projects including project feasibility analysis, coordination of design and construction administration services, budgeting, loan supervision, and direct project/construction management. .. -.. ... ... ... ... - ... - • ... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. - "" .. .. • ... Wally T. Grabbe Page two 1981-1984 1979-1981 1976-1979 1975-1976 Project Manager, CGS Engineering, Inc., Houston, Texas Responsible for project management, engineering design, and construction administration of water, wastewater, street, and drainage facilities for several municipal utility districts in Harris and Fort Bend Counties. Project Engineer, Steffeck and Van De Wiele, Inc., Houston, Texas Responsible for preparing plans, specifications and cost estimates for land development projects. Projects included design of street and drainage improvements, detention ponds, small dams, lift stations, force mains, water distribution analysis and design, and sewer gravity mains . Ovil Design Engineer, CGS Engineering, Inc., Houston, Texas Served as Ovil Designer of water, wastewater, street, and drainage facilities for single family, multi-family, and commercial land development projects . Oyil/Structural Engineer, Hydrocarbon Construction Co., Beaumont, Texas (presently Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas) Reviewed structural calculations prepared by other engineers. Provided structural design for components of petro-chemical plant projects, including pile foundation, concrete lift station, and steel structures . -.. ---... -.. ... .. .. .. - .. - .. ... - ----.. --------- Biographical Data MARK A. SCHMIDT Education B.S. in Civil Engineering. 1985, University of Texas at Austin Professional Affiliations American Society of Civil Engineers American Water Works Association Experience Record 1989-Date 1986-1989 1985-1986 1984 1980 Design Engineer, MacDonald-Stephens, Engineers, Inc. Responsible for engineering design of utility improvements and production of construction plans, including traffic control plans for extensive inter-City projects. Prepares hydraulic analyses for utility master plans for the City of Oceanside, Rincon Del Diablo Municipal Water District, and other entities. Design Technician, Haynie Kallman & Gray, Inc., Austin, Texas Responsible for engineering design. production of construction plans and obtaining governmental approval of water, wastewater, drainage, street improvements, and subdivision plats within several developments in Travis and Williamson Counties. Acquired experience with University of Kentucky Water Distribution Analysis Program, Hogien CAD System, Lotus spreadsheet software, and operation of IBM compatible PC's. Construction Inspector, Haynie Kallman & Gray, Inc., Austin, TX Responsible for field inspection of fourteen utility and street construction contracts within five hundred acre land development project • NOWSCO Service Company, Inc •• Houston, Texas Worked in summer engineering coop program, driving, operating, and maintaining oil field pump trucks and blenders. Surveyor, Jeryl Hart Engineers, Inc •• Austin, Texas Summer position working as rodman/chainman, with limited experi- ence as instrumentman.