Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-08-15; City Council; 5506-1; Papagayo Development alternate sewage treatmentCITY OF CARLSBAD AGENDA BILL NO. 5506 Supplement 1 __ ' Initial: DATE: August 15, 1978 DEPARTMENT; Public Works _ ^ Cm Mgr< Subject: _ *REQUEST FOR ALTERNATE METHOD OF SEWAGE TREATMENT - PAPAGAYO DEVELOPMENT Statement of the Matter See staff report (Exhibit 6). - Exhibits 1. Letter dated June 29, 19-78 from Larry Hunts 2. Letter dated July 11, 1978 from Larry Hunts 3. Letter dated July 24, 1978 from Larry Hunts 4. Letter dated July 25, 1978 from Public Works Administrator 5. Memo dated July 3, 1978 from Public Works Administrator 6. Memorandum dated August 7, 1978 from City Engineer 7. Memorandum dated August 7, 1978 from Public Works AdministratorRecommendations - -— — . That the City Council deny the'request of Mr. Hunts for an alternate method of sewage treatment for the Papagayo by the Bay Development for the reasons given in the City Engineer's memorandum dated August 7, 1978 (Exhibit 5). Council action 8-15-78 The matter was continued for investigation by members, of the City Council.of similar methods of sewage-treatment. 9-19-78 Council continued the matter until such time as there is a f u 11 Council, and di rected staf f -to--p 1 ace i-t—orv-the agenda at the appropriate time-. 10-3-78 Council continued the matter fo'r further staff report with regard to the conditions'proposed by the developer. 11-21-78 Council denied t-b«-Tequest of Mr. Hunts for an alternate method of sewage'-^featraentfTrr the'Papagayo by the Bay Development. <•*• June 29, 1978 Mayor Roanld Packard and Members of the City Council Mr. Paul D. Bussey, City Manager CITY OF CARLSBAD P. O. Box 265 Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Mayor Packard and Members of the City Council and Mr. Bussey: As you are aware, Papagayo is a condominium development located on Chinquapin Avenue in Carlsbad. The development consists of 230 units of which 50 are presently constructed. We now wish to build our the remainder of the development as approved by the City. * The existing 50 units are connected to the City sewerage system, having received building permits prior to the establishment of the building permit moratorium on July 26, 1977. Rather than wait for the lifting of the building permit moratorium, we now wish to propose an alternate method of sewage disposal for the entire Papagayo development. This proposal is intended to conform with Title 18, Section 18.05.020, Item 6 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The alternate method of sewage disposal proposed is by means of an independent waste water reclamation plant and reuse program to be constructed and operated entirely on the Papagayo property. Details of the proposed facilities are described in the report entitled "Feasibility Study Waste Water Reclamation" prepared for Papagayo by Lowry & Associates. Three copies of this report are enclosed for your information. A "Report of Waste Discharge" has been submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Following staff review, we anticipate that waste discharge require- ments will be issued by the Regional Board to Papagayo. It is our intention that the plant will be owned and operated by the Agua Hedionda Association, Inc. This organization is the non-profit corporation owned by the property owners of Papagayo. Corporate assets include all of the buildings and other physical improvements on the . . • c- • - :;?w Mayor Packard, Members of the City Council, and Mr. Bussey June 29, 1978 Page 2 site. A legal question regarding the ability of RWQCB to issue waste water dis- charge requirements to a private corporation is presently being examined by attor- neys for the .State and by our own attorneys. Our request for an approval of al- ternate means of sewage disposal is based on the assumption that we will receive waste discharge requirements from the Regional Board and thus be in a position to operate our own waste water reclamation and reuse facility. In order to be in com- pliance with these requirements, it will, of course, be necessary for the association to employ the services of a certified treatment plant operator and to meet all state and county health department requiremtns. Prior to acceptance of the system by the RWQCB the County Department of Health will review it and make comments to the staff. By means of this letter, we request your review and approval of this alternate means of sewage disposal and that, as a result of that approval, the City building inspector be authorized to issue building permits under the terms of Section 18.05.020 of the building permit moratorium, subject to the establishment of waste discharge requirements by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Sincerely, Larry D. Hunts, A.I.A. Papagayo Developers Enclosure cc Ron Beckman Bill Fannan, Lowry & Associates Roland Rossmiller, Regional Water Quality Control Board • July 11, 1978 Mayor Ronald Packard and Members of the Carlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Papagayo waste water treatment facility Dear Mayor Packard and Members of the Council: Papagayo by the Bay is a condominium development within the City of Carlsbad. Fifty units have been constructed at the present time and are connected to the Carlsbad sewerage system. An additional 180 units have received all discretionary approvals from the City. In view of the present building permit moratorium, Papagayo Developers has been.unable to proceed with the construction of these approved units. At this time, Papagayo Developers is proposing a complete waste water reclamation and reuse system on-site that would permit us to treat waste water and reuse it for irrigation of landscaping throughout the development. Papagayo Developers requests that the City Council approve this project as an alternative method of sewage disposal as defined in the Building Permit Moratorium (Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Section 18.05.020), subject to requirements of the City staff, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the State and County Departments of Health (DON). In order to answer some of the concerns which you may have, I have outlined below some of the aspects of the proposed system. I have also enclosed a more detailed explanation of these items, as well as a feasibility study from our civil engineers, Lowry and Associates. 1 . THERE WILL BE NO ODOR. This is an aerobic digestion system with additional charcoal filters. 2. THERE WILL BE NO VISUAL IMPACT. The entire facility will be built underground, 3. THERE WILL BE NO NOISE. Underground installation will eliminate any sound. 4. WATER WILL BE CONSERVED. Twenty-two million gallons per year will be re- claimed. 5. SOLID WASTES WILL BE RECYCLED. Drying facilities will allow solids to be used as soil amendment on site. R-E C E'l Y^ D11 BE N° C°ST T° THE CITY* PaPa9ay° Developers will install the ^ system, and the homeowners' association will operate, maintain, and replace it. ," 1 3 1978 CITY OF CARLSBAD Engineering Department 7. THERE WILL BE NO EXCESSIVE COSTS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS. The present homeowner assessment is large enough to handle estimated costs with no increase. \ 8. REDUNDANT EQUIPMENT WILL BE INSTALLED. 9. REPLACEMENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR. The Department of Real Estate requires that homeowner budgets include replacement funds for all physical assets. 10. A CORPORATION WHICH CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE WILL BE THE SOLE OWNER. This will be a private system owned by Agua Hedionda Association. 11. OPERATION WILL BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF A CERTIFIED CLASS II OPERATOR. The full time operator will make daily tests and file monthly reports with the RWQCB. 12. THE SYSTEM WILL MEET ALL HEALTH, WELFARE, AND SAFETY STANDARDS. The RWQCB and DOH discharge requirements must be followed. 13. THE SYSTEM IS NOT EXPERIMENTAL. This same system fs in use at other locations in this county, including the San Onofre power plant and the San Diego Wild Animal Park. Although there are only 50 units constructed at this time and 180 additional units approved, the system was designed with excess capacity to handle a total of 314 units. Facilities will be provided to treat and reclaim 60,000 gallons per day of waste water. However, approval of this project is not intended to constitute approval of units in excess of the 230 which have already received all discretionary approvals. Any City approval of this system will be contingent upon the review and approval of the RWQCB and the DOH. This approval takes the form of issuance of waste water discharge requirements by the RWQCB. The DOH and other interested agencies participate in the RWQCB action by re- viewing and approving the waste water discharge requirements prior to their final establishment. No separate document is issued by the DOH in these instances. This proposal is made by Papagayo Developers in order to permit us to proceed with the orderly development of those portions of our project which have received all necessary approvals from the City and lack only building permits which cannot be obtained due to the inability of the City and other operating agencies to construct additional treatment capacity at the Encina plant. The approval of this proposal and its certification as an alternate means of sewage disposal will not permit any construction that would not take place in due course when treatment capacity is eventually provided at Encina. It will provide an environmentally sound reclamation project in keeping with the policies and programs established at local, state, and federal levels. Sincerely, V / Larry D. Hunh, A.I.A. General Partner, Papagayo Developers P.O. Box 787, Carlsbad (714) 729-7446 C^ Mayor Ronald Packard and Members of the Carlsbad City Council Supplemental information on Papagayo waste water treatment facility July 11, 1978 1. THERE WILL BE NO ODOR. We are proposing an aerobic treatment and sludge digester system. This is vitally different from the anarobic system which is employed at the Encina plant. In the anarobic system, as a by-product of the bacterial digestion, sul- fides and methane gas are produced and this is what causes the odor. A different type of microbes which do not produce these by-products are used in the aerobic process. They do not produce any foul smelling gasses. In addition, we will take advantage of the enclosed treatment plant to provide complete control of all air. The atmosphere within the building will be passed through an activated carbon filter which has the ability to remove all odors. Such a system will be completely odor free. 2. THERE WILL BE NO VISUAL IMPACT. This item needs no further explanation. 3. THERE WILL BE NO NOISE. Centrifical type blowers will be provided to minimize noise. The type and amount of equipment will.not be significantly different than that utilized in building air conditioning systems. Once again, we will take advantage of the enclosed treatment plant site to mask, cover, and muffle all noises to the point that they cannot be heard outside of the treatment plant building. 4. WATER WILL BE CONSERVED. This item needs no further explanation. 5. ' SOLID WASTES WILL BE RECYCLED. Two to three cubic feet of solids per day will be generated. In a full year of operation, this would not fill a room 10 feet by 10 feet by 12 feet. This amount of soil amendment can be readily utilized for the more than 14 acres of landscaping planned at Papagayo. 6. THERE WILL BE NO COST TO THE CITY. This item needs no further explanation. 7. THERE WILL BE NO EXCESSIVE COSTS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS. The anticipated monthly cost of operation, maintenance, and replacement reserves for the facility is $7.50 per condominium unit. Homeowners would save the present City sewer charge of $2.00 per month and approximately $3.37 per month for landscaping water which has been recycled at the current City rate of 43$ per hundred cubic feet. This results in an increase in costs of $2.13. Since the present homeowner assessment of $71.55 includes $9.00 per month as contingency, there would be no need for an increase in fees to meet the plant expenses. In the event that City sewer fees or water fees increase substantially, the system could eventually result in cost savings for the homeowners. <f V 8. REDUNDANT EQUIPMENT WILL BE INSTALLED. The plant discharge requirements will be established for 60,000 gallons per day (GPD). We will provide in the ini- tial construction for two units at 30,000 GPD each. When flow reaches 30,000 GPD we will add a third unit to provide a total of 90,000 GPD thus maintaining a 50% redundant capacity to carry us through any conceivable equipment breakdown or process disruption. Standby pumps, chlorinators, and other vital units will also be provided. A standby generator will be provided to insure operation of the treatment facilities in the unlikely event of an extended power outage. 9. REPLACEMENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR. The Department of Real'Estate requires that funds for the replacement of all physical assets be placed in interest bearing accounts. A sinking fund approach cannot be used; the full cost of replacement must be amortized and the interest used only to keep pace with inflation. Unless the Department receives evidence that the amount included in the budget is adequate, the developer cannot receive permission to sell his units.• 10. A CORPORATION WHICH CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE WILL BE THE SOLE OWNER. A review of the articles of incorporation, by-laws, and covenants, conditions and restrictions of the Agua Hedionda Association has been completed by the legal staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It is their opinion that the corporation is legally responsible and can act as recipient of waste water discharge requirements and as the operator of a reclamation facility. The corporation will have assets in excess of $30 million. 11. OPERATION WILL BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF A CERTIFIED CLASS II OPERATOR. This item requires no further explanation. 12. THE SYSTEM WILL MEET ALL HEALTH, WELFARE, AND SAFETY STANDARDS. This is more fully explained in the text of the letter. ' 13. THIS SYSTEM IS NOT EXPERIMENTAL. The system which we are proposing is in operation at different locations throughout the country. In this county, it has been in operation for two years at San Onofre and for over six years at the Wild Animal Park. July 24, 1978 Mayor Ronald Packard and Members of the Carlsbad City Council 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Papagayo alternate waste water treatment facility Dear Mayor Packard and Members of the Council: Mr. Ron Beckman, Director of Public Works, has indicated to me that he will need a soil permeability test in order to adequately analyze our proposed wastewater treatment facility. This test is now being conducted, but if will not be completed until later this week. In order to allow the staff ample time to review the results, we respectfully request that consideration of the project be continued to the regular Council hearing of August 15. Sincerely, Larry D. Hunts, A.I.A. Papagayo Developers LDH:js P.O. Box 787, Carlsbad, California 92008 (714) 291-3813 c July 25, I97» Mr. Larry 0. Hunts Papagayo Developers P, 0» Box 787 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Papagayo Proposal for Alternate Waste Water Treatment Syste« \ received « copy of your July 24, 1978 letter to the City Council where- In you requested a continuance of their consideration of the referenced matter to August 15th. In our telephone conversation of July 24, 1978, I Indicated that City staff was prepared to have the Ite» on the August I, 1978 agenda. You Indicated that the Regional Water Quality Control Board wanted wore In- formation concerning soils at the proposed project site. You requested a delay to August 15th so the Information could be obtained to resolve the Regional Board's concerns and to fill In Information caps that we had discussed In previous conversations. I further Indicated that any Information submitted concerning the proposal should come through your engineer because It was his raspcnslbl Hty to prepare, document and sup- port the viability of the request. Staff Is prepared to make a report and recommendation to the City Council ontfee basis of the Information submitted. There ta sufficient Infonw- tlotvto allow Council to make the necessary policy determination. We are not requesting or requiring any additional Information or the expenditure of fund* to gather data. Any such\expensa'or effort Is * result of your decision as to what is required to support your proposal. Staff has analyzed the Information submitted by you and your engineer and Is finalizing a report to Council. If you wish to submit any further data for consideration In the staff report, which #9 must cornplete by noon of August 4, 1978, It should be submitted by no later than neon, August I, 1973. Ronald A. Beckaan, P.E*__ Pub tic Work* Administrator RABtveb CCt City Htrwger City Engineer jHgHpRABPUM ': TOJ Planning Director FR011: Public Works Administrator OATEi Jy!y 3, 197& SUBJECT: FE&StetUTY STUDY - \IASTE WTER RECLAMATION - PAPACAYO Attachtd for your Inforetatlon and. review is ;» copy of the referenced report, the City M«nas<ir and I twHl Jbe <nsetlng with l^rry Hunts end BUI F«n«<m (Lcwry 6 M$oci«tesJ on Wednesday, July 5th, st lOsOO a.s.» to dis- cuss ti»e proposal. While you haven't been scheduled, you «say ba fntereutctJ b«c«use tf«Jrs at*o several plann!ns-relat*t<J Issues. Ones that cor<6 quickly to isfnd or©: Ss>ecJf Ic Plan revisions General Haa revision (siting a treattasnt plent «nd a g fflin Jon flaMon reservoir) j ^onfns restrictions <»n r«<iufr«ti open spaces iispsct o« project of Local Coastal Program; need for Coastal PermHj SIR for facility .ittc I urf tag operations* storage and deep (!*e«, se«j*ag« pits to disuse of **7t of effluent produced). 1 would be happy fio answer eny technical tiaestlons you «^ay have. Ronald A, Secfcmn, Public yorks A*fet!n RASsveb CC: City Manager City E COPY MEMORANDUM TO: Public Works Administrator FROM: City Engineer DATE: August 7, 1978 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ALTERNATE METHOD OF SEWAGE TREATMENT - PAPAGAYO DEVELOPMENT Exhibit 1 (letter dated June 29, 1978 from Larry Hunts) is a request to the City Council for approval of an alternate means of sewage disposal for the project commonly known as"Papagayo by the Bay". This is a condominium project on Chinquapin Avenue, westerly of and adjacent to Interstate 5 and along the north shore of Agua Hedionda lagoon. The project was approved several years ago as a 230 unit project. However, only 50 units have been constructed. You have asked me to review the Feasibility Study dated June 1978 by Lowry and Associates as well as additional information that has been submitted over the last few weeks, and to prepare recommendations for City Council consider- ation at the August 15, 1978 Council meeting. Background of the Request The request is to receive Council approval for an alternate sewage disposal system (other than public sewer or septic system). The proposal is for a privately owned and operated on-site secondary treatment facility with a phased capacity up to 60,000 gallons per day. The system proposes an EXTENDED AERATION PROCESS, a biological process using AEROBIC treatment. In addition, in order to permit on-site disposal, the unit will provide coagulation clari- fication and pressure filtration and chlorination of the secondary plant effluent. The proposal is to utilize the effluent for irrigation purposes on approximately 12 acres of on-site landscaped areas. During periods where irrigation is not possible due to rain saturated soils, effluent storage of up to 5 million gallons is proposed. This storage is proposed to be "phased" with the initial storage in a series of underground, interconnected tanks. Exhibit 2 (letter dated July 11, 1978 from Larry Hunts) addresses some of the concerns that have been brought up during staff discussions. I take ex- ception to some of the statements made in the July 11, 1978 letter. Attached to this memorandum is a letter dated July 26, 1978 from the consultant Bill Fannon of Lowry and Associates giving additional information on a pre- liminary design of the EXTENDED AERATION system proposed for this project. A Public Works Administrator Page 2 August 7, 1978 process flow diagram has also been included. Analysis of the Request In reviewing the Feasibility Study and the other information provided, there are many more philosophical or policy concerns than technical concerns. For purposes of this memorandum, I prefer to refer to the system as a "black box" and instead concentrate on the policy considerations. There are, however, some technical concerns that I have with the "black box" system which I list as follows: 1. Is 5 million gallons (84 days storage) enough? What about exceptionally wet years? What if storage needs exceed capacity? 2. How would this storage be phased? Is open storage acceptable? Under what conditions by the State Department of Health? Are there any health problems with long term storage? Would phased construction of storage tanks cause problems to the existing tenants or neighborhood? 3. Does the system really have sufficient backup? What if the biological system fails? 4. Can all sludge be utilized on-site? What happens when all the landscaping is in and the soil is already "conditioned"? 5. How will the system be maintained? Is there a backup treatment plant operator if the regular one quits, gets sick, goes on vacation, needs ongoing training? 6. Will the irrigated spaces be usable for tenants (lawn, patio, recreation areas)? Assuming that technical "black box" and operational problems can be addressed, other policy considerations must be addressed. Some concerns are as follows: 1. Is a 60,000 gallon per day sewage treatment facility with storage capacity of 5 million gallons compatible with (a) the Papagayo project, (b) the neighborhood, and (c) anywhere in the City? 2. Is the proposal really exempt from further Coastal Commission permits? (Coastal staff says an amended permit will be required.) 3. If such systems are allowed, should the systems be privately or publically owned and operated? It is my understanding that the State and Regional Water Quality Boards have a policy which requires sewage package plants to be owned and operated by governmental agencies. (I am excluding, of course, any industrial "pre—treatment" systems which then discharge into public sewers.) Is there logic behind this policy? Public Works Administrator Page 3 August 7, 1978 It is my opinion that this is a sound policy because regardless of how the plant would be operated, government (therein read City of Carlsbad) has responsibilities for the Health and Welfare of its citizens. I question whether a homeowners association (or corporation) would have the ability to properly maintain a system in perpetuity. I believe it is beyond the ability of the average homsowners association to adequately manage and operate a relatively complicated sewage treatment facility. Our experience in Carlsbad is that homeowner associations have all they can do to enforce parking regulations and maintain landscaping. It does not appear feasible to have individually maintained private systems. What about publically maintained systems? Would it be economically feasible to maintain on-site package plants? While there is no way to know for sure how many systems would ultimately be proposed, I could probably list over 25 inquiries where developers have proposed on-site package plants. Many of these are large projects like Covington (300+ units), Chaparrel (150+ units), Quail Ridge (234 units), Tanglewood (200+ units), Carlsbad Oaks, Palomar Airport Business Park, Japatul, etc. It would be a major Council policy to accept the responsibility for perpetual maintenance of a variety of types and sizes of on-site sewage treatment package plants. The City Council has decided to explore the feasibility of an inland secon- dary treatment plant (Calavera Lake proposal). The main thrust of the feasibility study has to do with the benefits of water reclamation. I believe I interpret the Council's interest in water reclamation to be based on conniunity wide benefits from water reclamation. It would appear that the Papagayo proposal may, in actuality, work against the feasibility of community wide water reclamation. There is no doubt that on-site irrigation of landscaping will definitely reduce water consumption to Papagayo. It appears, however, that the proposal is to provide more irrigation effluent than is needed for plant growth in order to get rid of the effluent. In effect, waste the reclaimed water. Approval of on-site "water reclamation" systems would appear to work adversely against the concept of community water reclamation. More on-site systems would ultimately reduce the viability of basin water reclamation systems. It appears that the real purpose of the Papagayo proposal has more to do with achieving sewer capacity than it has in achieving the water reclamation goals of the City. Summary It would appear that approval of the Papagayo package sewage treatment plant would not further the long range goals of water reclamation for the City and may even be counter productive. Approval of such a system will most certainly lead to applications from many areas and could result in the City having less Public Wbrks Administrator Page 4 August 7, 1978 control in the ability to provide public facilities, conform to population growth curves, and meet air quality standards. The proposal is not consistent with Council policy to investigate water reclamation potential on a regional or drainage basin basis and may work adversely by reducing the potential for regional water reclamation. Recommendation That the City Council deny the request to approve an on-site sewage disposal plant for the Papagayo by the Bay development. Tim Flanagan City Engineer TFrsb Enclosure: July 26 letter cc: City Manager Planning Department owryssociates 3505 Camino£//2io,Sout/l,Suite334,San2bie90,(?a&fi,mia 92108, (7/4) 283-7f45 July 26, 1978 Mr. Ron Beckman CITY OF CARLSBAD P. 0. Box 265 Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Ron: Subject: Papagayo Reclamation Project Preliminary Design The Feasibility Report for Papagayo which was submitted to you in support of their request for approval of an alter- na'te method of sewage disposal was prepared some weeks ago. Since that time you have been requested by the City Council to review the project in order to determine its technical and environmental feasibility. We have been progressing with details of design ever since the preparation of the Feasibility Report. We feel it advisable to bring you up to date with our current thinking on the project. The Feasibility Report indicated that two basic treatment processes were under consideration. We have now eliminated the A.B.F. process and definitely decided to proceed with the extended aeration type of aerobic treatment. This final selection was made primarily because of the excellent track record achieved by this type of treatment plant. There are literally thousands of these units in service throughout the country. Three are located in San Diego County. These are at the Wild Animal Park, the Oak Crest Mobile Home Park in Rainbow and the San Onofre Power Generating Station. The first two can readily be viewed at any time. Special per- mission must be obtained from Cal Edison in order to get into the San Onofre Plant. Their engineering department has indicated that a request from the City would be necessary before such permission could be granted. I believe it would be advisable for you and your staff to visit at least on!e of these plants in order to see for yourself the type of facility which we are proposing. Each of the plants was furnished by a different manufacturer so that we are not limiting ourselves to a single type of unit. All of them employ the same basic method of treatment which provides 24 hour detention in the aeration tank. This long detention time gives the plant a strong capability of resisting varia- tions in flow and strength of.loading. 17748 SKY PARK BLVD., IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92714 (714)751-3820 Mr. Ron Beckman July 26, 1978 Page 2 We have also proceeded with-selection of sludge handling equipment. In order to avoid the necessity for constructing sludge drying beds, we propose to provide a sludge belt press unit capable of producing 15% solid sludge from well digested sludge from an aerobic digester. This density of sludge is capable of being handled by shovel. It can be readily used as a soil conditioner either by itself or mixed with natural soil. The belt press method of processing sludge is becom- ing increasingly popular replacing, as it does, the drying bed and centrifuge. We have a unit under demonstration at the.SERRA Plant in San Juan Capistrano. We can make arrange- ments for a visit to that site when you wish to view this equipment in operation. The matter of odor control has repeatedly been raised. We have therefore proceeded with conceptual design and equip- ment selection for this process. As you know from previous submittals the entire plant will be enclosed in an underground structure. This will permit complete control of the atmosphere. The compressors supplying air to the aeration units will take this air from the atmosphere inside the building thus picking up the air over the treatment plant and compressing it and introducing it into the liquid. This is a recognized means of recirculating any moisture or odor which should occur in the vicinity of the plant. • In addition, exhaust from the underground room would be channeled through an activated carbon filter which will ab- sorb any remaining odors in the atmosphere before their dis- charge . This equipment will be furnished by Calgon as part of a package unit. The Calgon representative informs us that the addition of a three inch layer of special filter material on top of the activated carbon will also remove residual nonsewage odors giving a completely odor free exhaust. Unfortunately, the nearest installation of this equipment is in Sacramento where it is being applied to a much larger size plant. Tertiary treatment will be provided by a package unit supplied by one of three available manufacturers. This unit will pro- vide coagulation, clarification and pressure filtration of the secondary plaint effluent. These treatment steps are re- quired by the Department of Health' in locations where irriga- tion is to be practiced in the vicinity of human activity. The owners of Papagayo have instructed us to plan on the con- struction of three units, each with a design capacity of 30,000 gallons per day. Since the design capacity of the k Mr. Ron Beckman July 26, 1978 Page 3 plant is to be rated at 60,000 gallons per day, this will pro- vide a 50% extra capacity capability. The additional capaci- ties are intended as a safeguard in the unlikely event of a complete breakdown of one of these units. As a matter of economics two units at 30,000 gpd each will be provided in the initial construction with the third unit being added when measured flow approaches 30,000 gpd. We have prepared revised schematic drawings showing the treat- ment facilities as now conceived. Two copies of these drawings are enclosed. We would appreciate your review of the project on the basis of the facts contained in this letter which supplement the information in our original Feasibility Report. In closing we once again' wish to emphasize that the project being pro- posed is a normal treatment facility of a type readily accepted throughout the country. .At least three examples exist right here in San Diego County. In addition Papagayo proposes to provide redundant capacity, emergency standby power generation, and a complete air quality control system. From a technical point of view there is no doubt that this facility will ade- quately perform the tasks required of it. The design of the irrigation facilities has been reviewed with RWQCB staff. To our knowledge they have no objections to the concepts contained therein. The amount of water leached into the ground was previously discussed with you in a letter dated July 11, 1978. At that time we pointed out that this is the normal "one-third" of the total flow which RWQCB considers will be disposed of below the root zone. To put the matter into perspective, this amount of water, when spread throughout the entire area underlying the Papagayo Development, amounts to approximately one gallon per square foot per month. Perme- ability o f the soil based on soil tests is presently being determined. This information will be forwarded to you as soon as possible. We have every assurance however that the permeability rates will be far in excess of the amount required to satisfy our irigation balance computations. , -->•-- Sincerely, ' LOWRY & ASSOCIATES mnon Project Manager WWFrcsh Enclosures cc: Tim Flanagan Larry Hunts k MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Public Works Administrator DATE: August 1, 1978 SUBJECT: PAPAGAYO PACKAGE PLANT REQUEST I would like to add my thoughts to those of the City Engineer concern- ing Larry Hunts' request for a package treatment plant at the Papagayo site. The question that Council must resolve is one related to policy issues rather than technical issues. There are probably dozens of technically sound ways for treating 60,000 gallons a day of effluent. All of them are of good de- sign and would work reasonably well. The real question is: Would it be con- sistent with City policy to allow a proliferation of such facilities without the benefit of a comprehensive study plan analyzing the technical compatibility of the system, the impact of this system on financing other systems in the treatment and reclamation area and, certainly, the very real environmental con- cerns? It is inconsistent with State and regional policies to allow such facili- ties unless they are under the operational control of a governmental jurisdic- tion. To allow a number of these facilities to spring up without the necessary planning and coordination would be inconsistent with basic good management and certainly inconsistent with the needs we face as a result of Proposition 13 to maximize governmental efficiency. The City Engineer's memo touches on a number of other operational and policy questions. I concur with his analysis and recommendation. The re- quested facility is truly a proposal to allow development in advance of com- pleting the Encina expansion rather than a true attempt at reclamation. Ronald A. Beckman, P.E. Public Works Administrator RAB:veb CC: City Engineer Planning Director ^ . % COPY SUPERNATANT PUMP FUTURE AERATION CHAMBER (30,0000PM) AERATION CHAMBER (30,000 GPD) AERATION CHAMBER (30.000GPD) PETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE SUPERNATANT BETURM WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE — u •] AEROBIC DIGESTER i *LI >•~JL\ i CHEMICAL FEED WET WEATHER CELLULAR ^ I . • i FUTURE ' ! »| """"! ! Sit— SECONDARY•" ECONDAR Jr FLOCCULATOR/-g CLARIFIER 3 ®! FILTAGE RETURN SLUDGE PUMP FLOC AND FILTER SLUDGE (J.) B•nBACKWASH RECYCLE PUMP . *. FILTER WASTE SETTLING TANK . DRIED SLUDGE USED ON SITE AS SOU. CONDITIONER EFFLUENT PUMP LTER BACKWASH PAPA6AYO RECLAMATION PROJECT EXTENDED AERATION PROCESS FLO'.'/ DIAGRAM i ]