Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-02-2006-10bORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: March 2, 2006 Action Agenda Item No. ~ O_~ SUBJECT: Buckhorn Road EDD/Community Water/Sewer Project -Project Completion/ Timing Issues DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) Yes ATTACHMENT(S): County Engineer's Memo Draft letter from the BOCC to CGLS City of Mebane letter to CGLS CGLS email (Cecil Madden) to County INFORMATION CONTACT: County Engineer, 919-245-2303 Engineer Proposed Alternative Financing Table PURPOSE: To update the BOCC as to Orange County and City of Mebane efforts to permit the portion of the Buckhorn EDD/Community utility project that will provide water and sewer service to the Gravelly Hill Middle school. BACKGROUND: The Construction Grants and Loans Section (CGLS) of the Division of Water Quality (DWO), NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is the regulatory/review agency charged with permitting projects funded by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG). The STAG grant process calls for the Grantee to submit a number of documents (Engineer's Report, Environmental Assessment, Construction Plans and Specifications, etc,) that are first reviewed and approved by CGLS and other local environmental agencies before being forwarded to the US EPA for its review and approvah This review process has created two sources of delays in the County's effort to get the Buckhorn Road EDD/Community project underway: • Delays in CLGS reviews of the EA and Engineer's Report have extended the overall state and federal review/approval process to a paint where it is probable that project construction cannot begin until the time when it needs to be completed; and • CLGS engineering review staff (constn~ction documentation review) has ruled that the City of Mebane's existing wastewater utility infrastructure has insufficient capacity to accept additional wastewater flow, including flow from the Buckhorn EDD/Community project. Their position, at least currently, is that they will require upgrades/modifications to Mebane's existing infrastructure before they will allow the Mebane system to receive wastewater flow from the Buckhorn Road EDD/Community project. Commissioners will recall from staff memorandums and presentations at several BOCC meetings and work sessions in February, a project that will provide water and sewer utilities to Gravelly Hill Middle School at a point in time anywhere near the proposed August 25th middle schcol opening will require that the County initiate a construction project (EDD south of I-85/40 and Gravelly Hill) that is not funded through the STAG (State and Tribal Assistance Grant) process, It may be possible for a locally funded project to provide the means (completed water system, short term pump and haul wastewater system) to meet a projected August 25th school opening, Although a reconfigured project would nc longer fall under STAG review processes and extended timetable, the actual project review/approval/ permitting would remain under the purview of CGLS, The Board has asked that staff seek answers to several questions with the answers serving as a basis for Board deliberation and decision: z • Does the City of Mebane have a formal CIP process for upgrading its water and sewer infrastructure and is the upgrade of the existing 8" sewer line (the 1200 feet of line Mebane now proposes to upsize to 12" to address capacity concerns raised by CGLS) considered in the plan or process. City Manager Robert Wilson and City consulting engineer Darrell Russell have indicated that the City does not have a formal GIP process for these infrastructure upgrades and had not scheduled the existing 8" line for upgrade, • Does the City expect the County to participate financially in the cost of upgrading its existing infrastructure, how much cost is involved and can that cost be offset somehow. The City is asking that the County participate in the amount of $50,000 in upfront costs, The City, which proposes to dispense with tap-on fees to the school as well as to existing single family residences in the Buckhorn Community, has indicated in principle its willingness to enter a contract with the County whereby the City reduces its usual utility (sewer and or water) rates that would be applicable to the Buckhorn Community residents to approximately $4.50 per 1000 gallons of use. This reduction would be applicable until the $50,000 has been expended (projected to be in excess of 5 years, given estimated water consumption levels), The County and City Attorneys are working toward capturing this agreement in a written amendment to the existing County/City utility service agreement. • Is the County's STAG funding is in danger of being reduced or otherwise negatively impacted by reconfiguring the overall Buckhorn Road EDD/Community and Central Efland project withdrawing the portion of the project intended to serve Gravelly Hill Middle School from the grant funding process. CGLS Chief Bobby Blowe has responded -via email -the CGLS has nc problem with the Gravelly Hill portion of the project being broken out and that this does not endanger the funding in any way, Mr. Blowe has also indicated that the EPA has na knowledge as to the original configuration of the STAG project and consequently has now and will have no concern as to any project reconfiguration. As per the direction of the Chair, County staff will ask Mr, Blawe and Congressman Price's office to provide letters indicating that there is no issue with the STAG funding if the STAG project is reconfigured, Is Mebane's proposal to modify its existing infrastructure (redirecting the discharge from one pumping station and increasing the line size/capacity of a 1200 foot section of its gravity sewer) is going to satisfy CGLS requirements as to the capacity of Mebane's infrastructure. CGLS staff has provided email correspondence indicating that Mebane's proposal appears to be satisfactory in principal and theory, but that final approval depends on Mebane being able to show by engineering calculation and hydraulic modeling (computer simulation modeling) that the proposal should actually work. As of March 15~, Mebane and its consulting engineer have submitted the required engineering calculation and modeling and a formal statement of Mebane's intent to make those improvements that have been show to be efficacious by those calculations. 3 County staff has, as of March 15~, been advised of yet another somewhat problematic and heretofore unknown requirement by CGLS staff, CGLS staff has indicated that it will not review Mebane's latest submittal or any more material or documents submitted by the County or the City of Mebane until we submit a complete package of information that includes all pertinent documentation, That package must include revised plans and specifications (either showing the reduced-scope project broken out of the STAG funding process or containing those STAG related revisions that have been required by CGLS), a plan (with supporting documentation) to improve the existing Mebane infrastructure and the County's formal letter of intent to reconfigure the existing STAG funded project, However, significant additional project delays consequent to this requirement can be minimized once the BQCC makes the decision to move forward with an expedited locally funded project. Plans and specifications showing the reduced scope project and the County's letter of intent (to reconfigure the project) can be readied and submitted very quickly. CGLS should then be able to make its decision on the adequacy of Mebane's infrastructure improvement plan (approving the County's plans and specs should be a essentially a pro forma process), If Mebane's plans are approved, CGLS authorization to advertise the project for bidders within five days of the County's formal statement of its intent to reconfigure the STAG project and the actual advertisement could published within a week of CGLS authorization to advertise. Should Mebane's plan not be approved, the project would be delayed until a satisfactory plan is developed and approved. The following attachments related to the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill Middle School Water and Sewer Extension project have been provided for the Board's information Attachment 1 -This 3/2/06 memorandum from County Engineer Paul Thames details the actions that have been taken to date, and the actions that remain to be done. Attachment 2 -This is a draft letter (as explained in the memorandum) that the County needs to send to the State/Construction Grants & Loans Section (CGLS). It is proposed that the Chair be authorized to sign this letter contingent upon 1) written assurance from the State/CGLS that the actions being taken will not affect the STAG grant, and 2) confirmation from Congressman David Price's office that his office does not believe that the actions being taken will adversely affect the STAG grant. Attachment 3 -This letter and report demonstrates that the City of Mebane has followed through in its efforts to satisfy the requests that the State has detailed. In the letter, Mebane confirms its plans to upgrade the sewer facilities and lines as required by the State. The County's project engineering consultants and the County Engineer have reviewed the Mebane engineer's pumping and flaw analysis report and find it to be technically sound. It also should be noted that the County Attorney and the Mebane City Attorney are currently working through the legal framework that had been agreed to in principle by the County and Gity. Attachment 4 -This 3/1/06 email from Cecil Madden with the State/CGLS demonstrates the manifest difficulty we have encountered in working with the State/CGLS on this project, Attachment 5 - Based on current engineering estimates, the additional funding needed to complete the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill infrastructure will be approximately $1,5 million beyond what is currently programmed for the project. The table in this attachment reflects options for how the County s planned April 2006 debt issuance plans could be configured to affect the sources of project funding, The default option, consistent with the BOCC's plans since Fall 2005, is to issue $2,000,000 in COPs for conservation easements, and $500,000 in COPS for construction of the waterline to the new middle school, The implication of adhering to this option is that the BOCC would need to decide at a subsequent meeting how it would identify pay-as-you-go capital funding totaling $1.5 million to complete the infrastructure project. That discussion could take place as soon as the March 15, 2006 budget work session. FINANCIAL- IMPACT: Financial Impacts are outlined above and on Attachment 5. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board: • accept the report as a basis for upcoming decisions on 1) reconfiguring the STAG funded project to separate out the portion that will serve the Gravelly Hill Middle School; and 2) designating utility extension funding sources outside the grant process; and • authorize the Chair to sign the letter (Attachment2) contingent upon 1) written assurance from the State/CG~S that the actions being taken will not affect the STAG grant, and 2) confirmation from Congressman David Price's office that his office does not believe that the actions being taken will adversely affect the STAG grant, 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners CAPIES: John Link, County Manager Rod Visser, Assistant County Manager Donna Dean, Budget Director Pam Jones, Purchasing/Central Services Director FROM: Paul Thames, PE, County Enginee DATE: March 2, 2006 SUBJECT: Moving forward with the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill Middle School water and sewer extension The purpose of this memorandum is to: update the Board on the latest developments related to Construction Loan and Grant Section (CLGS) review of Mebane's proposal to increase the capacity of its wastewater infrastructure (that portion which will receive wastewater flow from both the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill school and the Buckhorn community north of I-85/40) outline the regulatory approval process that allows Orange County to move forward with bidding a Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill water and sewer extension project. As the Board will recall from staff memorandums and presentations at several BOCC meetings and work sessions in February, a project that will provide water and sewer utilities to Gravelly Hill Middle School at a point in time anywhere near the proposed August 25th middle school opening will require that the County initiate a constn~ction project (EDD south of I-85/40 and Gravelly Hill) that is not funded through the STAG (State and Tribal Assistance Grant) process. It may be possible for a locally funded project to provide the means (completed water system, short term pump and haul wastewater system) to meet a projected August 25th school opening, Although a reconfigured project would no longer fall under STAG review processes and extended timetable, the actual project review/approval/ permitting would remain under the purview of CGLS, County staff, the County's engineering consultant (Coulter Jewell Thames - CJT} and the City of Mebane have been working to address CGLS concerns and comments arising from the review process to date, As of March 15t, the City of Mebane has submitted a revised plan to update the portion of its existing infrastructure that CGLS has found problematic, In a subsequent CGLS communication (phone and email, attached) to County staff, CGLS staff has indicated that it will not review Mebane's submittal or any more material or documents submitted by the County or the City of Mebane until we submit a complete package of information that includes all pertinent documentation. That package must include revised plans and specifications (either showing the reduced-scope project broken out of the STAG funding process or containing those STAG related revisions that have been required by CGLS), a plan (with supporting documentation) to improve the existing Mebane infrastn~cture and the County s formal letter of intent to reconfigure the existing STAG funded project. -2- This latest CGLS ruling has been a shock to all of the County/Mebane engineering personnel involved in the permitting and review process, because this represents a new requirement not previously stated by CGLS. Additional project delays consequent to this ruling can be minimized once the BOCC makes the decision to move forward with an expedited locally funded project. Plans and specifications showing the reduced scope project and the County's letter of intent (to reconfigure the project) can be readied and submitted very quickly. CGLS should then be able to make its decision on the adequacy of Mebane's infrastructure improvement plan (approving the County's plans and specs should be a essentially a pro forma process), If Mebane's plans are approved, CGLS authorization to advertise the project for bidders within five days of the County's formal statement of its intent to reconfigure the STAG project and the actual advertisement could published within a week of CGLS authorization to advertise. Should Mebane's plan not be approved, the project would be delayed until a satisfactory plan is developed and approved. Reconfiguring the existing STAG funded project the Gravelly Hill portion of the existing STAG funded Buckhorn Road EDD/Community project will require the following actions on the part of the BOCG, County staff, the County s engineering consultant (Coulter Jewell Thames - CJT), the City of Mebane and CGLS: • Submit a plan (with supporting documentation) to improve the existing Mebane infrastructure - by the City of Mebane -accomplished as of 3(1!2006 • BOCC approves reconfiguration of STAG funded project by designating a locally funded project containing just the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill utility extension BOCC approves or modifies the attached draft letter declaring its intent to reconfigure the STAG funded project by breaking out the Buckhorn EDD/Gravelly Hill utility extension as a separate locally funded project and authorizes the Chair to sign it once written confirmation is provided by CGLS that the proposed STAG project reconfiguration does not threaten the level of STAG funding in any way • County staff forwards the Board's letter of intent to reconfigure the STAG project to CGLS • CJT submits plans and specifications reflecting project reconfiguration (deleting all plan elements applicable to northern Buckhorn Community, all specification elements related to STAG requirements) and all CGLS comments, requirements, etc., applicable to the locally funded project. CGLS reviews letter of intent to reconfigure project and revised plans and specifications (essentially a pro forma process) and Mebane's proposal and documentation relative to improvement to its infrastructure. • CGLS approves all submitted documents, proposals, etc., and authorizes advertising of bids. If I may provide additional information or clarification of the information provided herein at this time, please advise. 1 March 2, 2006 Mr. ~l. Robert Blowe, PE, Chief Construction Grants and Loans Section Division of Water Quality Department of Environment and Natural Resources State of North Carolina 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 Dear Mr. Blowe: As per recent and ongoing discussions between Construction Grants and Loans Section staff and Orange County staff and engineering consultants, I am writing on behalf of Orange Gounty and at the express direction of the Board of County Commissioners to advise you of our intent to reconfigure our STAG funded utility expansion project currently within your review process. Specifically, it is the County's intent to move forward with a project that will provide water and sewer service to an area south of Interstate 85/40 along Buckhorn Road and West Ten Road and to the Gravelly Hill Middle School. It is fiarthermore the County's intent that the portion of the project along Buckhorn Road north of Interstate 85/40, the area of "environmental justice" interest be recombined with the previously separated out portion of the overall STAG funded project that will also provide sewer service to the central Efland community, As per those discussions referenced above, you will, of course, realize that our purpose in reconfiguring the STAG project is to eliminate that time associated with the federal agency review portion of the overall project review, approval and permitting process. It is our understanding, based on previous correspondence between yourself and County staff, that this reconfiguration poses no threat of loss of any STAG funding. It is likewise our understanding that the act of reconfiguring the STAG project is one that needs to be coordinated solely with Construction Grants and Loans and does not require any coordination with the US EPA or other federal funding sources, It is also our understanding the broken out locally funded project will remain within the approval and permitting purview of the Construction Loans and Grants Section. Mr, ,1. Robert Blowe March 2, 2006 Page 2 I trust that this letter makes clear the County's intent insofar as the reconfiguration of the STAG and locally funded projects is concerned and that this letter, in and of itself, meets your requirements insofar as a formal statement of our intent is concerned. If this letter is not sufficient, is unclear in any way or is otherwise unsatisfactory, please contact me and advise as to what additional information, revision or formality is required to accomplish the desired reconfiguration. Sincerely Barry Jacobs, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners. Cc Board of County Commissioners John M, Link, County Manager Robert Wilson, Mebane City Manager Dr. Shirley Carraway, Superintendent, OG Board of Education Orange County Board of Education Paul Thames, PE, Gounty Engineer RLLEY WILLIRMS Fax:3362263034 Mar 1 2006 .1450 Rbbert L Witson ~t~tt ~~ ~,11.~,1~.V t~t.~t W City Manager YJ^ Glwdrl SJCpheoson 106 East Washington Street Mayo, Mebane, North Cazoliua 27302 (919)563-5901 Council Parry Philipps, Ma~y~o°r' Pro Tem ~r1I0 B13u...~ Ed Hook Bob Hupman Everette Gremc February 28, 2006 Mr. Cecil Madden, Jr., P.E. Supezvisor N.C. Depamnent of Environment and Natuzal Resources Construction Grants and Loans Section Design Management Unit 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 P. 02 FL'mel. Hills A5G Alg~K1ry Oyu~i>Fim+^.. ~m Ia GR¢~iwm~ d~~lvf~voL_a Jimmy lobe .^u5& I#rt OUeemr ~~e Aeae Domnem Duo:w Dian A4y Rmmron d Avb bi~e:mr Amy Pecdagmp5 Arir2onmemfty Cmar phaml Boblaoa tvc aag P ~ nu~sm. Subject: Buc)cbom Water and Sewer Extensions Orange County STAG Project Faxed to: 919-715-6229 AWCI{ Job ~ 03224 Deaz Mr. Madden: We aze pleased to provide additional information regazding the capacity of our Industrial Drive Pump Station. Attached is an Analysis provided by our Engineer, Darrell L. Russell, P.E., which cll*r,mar;zes the estimates of existing and proposed flows tributary to this station. It also includes recommendations for certain system improvements, which will be completed in the neaz future. The following schedule is proposed to complete the recommended system improvements: TTEM 1. Replacing existing 8" gravity sewer line on Eight Street and McPherson Drive with a 12" gravity line (approximately 1200 feet). 2. Replace impellers in the L.J. Rogers Pump Station to modify the pumping capacity to 98 GPM with the Industrial Drive Pump Station in operation.. .Also included is the connection to the existing 8" sewer force main, COMPLETION DATE August 1, 2006 August 1, 2006 Chartered in 1881 RLLEY WIL.LIHMS FdX~55b11b5U54 rtar t t~uo lv~~v r u~ G~ Mr. Cecil Madden, .Tz., P.E.. Supezvisor N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources Construction Chants and Loans Section Design Management Unit 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 February 28, 2006 As we have previously discussed these issues with you, we trust all will be in order so the Orange County Pzaject can move fozwazd. If you have any questions, please let me Imow. ezely, ~~ Robert L. Wilson, City Manager RLW/ja Attachment cc: Paul Thomas, P,E., Orange County Engineer Darrell L. Russell, P.E., City Engineer HLLtY WlU~1HM5 ~~ alle CK FdX~33bLLb3U34 iiar 1 LUUb 14 ~71 Williams, carmen ~ kin Engineering Architecture Land Surv February 28; 2006 Mr. Robert Wilson, City Manager City of Mebane 106 E. Washington Street Mebane, NC 27302 Subject: Orange County Water and Sewer Project Industrial Drive Pump Station AWCK Job # 03224 Deaz Mr. Wilson: r. u4 ~, inc. Attached is our Analysis of Flow to the Industrial Drive Pump Station to address capacity issues related to the new Orange County Water and Sewer Project serving the Buckhorn area. Our analysis indicates that the Industrial Drive Pump Station will have available capacity to accept the flow from the Orange County Water and Sewer Project subject to the following: 1. The L.J.. Rogers Pump Station capacity be revised to 98 GPM and connected to the existing 8" sewer force main. Based on our modeling, s change out of'pump impellers will meet this condition. A permit wil( be requued for this change, We estimate that the design, permitting, and related wnstruction and impeller change out can be completed by August I, 2006. 2.. Replace the existing 8" gravity sewer line at the end of the existing 8" sewer force main on Eight Street and McPherson Drive with a new 12" gravity line, This replacement line is approximately 1200 feet in length. A gravity sewer extension permit will be required for this pipe replacement; however, it can be done using the fast track method. We estimate that the design and construction of this work can be completed by August 1, 2006. We are also attaching a copy of the pump station modeling that generated the estimated pumping rates for the various pumping scenarios. This information is summarized in the attached analysis.. The attached analysis with supporting documents should be sent to the Construction Grants and Loans Section for their review.. If you have any questions relating to this issue, please let me know. Sincerely, Alley illiams, Carmen & Ki Inc. a_ ~,~~ e L. Russe P.E. DLft/ja Attachments 740 Chapel Hill Road (27215) P 0. Box 1179 • Burlington, North Carolina 27216 Tel. - (336) 2265534 • Fax- (336) 226-3034 awck.com ESTABLISHED 1960 HLLtT WILLL HI'IJ I'dX •JJOLLOJUJ4 I'Idl 1 GUVO 14 •Jl !'. VJ '~ 03224 ANALXSIS OF FLOWS TO THE INDUSTRIAI. DRIVE PUMP STATION Febn~ary 21, 2006 This section swnmarizes the estimates of flows tributary to the City of Mebane Industrial Drive Pump Station as related to the proposed construction of the Buckhozzr Pump Station and Force Main Project, including the proposed STAG Project on the north and south side of interstate I-40/85. During the review of the subject pzoject by the Construction Grants and Loan Sections, questions have been raised regazding the available capacity in the Industrial Drive Pump Station. Following a review ofthe actual pump performance using calculated pump drawdowns, it was determined that the existing Industrial Drive Pump Station is actually operating at 501.2 GPM. While the station was oziginally rated at 350 GTPM, actual system head (TDI~ is less than estimated and the pump is operating at a point on the pump curve where it is pumping 501.2 GPM. This difference in head is attributed to fording trapped air in the force main due to a malfunctioning air release valve, Following manual release of the air, the pump opezated at its true system head (approximately 100 feet) and yielded the 501.2 GPM pumping zate. Due to the age of these aiz release valves, the City of 1vlebane has ozdered new valves for replacement to achieve consistent system operation. With the pumping capacity of the Indrrstrial Drive Pump Station being established at approximately 500 GPM, the receiving line was then evaluated for adequacy to accommodate these flows. Dozing the pump evaluation, the receiving manhole was observed during actual pump operation. While some pipe submergence occurred in the 8" receiving line, no manhole overflow occurred. Modeling for this 8" line does indicate pipe submergence of almost 3 feet at 500 GPM; therefore, it is zecommended that approximately 1200 feet of 8" gravity sewer being upsized to 12", A 12" Line can accommodate appzoximately 1300 GPM when flowing full at a slope of 0,65% (slope of the existing 8" line). The Industrial Drive Prunp Station currently has existing flows of approximately 45,000 CrPD from businesses flowing to this station, It also accepts flows fiom another pump station (L,. J. Rogers Pump Station) that currently has approximately 1,000 GPD of wastewater that flows into it. While the L. J. Rogers station currently pumps only 2-3 cycles per day, it has pumps that are rated at 200 GPM. These pumps are currently over designed for the existing flow and it is zecommended that this station be downszzed to a 100 GPM station. TfLis downsizing will provide additional capacity in the Industrial Drive Pump Station while providing capacity to accept additional users tnibutary to the L.J. Rogers Station. We have modeled these two stations as if connected to the existing 8" force main with the current pumps when operating sepazately and when operating simultaneously. This modeling indicates the following: Page 1 HLLCI W1LL1H1'IJ ~~[^JJVLL VJUJ4 A. Existins Pumps -Modelins Results 1141 1 LVVV 14 •Jl i".UV 13 03226 Industrial Drive Pump Station Pumping Rates a Operating alone 485 GPM b. Operating with L. J. Rogers Pump Station on line 485 GPM B. 2. L, J. R.ogeis Station Pumping Rates a Operating alone 75 GPM b. Operating with Industrial Dr. Pump Station on line 0 GPM As noted from this modeling, the Industrial Drive pumps have an estimated pumping rate of 485 GPM, which is very close to the observed pump rate of 500 GPM during the "drawdown" test. It is also noted that the modeling indicated that the L. J, Rogers Pump Station could pump 75 GPM when operating alone, but cotild pump 0 GPM when the Industrial Drive Pump Station was operating. With this being the case, the impellers on the L. J. Rogers Pump Station will need to be changed to provide a higher head to produce 100 GPM when the Industrial Drive Pump Station is operating. The modeling also indicates that if the L. J. Rogers Pump Station Impellers are changed, the following pumping rates would occur at both sta5ons: Existins Pum 3~s with I~Tew Impellers in L. J. Rogers - Modeling Results 1. Industrial Drive Pump Station Pumping Rates a Operating alone 485 GPM b. Operating with L. J. Rogers Pump Station online 437 GPM ?, L. 7.. Rogers Station Pumping Rates (with new impellcrs) a Operating alone 377 GPM b. Operating with Industrial Dr. Pump Station on line 98 GPM Based on the pump station modeling, if the L. J. Rogers Pump Station is connected to the existing 8" force main, and the impellers aze changed to provide 98 GPM when the Industrial Drive Pump Station is operating, the Industrial Drive Pump Station would be capable of pumping 437 GPM when the I,, J. Rogers Pump Station is operating. This indicates that the Industrial Drive Pump Station has available capacity of 437 GPM peak pumping capacity at the wozst case event when the L. 7. Rogers Pump Station changes are made. Page 2 HLLCi W1LLIHI'IJ i"[Sx ^JJVGLGJW4 line 1 «.+u~ 14 •..+c C. industrial Drive Puma Station Estimate of Contributory Flow it has been proposed that the L,.. J. Rogezs Pump Station be downsized to 100 GPM. This results in the Indusn'ial Drive Pump Station having a pumping capacity of 437 GPM when the L. J~ Rogers Pump Station is operating, ~ vi ,~ oaua The following is the estimate of contributory flow to the industrial Drive Pump Station, including flows from the new Orange County Schooi and the STAG Project area. Oran e Coun School Pum Stafion 205 GPM (PEAK RATE) This statioai was originally proposed at 220 GPM; however; it has been indicated tbat it can be revised to 205 GPM and still maintain adequate velocities in the 6" force main, This report is based on the assumption that this station will have a final design capacity of 205 GPM. 2. STAG Protect Area 69.7 GPM (PEAK RATE) The STAG Project includes the installation of new 8" gravity sewers in the Buckhom Road area on the north and south side of Interstate 85/40 to serve residents and 2 churches. There are a total of 28 existing residences, 38 undeveloped lots, and 2 churches to be served by the proposed sewer extension, Using flow estimates provided by C;ovlter, Jewell, Thames, P.A, for these users, the following estimate of peak flow is presented. A. Area North of U85-40 i. Houses (Existing and Undeveloped Lots) 48 x 360 Gal/day = 17,280 GPD (Avg. FIow) ii. Churches 1,050 GPD (Avg.. Flow) Total Average Daily Flow 18,330 GPD iii. Peaking Factor ~- 3.96 iv. Estimated Peak Flow =18,330 x 3..96 = 72,587 GPD 1440 = 50.4 CrPM (PEAK. FL,OV~ B. Area South of U85-40 i. Houses (Existing and iJndeveloped Lots) l8 x 360 GaUday = 6,480 GPD (Avg. Flow) ii. Peaking Factor - 4.28 iv. Estimated Peak Flow = 6480 x 4.28 = 27,734 GPD =1440 =19.3 GPM (PEAK) C. Total Peak Flow from A, + B. = 50..4 + 19.3 = 69.7 GPM Page 3 114111 will Y1111V I LLn VJVGG VVVV`t ILLI 1 GVVV i^Y•JG InVG 0322a 3. Existing Flows Tributary to the Industrial Drive Pump Station 112.5 GPM (PEAK FT,OVV) The existing flows to this station are bzLSiness and commercial flows with some businesses being in opezation on a 24 hoar a day basis, This continual water usage xesults in lower peaking rates when compared to residential usage; however, we are using a peaking factor of 3.6 which we are of the opinion is conservative foz these flows. The average daily water usage from the users in this azea is approximately 45,000 GPD. The peak sewer flow is therefore estimated at 45,000 x 3,6 ~ 1440 = 112.50 GPM. 4. Summary of Contributory Flow to the Industrial Drive Pump Station an Orange County School Pump Station 205 GPM (Peak) b. STAG Project Area 69.7 GPM (Peak) c. Existing Flow 112.5 GPM (Peak) TOTAL PEAK FLOW 387.2 GPM (Peak) As the existing Industrial Drive Pump Station is estimated to have a pumping rate bf 437 GPM when the L. J. Rogers Pump Station is reconfigured, this station has the available capacity to accept the peak flows from the new Orange County School Pump Station and firm the STAG project area It is also noted that the flow estimates from the residential users in the STAG azea are very conservative as the average residential monthly water usage in Mebane is less than 6,000 gallons pez month, or 200 gallons per day. This value is almost 45% less than the value used is the computations; therefore, the actual peak, flows will be less than the computed peak. Pzepare Darrell L. ussell, P.E. February 21, 2006 ~ 4 `tee ~ ~ESStp'~G/f~ 4 .f ~, ~ °Q REAL :p '~: ~v~ ~''~RF~I. L. R~,:~~,~ Page 4 From: Cecil G. Madden To: Paul Thames Date: 3/t/2006 1:02:02 PM Subject: Re: Orange County - Buckhorn Project Hello Paul, Per our conversation of earlier today, it is important for you to understand that all review of your project has been suspended, until we have received complete written responses to all comments to date.. These responses must be supported with revised plans and specifications that reflect any/all needed changes. It must also be supported with complete calculations. Once a complete package has been presented we will once again resume review. In response to your email, I received a call from Mr Russell about 10:30 today saying a fax would be coming from the City of Mebane, and that he would provide some supporting documents by mail, The fax came at about 10:31. It included a letter from the City of Mebane, a letter from Mr. Russell, and a four page engineeering report from Mr. Russell, We do understand that Orange County has a significant need to be able to proceed, so that a school can be brought on line. We want the County to be able to accomplish their goal. However, the County needs to serve as the Lead Agent for this project, and assure that a complete submittal is provided in one package Our work loads do not allow us to proceed in stepwise manner. Our office does not serve as a clearinghouse. Please understand that a complete submittal is required. If this project were not funded through our program, your application would likely be returned as incomplete, At that time you would be expected to start over, and would be required to provide a new permit fee. We would rather not have you go down that road. Please advise if you have further questions regarding this email. Cecil G. Madden, Jc, P.E. Supervisor Design Management Unit Construction Grants & Loans Section r91A1715-62n3 r~ Orange County, North Carolina Proposed Alternative Financing April 2Q06 COPs Issuance A B C March 2006 Proposal Manager's Recommended Funding Proposal 1. School Projects CHCCS Renovations $5,150,000 $5,150,000 OCS Gravelly Middle School Construction $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Total School Projects $8,650,000 $8,650,000 2. Count Projects With Defined Timetables Animal Services Facility Planning $700,000 $700,000 Seymour Senior Center $4,150,000 $4,150,000 SportsPlex $6,000,000 $6,000,000 Sub-Total County Projects With Defined Timetables $10,850,000 $10,850,000 3. Other County Projects Requiring Funding Conservation Easements $2,000,000 $1,250,000 Efland/Buckhorn Community Water and Sewer Construction $500,000 $1,250,000 Sub-Total Other County Projects Requiring Funding $2,500,000 $2,500,000 Total Proposed Alternative Financing for School and County Projects $22,000,000 $22,000,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 rrently Appropriated (Uncommitted) County Pay-As-You-Go Projects :cessary to Complete andlBuckhorn Community Water and wer Construction) 1 Subject to subsequent BOCC decisions (as early as March 15, 2006 budget work session) regarding individual project funding allocations D Possible BOCC Alternative $5,150,000 $3,500,000 $8,650,000