Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-1959 CRCCSC, NICHOLS AND CNDRCS5 V, W,rRMI; CONSULTING GNGINGVnS 11. C. NICHOLS UANCIGGR VADING YGLGPNONG I;. G, rMnl;ss PORT WORM 2, TGXAS CI)Isom 7.11361 November 31 1959 t ' Mr. Homer B1y City Manager City Hall Denton, Texas Dear Mr. Blyi ' Attached hereto is our Interim Report oo Water and Sanitary Betilerage Facilities. This Report has been prepared in accordance with the instructions given by the City of Denton. ' Your attention is called to the term "Interim" Report, This termin- ology is used since this Report is being submitted prior to the completion of the Master Plan. It is not anticipated that the blaster ' Plan would necessitate major revision in the Interim Reportl although some minor adjustments may be deeirabin, It is expected that the Master Plan will be developed to such a degree that it would be avail. ' able for conoultation purposes prior to actual construction, Only a limited effort has been made to program the oonstruotion, Stage development of the proposed improvement must, by neoessity, be coordinated by the City, your financial advisors and ourselves, ~i We would be pleased to meet with City Council, Utility Board and your staff to discuss the details of the Interim Report, Respectfully submitted, ~MSL, NICH0118 AND ENDRESS ' By~~1~j'1 ~ W/W Marvi eta thole MCNI lt 1 r r INTEPRI?4 REPORT ON WATER AND SANITARY SEWERAGE FACILITIES r r r PREPARF'D FOR THj CITY OF DF'NTON, MrAS r 1 r r r r r r ramp, NICHOLS AND EN,ORFSSS ' CONSULTING RNOTNEERS NOVF,148rR 19 9 1 r ' ==_'a fN[L9[, NII:IIUIB A.NU [NOk[69 i 1 B OF CONIE TS P CI1APTER A INTRODUCTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It Introduoti,on A-1 ' 2. Conolueions and Reoommendatione A-2 3• Summary of Estimated Coat of Reoommended Improvements A-5 ' CHAPTER 8 - POPULATION STUDIES 1. Population Study B-1 ' 2. Population Distribution B-5 CHAPTFft C WATEH• SUPPLY 1, General C-1 1 2. Study of Water Produotion Reoords C-1 Anticipated Future Water Requirements C-4 Present Souroe of Water Supply C-5 1 56 Additional Water Supply to t4eet Future Requirements 0-8 60 Water Treatment Plant C-9 CHAPTER D . WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1. General D-1 21 Storage - Ground and Elevated D-2 1 3• Water Distribution System D-7 CHAPTER E - SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM ' 1, General FI.1 2. Design Faotore E-4 3. Investigation of Line A F-6 Investigation of Line B E-Ei 5. Investigation of Lines C and D E«U 6. Outfall Links E-10 76 Estimates of Cost E-17 CHAPTER F - SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES le General F-1 1 2. Desoription of Existing Sewage Plant F-1 3. Proposed Sewage Treatment Faoilitiea F-4 1 1 Loa TABLE NO, 1 WATER PRODUCTION IN 1000 GALLONS C-2 TABLE, NO. 2 ANTICIPATED FUTURE WATER REQUIREMENTS C-6 ' TABLE NO, 3 ESTIMATED STORAOE REQUIREMENTS D-4 TABLE N04 4 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM D"OvamNTS ' ESTIMATES OF COST D-10 TABLE NO. 5 EXxSTINO SEWERAGE COLLECTION LINER - E-2 PRESENT FLOWS AND 1985 FLOWS TABLE Nos 6 ESTIMATED SEWAO'E FLOWS AND PROPOSED E-13 PIPE SIZES FOR YEAR 2985 TABLE NO, 7 IMPROVEMENTS TO SEWERAGE COLLECTION E-20 SYSTEM - ESTIMATES OF COST TABLE NO# 8 ESTIMATED CONTRIBUTING POPULATION AND SEWAGE FLAWS - SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES F-8 ' TABLE N0. 9 ESTIMATE OF COST - 1,5 MOD OEWAOE PLANT P-15 ' TABLE NO. 10 ESTIMATE OF COST - 2.0 MOD a.!;WAGE PLANT F-16 TABIE N0, 11 ESTIMkTE OF COST - 4,O MOD SEWAGE PLANT F-17 1 PIAT~;S ' PLAT , E, NO T+i 1 COMPARATIVE OROWPH CURVES ' 2 POPULATION PROJECTION AND PAST GROWTH ' 3 FUTURE POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - '"T` H[fd., UI VI tMN AI4U f.Nb H[HH ' L G O r, 4 WATER PRODUCTION ' 5 PROPOSED EXPANSION OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES ' 6 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXISTING AND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ' 7 EXISTING COLLECTION SYSTEM AND DRAINAGE AREAS H POPULATION - DENSITY CURVE ' 9 AREA - SEWAGE FLAW CURVE 10 PROPOSED COLLECTION SYSTEM WITH HICKORY CREEK AREA DIVERTED SOUTH 11 PROPOSED COLLECTION SYSTEM WITHOUT DIVERTING HICKORY CREEK AREA 12 LOCATION MAP 1 1 1 ' -=`s y.-_._... r"tt", P41017UL4 AHtl t" ""N 'y ' CHAPTER A ' INTRPP,1„CTLjQLA „ COMME TI ' 1. Introduction ' The purpose of this Report is to present the findings of various investigations of the water and sanitary sewerage systems, ' These investigations included studies of existing facilities and ' developing recommendatione for expansions of the systems to adequately serve present and future growth of the City, This Report is divided ' into the following seotionsi Chapter A - Introduction and Reoommerdations ' Chapter H - Population Studies ' Chapter C - Water Supplies Chapter D - Water Distribution System ' Chapter E - Sewage Collection System Chapter P - Sewage Treatment Facilities These studios have been concluded without the benefit of ' the Master Plan which has been authorized by the City, it is antioi- paced that the Master Plan, when completed, may alter the population studies, population distribution and land utilization from that fore- casted in this Report, Attention is also called to the fact that topographic mapping, which is included as a part of the Master Plan ' work, hays not been available for these studies, The only topographic maps available were prepared by the U, S, Corps of Engineers which ' were limited in area covered, and the Army Map Servioe, which were at a contour interval of $0 feet. 1 A-l ---'-----'-="T`• r^`-_W rnr r Are mn, iinl. 11 Aun runntOn s-n'-- _ ' Due to the factors outlined in the paragraph above, this Report has been entitled "Interim", It is anticipated that this ' Interim Report will require some revisions as the Master Plan is developed. t 2. a o ions and Reoon►mendations The following conclusions have been drawn and recommendations We based on the findings of the various studies. ' a. The City of Denton has adequate water supply to meet their needs through 1969, The firm yield of the supply may be exceeded in 1970, The City should continue its efforts to obtain additional surface water supplies, 1 b. The water trsa-bment plant is of.suffioient oapaoity to meet the expeoted needs through 1965. No expansion is recommended at this time, It is recommended that $13000.00 be made available at this time for modi. ' fication work on the treatment facilities, It is ' possible that a portion of this modification work is already included in the Operating Budget, ' i o, A deficiency in ground and elevated storage exists, I It is recommended that a 1,5 million gallon tank be t constructed in the near future at an estimated cost of ' $270~000.00, It is further recommended that additional ground storage be provided at the time the water ' treatment plant is expanded, ' A-2 tdt t nr. rn rIIt1 A4 b nH, At"9 ~r_ _ d, It is anticipated that water distribution problems ' will develop as the City becomes more dependent on surface supply. This trend roqutres that most of ' the water be pumped into the system at the water ' treatment plant and then transmitted to all sections of the City, This creates the need for large,feeder ' mains. It is recommended that $521,235.04 be ex- panded on the distribution system to meet the needs to 1965 ' e, The City is confronted with several problems in the sewerage system. These Include overloaded trunk ' mains, service to the State School for the Mentally Retarded Children and an overloaded sewage treatment r plant. Studies indicate the solution referred to ' as Scheme No, 1 is the most desirable. In brief, this scheme envisions the relieving of overloaded ' conditions on Lines A, B, 01 and D, constructing a new Hickory Creek Outfall, which will divert the sewage to the watershed of the State School, the ' State School Outfall and the Pecan Creek Outfall, The estimated post of Scheme No, l is $2,033,267,40. ' It is anticipated that a portion of Scheme No. 1 can be delayed until further development is made in the Hickory Creek Area, The proposed line between ' I A-3 ' tnt[aR, Pim[im.n Ann [Nhn[0.p i the existing Hobson Street Lift Station and the ' Hickory Creek Outfall could be delayed for some time, 1 This would require the continued operation of this station, but this should not prove to be objectionable, ' It would also be p,>aeible to delete the main which serves the area north of 'ohe State School, since there is very 1 little development at this time. The omission of 1 those two mains from the program would reduce the cost $158,940,00, ' It is further recommended that the construction of the Pecan Creek Outfall be delayed until 1965. This 1 will require the existing treatment plant to operate at 1 an overloaded oapaoity, but it is expected that a satisfactory effluent can be produced with careful ' operation. It is reoommended that Scheme No, 1 be constructed, 1 deleting the mains outlined above, The estimated cost of this project is as follows 1 Line H $2720207 1 State School Outfall 2960483 Hickory Creek Outfall 5589704 ' Connections from Line H and C to Line A 34,153 Paralleling Linea B, C, and U ,144 1 TOTAL $1,270,691 1 A-4 1 f. It is reoommended that a new sewage treatment plant ' be constructed in the vicinity of Pecan Creek and Garza-Little Elm Reservoir. It is further recommended that the plant be of the activated sludge process and have a capacity of l.5 million gallons a day ae outlined r under Scheme No, I in Chapter F. The estimate4 cost ' of this plant is $432,635.000 31 suffim-o~9stim"sd cost of RQQoMend,-ej,, =ovaerte A summary of the estimated costs of reoommended improvements as outlined in Paragraph 2 above is as followss ' Modifications of Water Supply Facilities $ 13,000 1#5 Million Gallon Elevated Tank 270,000 Water Dietribution System Improvements 21 ' Sub-Total Water System Improvements $604,235 Sewage Colleotion System $19270,691 ' Sewage Treatment Plant .432,P~.i" ' Sub-Total Sewerage System Improvements 11,7016526. GRAND TOTAL - WATER AND SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENTS $2s M761 It should be noted that the above figures do not inolude ' financial cost, legal fees, intrest during construotiun, eto, t A-5 FOHE C. NICOOLN AND 94D)KN! CHAPTER rJ ~xio~. unr~s ' le Povulation Study A sound prediction of population increase, and a reason- able projection tf the areas in which the City can be expected to exp*ndp are of essential importance in planning future water and ' cower faoil,itiese Shortsighted or inadequate planning can result in ' burdensome wastes of public funds, Water &nd sewage treatment plants usually constitute two of the largest capital investments a munici- pality has to undertake, Likewise# the service lines for these two systems involve the expenditure of large sums of public money, If these lines and treatment plants are not sized and located to handle future growth, they soon booome inadequate, requiring construction of ' expensive parallel faoilitieee For this reason it is important that ' careful consideration be given to growth potentials when planning improvements to utility systems, ' Many factors must be evaluated in arriving at growth I predictions for a oitye Those considered of the greatest influence ' on Denton are as followsi (a) &o~gini.o._Condition, of the Areas Denton has an ex- oeptionally stable and haalthy economye The City is largely self., ' sufficient in that only a small percentage of workers commute to other ' ---='-'---'~Ypf KS t. NItl NtILA AHtt. llb pl /IA towns for employment. In addition to the varied types of industrial, manufacturing and business firmap the City has a permanent and steady ' dollar input from the State colleges and other governmental sources, From a broader viewpoint, the entire southwestern section of the ' country is rapidly industrializing with. a result of wre yob oppor- tunities AM increased family dollar income, The north central part of Texas is receiving a large portion of this economic expansions ' (b) Climaotic and Envirgnroen a Inm The olimate in the area is mild and conducive to year-round outdoor activities ' with a minimum amount of discomfort. Denton's higher educational t faoilities, its quiet and attractive residential areast and the general attitude of its citizens present a highly desirable environ. ' ment in which to live, (o) .I.t-U11_18e~e 4 of e-AMU Natural resources of the area are somewhat limited, Oil !.s produced in the north part of Denton Countyl however, the most important resources of the county are its rich farmlands and surface water supply, (d) ,9~rroundinat Metir..oliti_nfi}e oeat The proximity of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area is perhaps the most ' important single factor in Denton's growth potential. Present trerrdd of industry are toward decentralization to areas surrounding the concentrated urban oentere~ This ie particularly true of component ' manufacturers who serve the larger assembly plants, Denton will un- doubtedly draw more of these basic industries, with the resulting ' population inoreaKee, ' Within a period of twenty-five to thirty-five years ' Denton will be an immediate suburb of both Dallas and Fort Worth, and will be <,e place of residence for many people working in the two larger oities. Future development of freeways and rapid transit ' systems will have the greatest effect on the time of this expansion. (e) Availability of Land for Fxpa siont There is ample mom for almost unlimited growth in all directions from the City. Much wooded, rolling terrain, ideally suited for residential use is available. Likewise there is much open, well drained land for all possible classifications of use. Hiektorioally, Denton has experienced a moderate but ' steady rate of growth since the first census was ta~en in 18801 The population has grown from 961 persons at that time, to an estimated figure of 309000 for the beginning of 19601 The greatest rates of growth, from a percentage standpoint have been in the two war decades (1910-1920 and 19+0.1950) and in the present decades The current populations as noted above, includes some 91000 students and faculty members from the two large State colleges. These persons are considered residents by the Federal Census Suretu and ahould be ' counted in the City's population to be served by utilities since they are in Denton at least nine months of the year. The Federal Census prior to 1950 enumerated collage sti%dents at their home residences rather than their college residenoes, it fact that must be recognized when studying past growth figures. ' g-3 7UEEW FIMPHILp Anb crrbneny 1 I As an initial step toward arriving at a population forecast for Denton, oomparative growth curves were plotted as shown on Plate 1. These five curves were plotted to show the pattern of population trends for other oities after they passed the present Denton popu- ' lations Towne chosen have all pao.ied the 30,000 person stage at least 30 years ago and not logger than 50 years ago. Effort was also made to select oommunities that had growth influencing factors similar to thoso of Denton. Several. signifioaft,facts are pointed out by this plate. First, it can be seen that once the 30,000 level was passed, all five cities continued to expand even though each ourvo included the depression period of the thirties. Their rates of ' development vary oonsiderablyl however, a common upward trend can be seen, The projected population curve for Denton has been super- imposed on this plate for comparison purposes. ' Analysis of the influenoing faotorm mentioned above clearly indicate that Denton is facing a period of continued expansion* The ' rate of this growth would appear to follow a steady, straight line increase. Barring a nation-wide economic recession of major consequenoe, ' there is no reason to ass°,ime a retarding of the City's growth. Like- wise, the estataishod, eoonomidally sound, steady growth trend will bo greatly exceeded only if high-employment industry should locate in I the immediate vicinity, There is always a possibility that such an industrial development will occur, with a resulting population surge; 1 ' B-4 PNU CNpNCIi [1 1 ' however, sound planning for utilities developments cannot be based ' on such speculation, The projected population growth is shown on Plate 2 and is as followsi 1965 - 37,000 1970 - 44,000 1975 - 51,000 ' 1980 - 5$0000 1985 - 65,000 ' These figures represent a steady growth rate of 1,400 persons per year for the next twenty-five yeari!, After this twenty- five year period, it is entirely possible that the rate will increase ' due to the previously mentioned expansion of the Dallas-Fort Worth motropolitan area, It should be noted that the population of the ' State School for the Mental Retarded Children has not been included in the above figurer, since this area i,s outside the city limits, 2, ration Distribution ' Most of Denton's growth in the past few years has been in the northeast and northwest sections of the City, with only moderate ' development in other scattered areas, For the immediate future, in- creasing growth is seen for the area west and northwest of the high school with some slowing down in the northeast section, Considerable new development is anticipated along the Dallas highway in the south- east section of the City with some filling in of the area south of ' the present City limits between the Santa Fe and Texas and Paoifio Railroads. 1 ~~5 _._,__._r f11FT 1T. IIIC H❑l.h ANb fNp!lT~q Development by 1985 should extend on south to the new ' State Sohool area. Other major growth is antioipated aoross the entire northern edge of the City and on both sides of Loop 288 on the east side, Very little residential development is expeoted for the west ' and southwest seotions in this twenty-five year period, This area is more ideally suited for industrial expansion due to the trans- portation faoilities and open land available. Further development of the Denton Airport will make this area even more attraotive to ' industry, ' The antioipated areas of development are shown on Plate 3, 1 ' t3~b ' -T' rPi It r 6F. I I IV.. H ru J0 nr ifi Pro `1 'It M11 r 1 CHAPTER C 1 WATER SUPPLY 1 1, pen_ eral 1 This section of the Report presents the findings of various investigations of the water supply facilities for the City of Denton, ' These investigations include the studies of past water use, anticipated water requirements, present sottroes of supply and future sources of r supply. 1 2, Study of Water Pr°r on R,,,, egorda Records of water production have been maintained for many years, ' For the purpose of these atuftes, records from 1944 to date have been examined. It should be acknowledged that errors probably exist in these 1 records during the earlier yearly however, this is considered to have 1 only a minor influence on the overall water production. A summary of the water production for the period 1948 through 1 1959 is shown as Table 1. This tabulation is the sum of all production as measured at the various well pump stations and at the water treatment ' plant, The water treatment plant was placed in operation in September 1 1957, Prior to that date all water was obtained from underground sources, The tabulation below indicates the total annual production, 1 yearly average daily production and the maximum daily production for the period 1954 through 19581 1 ' C-1 N H rl N N N N N M N N N IVA f 50 ~ ~ ~ N ~pM rl dp Ow ~ ~ ~ ~ O vM1 ~ `Rw w M ' ~ ~ ~ ~p ~ ~ h OD ~Op ~p ' ~ ~ h w 4 <V L ~ c'1 N r"w O rl N ~ ~ N w Q~w w w pph ~yw w h w nor ~pw N H ~ F` ~ ~ C~ C. ~ +r~ r'~-1 r1 rMI 1 +n ti ~ M w w h ~~~s Lt w Q~ (y ~ w 1 h ~D ~ t% I OD h lOp~ ~O 1 ~~tp~ a SZ NNw ~~p ~ ~~p ~ ow $ o~ ~ 1 ~O ~ ~ ~O vD ~ ~ ~ N 1 h ~ rw ~ r-h o w o %0 w 1 '%XfN ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 w ~ ~ ~ w w N ~No N h a ~ A L w hw ~ w Ow w w w ,~}h w w ~'pi, ~w 1 ~ a ~ r1~ V1 ~ ~ h w1 ~pOp fib 5A-__~`~.._~.-I ..__.-.~.;1. 1 Year Total Production Average Day Maximum Day Ratio oallons )VD ~ ~imum Averagg, 1950 724067,ooo 1,99 2.88 1.45 ' 1951 793425000 2.17 3,75 1.73 1952 842,642,ooo 2.30 4.18 1.82 1953 855,552,ooo 2.34 4.45 1,90 ' 1954 478,498,ooo 2.68 5.84 2.18 1955 1014,91o,ooo 2.78 5,46 1096 ' 1956 1,1720691,000 3020 5.41 1,69 1957 1054:111,o00 2.89 5192 245 ' 1958 945,941,ooo 2459 6.84 2.64 ' From the tabulation above it is apparent that the average daily water production increased steadily from 1950 through 1956 with a Small decline in 1957 and 1958. This decline in production probably is due to ' the fact that the I-Ong drouth period of the 1950's ended during 1957s The increased rainfall of 1957 and 1958 could be expected to reduce the ' average daily water consumption, The ratio of the maximum daily pro- duotion to the average c;tiily production varies from 1,45 to ,05 with ' the exception of 1958 when this ratio was 2,64, Apparently the year of ' 1958 was not a normal year, and not too much weight has been given to this particular year, The average ratio for the 9 year period from 1950 ' to 1958 is 1.95. Using the figures from the tabulation above, and the estimated ' population of the City, the water use per capita can be determined, This ' is shown ~o the tabulation bolati 3 C-3 . - rIt teo,,. 111131414 6 nnu e,+uursn - ' Year pe om4tioa tiiated Avermoe0 Day Ma-WD Day Avera"Is/Cg3aoiDtay Maximum Day 19`,0 210345 1499 2,88 93 135 ' 1951 229176 2,17 3.75 98 169 ' 1952 23,573 2,30 4.18 98 177 1953 24,104 2,34 4,45 97 185 ' 1954 24000 2,68 5,84 108 235 1955 250700 2,78 5,46 108 212 ' 1956 26000 3,20 3,41 121 204 1 1957 270300 2.89 5492 106 217 1958 280200 2,59 6,84 92 243 ' 3, Qntioir0ateFuture Water Rea iramen s t The anticipated future water requiremento can be predicted based on two prime faotorue (1) past water usst.and (2) expected growth of the city, Based on the data developed in the paragraphs above, it is noted that the average daily water use pe,r capita varied from 93 gallons to 121 gallons, and the maximum daily use varied from 135 to 243 gallons for the same period, The arithmetic average for the period is 101 gallons per capita average daily use and 193 gallons per capita maximum daily use, For the purpose of these investigational the average daily use per capita for the year 1960 is estimated to be 105 gallons, while ' the maximum daily use is estimated to be 210 gallons, It is anticipated ' that the average daily use will increase to 130 gallons per capita and that the maximum daily use will increase to 260 g gallons per capita by ' the year 1985, 1 c_4 FOMIF, +utHB?rn nkD ,:unuron I The exrected population growth of Minton is studied under a different section of this Report. In addition to the growth of the City, consideration must be given to the effect of the State School, for Mentally Retarded Children. The patients and employees of the State ' school have not been included in the population predictions for the City. While definite information is not available, it is estimated that the population at the State School for the Mentally Retarded Children will vary from 742 in 1960 to 2,700 in 1970 and that the average dail- water use per capita will be 110 gallons. The future water requirements, based on the criteria outlined ' above, are shown as Table 2. It is expected that the average daily consumption will inorease from 9,23 million gallons per day in 1960 to I 8.75 million gallons per day in 1985, It is noted that these estimates nf future water requirements make no allowance for a large water consuming industry. 4, 'resent Sogrce or Wa S h-4.. I The City of Denton presently obtains its municipal water supply I from both underground and surface water sources, Groundwater resources were the first to be developed and served as the sole source of supply ' until September 1957, The City has a total of 11 wells available for production, These wells are drilled into the Trinity Sand group con- listing of the Paluxy Sand and the Travis Peak Sand. The Travis Peak ' Sand is more commonly referred to as the Trinity Sands, It is estimated that the maximum production which can be obtained from the existing I 0-5 U. NttnI nL.r, euti C14 0 ur.ne r. . i '~•p f+♦1CVr~I~~~~~~OVb1+~1~cON~OrGI~~~o~f~t~~~~~R1 ~G H N h"1 ~d .f Vl ~O ti 0~ O. O p • • (y • • • • • • • • • • • j rl r-I rmi rn~l r0-4A4 "I rvi r4 k 'A~ o ri rf N N t~1 M cY1 ' v1 v~ v1 v1 ~O ~D ~o ~O ti t~ N N co Go 00 0` +n to 3' r, ch N N A P-4 o X77 NN(~SNr-Ir-trlrlAdo ` ' ~~h~~O~t'~L~~~O~oD~N..{{~~~b{{rNpl•1'd~~Wfr•100N~N~N hR0000tTQArglyd-IHrIHH~~~~r~lpq rnq ' 0 OWN ~O i'!R'0~-1(~hV~1hO~ C C~O~N1Y~1[~CN~h NMMMA4' .4 .41?~d`+n%AA%AvRlO*1O1OvN[*~co co co 00 w w.y w w F w h w w w h w w w F w w w w~ w a w w M w N t'%iMi°.7 • Nt~1lClMilGrltG~lcG`ltG+~M~G1M(MCG1M ~004dCi0eoC14OC,iC7t70c70pb o OC~00tJ` o N 1h v1 O O O G w. w "'M w w w h F w w h h w w w w w h 40;4 ,HrrlHHHNNNNNN<SNNNNNNNNN N 1 • • • h• . c~ • oo • • oo• a • • • • • • • • • • • • %A 4lr+ ~p ~cao.O.r°l r°+(r»~~r1~N~HA-z IrizH H r9rlAIiK~cQQ 9!*Rv ~ N~~ N ~Dv ` H v, o r, . U, r` ao v, ~o 00 cn, 0 c" IN, ,~dy ,v.. q. wcVw F h w. M. ww, w.~ywh. h, w~pF wraw. w. F. w.~j4,cc+w wow F, w w ire r1 N M t~1 t~1 A M t~ t'a g7 P tY +n +Nn ~n w .v~ u~ vOi~o ' y b N HHHMHrlrIHHMr♦Ht-4 HHH- 4HHHr~lralr=lr=4 r-IHH C.( water wells in 5,0 million gallons per day. It in further estimated that ' the average production from these wells is approximately 2,5 trillion ' gallons per day, It is anticipated that the production from these wells will decline in the coming years. For the purpose of t,heea studies, it has b-en estimated that the City will obtain no water from underground sources by 1970s ' The City has acquired conservation storage rights in the Carza. Little Elm Reservoir which is owned by the U, S, Government, A total of 4%ooo0 acre feet of conservation storage is included in this reser- voirs The City of Denton holds rights to 21,000 acre feet while the City of Dallas has 415,000 sore feet, This results in Denton's bhare ' being 4,82% of the total conservation storage, The Texas Board of Water Engineers has issued a permit to the City allowing an average daily withdrawal of approximately 10 million gallons, Recent studies of the reservoir indicates that Denton's share of th) storage will produce only about 540 million gallons per day during a critical drouth pe riodl therefore, even though the City has a permit for 10 million gallons per ' day the lake will provide only 5 million gallons per day during a critical period, The firm yield of the surface supply is, therefore, considered to be 5,0 million gallons per day, It should be noted that ' this is an average rate for the entire ar a ye and that a higher with. drawal rate can be mado in the summer months with a compensating lower rate in the winter months, Th9 total water supply for the City, combining surface and ground ' supplies, iv estimated at 7,5 million gallons per day for 1960, It is C-7 - InKtnt,. NIC 11 (11. 11 AIlb t,lhll[g0 1 further estimated that this will decrease to 5.0 million gallons per day by 1970. Since the development of a surface water supply there has been a steady change from ground water to surface water. While prior to 1957 all water was derived from ground water sources, +.he picture com- pletely changed after 1957, with surface water furnishing the major part of the water useage. This is graphically shown on Plate 4, t 5, AiWi,tional Water S on „y to Meet Fgture houirements The present well system is expected to have an average daily ' production of 2.50 million gallons per day and a maximum production of 5,0 million gallons per day for the year 1960 These supplies are 1 estimated to diminish to zero by 1970, It is not antioipate+d, nor recommended, that the underground resources be further developed as a municipal supply, It is recommended that all additional water require- ments be met from surface sources, The total amount of water to be derived from surface sources is indicated in Table Moo 2.:It should be noted that the average daily production from surface supplies exceed 5.0 million gallons per day in 1970. This iii sans that the requirement will be in excess of the firm ' yield of Denton's share in the Oarza-Little Elm Reservoir by 1970, It is not intended that this Interim Report include inveati» ' gationa of additional water supply to most the needs beyond 1970. It is strongly recommended, however, that Denton continue its efforts to insure an adequate water supply to meet its future water requirementdo r r.g ' Mttnt. ill❑MMn AMU YPAUU 4 L 6„ Water Treatme.nt_ plant The water treatment plant was constructed and placed in opera- tion during 1957, This plant has a normal, or rated capacity, of 4.0 million gallono ter day, These facilities may be overloaded to 6,0 ' million gallons per day for a t1hort period of time in order to most aummer demands, 1 Based on data shown in Table Noel, the average daily demand will exceed the rated capacity by 1970. The maximum daily requirements will ' exceed the plants capacity in 1966, It is therefore reoo mmended that ' a 4,0 million gallon per day expansion be made to the existing facilities prior to 1966. The estimated coat of this work it as follower 41000,000 gallon per day expansion of filter plant $350,000 ' 1,000,000 gallon clear well appurtenances 750000 Raw Water pumps (at intake) 2560 0 TOTAL $450, 000 r The proposed expansion of the water treatment plant is shown ' on Plate 5, Attention is called to the fact that a few modifioations are desirable at some of the existing water supply facilities, In order to facilitate better water plant operation, it is recommended that $59000,00 be available for equipment. An inspection of the raw water intake structure shows that an additional area adjacent to the structure should receive "rip-rap" protection, The estimated cost of this work is $$1000,00, Therefore, UA estimated modification work is estimated at $13,000.00. 0 C-9 YIitN6, If 1WHlll. it APM rW11lIMS CRAM M D E~~-~ UTION~SYS1'is~ i • Smnax~ This section of the Report oomprises the findings of various investi- gations concerning the water distribution system. For the purpose of 1 this Report, the water distribution system comprises ground and elevated ' storage and the network of piping which distributes the water from the water supply source to the consumer. It is impossible for a study of ' this nature to investigate all piping in the network, therefore, the investigations must be limited to trunk (feeder) mains and major laterals. The investigation covers the development of the distribution system for ' the period ending 1985, 2, 8toraar Urd end Elay r ted ' The storage reservoirs in a water system serve to provide water for three principal purposes (1) additional wstor to meet hourly demands which are in excess of the water supply facilities; (2) a standby supply ' to meet the increase in demand created during fins fighting periods, and (9) emergencies during short interruptions of the water supply, There ' are two types of storages ground storage and elevated storage. (around storage is generally a reservoir placed, immediately on top of the ground, or possibly just below the grout, , Water in this reservoir has been ' treated and is ready for usel howevor, it is necessary that it be re. pumped by high service pumps to be placed in the distribution system. Ground storApo is located at t'no water treatment plant and at each indi- victual wall pump station, Dr1 Iw tt ok. 14 1 if i 113 t.A Altlf U«rn t nn. Elevated storago is a reservoir which is set on a tower above the ground surface or on the ground at an elevation substantially above the distribution system. Water in this reservoir is also treated and is at ' sufficient pressure to flow into the mains. In other words, the elevated storage has been filled from the distribution system and has already been ' pumped by the high service pumping :!nits. The use of elevated storage ' has the major advantage of having water available for use, whereas ground storage requires the water to be pumped before it is available for use. 1!ho City of Denton has numerous storage reservoirs now existing in its distribution system. There is a total capacity of ground storage of 2.67 million gallons. The three existing, elevated tanks have a oombined ' storage of 1.61 million gallons. The location and amounts of storage are as .t'n'Iowa I Ground $torpAe At power plant 100000000 Gallons ' At Well No. 2 95,000 Gallons At Well No, 5 50,000 Gallons At Will No. 6 40,000 Gallons At Well No, 7 99;400 Gallons ' At Well No. 0 9joo0 Gallons At 1,Joll No. 9 959000 Gallons At Well No, 3.0 95,000 Gallons ' At Well No. 12 95,000 Gallons At water treittment plavit 1.000.000_Gallons ' Total 2,6680000 Gallons Boll Avenue r 360,000 Gallons High School 250,000 Gallons Thomas Street __1.000.000_Caallonn Total 1,6JU,r0„0a t1lons TOTAL ((around Elevated) 14,728,000 Gallonb D-2 ' t: 144 E f. bC. NItl H!9,!! Am? RIicir, r n9 ~ ' Tt should be noted that the storage tank at Thomas Street, commonly t referred to as "Scripture Hill" tank, is a 200000000 gallon standpipe, Only the top half, or 1,000,000 gallons of thin otandpipe, in available ' as elevated storage. The bottom hall' of the standpipe, or 1,000,000 gallons, is not considered as ground storage inasmuch as there are no ' facilities to place this water in the distribution system at an adequate There are several methods of determining the amount of s~.orage required ' for a distribution system. One of the best guides is the recommendation of the Board of Insurance Commissioners of Texas. If these recommendations ' are followed, a city will have adequate storage to meet all domestio ' demands as well as sire demands, The board reoommends that ground storage be provided in an amount equal to a 24-hour supply at the rate of 190 t gallons per capita per day. It is further recommended by the Board that elevated storage should be capable of providing a 10-hour supply at, the ' rate of 130 gallons per capita per day, which in equivalent to 54.17 gallonn per person, Therefore, the recommendations of the Board of Insurance Commisaionern roquire that storage facilities be increased as a city grows in population. Table No. 3 shows the calculated storage requirements Neksed on the reoommendations of tho Hoard of Insurance ' Comminnionorn of Toxan, It ie recognized that sometimes it is not oconomioally feasible for a city to provile as much storage as rooommended by the Insurance Board. {fforta have been made to determine tho absolute mioimura storage which the city should consider, This storage should be capable of meeting ' moat of the demands as outlined in the paragraph above, such an providing rntr. FCC NIF. H1 HM A1411 rr 16NFnn pp p~ ,~y N ~p p~ ~ rl h 00 M p ~p ' ~ ~ C'S ~ O~ N ~ DO r~~1 ~ C~ C7 f~'1 ~ C9 ~ Cnb 0~O r~l ~ ~O ~ r~ ~ h 0~ tal V; U1 V1 ~O ~p h h 00 00 00 CO C!r Cri 0., tT H to-O rdI rat r~ ri ri r~ rl E-r P ~ ~ as ~ h ~ v~ n o~ 7M~5 u~ `yam ~Q yry;~ ~„y~ ~My ~p h 1,4 1 4 ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 • ol 1 4 / A 1 4 • 4 f 4 1 N 1 4,4A A• 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~41 4 mnMMMMM poa ' M ON~ oQORV~~s~~N:smoF,rgARF~ ~NIsq 9 f 4,+ S i 1 f f f•/ v~ f N~1 • %n!•o • ~o f ~O ~ 1♦ ~o / ~n ! f 1 1 1 f oo f ao • at 1 oo / ao In In c~. h h ti c~ ~ co 1 stxt In+n+n+n~o~ow~hnhhhao06030o4T0h4T0r 49 1 a 1 a, ~ / yr o. ~ vti M h r~ u1 ~ to r ~ ~ o 0 0 o v o r-1 r~ r~ r~ ri ~ r~ ri ri ~ r~l ra ~ ~ rl ~ r~ r~1 ri 1 c~ W 7 r~ NNNlVNN44 44 Ntryir1AtoAAAAMAMM-* 1 ~ 14ci ,'1~OhLYS~~►~-fN(h~~t~~C~OrI~'1 'A r~4Ae4r1N4(4 N4 f 444 4(41 1b1M~iMr clMtrl~ ~N ' ~ ~ ~~rh1~O~C~1CL~rl~d.7'CU N~OH~V~~bb~GON~Nh~ (y . ~D h 1 1 h 1 / h 00 / co 6 1 Cn 01, / 1 1 1 1 NN 1 (I 1 1 • 1 1 f • f • 1 WH rpl r}rarirlrMiH,1H" H0.4r~I Hrh1 0 F F F w F w w F F F ti w h F F w w w w w F F R M rl ri i-1 rl N r^I H rl ri N rl rf H H 14 rl 1"1 H ri ~ rl fi r'1 M N D-4 r to meet peak demands, standby supply to meet fire fighting demands, and ' possibly to furnish standby water to meet emergeinoies when the filter plant is out of service for a short period of time, Based on detailed r studies made of other distribution systems, it has boon determined that storage should be available in the amount of at least 25% of the maximum daily demand in order to meet, hourly water consumption variations. This storage may be either ground or elevated but it should be noted that elevated ntorago should have a proferenoe since this water is readily r available for oonsumptiono It is impossible to closely estimate the ' amount of storage which should be provided for fire fighting purposes. As noted above, the Insurance Board recommends storage based on a con. sumption rate of 130 gallons per capita per day, Their data indicates that this rate is divided as follower 70 gallons per day per capita for ' domestic use, and 60 gallons per day per capita for fire fighting pur,- poeee, For the purpose of these investigations, it has been assumed that 60 gallons par capita per day should be set aside an the rate for determining fire protection storage This results in a ground storage requirement ' of 60 gallons per capita per day and an olevated storage in the amount of 25 gallons per capita per day. The computed abeolutn minimum storage requirements are shown on Table No. 3, Table No. 3 shows a comparison of storage requirements as reoom- mended by the Insurance Board to those determined by the absolute minimum requirement approach The existing available ground storage and elevated storage do not meet the requi.-ements of the Insurance Board at the present time To be more speoifio, the calculated ground storage required is 4.0 1 ruar.ar, ninnnrv nr+n cru,i:rrn ' million gallons as compared to the existing storage of 2.67 million gallons, The recommended elevated storage is 1,67 million gallons as compared with present available storage of 1,61 million gallons, The calculated absolute minimum storage requirements is also shown on Table No, 3. The calculated minimum storage requirements for the year ' 1960 in 4,21 million gallons. The combined capacity of available storage ' is now 4.28 million gallons, which is adequate to meet the requirements upon this basisl however, in 1961 requirements will exceed the presently available storage and this condition will continue to grow more serious no the population increases. As has been described in the paragraphs above, these oaloulations are based on 25 gallons per capita of storage being available for fire protection as elevated storage, The 1960 require- ment for fire protection alone is 0.77 millions. Since the present oapa- ' city of elevated storage is 1.61 millions, only 0.84 million gallons of elevated storage is available to meet the domestic storage demands, This represents approximately one-half the domootio requirements for 3.960, It is considered desirable to maintain one-half to two-thirds the doaAotio storage requiremant in elevated storage, Based on these studies it is apparent that the distribution system is deficient both in ground storage and elevated storage. It is reoom- ' mended that steps be taken as soon as possible to construct a 1.5 million gallon elevated storage tank in the general vicinity of the existing, 360,000 gallon tank on Bell Avenue, It is further recommended that an additional 160 million gallon storage tank be erected in the vicinity of the Thomas Street tank (Scripture Hill) prior to 197f3. ' D-6 IN[f r:c. 1 i 1 r: HO 1. r. AN f) FiN0N[Pill - Table No. 3 shows a deficiency in ground otorago facilities. Inasmuch as all new supplies will be developed at the water treatment ' plant, it is proposed that all future ground storage reservoirs be con- struoted adjacent to the plant. From the standpoint of economy it is ' advisable to delay the oonstruotion of these storage facilities until such time Its the water treatment plant is expanded. At the time this expansion program is in progress, it is recommended that an additional t 1.0 million gallon olearwell be constructed. It would be desirable, if funds are available, to make this oapaoity 2 million gallons. ' The estimated cost of the improvements recommended for immediate oon- struotion are as followsl 1.5 Million Gallon Elevated Tank $2700000 1 Million Gallon Ground Storage Tank * $ 79000 Ground storage tank should be constructed at the water treatment ' plant. The cost of this storage is also shown under Treatment Plant 31mprovements in another ohaptor of this report. ' 3. 11ta,gr Diatributi4nn Qya am The distribution system is in a transition period from distributing water from well supplies to distributing water from a surface Supply, ' prior to 1957, all water was obtained from wells which were located at strategic points throughout the City, particularly on the north and east sides. Ground storage tanks and high Service pumping units were con- ' strutted at each of these well locations. Water was then pumped into the distribution system at these several locations, This resulted in each pump station serving consumers in the area adjacent to the pumping D-7 - 1 kItt 11.. t111:H UL5 ApU f!!IS!if µti - _ _ r station, It is not necessar to transmit a large volume of water from ' one section of town to the other under this type of arrangement, With the development of a surface supply this picture is changing oonaiderably+ Now the major part of water used by the City is pumped from the water plant into the distribution system at one location, which is in the south- eastern section of the City. This requires that water be transmitted from this point in all directions in order to adequately serve the City, Studies have been made to determine the necessary improvements to ' meet the needs of 1965 Those studies are based on the following assump, tionss 1. That all. water will be obtained from the water treatment plant and the wells would be discontinued by 1970, 2, Additional ol,evated otorage would bo provided in the areas of the neell Avenue tank and near Scripture Hill, as discussed in the section covering storage requirements, Distribution system should be of such capacity as to permit I the refilling of elevated storage within a period of approxi- mately 6 hours during the night linen consumption demands are I low. This is oonsidored to be the most critical period, The reoommended improvements to the distribution system to meot the needs of 1985 aro shown on Plato 6, It should be noted that these improvements aro divided into two oategoriess (1) improvements to be constructed prior to 196,5, and (2) improvements to be constructed prior I to 1965, The improvements outlined for construction prior to 1965 are ' recommended to meet the following requirements$ (a) avoiding anticipated b.8 1171 i ~1:, III CItl p,!1 1NU tbbRf M: s::: „ ' future distribution system ditficu7,ti.es; (b) Providing adequate service ' to the proposed elevated tank; and (o) providing adequate water service to areas which are expected to be developed in the immediate future. r The total estimated cost of the improvements reoommended for construction prior to 1965 is as shown in Table No. 4. Inasmuch as the City is con- sidering a major street program, it is assumed that all proposed diatri- bution work would be placed in the ground prior to paving. It should also be noted that at the time the paving project is being developed it may be ' desirable to replace, or lower existing mains, and possibly to eliminate ' some d+sad and mains. No effort has been made to estimate the cost of this work although funds should br set aside for this purpose. ' Estimates have not been made for improvements proposed after 1965. Further investigations and studies should be made prior to finally dev- eloping this portion of the program. 1 1 r E r r r r D.9 r 1 141 r !i(. 14 1 r I to 11 if Alai 11 1 11 b 14 t. 11 c 1 ' TAALC NO. 4 WATER DISTRIBU'T'ION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMI';NTS FOR COMPLETION BEFORE 1965 ESTIMAZE ~F~Qx (a) Feeder Main from Water Treatment Plant to Greenwood) via Woodrow Lane, Mulkey ' Lane, Lattimore, Ruddell and Robinwood Streeter 20" Concrete Cylinder Pipe; 6,900 L,F, 0 $8.25 $56,925 ' 18" Concrete Cylinder Pipe; 9,100 L,F, 0 $7025 $65►975 Fittings, Connectional Specials, Fire Hydrants rasts and MisoellanEfous Construotion; ' Sub-Total , 00 Contingencies - 10% "AA j_zM • Engineering and Administration 796 1''2 1, 9NO TOTAL (a) $174070 ' (b) Weeder Main from Water Plant South to Existing 14--inoh main on south side of ' Interstate Highway No. 35= 16" Concrete Cylinder Pipel 61000 L,F, 0 $6,50 $ 39,000 Fittings, Connections, Specials, Fire H Lump Sum ydrantm and Miacellaneoue Construction; Sub-Total. Contingencies o 10% -41460 Engineering and Administration . 4900 60 TOTAL (b) $ $2o494 N10 1 1 r (o) Feeder Main from existing l4" in Teasley Lane South to center of Massey Street; thence west in Massey Street to James Street; thence north in James Street t to Meadow o Acme Street; thence east in Acme Street ' Street; Street to exist!ngn20 northeast at Inman Streets 14" Concrete Cylinder Pipet 1,700 L,P, @ $6,o0 $ 1()0200 16e Concrete Cylinder Pipel 7,650 L,F, a $6,50 $ 44,725 r 12" Cast Iron Pipel 2,6oo L,E, 0 $5175 $ 141,950 r Fittings, Connections, Specials, Fire Hydrants and Misoellaneous Construction) Lump Sum Contingencies 10% Sub-Total N r Engineering and Administration - ~ TOTAL (o) $110,28.5 N (d) Feeder Main in Dallas Drive from Smith to Oraham and Meadow Streetsl ' 121, Cast Iron Pipe; 2,000 L,F, ® $5,75 11,,500 Fittings, Connections, Special and Mieoellaneous Construotionl Lump Sum Sub-Total 1 0200 contingencies - 10 % r Engineering and Administration 7% 17,820 TOTAL (d) $ 190067 1 1)~ 11, rnu -nr:. rl iiu in i.n nrni trn10n rrrn f ' (e) Connecting two existing 12:' Mains at McKinney and Blount streets 12" Cast Iron Pipe; 200 L,F, @ $5,75 -j $ 1,].50 ' Fittings, Connections, Specials and Miscellaneous Construction; Lump sum $ 750 Contingencies - 10y6 Sub-Total a Engineering and Administration - 2'090 TOTAL (e) $ 21236 (f) Main in Bolivar Street from Parkway Street to Sunset Street 12" Cast Iron Pipe; 4,050 L,F, 0 $5,75 $ 230288 Fittings, Connections, Specials and Miscellaneous Construction; Lump Sum 7,200 ' Contingencies 10 Sub-Total Engineering and Administration - 7Y~ 2 TOTAL (f) $ 35085 (g) Feeder Nains in Bell Street and Riohey aoadl 12" Cast Iron Pipe; 1,200 L,V, 0 $5,75 $ 6,g0o 18" Concrete Cylinder Pipe; 1,750 L,F, G $7,2$ $ 12,688 t 16" Conorete Cylinder Pipe,, 30000 L,F, n $6,5o $ 19,500 Fittings, Connections, Specials and Miscellaneous Construoticnj Lump Sum 0 Contingencies - 10 Sub-'total r Engineering and Administration - 7% 5 577 TOTAL (g) $ ,550187 D-12 ' :::lac r. I k. mCMItti nNb I1USirnn - ' (h) Feeder Main in Sherman Drive and Greenwood from Bell Street to ltobinwuod; 1811 Concrete Cylinder Pipe; 3,10o L.F. r $7,25 $ zz,475 ' Fittings, COnn(lotions, Specials and Miscellaneous Construotion;,Lump Sum ~ B Sub-Total ' Contingencies . 10 27s3OO 2 E"gineering and Administration _ 7% ' 0030 o ' TOTAL (h) $ 32432 (i) Feeder Alain in Kayewood and Laurelwood from Robinwood east; 12" Cast Iron t'i;,e; 4,500 L,F. a $5,75 $ 25,875 Fittings, Connections, Specials and Miscellaneous Construction; Lump Sum f Sub-Total 8r0a0 Contingencies 10%33P~75 ~ga 23 Engineering and Administration ~ 796 71 M 2° TOTAL (i,) $ 390e71 1 TOTAL I (a) through (i), inclusive $521,235 ,I 1 U-l3 1fit f (;F, uplllOl,p /.pry IUG Nkp!! c ' CHAPTER F ' MIAGE Cour' iop1 SYSTEM General. Sanitary waste from the entire City ip collected by a network of ' sewers which convey the sewage to a treatment plant located on Pecan Creek at the Eastern edge of the City. The main outfall line follows ' Pecan Creek to the intersection of N. Bradshaw and E. Mulberry Streets from which point it begins branching off into the 00.ection system. One ' of the main collection lines continues along Pecan Creek into the north- west section of the City. Two ether collection lines branch off to the central and southern part of the City. These mains are referred to as t Lines A, B and C, respectively, t,n this Report. Many of these collection line9, including the outfall line to the ' treatment plant, were constructed approximately fifteen years ago. The City has, of course, grown considerably since that time and in several instances these lines are now considerably overloaded as indicated in ' Table No. 5, Consultations have been held with City officials and Utility per- ' eonnel concerning operational problems that have boon experienced. As a result of these meetings many "troublo spots" were located and theca areas of the system reooivad intensive study. For the purposes of this ' study the various collection mains have been designated Tine "A", SfB11 0 "C", eta., as shown on Plate No. q. As noted in Table No. 5, all of these lines are presently overloaded, particularly during wet weather ' periods when infiltration of storm water into the system is considerable. Apparently Line "All along Aeoan Creek is the worst overloaded main in the ' E•l INEt4r, 7111111(11 E{ ANN .-PION, fM siHip OWN 4~'FM Le'CivaBd rlrlr-.Hr-Ir4 CVNN~~'~.~' rIrINOOrI r4 t C. . • . . , . . . . V W W co H N N N Nth M .Z; cz tl . tl• 0p rl rl A 4,4 A {`Lyj it * M iF M IF 8 4 9 0 4 ss6 u vv u wu O F! op v o°O~~~r~br~1~~i ,°-s~ rlr~NNr4Nri►hA 1f1~v1vt OOOOrfN t~~~1Nr~iNNrMirMlrM1rMl rMIH N N 88 0000008886c; 0 000000 0000 r-IrINNNNNN 1 ~ W A 4 q CIO 0 N o N O O y, 4 0ts&~i•ts 4-1 H 1 68 4 tJ 68 y~ ~ C 10 to V) 43 o P4 - 68 68 a otl ,F41p q .4 8 0~•~ 2 rnar.r. mcmrtj.n Arlo cttlrutrn O rl ri rf ri N C^ C1 M M C1 O O 1 1 ~~i ~~ed-flr~-1r~^Ir~~iNNCr1~7~000D ' r-I r-I N f•1 ri • • • • • • • • ter. ~~r~i*-, r-I N N N 1 00 N N N N M v~ *-.0 ..ivvjj bW~00v~1N~~['WC1~3~r~^-i 1 i400rIP;MN NNN~r1 V IYi • • • r • • • • • • • • • f7 oaaoooarsoaooo 1 o~wa)0 wVI, %r)nWINvn fn w~ 1 a 04 V) 1 08 C~u 6? ou f-8 48 D 1 , e r~ ~ i{777 ell, ruu d unrrna _ J 1 entire collection system. Overflowing of manholes has also been reported on Lines "B', "C" and "D''. Overflow lines from manholes to I the creek have been installed on Line "A" and "B" to divert the raw sewage into Pecan Creek during these peak flow conditions. These "trouble spots", along with the problem of serving areas of future development, and serving the State School for Mentally Retarded I Children which is now under construction to the south of the City, have ' therefore been given intensive study and the findings are presented in this Report. ' 2. Design Factors a, Q,2, er s The principal factors which should be considered in the study and design of a sewage collection system include the Followings a► Domestic Sewage Flow J b. Industrial ^Jaste Flow of Wet Weather Infil''ration d, Drainage Area Served by Each Line It is difficult to obtain, accurate measurements of each of the individual items of flow. The moot dependable flow measurements can be ' made at the sewage treatment plant which, of course, would measure all of the contributing factors combined. Daily flow records have been I recorded at the sewage treatrr.ent plant for quite some time. The flow mater, however, has been inoperative periodically since its installation. During other periods of operation, its accuracy is questionable A sum uzy of the available data is as follows: I E-4 ' rrrk tr+r. rn❑nrne errn r. rrn nr; rrn : r Year Fstimated Population Daily Sewage Ratio Average Daily Average per Year _ Flow - MD Max/Ave, Flow per average 1~ i ~m Capita-a$11ons 1957 27,300 0.904 3.475 3.04 33.1(a) 1958 289200 1,943 5,596 2.88 68.9 r 1959(b) 299100 1.918 3.803 1199 65.8 (a) It is assumed that this low flow is due to inaccuracies of meter, (b) March and July only. r These records indicate the average sewage flow of Denton is approxi- mately 68 gallons per capita per day. This figure would include domestic r sewage, industrial waste (the quantity of industrial waste is estimated to be small) and dry weather infilt-.~ion, It is anticipated that as the r area develops and as the standards of living improve, the flows will increase, For the purpose of this investigation, the average dry weather r flow is considered to be 80 gallons per capita per day. The maximum dry weather flow has been estimated using a formula developed by Harold E. 9abbitt, Professor of Sanitary Engineering at the University of I113.nois. r This formula is as followar 14 r p15 Where M Tho ratio of peak sewage flow to average daily sewage flow. P = The contributing population in thousands. r An additional allowance should be made for infiltration of storm water. From studies made on similar collection ayatems, the factor of 80 gallons per capita per day hau been determined to be a reasonable ' allowance, This figure has been used in these investigations. 1 E-5 f'It{r pF, INCIIBl.9 Allh Riltm,, l1!1 y. r MEN" ' b. Drai a e r ' The ma,#or portion of the presently developed area of tte City lies with is boundaries of the Pecan Creek drainage area. Plate No, ' 7, however, shows that the southern part of the City extends over into ' Hickory Creek watershed and the northeastern part of the City is in the Cooper Creek watershed. The flow from the areas which are not in the ' Pecan Creek watershed is now being pumped over the divide to Pecan Creek so that it may flow by gravity to U* sewage treatment plant, There are at present four of these pumping stations, or sewage lift stations, in t the Hickory Creek area and one in the Cooper Creek area. Each of these watersheds has several tributaries which branch off into different parts ' of the City, dividing the City into numeroue small sub drainage areas, 'T'hese areas, as shown on Plate No. 7 have been used in this study in ' determining the population contributing to the flow in various sections of each of the collecting lines. Plates B and 9 have been used to deter- mine population density and sewage flows. ' 30 Investigation Of Ling npn The collecting main which generally follows Pecan Creek from the eastern side of the City, across to the north of the business district and on to the northwestern section of the City has been designated nine "Of The line branches off the 24" Iutfall line at E. Oak and F. Hickory ' Streets as 15" site, It continues as 15" size to first and Bolivar streets where it reduces to a 1211 size and continues on to Crescent and Fulton Streets, Table No. 5 shows the slope of the main with its maximum carrying capacity, This Table also indicates the caloulated peak flows which the line is expected to carry at tho present time, 'his gives an indication E.6 FNC[bp. NIRN0Ip AN 13 fNDNL'Ili of the quantity of raw sewage which is being iy-passed directly into ' Pecan Creek during periods of peak flown Investigations reveal that the most economical solution to this prob- lem would be the installation of another collection main to the north of Line "A". The proposed line would intercept all of the area to the west t and north of Line "A". Table No. 5, in the column headed "1958 Peak ' Flows - mav,, shows the estimated flow Line "A" would be carrying by the year 19859 if the new line to the north were installed, ' The new line, designated Line "H" in this study, would begin as an 18" main north of Highway 24 on Ponder Street and would continue downgrade as shown on Plate No. 10, essentially parallel to Line "A". The size of ' the new line would increase ti a 21." at Crescent and Anna Streets and increase from 21" to 24" at Bell and Texas Streets. Line "H" connects ' with Line "A" in the vicinity of To Mulberry and S0. Crawford Streets, from which point Line "Fill and Line "A" (also called 24" outfall line at t this point) would parallel each other with the flow divided between them. ' The size of Line "H" from its junction with Line "A" to the existing sewage treatment plant would depend on whether or not they flows from the Hickory Creek area of the City continue to be pumped back into the exist- ing collection system, The existing 24" outfall line is asbestos-cement ' ripe which was installed in 1.946, The condition of the line at this time ' is reported to be in bad condition, but this has not been confirmed. Table No. 5, however, showi that one portion of the line, in particular, is laid ' on a very flat grade, which reduces the carrying capacity of the line con- siderably. Should it be determined to abandon the existing outfall line, ' Line "H" would be increased in size, The design a° Line "H" is shown in ' Table No, r,. ~-7 rii r. r 9 t. II II❑I"4n AM) t"b at 9 n - ' 4. I~t vestiuaticn of Line "B" ' Line as shown on Plate 10, branches off the 2411 outfall line at E, Hickory and Exposition Streets as a 1.511 main, It reduces to 12" ' site at E. Hickory and Blount, to 10" at E, McKinney and Blount and to 811 at Bolivar and Congress. An overflow pipe has been installed from a ' manhole at Oakland and Congress Streets to discharge directly into Pecan ' Creek during periods of peak flow. Table No. 5 indicates that the section of sewer immediately downstream from this manhole is of lesser slope than the rest of the line. This condition, of course, reduces the carrying capacity of the line. ' The ultimate solution to this situation would be the installation of a new line parallel to ?mina I'D", of 12" size, which would relieve the over- t loaded condition. Another solution which t though it would not completely ' relieve the overloaded condition in all. sections of Line "B" but would be much more economical, would be the installation of a short line between the above mentioned manhole at Oakland and Congrese Streets and Line "A" ' across Pecan Creek. Table No, 5 shows that, although the upper end of the line would ' still be overloaded with peak flows, the bottleneck caused by the flat section of sower would be relieved. This solution would also eliminate the discharging of raw sewage into Pecan Creek. ' 5, Investigation of Linea 11C" and 1IMI1 Line 11C" begins on Eagle Drive near NTSC and lies in Eagle Drive to ' Highway 377, The line commences as a 1011 sewer, reduces to 8" at Ave. A and increases to 1011 again at Center Street, Line 12C' continues from ' Eagle Drivt- and Highway 377 to We Prairie and So. Elm Streets, At this ' E-8 r11 rf9r, rM f:41(1LH AND 11 blif 6 .1 ' point it joins with the line designated as Line "D'" and continues oast ' on E. Prairie to Oakwood Cemetery and thence to a junction with Line "A", Table No. 5 shows that the last section of this line from Lakey at E. ' Prairie to Line "A" is laid on a very flat grader This limits the capa- city of the line upstream to far below the required oapacity. This jon- dition is borne out by the fact that the manhole ,just ahead of the flat ' section, at E. Prairie and Lakey Streets, overflows badly during peak flow periods. Other than this one location, however, Linea "C" and "D" ' have reportedly not given any difficulty in quite soma time. Most of the flow from the Hickory Creek areas is now being fed into these two lines at various points. Table No. 5 shows the peak flow in these lines by 1985 if the Hickory Creek area flows are diverted to the south, Plate Roo 10 shows a now 211" line from the manhole at E. Prairie and Lakey Streets to tie into Lines "A" and "tf". This solution would, essentially, abandon the flat section of Line "D" which is causing the "bottleneck", ' Table No. 5 indicates that, even with the above mentioned conditions, Lines "C" and "D" would still be theoretically overloaded by 1985, The 1 flows would be smaller then, however, than they are at the present time (providing the Hickory Crook area is diverted) and it is anticipated that no difficulties would be encountored. Its in the case with Tine 11I3110 however, the ultimate solution to the problem would be the installation of a new line paralleling Lines "C" and "D" from Avenue "All and Eagl.e Drive to the junoti,on with Lines "A" and '7i". This parallel line is shown on Plate 10 as B" size from Avenue "A" to W. Prairie and Wainwright Streets and as 12" size from this point to E, Prairie and Lakey 8tt-eats. F-9 wi From this point to the intersection with Lines "A" and "H" the line is ' shown as 2111 size with this section of Line "b" being abandoned. This latter portion of.' the new line should be constructed regardless of whether the rest o.£ the line is installed. 6. Outfall Lines A, ,General= Chapter F, Section 3, of this Report, entitled ' "Proposed Sewage Treatment Facilities", discusses the feasibility and location of a new sewage treatment plant. It is recommended in the above section that a new plant be built and be located in the vicinity of the junction of Pecan Creek and Qarza-Little Elm Reservoir, This 1 section of the Report presents the various routes which have been investi- gated. Three different sohow s to be presented are outlined as follows: Scheme 1 - Hickory Creek Va]II (a) An Outfall ,Sewer Line along Hickory Creek, eliminating all of the existing Hickory Creek area lift stations, (b) Construction of a new lift station on Hickory Creek to pump the waste over the divide into the watershed of the State School property. (c) Continuing the outfall line by gravity through the State School to the proposed new treatment plant. ' (d) An outfall sewer main from the existing sewage treatment plant along Pecan Creek to the proposed. plant. This line ' has been sized to carry all the flow in order that the existing plant may be abandoned. &14 ' Iltf.f o-.1. I111111f11.M ANN f11b11F n^. . chgme Hobson Street Cutfalls (a) Diversion of all flow from the existing lift station at N.T.S.C, stadium and at McCormick and Willowood Streets ' to the vicinity of the lift station near the Co-Ed Drive-In Theatre. (b) Construction of a new lift station at that point to trans- mit the waste over the divide into the watershed of the oreek near the State School through a new force main on ' Hobson Street. (c) An outfall line from the State School area to the proposed sewage treatment plant. (d) An outfall sewer line from the existing sewage treatment plant down Pecan Creek to the proposed plant, Scheme - tai on, of~N ia-Unz Col eo •i n Ss (a) Paralleling and building up the existing collection lines ' to a capacity sufficient to take All the nowago flow bxpooted ' from the Hickory Creek watershed. (b) 1i,,I-aginr, existing lift stations to handle the expeotod flows, i (e) Constructing an outfall sower line from the existirg sewage treatment plant along; Pecan Creek to the proposed sewage t treatment plant. (d) Construction of an outfall line from the State School to ' the proposed plant. The general routes of these schemes are Shown on Plates 109 11 ' and 12, E-11 ' U. Hickory Creek OutfAllt The general route of the Hickory Creek ' Outf all, as outlined in Scheme No, 1 above, is shown on Plate No, 10, &peeted flows and proposed pipe sizes are given in Table No. G, The t line, as shown, would begin in the vicinity of the lift station near the N,T,S,C, football stadium and pick up the flow from this lift station. It would then continue parallel to the Santa Fe Railroad to a point near ' Highway 377. At this point, it would pick up the flow from the areas now being served by the lift station at licCormiok and Willowood Streets and by the one near the Co-Ed Drive-In Theatre. The line then would continue ' on down Hickory Creek to a point approximately 9,400 feet due south of the Intersection of Hobson Street and Teasley Lane. A new sewage lift citation ' would be constructed at this point to pump the waste over the divide into the watershed in which the State School for the Mentally Retarded 11eee ' It can be readily seen from Plate 10 that this outfall location is con- siderably south of all the area which is expected to be developed by the year 1985, The watershed in which the State School lies merges with the Pooan Creek watershed at the location which has been reoommended as the site of a new sowage treatment plant, A gravity out!all line can, thei-e- t foro, bo constructed which will take the waste from the Hickory Creek I Outfall, cc,ntinuo through and receive waste from the State School, and thence on to the proposed plant. Lateral collection lines would be required, as shown, to serve the areas to the north of the State School, the area in the vicinity of the ' existing Hobson Street lift station, and the area served presently by the McCormick and Willowood Street lift stations, The area to the south I of the latter lift station is being developed at the preeent time, It ' E-12 ' FOIFF"v' NilOMIN ANN fNnpr..9: r.... _....._.,_.v 1 O~ 4 Vf V) u\ \0 Os CM10 OO NM Cf\M4~ O >n V 1 to A (1 to >n p, ~p K7 O O o O >n t!1 O Vl • . • • • • • N • • • • V\ ll1~ t0 t0 d~ Q\ W N M 1 v1 ~1 N N M Vl Vl t/1 N M M Vl y t!1 t \00~~r{{ p h ~rlI i~ -erli~ aCOr rlna c.{{r.~ ff1 ~~I rl (V N ~t, is (V err r-f r•-f C`! W N N N r-f rl N N N N N tV .'V ' `r-DI fN" ~p 00 r ~ 1 1 1 r I 1 1 1 1 1 1 f I f I l i I I I I~~ ~ I I I 1 1 I l i l 1 1 1 1 1 f I 1 1 1 1 1 N N NNE-u; NNNC1jvilhti NM %A cc x 9 :w V`t H M O Poo cr ov, Vo) :8 ov N r ~O~ Cn' (-)o I4 H r I N ri o d r! H H N 8 r4 r4 H H N N CeR 1 0 a n a a 110 G C) ~90 1 rlr-Ir-iN F I wM\ON w NO(VMd~~ror-i r-I ri rl N H r-1 rl rl r-1 rf N c'1 . w, w w. w w.. w. w. w Ow~ f~'~ U~ O (~1~ N ~ ~ ~ N N E-r r-I rl rl N lh w . w w w ~ , ~ C ~ ra rl N tV N t~ ~O ~ ti}C'• N ONChV1ti f "6. •f . 41 FC , 'yk M~k N r#M, k1 N P1 9 4) ' l~ 00 d yM V I I I 1 1I l i l{ 7 1 1 1'41 Q I ~j~y H~ Crl ~ h M {~j N U N f~11/~ i~ I I f ,}I 1 ~QI I I fn fG ttJ Mh ~Ik CL" Wir ~Ih ~1~4a `N M 'I~+~ y' MNi+ Mk rN Mr yk'k+ N~k oD •Ifa E-13 fore Ni L•iIOI n Ar,b rrgirrr y[1 8 h (N Ct 1 N f 1 +/1 +n CN $10 Tj d\ ► • r r ► ► r ► ► r r-I N N 0"00 f'~ N l~'t M r-1 N t`'\-a a N ~ a CrN C~ o o ra " w g I"0 ~ ~ ouo '+nrw ' M M H r-I N r-a r-I ri d r-I rl ri N 4 n kn e-4 r-I ' 04 CS~DHM,;~J p ~a H. r"'I .{iF.y~l 1 I 1 IF v O 8 ~i r4 I t I rl 11 1 I to N ' cn r r. r o I I l a o0 N I I I i~ J+a r-1 I l t t 06 ' ~O W t7 C? qb~M h" ~ (N*1d~NO~W MCO~~ O N N r~ W ► N N ► ► ► r N M.d' ~0 r-I N N M M~' r••{ r°1 N4 O W VfTI ~ R R N L~ ~ M cll r4 n 1 H r ► kr ► N NC1 00 tr0 rW r-I ~ OOOOCSN ~OO► Or-I r ~ g IV) c P N V V1~O 1 V 0":N w w w w a• w lnl fi HM 0 rf t Ir`it 0 OD ,co 100 "Ost ON 091 N s ChMl 'd O ~J CO L~ w w rl H (V 1 ~ rl ~ ~ ~ N ~ N N .OyJ t~ ct~r11~r1 c'1 t~1 N N ~ tin, Pilia '1 tw l~ ~ ~~~~y( Y ~ Fri V r: + 1 ~f-0 YN ~I.'~ ci'1 a k~ ~tl it iri r ~rlrrrr Ir~l ~ PiN NN E•{ Aa ~ MM. +k+ylt'Ik Ills 'IM'~`.' M'~ ~ Yf+t M E- 14 ' y. fHl. f. S,I, HIMMILtl AHU rHhift1n. ' is recommended that the line shown from this lift station down to the ' vicinity of the Santa. Fe Railroad be constructed itowdiately, elimin- ating the need for the McCormick Street lift station, regardless of ' which scheme is followed,. ' The outfall from the existing sewage treatment plant along Pecan Creek to the proposed treatment plant would be necessary to take the overload flow from the existing plant to the new plant. Sizes indicated for this outfall line are adequate to handle expected flows to the year 1985 with the existing sewage treatment plant completely abandoned. C. Hobson Street Outfalls The Hobson Street Outfall is shown as an alternate outfall route on Plate No. 10. Design do', ire shown on Table No, 6. This plan would involve diversion of the flow from the lift area near N.T'.S,C, football stadium and the flow from the lift station at ' McCormick and Willowood Streets to the vicinity of the Santa Fe Railroad and Highway 377. This would still require the use of a lift station in ' the vicinity of the N,T.S,C* stadium, the flow from which would be diver, ' south from Eagle Drive along Collier Street, across Interstate Highway 35 and down McCormick Street to Willowood Street. At this point the sewage ' flow from the lift station at McCormick and Willowood Streets could be intercepted, relieving the need for this lift station, and transmitting j the waste by gravity to a point near the Santa Fe Railroad and Highway 377 intersection. It would be necessary to construct a new sewage lift station at this point which would pump the sewage over the divide to the State School watershed, The discharge line from this lift station, as shown on Plate ' No, 10, would be in Hobson Street. It would not be pumped a second time ' E-15 rlifrfr. N1011M" AMNJ FNIJUC n.. :4_. ' by the existing lift station on Hobson Stroet, however, as is presently ' done, The existing lift station on Hobson Street would still be neo- essary, however, to receive the waste from the area immediately to the ' north of it which is expected to develop in the future, i A gravity outfall line would then be constructed from the divide of the State Sohool watershed, past the State School and to the proposed sewage treatment plant. It is expected that, by the year 1985, there will be approximately 725 acres south of Hobson Street which will be ' developed. The outfall line as shown on Hobson Street would not be capable to serve this area by gravit34 Another lift station would be required at some future date to lift the waste from this area to the ' atfall line from the State ,School, The line carrying this waste would junction with the State School Cutfall as shown on Plate 11. Cost of construction of service for this area is, however, not included in this Report, The size of the outfall line from the State School to the pro- posed. sewage treatment plant, as shown on Table 6, is adequate to carry the flow from the area south of Hobson Street, The outfall line from the existing sewage treatment plant to the proposed plant would be of the same size whether the Hickory Creek area flows were diverted through the Hickory Creek Cutfall or through the ' Hobson Street Cutfall. ' n. Modification of, Exi.s i n Collection System The lines involved in this scheme are shown on Plate 11 and the design date is included in Table No. 6. The waste from the Hickory Creek area, under this plan would all continue to be pumped back into the Pcoan Creek (existing) system as is now being done, The lift station at 14cCormiok and Willowood H-16 - IN[kn[, NIV.11111.n ANB Ei,hpCnn _ 1 - ' Streets would be eliminated, with waste from this area being diverted to ' a now lift station in the vicinity of the Santa Fa Railroad and Highway 377 as outlined for the other two outfall line plans. The discharge line r from the new lift station would go up Teasley Lane to the Pecan Creek watershed instead of continuing over into the State School watershed, The Hobson Street lift station, as under the Hobson Street Outfall Plan, ' would serve only the adjacent area to the north but would discharge into the Teasley Lane sewer, t Line "H", from the junction of Line "C" to the existing sewage treat- ment plant would be increased to 27" size to handle the additional flow from the Hickory Creek area. The outfall line from the existing sewage ' treatment plant to the proposed plant along Pecan Creek would, of course, also have to bo of a larger size. ' This plan, like the Hobson Street Outfall Plan, would not serve any of the area to the south of Hobson Street, The outfall line from the State School to the proposed sewage treatment plant is therefore sized with an adequate capacity to carry the flow from the school plus the flow from the area to the north of the State School. ' 74 Estimate of Coat The estimated cost of the various sewer mains which have been con- sidered in this study is shown as Table No, 7. In order to detormine ' the most economical improvement program, a comparison of the overall cost of each of the schemes must be oonsidorad. A summary of this cost ' is as follower ' E-17 ' a, Schemes No. 1- Hickory Creek Outfall. Line H Cost Estimate No. 1 $272,207,00 Peoan Creek Outfall Cost Estimate No, 2 6039633,00 State School. Out.fall Cost Estimate No. 3 296,)86,00 ' Hickory Creek Oatfall Cost Estimate No. 4 7179644.00 Connections from Line B & C to Line A Cost Estimate No, 11 34453.00 Paralleling ' Lines B, C. & n Cost Estimate No, 12 109.144.00 Total Estimated Cost of Scheme No. 1 $29033,267,00 be Scheme No. 2 - Hobson Street Oatfall ' Line H Cost Estimate No. 1 $27200700 Paean Creek Outfall Cost Estimate No, 2 6030633400 State School Outfall Coat Estimate No, 3 296,483,00 Hobson Street Outfall Cost Estimate No. 5 534,432,00 j Connections from Lines B & C to Line A Cost Estimate No. 11 34,153,00 Paralleling Lines fl, CO & D Cost Estimate No, 12 109,144,00 Total Estimated Coat of. Scheme No. 2 $1,9,50,052,00 ' of 19oheme No. 3 -Modification o£ Existing Colleotign System Line H Cost Estimate No. 1 ' Modification of (Modified) $295,365,00 Fxisting System Cost Estimate No, 6 507,192,00 State School Outfall Cost Estimate No. 7 191,764sOO Pecan Creek Outfall Cost Estimate No, 9 91791.85,00 Paralleling Line B Cost Estimate No, 13 2.811, 0 Total Estimated Coat of Scheme No, 3 $1,964,337,00 t Based on the estimated cost as outlined above, Scheme No, 2 is the lowest first cost. Scheme No. 1, is the moat expensive, oosting $187,272 more than Scheme No. 2, It should be noted that Scheme No. 2 and Scheme No, 3 do not provide sewage service to approxiPtately 725 acres south of Hobson Street and both schemes require the operation of three lift stations, ' Scheme No, 1. serves all the expected development and requires only one lift i E-18 I MI. 1'M, 11 I(; I l I l l.!; A11 lr 1!111 N1111I ' stP,tion. After considering all factors, it has teen concluded that the advantages of Soheme No. 1 justifies the additional, expense of some $1900000.00. r t E-19 .°°5 rPIT r❑t IIiGHI)Lb fub I'lI,IIInS r _ ...:_Il TABLE NO, 7 IMPROVEMENTS TO SVERAQE OL ECTION ~YgE F„STI!fAF$ OF COST ' A. Cost Estimate No. 1 Line H (Parallels the existing 24" Outfall .Sewer ) ' DESCRIPTION FSTxrtATtp UNIT Ah OUN n,UANTI PRrrx ' 12" Sewer Pipe 59100 L,F. Oo 74 $199074,00 18" Sewer pipe 5,400 L.F. 6,oo 32,400,00 21Sewer Pipe 6,320 L.F. 7039 46,705.00 ' 24 Sewer Pipe 71400 L,F, 0,12 67,488.o0 Highway O rossinge L,S, 1,080 6,20040 Railroad Crossings r„ S, L,S, 4,o00.00 Aerial Creek Crossings L10 So L.S,' 150000000 Wet Conneotione L.S. L.S. 600040 Manholes L.S. L.S. 1A,865.0o Pavement Replacement 70900 S.Y. 2000 15,80040 ' Concrete Cradle & Encasement L.S, L.S. 3,150,00 Embedment Materials L.S. L,S. 4.59 .o0 ' Sub-Total $231,272,00 Contingencies 10,$) Sub-Total 2540399.00 ' Engineering & Administration 71 z. 08 r Total Estimated Cost $2'2,207.00 ' B. Cost Estimate No. 2 - Pecan Creek Outfall (Existing Plant to Proposed Plant) h,-'Tory Creek Area Diverted to the South DESCRIPTION FSTP ATFD UNIT 7%UNT QUARTITY. PRICE 3011 Sewer Pipe 7,9'10 L,F. $143o241,00 1,00 3,z41,oo „ X17,95 33 Sewer Pip6 14,850 L.F, 20.50 704,42540 Aerial Creek Crossings L.S. L,S, 2200040 ' Highway Crossings L,S. T1, S, 6,000,00 Manholes LI S, L,5. 6095400 Conersts Cradle & Encasement 150 COY, 25,00 39750,00 Embedment Material. 21980 C.Y, 2.50 _ 7.4 0.00 Sub-Total $493t461,oo Contingencies 1010) Sub-Total $542 FiN ineering & Administration 79 3 , 6,00 Land & R,O,W. ' Total Estimated Cost X603,633,00 F-20 - r ur.9T Ilttlrrhiq Aran 1'Ill,nf qP- t C, Cost Estimate No. 3 - State School Outfall (size to serve Hickory Creek ' Area) U1 SCRTPTION ESTIMATED UNIT AMOUNT ' - WANTIT' PRT .E 2711 Sewer Pipe 15000 L. F, $12073 $201,13440 Aerial Creek Crossings L.S. L,S, '/,;00,00 Highway Crossing L.S. L.S. 15,400,00 Railroad Crossing L.S. L,S, x,850.00 Manholes L.S. LOS* 4,240,00 ' Concrete Cradle 8; Encasement 80 C.Y. 2500 20000,00 Embedment Matorial 1040 C,Y. 2050 4,'50,00 Sub-Total $238,47+,00 Contingencies 104, 41,847.00 Stab-Total $262p321*07 Engineering & Administration 7 18,3621100 Lend & R, 0, W. 15.800.00 Total Estimated Cost $296,483600 D, Cust Fstimste TIo, 4 - Hickory Creek Outfall (To Junotion with State School Outrall) DE3C CPTTON ESTIMATED UNIT ARONNT ' - U~1lTX,1'.Y PRICE 10" Sewer Pipe 3,300 L'.r. $3622 $l0 626,00 12" 59wer Pipe 110660 L,F, 3,74 43,608,00 ' 15" Sewer Pipe 25,280 L,F, 4,77 120,586.00 18" Sewer Pipe 6,020 L,F, 6,oo 36,120,00 2111 Sewer Pipe 39600 L,Fo 709 26,6o4,oo ' 24" Sewer Pipe 12,320 L.E. 9.12 112x358,00 16" Concrete Pressure Pipe Force Main 8,920 L.F. 9000 800280,00 Railroad Crossings LOS, L,S, 3,503+00 ' Highway Crossings L.Se L,S, 6000400 Aerial Creek Crossings L,S, L,S, 22,500,00 Manholes L,S, L,S, 11,660,00 ' Lift Station - 5e3 MOD L.S. Lo So 6500040 Concrete Cradle & Encasement 320 0,Y. 25.00 80000,00 Embedment Material 3,690 COY, 2,50 9,22.5..00 ! Sub-Total $556067,oo Contingencies lot r sub-Irotal 1.2, Oo4, 00 Engineering & Administration 7f 42 840,Oo land & R,O,l-f, _62.900.Oo- Total Estimated Cost $717,644,o0 F-21. ' as y-..-- flt 11f 1i R. In V HIItIt Arlh [IJU NC gn ' E, Cost Estimate No. 5 Hobson Street Wtfall (To Junction with State Sohool Outfall) ' AESCftTPTIQN FSTIMATKO UNIT AMOUNT ,A~ArITI;C~, 1 10" Sewer pipe 39300 L,?. $3.22 $io,626,00 1211 Sewer Pipe 49260 LtF, 3,74 15.932.00 1511 Sewer Pipe 30680 L,F, 4.77 17,554.00 18" Sewer pipe 91200 L. F , 6,o0 55,20040 24" Sewer Pipe 8,450 L.F. 9,12 77i064.oo 10" Cast Iron Force Main 3,900 L,V 7.27 28 053*00 16" Concrete Pressure Pip.-, ' Force Main 90500 L,F. 9,00 88,500,00 Highway Crossings. L.S. L.S, x,1,25,00 Aerial Creok Crossings 10480 L,S. 79500,00 Manholes L.S. L,$, 811+80,00 Wet Connections LOS. L.S. 11000000 Pavement Replacement 3015 S.Y. 2100 6,o3o.o0 1 Lif t Stations T.. S, L, S* 101,100400 Concrete Cradle & Encasement 11170 COY, 25,00 4,25000 Embedment Material 1,76o c,Y, 2450 4,40o,oo Railroad Crossings L. S, L„S, I AMD.00. Sub.-Total $4309614,Oo Contingencies 10% , ' '3, 75,00 Engineering & Administration 7% 33,15700 Land & R, 0.14, 27.600.Oo ' Total Estimated Cost $534,482.00 ' Will not serve area to South of Hobson Street (approx. ?25 aures expeoted by 1985) I' E-22 ' .-----'•L._:.,.:~_C'~-~~or __ar~ itar.t. mammy ANb tHbl,te8 i 1 1 F, Coat Estimate No, 6 Modification of Existing System to Accomodate Hickory Creek Area Through Pooan Creek System 1 DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED UNIT AMOUNT QUANTITY RR'1 E 10" .5ewer Pipe 5,160 L,F, $3,22 $25,61540 121, Sewer PipA 119460 L,F, 3,74 42,860,00 15" Sewer Pipe 129060 L,F, 4,77 57026,00 1 18" Sewer Pipe 13,160 L,Ft 6,00 78,960400 24" Sewer Pipe 29200 L,F, 9012 20,064,00 10" Cast Iron Force Main 3,900 L,F. 7,27 28x353.00 161, Concrete Pressure Pipe 1 Force Main 110900 L,F, 9,00 107,100,00 Wet Connections L,S, L,S, 50000000 Pavement Replacement 79190 S,Y, 2,00 14,380,00 ' Railroad Crossings L,S, L,S, 6,000,00 Highway Crossings L,S, L,S, 702OOoOO Manholes r, „9, LOS, 150900000 1 Concrete Cradle & Encasement L,S, L,S, 6,250,00 Embedment W erial L,S, L,S, 5,OO .00 Sub-Total $411,208,00 1 Contingencies 100, 41,121.00 Sub-Total 5202900 Engineering & Administration 711) 31,66340 1 Land & R,O,W, 21,200,00 Total Estimated Cost $507,],92,00 Notes This estimate does not include additional coat of enlarging Line "}C" or Pecan Creek Outfall to accomodate this flow, 1 i 1 E.23 rgr.eet, N ONOLN AND CNnatan _ Y 1 G. Cost Estimate No. 7 State School Outtall (size to serve State School and adjacent area but not Hickory Creek Area) ' DESCRTPTTON ~ a E.,TI4ATED UNIT AMOUNT 2111 Sewer Pipe- NT 15,800 L, F'. 7.39 11 ,762.00 Aerial Creek Crossings t„ S, 70500.00 Highway Crossing Los, 129600400 ' Railroad Crossing L.S. L.S. Manholes 3,150.40 L.S. L.S. 4,240,00 Concrete Cradle L,S, Lost 1050.00 ' Embedment Material L.S. L.S. 3.500.00 Sub-Total $1490502.00 Contingencies 10% Sub-Total 1 ,45200 Engineering & Administration 11,512.00 Larid 8c R,4.w. 15.Boo.oo Total Estimated Cost . $191,764.00 ' H, Cost Estimate No, 8 - Line 'H" from Austin Street to junction with Line "A" ' DESC~FTYOPI ESTIMATED UNIT AMOUNT 21'' Sewer pipe 19 00 L.F, 7.39E~$11-824000 ' 2411 Sewer Pipe 5,500 La Po 9,12 50,160.00 Railroad Crossings L.S. LOS, 3tl50oOO Manholes L,S, Loss 30975.00 ' Wet Connections Se L S 31200.00 Pavement Replacement 30200S,Y, 2400 6,400,00 00wlrete Cradle & Encasement L,S, L,S, 10000000 Embedment Material L,S. LOS, .2.000.00 Sub-Total $81009000 Contingencies 109 Subneering & Administration Engineeri 89 0000 Total Estimated Cost $96#172,00 E-24 FRunr' u10Nfl.p 040 F.H04 U - - I, Cost Estimate No. 9 - Pecan Creek Outfall (Existing plant ' to proposed ' plant) size to take flow from Hickory CrcFk area. DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED UNIT AMOUNT 33" Sriwer Pipe 79980 L,Fo -O.UANTXZY PRICE 20050 163,590,00 ' 2-30" Sewer Pipes (parallel) 14,850 L.F, 36000 5)4960040 Aerial Creek Crossings L,S. L,S, 259000.00 Highway Crossings L,S. L. S. 8000.00 ' Manholes L.S. LIS, 109070.00 Concrete Cradle & Encasement 250 C,Y, 25.00 6,25000 Emn*dment Material 4040 C.Y. 2,50 11,850.00 ' Sub-Total $759,860,00 Contingencies 10"4 0 Sub-Total 31, ,00 ' Engineering & Administration 7'% 58,509.00 Land & R.O.W. 22.810,00 Total Estimated Cost $917919540 J, Cost Estimate Noe 10 - Line "H" to Existing Plant it Existing 2411 Outfall Line is abandoned, DESCRIPTION ESTVATED UNIT AMOUNT UAMTITY Palo 1F Sewer Pipe 59100 L,r, .;3074 19107 60 181 Sewer Pipe 5,400 Lsr, 6000 32,440,00 21 1 Sewer Pipe 3,920 L,F'. 7139 28,969,oo I 2411 Sewer Pipe 50500 1I.F, 9012 50,160,00 30" Sewer Pipe 4,320 L.F. 1705 77,%4,00 t Highway Crossing L,S, L.S, 6,200,00 Railroad Crossing L,S. L.S. 4,0o0.00 Aerial Creek Crossings L.a L.S, 1.50000000 ' Manholes L.S. L.S, 109865,0o Wet Connections r,. S, L,S, 6,00040 Pavement Replaoemont 7000 S.Y. 2000 15,800,00 Concrete Cradle & Enoasement L, S. L,S. 3,750.00 ' Embedment Material LIS, L.S. 5..000.00 Sub-Total $2749762.00 1 Contingencies 10? 0' Sub-Tota?. 302023$0.00 Engineering & Administration 7'11 _ 21.157.00 ' Total Estimated Cost $321095100 E-25 - _ :M 1'(iC[P4 11011 1100 nr.n t. 11❑9[9R t=. a K. Cast Estimate No, 11 Connectiona from Lines "Ti", "C" to Line "A (If lines are not paralleled for entire length) D S~ Of 0r- " ESTIMATED UNIT AMOUNT l0" Sewer Pipe 540 LIFO 21" Sewer Pipe $3622 $ 17,39.00 Aerial Creek Crossings 2'2110 L'F• 7M39 16056#00 Pavement ReplacementLOS` L•S• 7,500,00 Manholes LOS. Lo S. 500.00 Wet Connections L•S• L, 5. 1,50040 Enbed<,ent Matarialn LISP L,S, 11000000 208 C.Y. 2150 _U0109 0.00 ' on Contingencies 10 $29,017,00 ontingan 0 LSu'b- Total - ( 1 r 919.00 Engineering k Administration 70 2,294.00 Total Estimated Cost $34,153.00 r L. Cost Estimate No. 12 - Paralleling Lines "D", 110.1 and "A" to completely relievo overloaded condition. ESTiriATF.D UNIT At40UNT ' - OUAN~ PltrrwA" Sawar Pipe - Line C 5060 L, ta', $3000 1211 fewer Pipe - Line B 7,200 La Fe $7t928W ,Ob 1 12" Sewer Pipe - Line D 2,200 L.F. a•74 2 26,.00 Railroad Crossings L,a ,.74 $,228.00 Wet Connections TJ•S' 10,250,00 Manholes L'S' TJ4191 10,000.00 LtSo 5,300,00 Pavement Replacement L's' Embedment Materials 698 6►j98 CS.•YY. ' 2:50 2 2. 0 00 13,000.00 50 1..745.90 Sub-Total Contingencies 100 $92,731.00 A 1100 Sub-Total 102,00 .00 Engineering & Administration 7 7.140.00 Total Estimated Cost $109,14440 E-26 IRMt M[. N10HOLR ANb WHR[R11 ' M. Coat Estimate No, 13 Paralleling line "B" only. DFSCRIPrT0 ESTIMIA ~MD ~~UNIC AD'~WfOfINT CWNTITY p T ' 12" Sewer OF Railroad Crossing 7'LQSO.L'i. $3,74 $26,9211,00 Wet Conneotionc L, So 4,125,00 1 L'S` L.5. 4,000.00 Manholes Pavement Replacement 3,2210 10 S 2,500,o0 Embedment Materials ,Y. 2100 b, 420, 00 t 365 C,Y, 2,50 9.c3.00 Sub-Total $44,886.oo Contingenoies 10!' ' Sub-Total $49,37555 00 Engineering & Administration 7% „~,456.oo Total Estimated Cost $52,891.00 1 E-27 :...t_.___• /Rtrm HIMHOL6 .H6 Wbh.*! 1 CHAPTER P "~FWAQE N;A ,M~NT~C IT ' 1 ' 1, aen r This section of the Report presents tho findings of investiga.• ' Lions of the neoessary improvements required to provide adequate treatment facilities to serve the City. These investigations include studies of existing facilities, feasibility of expanding ' existing faoilities, and the feasibility of constructing new facilities at a different location, 2, a ri tipn of Exist n&SaRAj Plan The existing sewage treatment plant is located on Pecan Creek approximately 11000 feet east of Woodland Lane. From the information available it appears that this site was first acquired in 1923 with a sewage treatment plant being built at that time, In 1946-1947 the r original sewage treatment plant was abandoned, and a new plant was oonstruoted. This plant is now in service and provides treatment of all the sewage from the entire city, The pri,noipal treatment units are a hand clean bar screen, Parshall flume, grit removal channel, Imhoff tank, two standard rate ' trickling filters, final clarifier and sludge drying beds. Provisions are made to chlorinate the raw sewage and the final effluent, Based on information obtained from the construction plane, it appears that ' this plant is capable of treating sewage from a oontribstting population of some 20,000 people, This statement is substantiated by the follow. ' ing analysisi ' sinFoators. Design Population 20,000 Average Daily plow 80 Gallons per capita ' DOD 1,6 Million Gallons per Day 0.22 Lbs, per Capita ' 4,400 Lbs, Suspended Solids p Am ppm Volume 1321000 Gallons Surface Area 2,073 Sq, Ft, l Detention Time 1.98 Hours Upflow Rate 521 Gal. per Sq, Ft. per D Sludge Chamber Capacity 82,496 C+1. Ft. ' Sludge Capacity per capita 4,12 Cu. Ft. ZILd at a Filte ' Number of Units 2 Diameter 1570.011 Rook Depth 70 .0't ' Volume of Media per Filter 5019 Cu. We, Total Volume of Media (2 Units) :10,038 Cu, Yds, Surface Area per Filter 19059 Sq. Ft. ' Total Surface Area (2 Unite) 38,718 Sq, Ft, DOD Loading per Cu, Yd, of Media 0.28 Lbs, Application Rate 1680 Million palef per Day ' per Acre Volume (side water depth) 144,813 Gallons Volume of Sludge Hopper 53,048 Gallons Surface Area Detention Time 1,936 ou Upf.Zow Rats 2.17 Hours* 826 Gals, per Sq, Ft, per Day *Volume of sludge hopper not considered in ' determining detention time, F-2 - - raccnc. wroHe!.r MHO cNtNcee lu a pryi.ttu beds Total Surfaoe Area 16,800 Sq, Ft, Area per Capita 0.84 Sq. Ft, r hall Flume ' Throat Width lf~oll Range of Measurement-Minimum Flow 0,07 MOD Maximum Flow 10,41 MOD ' All units desoribed abrve are within accepted design oriteria to aocomodate a sewage flow of 20,000 people as set forth under Design F'aotors, It should also be noted that the plant operating at design faotors will meet the reoommendations of the Texas State Board of Health, ' It should be noted at this point, however, that the plant is now serving a contributing population in exoess of its rated capaoity, ' Based on available flow reoords, +t is estimated that the average daily t flow to the plant is approximately 2,0 million gallons per day and that the oontributing population is 30x000 people. ' Sewage samples were taken September 30, October 15, and 16, 1959 and analyzed, A summary of the various tests is shown in the ' tabulation uelows $amnl8a Taken 145d ' S8 oQt Estimated Contributing Population 30,000 30,Ooo 30,000 Total Day's Flow . MOD 4.08 3.45 t BOD of Raw Sewage w ppm 200 216 16 BOD of Final Effluent.. ppm* Y~ 46 43 DOD of Raw Sewagepp 43 ound per oapita 0,227 0,211 Overall DOD Removal-per oent 6340 78,8 84245 Suspended Solids in Raw Sewage-ppm 114 132 200 Suspended :solids in Final Effluent-ppm 27 55 33 Overall Removal of Suspended Solids- per oent 8143 5803 8345 Samples taken prior to postohlorination F-3 1 ~ There was considerable rainfall during the period of sampling ' which resulted in higher flows at the plant due to infiltration. It is 1 anticipated that these high flows reduoed the HOD as shown in parts plir million (ppm), The normal DOD on an average day is expected to be al,Proximately 300 to 730 ppm, The overall reduction in sewage strength as measured by HOD, ranges from 7848% to 84,4%, Thia indicates a 1 reasonably satisfactory treatment but should the sewage load continue 1 to increase the degree of treatment can be expected to dholine sharply. It has been concluded from these studies that steps should be taken 1 either to relieve the existing sewage treatment plant by removing a portion of its load or the plant should be expanded to adequately treat 1 thti sewage which it receives, 1 3, 2gooosed--Sewaae.T eeatment Facilities a, 02ngrili 1 I The existing sewage treatment plant which is located on Peoe.n Creek is presently overloaded as outlined in the paragraph above, t This overloading condition will continue to increase as the City grows ' unleas adequate steps aru taken to remedy the situation, Two courses of action are available to the City; (1) the present sewage treatment plant 1 can be enlarged and expanied or, (2) a new treatment plant can be con. struoted at a different location, The Peoan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant is located relatively close to inhabited areas, It is noted that these areas kdjaoent to the 1 plant site have been sparsely developed but this can be attributed, in 1 part to its proximity to the sewage treatment plant, It is anticipated F~4 Yl,tt6t, WhHOLO AND tNt6NtlH ■ 1 that it will be in the beat interest of the City to abandon this site oomplstoly at some future date in order to permit industrial and resi- dential development of the area, It is expected that the City will continue to grow in An east- ward and southeastward direction. This would result in the "building- ' up" of the area between the Peoan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant and the Oar%&-Little Elm Reservoir, These areas are, of course, downstream from ' the sewage treatment plant, and thay will be difficult to serve from the present plant site, After considering all faotorso it has been concluded that it would be in the beat interest of the City of Denton ' to construct a sewage treatment plant at a new location rather than expanding the existing faoility, ' Careful consideration has been given to the site for a new oewage treatment plant, The proposed plant should be so located that it can ' readily serve all areas of the City, Due to the terrain of the City of Denton, it is not .feasible to serve the entire city by a gravity system to a central plant site, A thorough examination of the problem indicates that a site in the vicinity of the junction of Peoan Creek and Oarzp.-Little Elm Reservoir would permit the construction of the most ' economical outfall and oolleotiosi system. It is recommer led that the proposed plant be located in this general area, No effort has been made to determine a definite site inasmuch as the availability of land ' is not known, b, Djaign. of The design of sewage treatment facilities involves the con- ' F-5 "-u - ~ YNLt8f, HICNOLM AND CNDMi Nh f 1 sideration of mu ny various faotors. The contributing population, the estimated sewage flows, and the quality of the sewage are three of the ' more important items. The determination of the contributing population to the proposed sewage treatment plans has been one of the more difficult ' factors to resolve. This involves the deoision as to how the existing Pecan Creek Sewage Plant is to be operated. There are several schemes which can be developed for the operation of this existing plantl however$ ' for tho purpose of this Report the number has been reduced to three. These schemes are outlined as follows: r 8oheme No. 1 ' (a) The Pecan Creek Treatment Plant to continue treating all waste from the City with the exception of the area lying within the Hickory Creek watershed until 1965. (b) Divert all waste from the Hickory Creek watershed to the ' new sewage-breatment plant. ' (o) In 1965 divert sewage waste from the Pecan Creek Plant which is in excess of its rated capacity (20,000 people ' 1.6 MOD). The Pecan Creek Plant would then be operated at rated capacity from 196$ through 1985. ' 8ohgms No, 2 ' (a,) The Pecan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant to ti 44ete derived from the entire city with the exoeptioi. the ' Hickory Creek +4atershed, The plant to be operated at rated capacity (20,000 people 1,6 MOD). F-6 ' /Nt[NC HIENHLN AMb Y.MbNtAA r r (b) The waste from the Pecan Creek watershed in excess of the capacity of the existing sewage treatment plant ' would be diverted to the proposed sewage treatment plant, (o) The waste from the Hickory Creek watershed to be trans. r mitted to the proposed treatment plant, o ems No, 3 r (a) Abandon the Peuan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant immediately, (b) Treat the waste from the entire city at the new proposed sewage treatment plant, ' The average daily flow and the contributing population for the three schemes described above is shown in Table No, s , As outlined ' above it is not proposed to enlarge the facility at the Peoan Creek ' Sewage 'treatment Plant, Under Scheme No. 1 the Pecan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant would be overloaded from the present time through 1965, ' It is anticipated that this overloaded condition will not be of greater magnitude than now exists, While tho area served by this plant will ' grow in population during this period of time, this growth will be r offset by diverting the Hickory Creek watershed area to the proposed treatment plant, The Pecan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant under Scheme ' No. 2 would operate at its rated oapacity upon the oompletion of the proposed new sewage treatment plant, The proposal described as Scheme r No, 3 would envision the abandonment of the Pecan Creek Sewage Plant immediately upon the completion of the proposed sewage treatment plant, It should be noted that under all three schemes no expansion of the ' existl,ng Pecan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant is contemplated, 1 F-7 ' INttlt, NICH13LO ANb tHM1111 r A4 0; rrrro--{{{I' A r~-+ 00 V (o)N rr-I v~ r ~ a! O :-I M O r1 n N d11+1 H A 000 oo(~. ao to coh r 0 000 N M 98 Q..~ 4f r-1 OOH OOra +~raM a' Q~s N po g i+4 a1 ra N r-I N rl N 48 h O pp Q CS coo 000 000 q a o r W W IC)Ora O[JrI c; O 06 $pp 8oo $8 c~fl).k ~NN NNN 888 r O r d ~+ona oa Nnkr~ NMW!. f MVI) W) VIN 00 r i Vl ra N M ' vy _ rp[te[, NIrNDLS AN4 LNORI•A The capacity of the proposed sewage treatment plant will ' derend upon which scheme is selected. A summary of the average flown ' to tho new plant and contributing population for each scheme is shown in the tabulation belowi ' 1965 -1985 Scheme Contributing Average Flow Contributing Average Flow No, Pop lati_on WD Population 40D r 1 149150 1.19 4?t700 3090 ' 2 18,850 1457 479700 3690 3 38,850 3017 67,700 5.50 The character or quality of the sewage which will be received at the proposed sewage treatment plant is estimated to be similar to that now being received at the Peoan Creek Sewage Treatment Plant. ' Sewage samples have been gathered and analyzed. A summary of these results are given in the paragraph of this Report entitled "Desori,ption ' of Existing Sewage Treatment Plant"s The BCD analysis of the raw sewage ' indicates a sewage strength of 0.21 to 0.26 pounds of BOD per capita. For the purpose of making preliminary design of the proposed sewage ' treatment plant the strength of raw sewage is estimated to be 0.22 pounds BOD per capita per day. (o) geleotion of Type-of Treatment., Careful consideration must be given to the selection of treatment processes to be employed, Thorough exariaation and study ' should include investigation of the initial csonstruotion oost, operation ' F-9 YN[C6[, NIMHALb ANO CNONtHR r r ooet, maintenanoe cost, degree of treatment desired, location of plant site, character of raw sewage, eto. In general, the treatment process r must be capable of meeting the following oonditionst (a) The sewage treatment plant is located Adjacent to the r garwa..Little Elm Reservoir. This reservoir serves as a municipal water supply for Denton, Dallas and other' oommunities. The treatment prooees selected must be of ' W,tM that will produce a high quality effluent. (b) Inasmuch as the plant will be a great distance from the ' center of town, the outfall lines will be of considerable length. It is anticipated that the sewage may arrive r at the plant in a "stale" condition and will have a poor trestability index. The plant should be capable of meeting this condition. r (o) The plant should be capable of handling a wide fluctuation in sewage flows. Flow will vary from day to day and even r from hour to hour. ' Many types of treatment processes have been developed and are in use at the present time. In general, treatment processes fall under r one of two classifications; biological oxidation by passing the sewage over rook filters or, biological oxidation by discharging compressed air in r the sewage. Sewage treatment processes might also be defined as standard rate and high rate. The high rate, as the name would imply, simply means passing the mewage through the treatment process at a very high rate of r ' applioation, This peritA is smaller treatment unite and results in lower initial cost, Tito high rate sewage treatment plants cannot ' produce the quality of effluent nor as stable an effluent As can be produced by a standard rate process. Due to the proximity of the pro. posed treatment plant to the municipal water supply reservoir of Garza- Little Elm# it is recommended that a high rate process not be considered, After review of all the available processes it has been cons, ' oluded that consideration ethould be given to the use of biological filtration and the use of activated sludge process, The biological filtration process is the same process which is now being employed at. 1 the Pecan Creak Sewage Treatment Plant, The activated sludge process i employs the use of bubbling compressed air through the sewage liquid, ' Both processes are well accepted by sanitary authorities and have many years of satisfactory experience, r The treatment process can be divided into two divisional (1) primary treatment, and (2) secondary treatment. The coarser and heavier material is separated from the sewage liquid in the primary proceae, The principal unite employed in the primary process are the same for both biological filtration and activated sludge. The sizes of the various e units will vary from one process to the other due to the use of different design criteria, The primary treatment consists of mechanical screen, grit removal and primary sedimentation. It is proposed that all sew,sge ' be screened and that this screen be mechanically cleaned, The screenings will be ground or shredded and returned to the flow. The eand acid grit F'-11 ' POItFORi HItl HMA AND CNON964 will be removed by a "Detritor" or a similar unit, and the grit to be hauled away for burial, The sewage flow will then paeb to the primary clarifier for sedimentation where the larger and heavier particles are separated from the liquid, ' The secondary treatment division is biological. The bio-ohemioal oxygen demand is satisfied in this portion of the sewage treatment plant, ' In the case of biologioal filtration the sewage liquid passes from the primary clarifier to the standard rate filter where the liquid is passed over a bed of large rooks, This permits the liquid to absorb oxygen which satisfies the bio-chemioal oxygen demand. The rook filter is then followed by a final clarifier. After passing through the final clarifier ' the flow can then be chlorinated, and the efflurnt discharged into Peoan Creak, In the case of the activated sludge prooera, the sewage liquid flows from the primary clarifier to aeration basins. Compressed air is discharged into these basins near the bottom. Liquid then absorbs a portion of this air to satisfy the bio-chemioal oxygen demand, From the aeration basin the liquid passes through the final clarifier and in ohlorinated prior to being discharged into Pecan Creek. In order to handle the sludge received from the clarifier, one sludge digoster will be provided with a floating oover, external heater and gas recirculation, (d) getorminaticn bf piA„+ °ides The size of treatment plant to W constructed is dependent r F..12 - 1'n1.C 4[. /1i011 tIL0 b46 Y.NVIIC Np upon the ochemes developed, The recommended plant oapanities for the ' various sohemes is as followse proposed plant C gagitigs MOD Immediate Construction 1970 Construction Total Ca aoit Scheme No. 1 1'% 2450 4,00 ' Scheme No, 2 2900 2,00 4,00 Scheme No, 3 4600 2,00 6,o0 t It io noted that the immediate construction phase under each soheme will provide more oaraoity than is required to meet the needs of ' 1965s If the plant is constructed only to serve until 1965, it would be necessary to make a major expansion within four years of the completion of the first construction phase, The proposed capacities for immediate construction should be ad(quate to meet the needs until approximately 1970. ' (e) Estimates o!' Coed The rstimated construction cost of the first phase is shown ' in Table Nos. 9 through ll inelusioe. A summary of these costs is as ' follows Standard pate Filter. iAot yated Sludge ' Scheme No, 1 $587,460 $432,835 Sohome No, 2 $693,390 526095 Scheme No. 3 $10199000 18979 M i The initial cost of the activated sludge plant is the lowest under all three sohemes, It should be noted, however, that the operating cost of this type of plant is somewhat higher than a standard rate filter plant, Both types of plant will require 24-hour supervision by trained ' x'-13 operators and staff, but the activated sludge plant will require oon. ' siderably more a'lootrio power. Assuming electric power ® $0.015 per M f the power cost of the activated sludge process will be approximately $15,00 per million gallons of sewag6 treated as compared to a standard ' rate filter of $5.55 per million gallone, Based on the plant operating at rated capacity, the annual power costs are estimated to be as follows r ANNUAL EJ§CTRICPOWER Cg4'r Aotivated Standard. Rate Plant Enter plant Aiifferer scheme No. 1 051 $8,212 J~pO520039 Scheme,No# 2 100950 $6,©9B 3 121,9oo 8,103 $13o?97 r If the difference in electric power cost is amortimed over a r period of 30 years at an interest rate of 3%t the following data is developed$ Difference in Initial Cost Additional. Power Cost (Activated Sludge Plant for Activated Sludge less Standard Rate Filter Plant r Plant) Amortized Scheme No. 1 154,625 101i393 Scheme No. 2 166,395 1135,204 ' Scheme No. 3 301,750 $270,427 There ore after considering operating coats, the activated sludge r process appears to be the most economical type of treatment. It is also ' anticipated that this process will produoe the best quality of effluent. It is therefore recommended that the proposed sewage treatment plant be r of the activated sludge type. r i Y-14 rnp t43 F, HIIIHMn AND LND"knn _ r ~ TABLE NO. 9 r ESTIMATES OF CUT ttQPO gA 5.EWAOE_TREATMENT PLANT 1- 5ON O4LIAN5 plot DAY CAPACITY (Soheme No. 1) ' A. STANDARt) RATE FILTEEi PLANT ' Sewage Treatment plant including strudturee, equipment, road, yard piping, etc. $484,004 r Contingenoiea - 10% Engineering & Administration 79~ %0 x000 - 36,96o $564060 r Land - 22A 00 r TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $587,460 B• ACTIVATED SLM.GE PLANT ' Sewage Treatment Plant including struoturea, equipment, roast, yard Piping, etc. $355,040 r Contingencies . 10% 111500 r Engineering & Administration . 7% 390,500 $417035 Larld l 04 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $432,835 r r r F-15 rrrcrne. UrMlth AIM rr4014frisr _ TABLE No. 10 ' ESTIMATE; OF COST PROPQ P-SEWAOE TEA,z .P 2,0 MILLION UU CAPACIT (Soheme No, 2) A. STANDARD RATE F31TE„R, PLANT t Sewage Treatment Plant inoluding struotures, equipment, road, yard piping, eta, $5700000 ' Contingenaiee - 10% 27,0 0 ' Engineering & Administration - 73~ _ k3 c0~ $670,890 Land 22,500 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $693,39o li ' B. ACrIVA_TED Sb MS PLARX Sewage Treatment Plant inoluding struotures, equipment, road, yard ' piping, eta. $435,000 Contingenoies - 10% 43*500 Engineering & Administration . 7~ 495 $511,995 Land ~.,..,14.OD0 t TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $526,995 F-16 ' t14 r. F i;r. P04 t:nryl4 A j( rani 14 r.5 << 1 _ - - ' TABLE NO. 11 t ESTIMATE OF COST PROPOSED SEWAGE TREA_TMgNT ?4U r 4_,2MILT.SON OALLON "CAPACITY (Scheme No. 3) 1 A b $TANDAN RATE FTLTEg PLANT r Sewage 'treatment Plant including structuree, equipment, road, yard r piping, eto. $100000000 Contingenaies - 109 100400Q 1,104,000 r Engineering & Administration ---2z&4 r $1,177,000 Land 22,NO r TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $2,1999500 B, ACTIVAD SLWO PLANT r Sewage Treatment Plant inoluding struoturee0 equipment, road, yard piping, eV. $750,000 r Contingenoiee 10% 0 251 4 r Engineering & Administration - 7% $ 882,750 r Land 15,000_ TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ p97r730 r r F_17 1 1 ~ 1 1, W c O s'~J, ~ Q L7 i 1 a~ It 4+ o 1 ON a, 06 o 0 1 U ' P 0 P U 1_AT10N n~A'tC ' 70,000 ' r ' 60,000 T1 r l 50,000 / ' J 441 40,000 ' $o,o o ESTIMATED 0 o JANUAl2 1960` 30,000 ' ?0,000 10,000 MWAMW 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 f930 1940 19b0 f 960 1970 1980 199o Y E A P POPULATION PROJECTION AND r OAST GPO W T N MATF 2 J , fill 77 yr5 (,f , M! it 4 ~rcf 1 {}t 11gr F 01 11' •~X"•~i~~ 1f r'r'~~~ ~ c r~ 4 III,' ~I ~ ~ I ~ / Wit 1.4 1 ! + E 16U~ . f ° a, .Y, -,M. F )I 11- 3}i~ G ~If EY 1.1 f~ r ~ y „jj, ' fl1 ~ Ir J A wrvir f 9!II i L f .-^rt 1 ~ off I' f.{13ilfflr[ It N,rf•~, ~ I . ~ I 1 i f~~~ ~ I. I!M / 111 11. ~1~}. ~ i ~ ~ 33 i.wn•r J 11.4 r, taa„ t 11 It I' 11 1 1 ` J ' y I ~ I 1/ s ..Y YrY~pyyyNyyryNy~wq~ Milli I 1 vJ J ~ 1 0 `J^ 1 V a ~ > a Z 1 0~~ p J r/ 1 ou M 1 0. Z. ~I 00 o U a ui CIA, o01 1 1 N 1 wa~,. IM 00 h Y V' ( -12 1 o O r T 1 _ 40 1 ~ Y. / 1 ✓ kN/d7lnp l1R17ld :1SJX8 ' N 17 ~h lh rma . x ~ 2 \ 1 1 ~ pLQ C Y ~ ' 1 ~ ~ I Igo h 1 JNr~RJn~ a~'noar Dnl WAMP PAM MRS ArNrON, r,0148 1 PROP010 SAIPANS/ON OF WAM MArMENT Pr AM"FACILITIES fArtl0.1 N/CHOGS' AND 00VO.WS Om,iu/Fig rny/nare ' \ Da/ob~r Ji!! PIArt 5 1 j i >I~ ~ is x U .dL614ht,kr r e 1 1 .1 ol iii n,~ wRe - ,~Nr~\~ F.nn ~ J~ ~ ~1 ~ h ( / ~ ✓I~ r 1 I I~ , I~fMk _I w. l ; 1 Y I I 1 w r r w + { k i Jill h { ,k f 4 EMIT- MIS 4 ~ r?, oil I l 1I~,~ a LIMMUMM, j • / J 1 tljk r '1 ~ - h I f t I -IN In i 'IT f~ I w aim • IO, N / in I t ' IM { l \ Ir I" Ww 1 R tt ~ , I ; Ifirt!o to r r V . O 1 W ~ ~ r 6 : 9 r } ~ I a r v6 J 114 i fill i L. r ' r 2 s q ~ c 7 6 io it ~p i~+ " ra AReA -"THOU-SAND 41F ACR&S PLA7 e r 1 TM till Vill I 1 z 1 r; f. 1 oil t I I I IM r, 17 p~ are , , o li ~ w q Y~ 11 f6b1~M~~F }7 r I~~tS ~ `,X ! ~ X ~~r~.~~I11i1jITr n ~ MQ I yy tt ..r 6 ♦ y, ~yjj~ r 3 1 , .M • ~fYyo C ` ~ ~ _ I ~ •~--r rte. ' / //yJf/ • H ~ . 1 ,I I ~ ~ t ~rlTxa r~ ~ ~ •111 ' _ yr FFF w wrn\ {II 11 1 r 1 . II ,l. 1 / ~l ~ --444 • ! r ~ Z d ~ ~w~~y i ( ~l f ! ~~r 4 J ~f ,w acr I r Yl ll I r., . r r 1. ~ .r►^,t~ 1 ( i.n' 1 1T ♦ i~~,~ i 111 JJ i iI I ~ r i ~ ~ ti !II n 7 i ✓ HIV r y r a w. ~ dbb4vt~ 4 AVOW y.~ y~~~`'~a•••iy ~~x y3r f.. f +k~f J IY~Y l Ila r y 'A`-\\'~\...n IrN1Y..~W1..:Y~ J ~`.I., ~rY `'1~.•~ 9 ' ~ 5 ~j ~I .~u (I II~~MM/// 1( ~ ~7 J 1 I F + li _+r 4,; 1 ' f 1 u 1 ~ I I ~v ~ FR'I ~t + 7 V , I T . it i (r• +ir I~ r i * i 01 RM r p 4 • I'I , f iI Vr~ ~ - ~ ` fly. / -'J '!Y R wilill, 411`4 1, r i Ni.I~ I! J u1 Y1 ^'ry / ~~f f ~f f 1 r u~ '`)',+~~t +f !t I~I~.. ~ ~ 41 ..rR ~ rl r , ~ r.. l~ Iwo i ' r 1 1 fi s~I~ Q ~ j~~:~ll~i,j \ 7 rg M °II \ 1 jl . • f ~ ! 1~+~ illy) f ~ ~ /,~;~'y~" ..Y I } 1 ~ I. Icly_~~,;r r woomumbd"W py. 1 1.. STATE 19N y No' f 19Cp,..1 CITY LIMITS, D E N TO N 444 . 1 ~ Sewagd4 S, yw ;L f'lanf OARZAA 1 p,oposed c1rr45 , 11i nUt}"al/ Sawar 64M R65 ~y Nubson yr ~~~k 1 i If Poule 'gy'p rq y, iiJ solo 00 SM rnn a tatJcn ' Pro cooed 1 Route~~ ~ii ata Plan ~ 1 Pro/OOSOd ~r 1 's OUMO// pool Se wor 1 r In NICU 0 Y cneCll Rob rE /Pi 1 ,fitofi'an 1N70C1,I10 RE POPr ON 1 SANI rARV 3S WE'X7A0 l;AC14MES OZA/r"ON, riFYAS Zv d CA 7/ O N MA P 1 RRE4'SL', NICHOLS AND CNORE'SS Con9u/tingg Enginaers 1 as~a6.~r 1389 PLA rE /Z