Public Meeting – December 15, 2016
Eagles Nest, Timbers Condo’s – 5:45 p.m.
Ron Krall presented the attached presentation to all those in attendance at the meeting. He was assisted by Mary Andre from CDC Engineering.
TWSD PNA Public Hearing Presentation Final
Attendance:
Board Members: Ron Krall, Gary Osteen, Dusty Atkinson
District Staff: Jodi Lightfoot, Kasey O’Halloran,
District Residents: Mike Lomas, Gary Theander, Todd Chapman, and Brian Ayer (Manager, Timbers Condominiums)
District consultants: Mary Andre, CDC
Questions and Answers:
1. Is the need to replace just the treatment system, the collection system, or both?
a. Both the treatment and collection systems are aging and need replacement to bring the system into compliance with applicable regulations.
2. What type of breaks have been seen in the collection system?
a. Settling of pipe segments, separation of joints, root intrusion and cracks are all present throughout the collection system. The joint separations and settling suggest an inadequate foundation for the existing pipe and make lining the existing piping unlikely to be satisfactory long term or less expensive than replacement.
3. What type of material is the pipe?
a. Asbestos cement truss pipe, a type of pipe commonly used in the 1970’s but no longer used.
4. What’s the diameter of the pipe?
a. 8 in
5. Is there a way for the operator to collect analysis samples in the winter?
a. There is no safe way for an operator to collect samples from the existing upper pond. However, a new lagoon system would include a vault for sample collection.
6. What happens to the irrigation system in the winter?
a. In the winter, treated effluent flows into the unlined final lagoon where it infiltrates into the groundwater or is stored until the following summer/fall season when the irrigation system is operational and the treated effluent is sprinkled on the upland slope.
7. How would we replace the existing lagoons?
a. Because there is insufficient land to construct new lagoons adjacent to the existing ones, the existing lagoons would have to be taken out of service and new lagoons constructed on the same site. During construction we would have to haul sludge to Leadville and sewage to the City’s Wastewater Treatment Facility. These costs contribute significantly to the overall cost of a new lagoon system.
8. Are chemicals required to be added as part of the mechanical treatment systems?
a. No, but the addition of alkalinity may be considered. The disinfection is proposed to be with ultraviolet light instead of chlorination/dechlorination
9. What does replacement of the collection system cost for all three options?
a. There is no difference in the cost of the replacement of the collection system for the
three treatment systems considered (new lagoons and the two mechanical plant
systems). If these systems are placed at the existing treatment site, the cost is
approximately $1,000,000. If the treatment system is located at the upper site, the
collection system replacement cost is approximately half since the lower collection
system would be abandoned and not replaced.
10. If the treatment system is located at the Upper Site, what happens to the lower lagoons?
a. Our plans call for this land to be reclaimed.
11. Does the Timbers Water and Sanitation District own the land for the lagoons?
a. No, Timbers Water and Sanitation District holds an easement on this property.
12. Is there any potential for new properties to connect to the sanitation system?
a. Existing platted lots within the district service area, which are currently vacant will be
able to tap into the sewer line. However, the Timbers Preserve properties are served by
septic systems. There are no other plats that can connect to or join the sanitation
system.
13. Does the magnificent ponderosa tree near the upper site get affected?
a. This tree will be carefully protected.
14. Who owns Timbers Preserve Lot 3 and Lot 1?
a. Ronald and Susan Krall own Lot 3 and James Galvin owns Lot 1.
15. Is there a possibility that the land will be donated?
a. Donation is a possibility. A survey has been completed and once appraisals are done the
District will negotiate access to the property.
16. Will anything be built on the Lot 1 portion of the Upper Site?
a. Lot 1 provides access to the building site. The Collection system will run underground
and the entrance driveway may sit partially or completely on Lot 1.
17. What is the purpose of the pond adjacent to the water treatment plant? Was it built for fire
protection?
a. It is unknown if this pond was intended to store water for fire protection. Original
drawings identify it as a backwash pond and the backwash water from the sand filter of
the original Timbers’ Water Treatment Facility was discharged to this pond.
18. Where would the driveway for the new facility be?
a. It could be directly across the road from the existing WTF or could be 100 ft down the
road from that driveway entrance.
19. Does the sewer line go under the pond?
a. No, it passes to the east and north.
20. Could the current collection system be lined rather than replaced?
a. The current collection system is not a suitable candidate for lining because of the extent
of the joint separations in the existing pipe. Furthermore, the distances between
manholes and the geography of the collection system make it impossible or expensive
for lining technology.
21. Is the newer PVC sewer being replaced?
a. No, there is approximately 800 ft of PVC installed around the year 2000. This is not being
replaced. Only the asbestos cement sewerline installed in the early 1970’s is proposed to be
replaced.
22. Will it be necessary to replace the newer segment of sewer at the Lomas driveway that replaced
a collapsed pipe about 15-20 years ago?
a. This will need to be reviewed further. We are not aware of as built records detailing the
length and location of pipe replaced. Further info may be able to be obtained from the
sewer video. This could be evaluated at the time of construction. It may be possible to
connect to each end of this newer segment and avoid construction disturbance to this
driveway.
23. Did we consider a specific liner technology with UV cure and structural integrity?
a. We looked into multiple technologies and can consider this further in the design phase.
(Yes, this is one of the technologies we considered and the same conclusion above
applies.)
24. Have we looked into a product to renovate current manholes ?
a. Yes. The cost is less than half to renovate rather than replace existing manholes and will
be further considered in the design phase.
25. Are there other utilities that could conflict with the new sewer line?
a. There are fiber optic, electric and waterlines in the road. The fiber optic line is an
important regional connector and we will need to work around it.
26. Has the state ever told us what the bare minimum is to get a discharge permit?
a. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has told us that the
collection and treatment systems have to meet current standards for construction and
performance.
27. Does the State have a preference of treatment systems?
a. The State appears to be supporting the use of mechanical plants as they have better
potential to treat effluent for the long term and to remove chemicals that may become
regulated in the future.
28. What type of wastewater treatment are you proposing?
a. We are proposing a Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) treatment technology, which
provides multiple treatment processes in a single tank.
29. Does this type of Wastewater Treatment Facility smell?
a. No, these facilities have odor control.
30. Have you visited these types of facilities?
a. Yes. We’ve also talked with operators.
31. Where is the closest SBR type of facility?
a. We are not sure where the closest is but there are several SBR facilities along the I-70
corridor, and in other local small mountain communities.
32. How many users are on the system?
a. 83.
33. How much will users pay for the new system?
a. Assuming that the system is financed with a combination of grants and loans and the
District takes on the voter approved indebtedness of $2,070,000, the average cost to
users is estimated at approximately $1100 per year. This amount would vary depending
on the assessed valuation of the home. The debt would be paid over 20-30 years.
34. Does the District Board have the authority to take on this debt or does it have to come to a vote
of the District Members?
a. The Board has the authority to take on debt up to $2,070,000 as approved by the vote
of District members in 2014.
35. If we don’t undertake construction until 2018, will the price increase from current estimates?
a. The longer construction is delayed, the greater the possibility the cost will increase. That
is the reason we are pushing for rapid approval and construction.
36. Is there a contingency built in to the cost estimates?
a. Yes, a 20% contingency is included in the cost estimates.
37. What would the interest rate of the loan be?
a. We have projected 2%, but that is highly dependent on the source and timing of the loan(s).
38. Are user fees the same for the condos, regardless the size?
a. Yes, currently user fees are the same for all occupied District member units. Note, there are some taps serving large residences rated at multiple equivalent residential units.
39. How can we help more?
a. Share the information you’ve learned and encourage participation with the Board on the decisions we have to make.
40. Is restoration of the service road included in the project?
a. The Board will make sure that road restoration is included in the project.