HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-097A.ATTACHMENT 3
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY `
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
ROCKRIDGE SEWER COLLECTION REHABILITATION ANALYSIS
FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
JANUARY 2005
Prepared for
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Prepared by
i
PBS&J
482 S. Keller Road
Orlando, FL 32810
www.pbse.com
January 25, 2005
Mr. Steve Doyle
Assistant Utilities Director
Indian River Co. Dept. of Utility Services
1840 25th St
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Rockridge Sewer Collection Rehabilitation Analysis
Dear Mr. Doyle;
In accordance with our scope of services, PBS&J is pleased to submit 12 copies
of the final technical memorandum for the Rockridge Sewer Collection
Rehabilitation Analysis. After submittal of the draft repo t and upon fu :her input
from County staff, PBS&J has concluded that the emergency power option will
serve the needs of the County most effectively. This conclusion results from
further review of each alternative in consideration of initial capital costs,
operations, maintenance and impact to the customer. The central sewer option
would be difficult to implement, would be extremely costly due to the soil
conditions, and would result in a large impact to the customers. The vacuum
sewer system was an attractive option, but would result in a large impact to
customers and appears to require substantial maintenance for proper operation.
The emergency power option would result in the least amount of impact in terms
of interruption of service to the customers, maintenance and operation of a
system.
In a further review of the emergency power option, PBS&J has provided a more
detailed cost estimate to include three generator sites with buildings that
attenuate sound and give proper security and appearance. Also, land acquisition
costs were included as well as additional ventilation requirements for the
enclosed buildings. Finally, since the area is prone to flooding, it is assumed that
each generator would be installed above the 100 -year flood elevation, requiring
each site to be raised. The currently proposed system was reconfigured to the
three sites selected by County staff. The cost estimate has risen considerably
from the draft report in consideration of the factors listed above.
Since the project is eligible for FEMA funding, PBS&J felt it would be in the best
interest of the County to understand the complete cost to design and implement
this option, which has resulted in a higher cost estimate. The current cost has
been included in the application for FEMA funding. The funding application has
been completed concurrently with this effort under a different work authorization
and is attached for your review.
335 East Van Fleet Drive • Bartow. Florida 33830 • Telephone- 863.333-7000 • Fax86'4 533-7888 • ipv. v pbsixw
Mr. Steve Doyle
January 25, 2005
Page 2 of 2
Upon securing funding or during the final design, PBS&J would recommend an
option to supply power to the entire system with only one generator functioning at
a higher voltage. The initial findings are that the costs for the emergency power
option could be significantly reduced and still could provide the same result. This
option would require a 1000 KW generator to operate the entire system
simultaneously. If it is determined that the system can be effectively run in three
operating zones rotating continually, then the generator size can be reduced. A
more detailed review in the operation of the system would be required, especially
in flood conditions when infiltration and inflow are high. However, PBS&J has
determined that a single generator option is feasible and due to the site
preparation and building requirements for each generator, this option would
reduce the cost significantly.
PBS&J is pleased to submit our findings for your review and we look forward to
working with the County on the next phase of this project. Please do not hesitate
to call me if you have any questions or need further clarification on the results
from the report. (863) 559-2471.
Sincerely,
PBS&J,
Robert Beltran, P.E., D.E.E.
Environmental Services Manager
111
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Steven J. Doyle, Assistant Utilities Director, and Indian River County
From: Bob Morrell, Project Manager, PBS&J
Date: March 14`h 92005
Re: Rockridge Sewage Collection System Hazard Mitigation -Alternatives
Indian River County Utilities had experienced significant problems in maintaining
operation of the sewage collection system within the Rockridge subdivision during the
recent storm events in September of this year. In response to these events, Indian River
County Utilities contracted with PBS&J to develop and evaluate different alternatives
to mitigate the potential for future re -occurrence. Also, the County requests PBS&J to
investigate possible funding options through the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA).
PBS&J has made an analysis of three alternatives to correct problems with the existing
system. These alternatives include providing emergency power to the existing system
as it is currently installed, replacing the system with a gravity flow collection system,
and replacing the system with a vacuum collection system.
This technical memorandum presents PBS&J's findings and recommendations. This
document will form the basis for discussions to be held with the County to select the
alternative to pursue for a design and construction effort. As part of these discussions,
funding options will be reviewed and identified.
Introduction and Background:
Existing S s� Rockridge is a community of predominantly single-family residential
homes. Of these, 413 existing residences are connected to a sewer collection system
that relies on individual pump stations at each home. The pump stations include a
single two horsepower pump powered through a 240V, three-phase control panel which
runs on an on/off float control system. The 413 control panels are powered through 58
distribution panels located throughout the neighborhood which power from three to
eleven control panels each. Each distribution panel is fed by an overhead power grid,
which also serves the residential power. Currently, each distribution panel has a
generator receptacle that can be used to provide emergency power in the event of a
power outage.
The wetwell at each pump station is a 30 -inch diameter fiberglass tank with a three-foot
depth. The pump is turned on its side for piping considerations, which reduces pump
efficiency and pumping volume available for storage. Pumping volume within each
pump station is approximately 35 gallons. For a typical residential flow of 250 gpd,
this would represent 3 to 4 hours of storage capacity on an average basis. During any
prolonged outage, as many as eight generators would be needed to service the 58
Page 1 of 7
F:\Utilirics\UTILITY - ENGINEERING\Projccu -Utility Ccmvuaion Pcmd\siJRC - Rack dgc Sewa FEMA MiJgwion UCP a 2521W65&J Engincemng Repon\Tech Mcmo
Rocl dge- Vacuum Option doc
distribution panels to assure that no pump station is without power for more than three
hours (one generator for every seven to eight stations, 24 -hours per day).
Recent Storm Related Problems: During the recent hurricanes, power was lost for
prolonged periods lasting as many as nine days. The Utilities Department, in addition
to the 58 distribution panels within Rockridge, has over 250 lift stations throughout the
County that also rely on portable generators for backup emergency power. The number
of generators and crews needed to service this number of sites is not available. As a
result, sewage systems backed up through out the Rockridge community creating a
public health hazard over an extended number of days.
Flooding of the low-lying area also contributed to health concerns. The top of each
pump station is flush with grade and therefore is susceptible to infiltration during
flooding which further exacerbates storage capacity of the system.
Geological Considerations: Beneath the grade in the Rockridge area, there is an
unusually small distance from grade to bedrock, sometimes as low as 2 to 3 feet. The
neighborhood was originally built as a septic tank system. Due to the rock bed,
percolation rates were very unfavorable for such a septic system. In the early 1990's,
the Connt'y ICplaCed Lie Septic tank s"y"stem with the current system. it was found to be
difficult and costly to install a gravity system due to excavation through rock.
Therefore, the low profile piping system that exists now was installed.
Hazard Mitigation Alternatives:
It has become a major priority to the County to modify the existing system and mitigate
future hazards due to power outages and flooding. The following three alternatives
were investigated:
1. Dedicated Emergency Power Generators for Existing System:
System Description — The existing distribution panels can be re -fitted to feed power
from buried conduits connected to dedicated automatic transfer switch (ATS) stations.
The ATS stations would receive normal power from the power company from the
existing overhead distribution system. The ATS stations would be equipped with
emergency power from permanent generators. Upon loss of normal power, the ATS
will automatically start the generator and then switchover to emergency power to keep
all stations fully operational during the power outage.
It is proposed under this alternative to secure up to three sites to locate ATS and
generator equipment. The three sites must be located to minimize the distance from the
generator to each individual distribution panels. From these three sites, underground
power is to be installed largely along existing wastewater collection main routes, storm
water mains, or other utilities' easements. Figure 1 depicts the proposed system for
this alternative.
Likely Construction Cost — $27000,000
Page 2 of 7
F:\Utilitics\UTILITY- ENGINEERING\Projccu - Urili\y Comvuaion Per uh RC - Rock idgc Scwa FEMA Mitigation UCP N 3521\PBS&J Engincccring Rccpon\Tcch Mcmo
Roclmdgc - Vacuum option doc
Table 1 depicts the cost breakdown used to estimate the cost of this alternative. In
order to develop the cost estimate for this alternative, the following assumptions were
made:
• Power distribution is underground through polyethylene conduit
• Change distribution to 480V, 3-phase power
• Property can be obtained for generator/ATS sites (land cost is included)
• Two generators will be outside a building with a sound attenuated enclosure
• One generator will be inside a building (building cost is included)
• Fuel tank — sub -base, 660 gallons with critical muffler
• Conduit routes to largely follow existing collection system routes (backyards)
• Grade in the area is essentially flat
• The cost includes 20% for contingencies and administrative
• The cost includes 10% for engineering and planning fees.
If 480V, 3-phase power is not available from the power company, then cost will be
40% higher to distribute at the existing 240V, 3-phase service ($3,174,000). This is
due to voltage drop losses requiring nearly doubling the wire size. In order to convert
to 480V service, each of the existing 58 distribution panels would have a new step-
down transformer installed to drop back to 240V service.
Discussion of Benefits and Disadvantages —
For this alternative, there is no change to the system that will be readily apparent to
customers. The existing system remains in place, the only change being the ability to
maintain operation during power outages.
Unfortunately, the system will continue to be a high maintenance problem with over
400 individual pump stations, 58 electrical service substations, and three additional
sites with complex electrical systems. The system will also continue to be susceptible to
flood interference since the individual pump stations remain.
The generator site will be built above 100 -year flood elevation, which will require each
site to be raised. The generator sites will be included with buildings that will attenuate
sound, provide proper security, and reduce risk of tampering with the system.
This alternative will be readily implemented and would result in very little, if any,
interruption of service for the existing system.
2. Replacement with Gravity Collection System:
System Description — The conceptual design of a gravity sewer system is based on
constructing a master pump station at the intersection of 16`h Street and 4`h Court to
collect individual homes' sewage using a gravity force main system as shown on
Figure 2. The gravity system includes the gravity and force mains and a single master
pump station. The master pump station will transfer sewage to the County's existing
pump station located at 141h Street via an existing 6 -inch force main. An emergency
Page 3 of 7
F Widaics\UTILITY- ENGINEEIUNGVrojws- Utility Covvoction Pc UNIRC - Rock dgc Scwar FEMA Mitigation UCP p 2521TSS& Engincccring Rcpo kTcch Mcnno
Rockridgc - Vacuum Option doc
generator and automatic transfer switch will be installed at the site to maintain
operation during power outages.
Likely Construction Cost — $725005000
Table 2 depicts the cost breakdown used to estimate the cost of this alternative. A
major factor in pricing this alternative is the uncertain amount of effort required to
excavate the rock subgrade. In order to develop the cost estimate for this alternative,
the following assumptions were made:
• 8 -inch diameter minimum sewer size
• 0.34% minimum design slope
• 4.0 feet cut at uppermost manhole
• i00% cost premium for rock excavation
• Grade in the area is essentially flat
• Drop manholes are not considered
It Drops through manholes are not included in the cost estimate
• The cost of lateral (service) line was included
• Annual average daily wastewater flow estimated as 300 gpd per connection
• 3.7 -peak factor was used to estimate the design flow
• The cost includes 20% for contingencies and administrative
• The cost includes 10% for engineering and planning fees.
Discussion of Benefits and Disadvantages —
The gravity system alternative might not be feasible due to the rock layer restriction
that is reflected in the cost estimate. This is the major impediment to implementing this
system and most likely why it was not originally implemented when the current system
was installed. Of related concern is the possible damage to existing structures due to
translated vibration during excavation through the existing rock layer.
A gravity flow system should decrease problems related to flood conditions. The
current system's individual wet wells, installed flush with grade, will no longer be
needed. The new gravity lines, initially installed to limit leaks, may experience
increased infiltration problems over time, but the pump station should be sized to
handle the expected peak conditions.
A gravity flow system has comparatively low maintenance since maintenance is limited
to a single site. There is very little maintenance required for the gravity lines once
properly installed.
This alternative requires reversal of the sewer line from the back of most houses to
the front. This, along with the depth of excavation required, will result in a higher
impact on customers both in construction activities and disturbance to existing
property.
Page 4 of 7
FAUtilities\UTILITY - ENGB ERINGIPmjeeu -Utility Can tinction Pe uVRC - Rcxk dge Scwa FEMA Mitigation UCP W 2521VBSU Engineeedng Repon\Tech Memo
RocWdge - Vxuum Option. doc
3. Replacement with Vacuum Collection System:
System Description — A vacuum collection system entails connection of each house
service to a dedicated collection chamber from which a vacuum system transfers the
collected sewage to a central location via vacuum. A layout of the system is shown in
Figure 3. Similar to the gravity flow system, electric service is only required at the
central vacuum station.
The conceptual design of the vacuum sewer system is based on approximately one (1)
collection chamber for four (4) homes. The final number of collection chambers will
be determined based on the cost effectiveness of lateral (service) line length versus the
cost of additional chambers. It is assumed the collection chambers would be located
along the back easements, near the adjoining property lines. Each home would connect
tv uic cha2i2ber "witii ail o-lllbh PVI, (SDR 35) service. Thus service will nun trom the
existing house sewer connection, near the existing pump chamber, to the new collection
chambers. These 8 -inch services provide system storage, in addition to the storage in
the collection chambers.
The vacuum system will consist of 3" through 8" PVC (SDR 21) pipe laid in a saw-
tooth pattern to a single vacuum station, centrally located. As shown in the proposed
layout, two separate loops to the station are proposed to minimize vacuum runs. One
loop will service the north portion of the community while the other will service the
south portion.
The station includes the vacuum pumps, chamber, and sewage pumps for transfer via
force main to a connection point in the existing gravity or force main system. An
emergency generator and automatic transfer switch will be installed at the site to
maintain operation during power outages. A bio -filter will be installed with the
vacuum station to minimize odors through the system vent. The station will be housed
above ground to avoid problems during flooding.
Likely Construction Cost — $3,500,000
Table 3
depicts the
cost breakdown used to estimate
the cost of this alternative. In
order to
develop the
cost estimate for this alternative,
the following assumptions were
made:
• 8 -inch diameter service connection per home
• One collection chamber for each of four homes
• 15% cost premium for possible rock excavation and existing obstructions
• Grade in the area is essentially flat
• Annual average daily wastewater flow estimated as 300 gpd per connection
• 3.7 -peak factor was used to estimate the design flow
• The cost includes 20% for contingencies and administrative
• The cost includes 10% for engineering and planning fees
Page 5 of 7
F\UWitics\=W -ENGINEER G\Pmjev;- Ulilay Cmmrunlon Pm UVRC- Rockridge5ewer FE Miiigv ion UCP a 2521WBW Enginecering RepoAhch Memo
Rockn'dgc -Vacuum Option doc
Discussion of Benefits and Disadvanta es —
Like the gravity flow system, there is need for only one electric service and therefore
exposure to possible power problems is limited. A vacuum system has high velocity
sewage flow, which minimizes settlement of solids.
The system should only be higher maintenance than a typical lift station due to the
addition of the vacuum pumps. Also, the vacuum system has less storage volume
compared to a typical lift station. Therefore, the system will run more often than a lift
station, which may create more noise and potential odor problems.
The system should be watertight since it must maintain an active vacuum. This should
make the system very robust during flood conditions. However, it can be troublesome
to detest "'h� 1"�O � L U "hcy do p yeriy dcsigncu system inciudes
., .. c.re ., u arc, ACaciu i♦ c occili. h rU
isolation devices to aid in detecting leak locations.
Hazard Mitigation Funding:
FEMA has a number of funding programs to respond to emergencies, both in a reactive
mode after an emergency and in a proactive mode in anticipation of future emergencies.
FEMA currently has three mitigation grant programs: the Hazards Mitigation Grant
Program (HGMP), the Pre -Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood
Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. Section 404 of the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP) provides grants to States and local governments to implement long-
term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster declaration. The PDM and FMA
programs do not appear to apply to the type of funding required for this project.
As a first step in applying for funding under FEMA grant programs, PBS&J completed
and submitted a Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Mitigation Measure Proposal Form.
The project has been approved by the LMS Board and is now on the approved LMS list
that will be considered for funding by HMGP.
The second step is to complete and submit a "State of Florida — Joint Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program & Flood Mitigation Assistance Application" (Form). The County
authorized PBS&J to complete the HMGP/FMA application form for possible funding.
A draft HMGP/FMA application is attached. It does not appear that funds will be made
available from FEMA for several months. If funding is needed for this project to start
immediately, normal funding should be considered as an at -risk option.
Reimbursement from FEMA can be obtained at a later date if the project is approved
for funding through a FEMA grant.
Page 6 of 7
F.WIdllies\UFILITY-ENGIN ER GTrojcas-Usili1y Ccto"cnnn PcmmVRC- Roclndgc Sewec FEMAMitigazlon UCP p 252 IV BS&I Engincemng Repon\TecF Memo
Rochldge - Vacuum Option. doc
Recommendations:
The high cost and likely difficult installation methods needed to install a gravity
collection system appear to preclude this alternative. Both alternatives 1 (dedicated
emergency power generators to the existing system) and 3 (replacement of the existing
system with a vacuum collection system) are more likely for the County to consider.
IRC staff has conducted further evaluations to investigate the viability of these two
alternatives to mitigate the existing sewer system. The staff felt the vacuum system is
more desirable due to lower maintenance cost than standby generators, possible outcrop
of rock formations can be designed around to meet the critical profiles required meeting
the hydraulic jumps. After further consideration and input from staff, PBS&J and
County staff have concluded that the installation of standby generators or standby
p^ewer feed OYSLe111 would nGt Ue LAI li1GSt dcsirabic a1LUIIIat1VO. The re81On 15 subjcet to
flooding at the generator scenario in concert with ancillary equipment would also be
susceptible to flooding, making the system unreliable. While gravity sewer is desirable,
the economics make this alternative cost prohibitive. Therefore the vacuum system
provided the greatest level of reliability at a cost substantially less than gravity sewer.
Due to the urgency to correct existing problems prior to the next hurricane season,
funding should begin through normal County means while reimbursement funding from
available FEMA grants is concurrently pursued, beginning with timely submittal of the
appropriate application.
Page 7 of 7
F:\UJlinics\UrIGTY-ENGB ER G\Projccrs-Utility Conswaian Pe AiURC- Rocimdge Sewo FEMA Mingazion UCP N 2521\PBSU Enginecering Report\Tech Mil n
Roctr dgc - Vuuum Opuon.doc
Z
v
a
x
z
M
0<
3m
M�
z c
vz
m�
v<
0c
m -�
m
0
m'
m O
m 0
Ox
mm
nv
<o
M
v CO
MM
m0
00
m�
x f0
0
cn --i
-4o
�z
x
fA m
<x
U1 a
-� co
MF
Ki
a
0
z
m
c�
I6U ST
:g
Z
v
a
z
��
-10
zc
>
m{
N C
1 r
�m
D CD
<
�O
30
a A
Z �
cv
Cm
-.i CO
mm
�i
�m
--lo
=O
Cr
.0m
v0
.i
i0
D Z
-i m
Om
z=
D
to
a
0
z
10th Si
m
Dm
rm
m0
m V
Z c
DZ
1 1
mj
we
I 1
Di
cm
CP
i1
co 0
�
°
M
M v
N0'
,< m
CDW
1 m
m*
�m
�M
0
=0
m
cm
�0
v-4
NO
1 Z
1 m
O=
Z D
m
r
-1
D
1
O
Z
CA)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES
ROCKRIDGE
SEWER
COLLECTION REHABILITATION
TABLE 1: ESTIMATE FOR EMERGENCY
GENERATORS
ADDED
TO EXISTING
SYSTEM
ASSUMPTIONS
-
Project Number:
071415.03
BURIED CONDUIT,
POLYETHYLENE
Date of Estimate
14-Mar-05
CHANGE TO 480V SERVICE
Estimate By.
DBS
CONDUIT
ROUTES
FOLLOWING EXISTING
MAIN
RJW
ITEM
HP
CONDUIT
CONDUIT
REQUIRED
UNIT
UNIT
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
FROM
TO SERVED
LENGTH
SIZE
WIRING
QTY
COST
UNITS
COST
(feet)
(inches)
CONDUIT 8 WIRING
FROM STATION
1
LEG 1
STAT 1
OP7
36
600
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
144lOG
600
$43.00
Ln Ft
$25,800
DP7
DPS
18
250
3.5'
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
DPS
DP2
18
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
DP2
DP1
18
250
3.5'
3-100 MCM,
1-#Z/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
LEG 2
STAT 1
DP4
36
300
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
300
$43.00
Ln Ft
$12,900
DP4
OP3
16
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
LEG 3
STAT 1
DPS
16
550
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
144/OG
550
$43.00
Ln Ft
$23,650
LEG 4
STAT 1
OPS
32
500
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
500
$43.00
Ln Ft
$21,500
DP9
DPS
16
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
DPS
OP1O
16
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
DP10
DP11
16
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
LEG 5
STAT 1
DP16
30
200
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
200
$33.00
Ln Ft
$6,600
DP16
DP17
18
250
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$33.00
Ln Ft
$8,250
LEG 6
STAT 1
DP13
34
400
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
142/OG
400
$33.00
Ln Ft
$13,200
DP13
DP12
12
250
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#VOG
250
$33.00
Ln Ft
$8,250
LEG 7
STAT i
DPi5
40
900
3,5A
3-250 MOM,
144/OG
900
$43.00
Ln Ft
$38,700
DP15
DP14
12
250
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
250
$33,00
Ln Ft
$8.250
CONDUIT 8 WIRING FROM STATION
2
LEG 1
STAT 2
OP19
30
150
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
150
$4300
Ln Ft
$6,450
DI
DP18
16
350
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
350
$43.00
Ln Ft
$15850
LEG 2
STAT 2
DP22
38
350
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
350
$43.00
Ln Ft
$15850
DP22
DP21
30
300
3.5"
3-100 MGM,
1-#2/OG
300
$43.00
Ln Ft
$12,900
DP21
DP20
12
100
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
100
$43.00
Ln Ft
$4.300
LEG 3
STAT 2
DP30
30
SW
3.50
3.250 MCM,
144/00
600
$43.00
Ln Fl
$25,800
OP30
DP29
52
600
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
600
$43.00
Ln Ft
$25.800
OP29
DP24
30
600
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
600
$43.00
Ln Ft
$25800
DP24
OP23
12
300
3.5'
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
300
$43.00
Ln Ft
$12,900
LEG 4
STAT 2
DP31
32
250
2.5'
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
250
$33.00
Ln Ft
$8,250
LEG 5
STAT 2
OP25
32
250
2.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
250
$33,00
Ln Fl
$8,250
DP25
DP26
20
250
2.5'
3-100 MCM,
14MG
250
$33.00
Ln Fl
$8,250
LEG 6
STAT 2
DP28
30
500
2.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
500
$33.00
Ln Ft
$16,500
DP28
OP27
32
300
2S
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
30
$33.00
Ln Ft
$9,900
LEG 8
STAT 2
DP32
36
800
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
800
$43.00
Ln Fl
$34,400
DP32
DP33
30
250
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
250
$4300
Ln Ft
$10,750
DP33
DP34
6
250
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
1-#2JOG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
LEG 9
STAT 2
DP37
24
400
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
400
$43.00
Ln Ft
$17,200
DP37
DP36
18
100
3.S
3-100 MCM,
14MG
100
$43.00
Ln Ft
$4.300
DP35
DP37
6
200
3.5-
3-100 MGM,
142/06
200
$43.00
Ln Ft
$8,600
CONDUIT 8 WIRING
FROM STATION
3
LEG 1
STAT 3
DP40
32
300
2,5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
300
$33.00
Ln Ft
$9,900
OP40
DP39
22
300
25'
3-100 MCM,
1-#2JOG
300
$33.00
Ln Ft
$9,900
LEG 2
STAT 3
DP42
28
400
2S
3-100 MCM,
1-#2/OG
400
$33.00
Ln FI
$13,200
DP42
DP41
18
150
2.5"
3-100 MCM,
142/OG
150
$33.00
Ln Ft
$4,950
LEG 3
STAT 3
DP45
42
700
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-44/OG
700
$43.00
Ln Ft
$30,100
DP45
DP"
28
150
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
142/OG
150
$43.00
Ln Ft
$6,450
DP44
OP43
14
150
3.5'
3-100 MCM,
142/OG
150
$4300
Ln Ft
$6,450
LEG 4
STAT 3
DP46
66
100
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-A4/OG
100
$43.00
Ln Ft
$4,300
DP46
DP47
50
200
3.5'
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
200
$43.00
Ln Ft
$8,600
DP47
DP48
36
450
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/OG
450
$43.00
Ln Ft
$19,350
DP48
DP49
16
200
3.5'
3-100 MCM,
142/OG
200
$43.00
Ln Ft
$8,600
LEG 5
STAT 3
DP50
70
600
3.5"
3-250 MGM,
1-#4/OG
600
$4300
Ln Fl
$25.800
DP50
DP51
56
200
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-46/OG
200
$43,00
Ln Ft
$8,600
OP51
DP52
46
200
3.5"
3-250 MCM,
I tM/OG
200
$43.00
Ln Fl
$8.600
DP52
DP53
36
250
3.5'
3-250 MCM,
1-i14/OG
250
$43.00
Ln Ft
$10,750
DP53
DP54
14
200
3.5"
3-100 MCM,
14OG
200
$43.00
Ln Fl
$8,600
LEG 6
STAT 3
DP55
26
800
2.5"
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/0G
800
$33.00
Ln Fl
$26,400
DP55
OP56
14
250
25"
3-100 MCM,
14OG
250
$33.00
Ln Fl
$8,250
LEG 7
STAT 3
DP57
32
950
25-
3-250 MCM,
1-#4/0G
950
$33.00
Ln Ft
$31,350
DP57
DP58
18
550
2.5'
3-100 MCM,
14DOG
550
$33.00
Ln Ft
$18,150
NON -WIRING ITEMS REQUIRED
REPLACE EXISTING
POWER DISTRIBUTION
PANEL
58
$5,000
EACH
$290,000
300 KW EMERGENCY GENERATOR WITH SOUND ATTENUATED
ENCLOSURE
2
$72,000
EACH
$144,000
300 KW EMERGENCY GENERATOR W/O ENCLOSURE
1
$60,000
EACH
$60,000
AUTOMATIC TRANSFER
SWITCH
3
$30,000
EACH
$90,000
STATION DISTRIBUTION
PANEL
3
$12,000
EACH
$36,000
MAIN DISCONNECT
3
$3,000
EACH
$9,000
POWER COMPANY CHARGE FOR NEW
480V
SERVICE
3
$1,000
LS
$3,000
Land Cost @ $75,000/acre
1
$75,000
$75,000
building around generators
(2432), $100/SF
768
$100
$76,800
SUBTOTAL
$1,575,650
CONTINGENCY
20%
$315,130
ENGINEERING FEES
10%
$157.565
TOTAL
$2,048,345
PER SERVICE
$4,960
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES
ROCKRIDGE SEWER COLLECTION REHABILITATION
TABLE 2: ESTIMATE FOR GRAVITY COLLECTION SYSTEM
ASSUMPTIONS
8
INCH DIA
MINIMUM SEWER SIZE
GPD
0.34%
DESIGN /
MINIMUM SLOPE
GPM AVG
4.00
FEET CUT
AT UPPERMOST MANHOLE
400
MAXIMUM
MANHOLE SPACING
5.72 2 0.34% 18 9
LOCATION
FROM
TO
INLET
LENGTH
0'-6'
66.1%
13,517
DEPTH
OFRUN
PIPING NORTH OF 17TH
STREET
LF
8'-10'
6TH AVE
N END
17TH ST
4.00
519
5TH CT
N END
17TH ST
4.00
505
5TH AVE
N END
17TH ST
4.00
525
17TH ST
6TH AVE
5TH AVE
5.76
480
PIPING BETWEEN
16TH
AND 17TH
STREETS
29
16TH PL
W END
6TH AVE
4.00
600
6TH AVE
17TH ST
16TH ST
4.00
487
5TH CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4.00
487
STH AVE
17TH ST
PS MH
7.40
630
5TH AVE
16TH ST
PS MH
13.08
29
4TH CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4.00
480
4TH AVE
17TH ST
16TH ST
4.00
492
3RD CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4.00
490
16TH ST
6TH AVE
5TH AVE
6.67
480
16TH ST
3RD CT
5TH AVE
5.67
775
PIPING BETWEEN
15TH
AND 16TH
STREETS
679
16TH ST
W END
6TH AVE
4.00
615
6TH AVE
16TH ST
15TH ST
6.09
600
15TH PL
W END
6TH AVE
4.00
600
5TH CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
525
5TH AVE
15TH ST
16TH ST
11.04
600
4TH CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
540
4TH AVE
16TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
490
3RD CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
525
3RD AVE
16TH ST
3RD CT
4.00
780
15TH ST
6TH AVE
5TH AVE
7.16
480
15TH ST
3RD CT
5TH AVE
8.37
786
PIPING BETWEEN
13TH
AND 15TH
STREETS
15
6TH AVE
14TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
575
5TH CT
14TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
575
5TH AVE
14TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
575
4TH CT
13TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
1,235
4TH AVE
13TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
1,235
3RD CT
13TH ST
15TH ST
4.00
1,225
14TH PL
E END
3RD CT
4.00
513
14TH ST
E END
3RD CT
4.00
620
PS MH
PS WW
0,34%
13.18
20
15TH ST
6TH ST
6TH CT
4.00
200
14TH ST
6TH ST
6TH CT
4.00
170
TOTALS 20,463
STEEPER SLOPE AT UPPERMOST RUN IGNORED
STATION
GRADE IN AREA IS ESSENTIALLY FLAT
GPD
DROP MANHOLES ARE NOT CONSIDERED
431 LOTS
DROPS THROUGH MANHOLES ARE NOT INCLUDED
GPM AVG
OUTLET MHS SLOPE LOTS DBL
SGL
DEPTH SVCS
SVCS
5.76 2 0.34% 9 4
1
5.72 2 0.34% 18 9
0
579 2 0.34% 17 6
1
7.40 3 0.34% - -
-
PUMP
STATION
129,300
GPD
18
431 LOTS
90
GPM AVG
EA
300 GPD/ERC
3.7
PEAK FACTOR
12'-14'
1
334
GPM PEAK
GRAVITY SEWER
EA
QUANTITY
11
0'-6'
66.1%
13,517
LF
6'-8'
21.4%
4,387
LF
8'-10'
T13%
1,604
LF
10'-12'
2.9%
568
LF
12'-14'
1.8%
367
LF
MANHOLES
0'-6'
S4
EA
6'-8'
18
EA
8'-10'
6
EA
10'-12'
2
EA
12'-14'
1
EA
DOUBLE SERVICES TO PL
210
EA
SINGLE SERVICES TO PL
11
EA
LATERALS 431 EA -
34.480
FT
PL TO BACK OF HOUSE
80
FT EA
FORCE MAIN
1,100
0
PUMP STATION
1
487
Aband. of the Exist. Septic _
1
0.34%
Roadway Restoration
1
0
0
0
453
SUBTOTAL
630
13.18
ROCK EXCAVATION PREMIUM
100%
-
SUBTOTAL
-
29
CONTINGENCY
20%
29
ENGINEERING FEES
10%
2
TOTAL
16
8
Project Number: 071415.03
Date of Esitmate: 14 -Mar -05
Estimate By. CJB
SEWER DEPTH GREATER THAN
12
10
8
6
0
0
0
0
0
519
0
0
0
0
505
0
0
0
0
525
0
0
0
411
480
6.04
2
0.3
16
8
0
0
0
0
12
600
5.66
2
0.34%
8
4
0
0
0
0
0
487
5.66
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
0
487
9.54
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
453
630
630
13.18
1
0.34%
-
-
-
29
29
29
29
29
5.63
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
0
480
5.67
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
0
492
5.67
2
0.34%
7
3
1
0
0
0
0
490
8.30
3
0.34%
-
-
-
0
0
89
480
480
8.31
3
0.34%
-
-
-
0
0
91
679
775
6.09
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
27
615
8.13
2
0,34%
10
5
0
0
0
39
600
600
6.04
2
0.34%
14
7
0
0
0
0
12
600
5.79
2
0.34%
15
7
1
0
0
0
0
525
13.08
2
0,34%
10
5
0
318
600
600
600
600
5.84
2
0.34%
15
7
1
0
0
0
0
540
5.67
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
0
490
5.79
2
0,34%
15
7
1
0
0
0
0
525
6.65
3
0.34%
14
7
0
0
0
0
192
780
8.79
3
0,34%
-
-
-
0
0
234
480
480
11.04
3
0.34%
-
-
-
0
306
786
786
786
5.96
2
0.34%
14
7
0
0
0
0
0
575
5.96
2
0.34%
17
8
1
0
0
0
0
575
5.96
2
0.34%
16
8
0
0
0
0
0
575
8.20
4
0.34%
37
18
1
0
0
59
647
1,235
8.20
4
0.34%
33
16
1
0
0
59
647
1,235
8.37
5
0.34%
22
11
0
0
0
103
664
1,225
5,74
2
0.34%
13
6
1
0
0
0
0
513
6.11
2
0.34%
9
4
1
0
0
0
32
620
13.25
-
0,34%
-
-
-
20
20
20
20
20
4.68
2
0.34%
4
2
0
0
0
0
0
200
4.58
2
0.34%.
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
170
13.25
82
431
210
11
MAX
FORCE
MAIN
367
955
2,559
6,946
20,463
6
INCH
18%
4.7%
12.5%
33.9%
100.0%
3.8
FPS
367
588
1,604
4,387
13,517
1B%
2.9%
7.8%
21.4%
661%
PRICE
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$1,500
$2,000
$2,700
$3.700
$4,900
$400
$350
$20
$15
$150,000
$175,000
$1,100,000
PER SERVICE
AMOUNT
$270,338
$131,608
$64,155
$29,412
$22,024
$81,248
$35,159
$17,353
$8.722
$7,207
$84,000
$3,850
$689,600
$16,500
$150,000
$175.000
$1,100,000
$2,886,175
$2,886,175
$5,772,351
$1.154.470
$577,235
$7,500,000
$17,401
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES
ROCKRIDGE SEWER COLLECTION REHABILITATION
TABLE 3: ESTIMATE FOR VACUUM COLLECTION SYSTEM
ASSUMPTIONS
16TH ST
15TH PL
8"
300
300
Project Number:
$45
071415.03
6TH AVE
8 INCH SERVICE CONNECTION EA. HOME
15TH PL
6"
Date
of Esitmate:
Ln Ft
14 -Mar -05
$12,000
1 COLLECTION
CHAMBER PER 4 HOMES -
6TH AVE
Estimate
By:
600
DBS
$35
SOME ROCK EXCAVATION
MAY BE
REQUIRED
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
GRADE IN
AREA IS ESSENTIALLY
FLAT
16TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
ITEM
FROM
TO
PIPE
LENGTH
UNIT
520
UNITS
UNIT
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
16TH ST
15TH ST
SIZE
OF RUN
QTY
Ln Ft
$35
COST
COST
16TH ST
15TH ST
4"
(inches)
(feet)
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 3RD AVE
16TH ST
PIPING NORTH OF
17TH STREET
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
15TH ST
3RD AVE
4TH CT
EAST of 6TH AVE
N END
17TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
EAST of 5TH CT
N END
17TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
5TH AVE
N END
17TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
17TH ST
5TH AVE
6TH AVE
4"
550
550
Ln
Ft
$35
$19,250
PIPING BETWEEN
16TH AND 17TH STREETS
14TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
16TH PL
W END
6TH AVE
4"
600
600
Ln
Ft
$35
$21,000
6TH AVE
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
650
650
Ln
Ft
$35
$22,750
WEST of STH CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
520
520
In
Ft
$35
SIA 9nn
WEST of 5TH AVE
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
600
600
Ln
Ft
$35
$21,000
WEST of 4TH CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 4TH AVE
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 3RD CT
17TH ST
16TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln
Ft
$35
$18,200
16TH ST
E. 3RD CT
5TH AVE
4"
800
800
Ln
Ft
$35
$28,000.
16TH ST
5TH AVE
6TH AVE
6"
600
600
Ln
Ft
$35
$21,000
16TH ST
W END
6TH AVE
4"
600
600
Ln
Ft
$35
$21,000
PIPING BETWEEN 15TH AND 16TH STREETS
6TH AVE
16TH ST
15TH PL
8"
300
300
Ln Ft
$45
$13,500
6TH AVE
15TH ST
15TH PL
6"
300
300
Ln Ft
$40
$12,000
NORTH of 15TH PL
W END
6TH AVE
4"
600
600
Ln Ft
$35
$21,000
WEST of 5TH CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 5TH AVE
15TH ST
16TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 4TH CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 4TH AVE
16TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 3RD CT
16TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 3RD AVE
16TH ST
3RD CT
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
15TH ST
3RD AVE
4TH CT
4"
650
650
Ln Ft
$35
$22,750
15TH ST
4TH CT
6TH AVE
6"
900
900
Ln Ft
$40
$36,000
PIPING BETWEEN 13TH AND 15TH STREETS
WEST of 6TH AVE
14TH ST
15TH ST
4"
700
700
Ln Ft
$35
$24,500
WEST of 5TH CT
14TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
W EST of 5TH AVE
14TH ST
15TH ST
4"
520
520
Ln Ft
$35
$18,200
WEST of 4TH CT
13TH ST
15TH ST
4"
1,300
1,300
Ln Ft
$35
$45,500
WEST of 4TH AVE
13TH ST
15TH ST
4"
1,200
1,200
Ln Ft
$35
$42,000
WEST of 3RD CT
13TH ST
15TH ST
4"
1,200
1,200
Ln Ft
$35
$42,000
3RD CT
14TH ST
15TH ST
4"
600
600
Ln Ft
$35
$21,000
14TH PL
E END
3RD CT
4"
500
500
Ln Ft
$35
$17,500
14TH ST
E END
3RD CT
4"
650
650
Ln Ft
$35
$22,750
NON -PIPING ITEMS REQUIRED
4 -INCH DIVISION VALVES
15
EACH
$1,300
$19,500
6 -INCH DIVISION VALVES
10
EACH
$1,600
$16,000
8" SERVICE CONNECTIONS
TO COLLECTION CHAMBERS
413
EACH
$1,400
$578,200
COLLECTION CHAMBERS
(ONE PER FOUR HOUSEHOLDS)
104
EACH
$3,500
$364,000
INSPECTION PORTS
10
EACH
$750
$7,500
VACUUM / PUMP STATION
1
EACH
$250,000
$250,000
BIOFILTER SYSTEM
1
EACH
$75,000
$75,000
EMERGENCY GENERATOR/ ATS
1
EACH
$100,000
$100,000
Air Intake System
413
EACH
$500
$206,500
building for the vacuum station (24x32)
768
SF
$135
$103,680
Abandonment of existing septic/wetwells
1
LS
$175,000
$175,000
Land Cost @ $100,000/acre
0.5
EACH
$100,000
$50,000
SUBTOTAL
$2,692,880
CONTINGENCY
20%
$538,576
ENGINEERING FEES
10%
$269,288
TOTAL (Rounded value)
_
$3,500,000
'
PER
SERVICE
$8,475