Community Assessment Report - Onsite Sewage Treatment ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

What can be noted from Table 5 is there are no collection system costs as this component isalready in place at each residence. Plumbing costs such as verification and separation of sumppumps, drainage tile, foundation drains, etc. from the existing infrastructure are included in thecosts estimate. On average, this alternative has the least capital cost.4.2 CLUSTER SYSTEM (ALTERNATIVES 2 & 3)Table 6 provides the cost estimates for cluster systems with the installation of a STEP system ateach cluster residence, collection system, and a treatment/dispersal system. MSTS clustersystems may or may not require nitrogen removal as part of the treatment system dependingupon results of a hydrogeological study and nitrogen assessment. As it is not yet known (andcannot yet be determined) if nitrogen removal will be required for the proposed MSTS cluster,costs columns are included assuming both situations-without and with nitrogen removal costs.Table 6: 25-Year Capital Cost Estimates Cluster System AlternativesWastewater Treatment SystemComponent CostsAlternative 2LISTS Clusterwith NitrogenBMP + 8 ISTSCostsAlternative 3MSTS Clusterwithout NitrogenRemoval CostsAlternative 3MSTS Clusterwith NitrogenRemoval CostsCluster TreatmentSystem Costs* $ 90,000 $ 197,000 $ 180,000ISTS at Non-clusterProperties Costs $ 117,900 $ - $ -Nitrogen Removal SystemCosts $ - $ - $ 242,100Land Acquisition Costs** $ - $ 25,000 $ 25,000Collection System Costs $ 149,000 $ 248,000 $ 248,000Contingency Costs (5%)*** $ 23,900 $ 44,500 $ 67,010Legal, Engineering, andAdministration Costs $ 39,500 $ 97,900 $ 147,500Total Cost Estimate $ 420,300 $ 612,400 $ 909,610Avg. Cost/Cluster Dwelling $ 50,400 $ 43,800 $ 65,000Avg. Cost/ISTS Dwelling $ 14,800 $ - $ -Avg. Cost/All Dwellings $ 30,100 $ 43,800 $ 65,000*Cost with nitrogen BMP assumes mound SSTS over loamy or finer textured topsoil which has medium or high organic matter content. Cost withnitrogen removal assumes effluent meeting treatment Level B discharge requirements (CBOD
The replacement wastewater system Alternative 2 would qualify as an LISTS (2,500-5,000 gpd)and would likely require a nitrogen best management practice (BMP), depending upon results ofa hydrogeological investigation for nitrogen impacts to the aquifer, which is included in theLISTS cluster treatment system costs in Appendix F. A mound wastewater treatment anddispersal system placed on loamy or finer textured topsoil which has medium or high organicmatter content would qualify as a nitrogen BMP. Phosphorus standards are not applied to LISTS.Figure 6 shows the potential LISTS cluster system and collection line locations. Properties notincluded in the LISTS would continue with compliant ISTS.The replacement wastewater system Alternative 3 would qualify as a MSTS (5,000-10,000 gpd)and may require nitrogen removal technology (depending upon results of a hydrogeologicalinvestigation 6 for nitrogen impacts to the aquifer, which is included in the cluster treatmentsystem costs in Appendix F). The hydrogeological investigation (included in the costs inAppendix F) would also evaluate the potential for groundwater mounding beneath a proposedsystem. Table 6 reflects the difference in cost estimates if nitrogen removal is required. TheMSTS would not have a phosphorus standard applied by the MPCA, as it will not be placedwithin 500 feet of a surface water. Figure 7 shows the potential cluster system and collection linelocations.Treatment system costs were based on average daily flow estimates for all properties in the CARarea. Adding bedrooms to or changing the Class of residential properties would change the sizerequirement for the cluster system, as well as the overall cost and the cost per dwelling. Pricesincluded in Table 6 also take the increased cost of design due to permitting into account. Pricesassume residential strength waste from each wastewater generator.Collection system costs were based on cost estimates of force main installation on a lineal footbasis for both the mainline and laterals based on the routes shown in Figure 6 and 7.6 A Soil and Site Investigation and Preliminary Groundwater Investigation are required by MN Rules Chapters7081.150-7081.210 for all MSTS. Additionally, the MPCA’s Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems PrescriptiveDesigns and Design Guidance for Advanced Designers (Version 2.4, 9/27/2011) lays out procedures for evaluatingnitrogen impacts to an aquifer, applying to all SSTS with flows between 2,500 gpd and 10,000 gpd.T:\2797-01 Chisago County\CAR\ROLLINGS SHORES CAR 090712.docx4-3
Page 1: Rolling ShoresCommunityAssessment R
Page 4 and 5: 1.0 Introduction1.1 BACKGROUNDThe C
Page 7 and 8: 1.3 REPORT PURPOSEThis report is a
Page 9 and 10: 2.0 Existing Conditions2.1 INTRODUC
Page 11 and 12: 2.3 FINDINGSThe purpose of the site
Page 13 and 14: Photo 1: Wastewater effluent surfac
Page 15 and 16: 3.0 Alternatives Analysis3.1 INTROD
Page 17 and 18: 3.2.2 Private ISTS ProgramIn a priv
Page 19 and 20: ISTS rules dictate that systems tha
Page 21 and 22: with CAR ID#13 is allowed to build
Page 23 and 24: Table 4: Estimated Permitting Flow
Page 25 and 26: etained at all individual propertie
Page 27 and 28: • Lower operation and maintenance
Page 29: 4.0 Cost Comparison of Alternatives
Page 33 and 34: asis, other considerations such as
Page 35 and 36: analysis over a 25-year period show
Page 37 and 38: 5.0 Summary and Recommendations5.1
Page 39 and 40: • Chisago County would continue t
Page 41 and 42: Project LocationRush Lake 7.5 Minut
Page 43 and 44: 920940920920920920940930920920920!A
Page 45: 13Note: CAR ID#13 will be a holding
Page 48 and 49: Appendix ABackground Information
Page 50 and 51: pores and channels. As a result the
Page 52 and 53: The trench is the most common of th
Page 54 and 55: DRAFT - 5/30/12Septic System Improv
Page 56 and 57: CAR ID#Property Information Drainfi
Page 58 and 59: 03.01358.15!>SB 1948.71503.01358.16
Page 60 and 61: !(03.01358.13!(!A!>SB 1939.30703.01
Page 62 and 63: !>!A03.01358.11!. !.03.01358.12!>SB
Page 64 and 65: 03.00047.1003.00047.00!(SUMP OUT925
Page 66 and 67: 03.01358.06!ACambridge Dr!>SB 1939.
Page 68 and 69: !A03.01358.04Cambridge Dr!A03.01358
Page 70 and 71: !(!>SB 1939.98903.01358.02!ASB 1940
Page 72 and 73: !>03.01358.18470th St!>SB 4935.649S
Page 75 and 76: Appendix DSoil Borings
Page 77 and 78: Date Completed:Completed By:Project
Page 79 and 80: Date Completed:Completed By:Project
Page 81 and 82:
Date Completed:Completed By:Project
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Appendix EFlow Calculations
Page 101 and 102:
LISTS Final Permitting FlowWorkshee
Page 103 and 104:
MSTS Final Permitting FlowWorksheet
Page 105 and 106:
ESTIMATED LISTS CLUSTER CAPITAL COS
Page 107 and 108:
ESTIMATED CLUSTER MSTS CAPITAL COST
Page 109 and 110:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR CLUST
Page 111 and 112:
Appendix GChisago County Letters
Page 113 and 114:
Compliance Inspection FormExisting
Page 115 and 116:
Property address: Cambridge Dr, Har
Page 117 and 118:
Easement and property research find
Page 119:
#210968• Signed June 27, 1988•
show all

Community Assessment Report - Onsite Sewage Treatment ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?