Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-17 Info PacketV.. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: September 13, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule September 17, 1985 Tuesday 6:30 - 8:45 P.M. Council Chambers 6:30 P.M. - Special Council Meeting - Separate Agenda Posted 6:45 P.M. - Wastewater Plan - Alternative Study 7:45 P.M. - Economic Development Update - Ray Muston 8:10 P.M. - Council Time, Council Committee Reports 8:20 P.M. - Executive Session September 23, 1985 Monday 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. Council Chambers 6:30 P.M. - Review zoning matters (tentative) Gas and Electric Franchises - Council Agenda, Council Time, Council Committee Reports - Consider appointments to Board of Adjustment, Planning and Zoning Commission and Housing Commission September 24. 1985 l ! � � � j Tuesday 7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers October 1, 1985 Tuesday 6:30 - 8:45 P.M. Senior Center Classroom 6:30 P.M. - Pre -Budget Discussion - Council Meeting with Department Heads 8:30 P.M. - Council Time, Council Committee Reports October 2, 1985 Wednesday 3:30 P.M. - Meeting of City Council and Chairpersons of Boards/Commissions Highlander Inn 6:30 P.M. - Dinner - Highlander Inn /173/ t j i l ! � � � j r s 1 r. I i City Council September 13, 1985 Page 2 PENDING LIST Priority B: Transit System Study (October 21, 1965) Leasing of Airport Land for Commercial Use City Administrative Procedures (November 1985) Kirkwood/Dodge Signalization and Traffic Patterns City Government Fees Structure (October 1985) Council Pre-Budget Discussion (October 1985) Coralville Milldam Project (October 1985) Clear Creek Development Project Sidewalk Cafes (October 1985) Newspaper Vending Machines (October 1985) Stormwater Management Ordinance Review Meeting withhDon eZuchellicre. Parcelo64-1a 9 Appointments to Riverfront Commission and Resources. Conservation Commission (October 8, 1985) i Appointments to Board of j Examiners of plumbers, .Senior; Center l Commission and Resources Conservation Commission (October 22, f Ii i I f i i I City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM DATE: September 12, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manage�(�2✓ RE: Wastewater Plan - Alternative Study, Phase III At the Council meeting of September 17, the City Council will review the Wastewater Plan - Alternative Study, Phase III, and will be requested to select the preferred engineering solution. Metcalf & Eddy is recommend- ing Alternative 11 as the preferred plan. Members of the ad hoc study committee also will be present at the meeting. Representatives of Metcalf & Eddy will present the recommendation and respond to questions. After selection of the preferred engineering solution, Metcalf & Eddy will proceed to prepare the final study report which will include a preliminary plan for implementing the solution together with a plan for phased con- struction. While the preparation of the final report is proceeding, the ad hoc study committee will develop recommendations for the City Council as to how the City should proceed with the design and construction contracts. Also, the City staff will be working with our fiscal advisors in developing financing alternatives and recommendations. J J CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA REPORT ON I WASTEWATER PLAN -ALTERNATIVE STUDY PHASE III I SEPTEMBER 2,1985 1 71 ' METCALF & EDDY, INC. / ENGINEERS BOSTON / NEW YORK / PALO ALTO / CHICAGO I ...................... Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Engineers 8 Planners r 65 W. Algonquin Road. Suite 500 Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005-4422 (312)228-0900 - I' September 5, 1985 { Mr. Charles J. Schmadeke, PE a. Director of Public Works City of Iowa City -I 410 E. Washington Street j; Iowa City, Iowa 52240 j Subject: Wastewater Plan - Alternative Study iDear Mr. Schmadeke: I: I Enclosed is the Draft of the Phase III report. This report describes the selection of the recommended Technical Plan for j expansion of the Wastewater Collection Treatment Facility serving J the City of Iowa City. Included with this report is the work i completed by Fluor. This draft report is intended for review by ; <_! City staff. ; We are prepared to meet with you at your convenience to discuss rt this report. The final phase of this study cannot begin until ul concurrence is reached,as to the recommended plan. Very truly yours, ' Lawrence P. orski � - Project Manager LPJ/jPP I i BOOM / Now York / Palo Allo / San Solnaldino / Irvine. CA / Chicago / Houtlon / Allenla / 5omervllle, NJ / Suver Sprang, MD / Honolulu i Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Engineers 8 Planners r 65 W. Algonquin Road. Suite 500 Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005-4422 (312)228-0900 - I' September 5, 1985 { Mr. Charles J. Schmadeke, PE a. Director of Public Works City of Iowa City -I 410 E. Washington Street j; Iowa City, Iowa 52240 j Subject: Wastewater Plan - Alternative Study iDear Mr. Schmadeke: I: I Enclosed is the Draft of the Phase III report. This report describes the selection of the recommended Technical Plan for j expansion of the Wastewater Collection Treatment Facility serving J the City of Iowa City. Included with this report is the work i completed by Fluor. This draft report is intended for review by ; <_! City staff. ; We are prepared to meet with you at your convenience to discuss rt this report. The final phase of this study cannot begin until ul concurrence is reached,as to the recommended plan. Very truly yours, ' Lawrence P. orski � - Project Manager LPJ/jPP I i BOOM / Now York / Palo Allo / San Solnaldino / Irvine. CA / Chicago / Houtlon / Allenla / 5omervllle, NJ / Suver Sprang, MD / Honolulu � X3,2 1 I - Table of Contents I Paae i. Chapter I Introduction 1-1 Chapter II Findings and Conclusions 2-1 Chapter III Planning Needs Assessment 3-1 Chapter IV Development of Alternatives 4-1 Chapter V Evaluation of Alternatives 5-1 is Chapter VI Selected Plan 6-1 Chapter VII Implementation 7-1 Appendix < I A Phase I Report H Phase II Report i C Fluor Report Ir 4t i I I � X3,2 Chapter I Introduction j i I The City of Iowa City is responsible for the treatment and disposal of domestic, commercial and industrial wastewater _ generated within the City limits and University Heights. I Wastewater treatment is currentlybeing g provided by the existing , treatment facilities located near the center of the service area. Wastewater is transported to the treatment site by a - gravity flow system which utilizes several lift stations. �. J To meet future needs for wastewater treatment and disposal, the City of Iowa City had undertaken engineering studies and I authorized the preparation of construction documents for ) improvements to both the collection and treatment systems. This work was partially funded by grants from the Iowa Department of Water Air and Waste Management (IDWAWM) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 9 Y (USEPA). � As a result of the uncertain status of future grant assistance for implementation of required improvements, the City of Iowa City choose to reevaluate the recommended plan of action. j Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. was retained to study alternative wastewater treatment and disposal options. Metcalf & Eddy was assisted by Fluor Transportation and Infrastructure, Inc. Because a considerable engineering effort had already been I' expended by the City of Iowa City, this study utilized as much of i the previous work as possible, especially the Facility Plan which had been submitted to the IDWAWM for review and was approved. I - j i 1-1 I I ■ Based on the foundation of the previously completed work, alternative plans were formulated. From this process the following common elements were defined: o The wastewater collection system experiences significant peak flowrates as a result of numerous sources of infiltration/inflow. o During storm events large quantities of wastewater are discharged from the collection system without adequate treatment. o The existing treatment site has sufficient area to meet future needs. o A significant portion of the service area is located downstream of the existing treatment site. Metcalf & Eddy was retained to develop alternative solutions that meet the goals of the City of Iowa City. These goals were: 1. Provide service to designated planning area 2. Provide useful life of twenty years 3. Consideration given to extending useful life to 40-50 years 4. Relieve sewer back-ups and surcharging 5. Provide stormwater flow treatment 6. Produce effluent meeting IDWAWM requirements This report summarizes the Phase I and Phase II reports previously submitted to the City in which alternative plans were developed and evaluated. The report begins with an evaluation of planning needs. Alternatives were developed to meet the goals of the City and to meet the planning needs. Following the development of feasible alternatives, the alternatives were screened and reduced to four plans. Finally, the most favorable three plans were studied in detail. A selected plan is presented in this report. I � 1-2 /73z Chapter II Findings and Conclusions 1. The results of the construction cost estimate analysis phase of this study support the earlier conclusion that the ranking of the remaining three alternatives in terms of total i construction costs is Alternative 2 - most expensive ($49,272,000) followed by Alternative 11 ($33,911,000) and - Alternative 8 ($31,696,000) estimated in 1990 dollars. i 2. The constructability review phase identified several areas of potential concern; however, these issues can be addressed in I subsequent design efforts by use of modern construction technology. l 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions of the effort expended to date in this study, Alternative 11 is suggested as the recommended plan for the City of Iowa City. While this alternative is approximately 11 percent higher in total present worth cost then the next alternative, this slight increase in cost is offset by the significantly increased flexibility afforded the City in responding to future development patterns and in fulfilling the City's wastewater collection, treatment and disposal needs beyond the identified 20 year planning period. J I I i 2-1 / 73.E Chapter III I Planning Needs Assessment I The City of Iowa City had prepared a Facility Plan complying with the requirements of IDWAWM and USEPA. This Facility Plan projected the needs of the City for a twenty year planning - period. Population growth projections were analyzed, industrial _ loading was reviewed, and quantification of extraneous sources of water was completed. Based on the findings of the planning needs Jassessment in the Facility Plan, improvements to the wastewater - collection and treatment system were identified. The evaluation of planning needs assessment performed as a part of this "j alternative study utilized the work completed in the Facility I ` Plan. However, the planning area, population projections, industrial loads and stormwater loads were reviewed. This review J was undertaken to assess the validity of alternative treatment schemes and to identify other deficiencies in the wastewater treatment and collection system. i The following areas were reviewed: ! I1. Planning area designation 2. Population area designation f .. 3. industrial loads -; 4. Stormwater effects I ? - 5. Total system loading i 6. Effluent requirements i PLANNING AREA DESIGNATION The planning area was described in the Facility Plan as shown in I I Figure 3-1. No significant gnificant change from this designation is required. Sufficient undeveloped land is provided within this { area to meet the growth projections of the Iowa City Department I � i 3-1 I i ILI rot* 7k. UP�llI—; Ilk ry I 4,Y: AND NVERCEMOR SEWER IOWA CITY. IOWA f of Planning and Program Development. It should be noted that the Planning area corresponds closely to the existing corporate limits of the City. The planning area boundaries are also defined by natural barriers along the east, west, and north edges. These locations represent watershed boundaries. Approximately one-third of the planning area is located south or downstream of the existing wastewater treatment site. To serve these areas downstream of the existing plant either the plant must be relocated or the wastewater must be pumped back to the — existing plant. i i POPULATION PROJECTION I iThe City's 1983 Comprehensive Plan - Low Estimate and the Facility Plan presented similar population projections. The population in the year 2030 is expected to reach 69,000 to 71,000. The projected population in the design year of 2010 is estimated to be 63,700. This population projection reflects a compounded annual rate of growth of 0.758. INDUSTRIAL LOADS Industrial loads currently represent 258 of the organic and suspended solids loading received at the plant. This ratio is not expected to change substantially in the future. A 159 growth in industrial loading has been allowed. The current trend in i treating industrial waste in other parts of the country is to require extensive pretreatment. If this practice is adopted by the City the total loading to the plant may be reduced. Currently, the City's landfill has a problem with leachate disposal. Because the existing plant has some reserve capacity, the leachate is being transported to the plant for treatment and disposal. This wastewater source is high in organic strength and has utilized the reserve capacity believed to exist. This i 3-3 I i practice of leachate disposal should be evaluated if additional industrial capacity is required. Treatment and disposal of the leachate at the wastewater treatment facility will be provided. STORMWATER EFFECTS The most serious problem facing the City is the collection and treatment of stormwater and/or groundwater that mixes with the wastewater in the collection system. Two problems result from the entrance of extraneous water into the sewer system. First, the extraneous water utilizes capacity of the sewer system that was intended for conveyance of wastewater. Second, the extraneous water must be treated to the same degree as the wastewater. Sewers must be constructed large enough to convey the total wastewater flow during design• storm conditions to prevent wastewater from entering the basements of homes located at restricted sewer sections. As sewers are constructed larger to relieve critical locations other downstream locations may become the restricting section. Additionally, the cost of constructing larger sewers for longer distances increases disproportionately. In the case of alternatives requiring the relocation of the wastewater treatment plant, the cost associated with providing this increased sewer capacity increases the cost of these alternatives. in the design of pipelines to convey stormwater, the pipes are not designed to handle the worst storm condition. Storm sewers in Iowa City are designed to handle storms having a probability of occurring every 5 years. This means that some storm events will exceed the sewer capacity. When extraneous waters are mixed with wastewater, the resulting mixture must be treated to the same degree as wastewater. Stormwater or groundwater alone does not need to be treated prior 3-4 /i3.2... . I I I to discharge to surface waters of the state. The mixing of wastewater and extraneous water results in additional costs to properly dispose of the combined flow. I In communities the size of Iowa City the ratio of peak flowrate to average flowrate would be expected to be in the range of 3 to I 1. The sewers in Iowa City typically transport peak to average i ratios of 10 to 1. This means the maximum size of all facilities must be approximately 3 times larger than necessary. While it is understood that old sewer systems cannot be restored to new sewer conditions, it is recommended that the current program to replace deficient sewers and to eliminate connections between the storm and sanitary sewer systems be pursued. The reduction of extraneous flows allows utilization of existing sewer capacity for the conveyance of sewage and reduces the need for additional I, sewage treatment capacity. j TOTAL SYSTEM LOADING J Table 3.1 and 3.2 summarize the design basis for the 20 year planning period. EFFLUENT REQUIREMENTS ! j. I During the development of this study, the IDWAWM was contacted to define the required degree of treatment to be provided by expanded wastewater treatment facilities. During this same period the IDWAWM was in the process of changing the stream i designation for the Iowa River immediately downstream of the City. At this time, the expanded facility must provide the following effluent quality: Parameter Limit (ma m j Sumer Winter BODS 30 30 SS 25 25 NH 221 502 — F-Coliform 100 mpn3 100 mpn3 - 3-5 Notes: 1. 2. 3. Not to exceed a mass loading of 1650 lbs/day of BODS Not to exceed a mass loading of 4680 lbs/day of suspended solids MPN = most probable number. Regulations also stipulate no chlorine residual. This will necessitate dechlorination if chlorine is used as disinfectant These effluent requirements are consistent with the adopted rules and regulations of the IDWAWM. The USEPA definition of secondary treatment is less restrictive; however, the IDWAWM has not adopted this definition at this time. It is suggested that the status of this definition be monitored and that design criteria be flexible in providing the ability to be adjusted to meet new effluent limitations. It is believed that the effluent limitations will not become more restrictive in the short term future. 3-6 I I j I I � I I' t 11 i i ,I I I Notes: 1. 2. 3. Not to exceed a mass loading of 1650 lbs/day of BODS Not to exceed a mass loading of 4680 lbs/day of suspended solids MPN = most probable number. Regulations also stipulate no chlorine residual. This will necessitate dechlorination if chlorine is used as disinfectant These effluent requirements are consistent with the adopted rules and regulations of the IDWAWM. The USEPA definition of secondary treatment is less restrictive; however, the IDWAWM has not adopted this definition at this time. It is suggested that the status of this definition be monitored and that design criteria be flexible in providing the ability to be adjusted to meet new effluent limitations. It is believed that the effluent limitations will not become more restrictive in the short term future. 3-6 I j I I � I I' t 11 I I I' I I I II i Table 3.1 Hydraulic Design Condition Source Existing(1) Theoretical Sewer Infiltration Footing Drain Tile Inflow Subtotal Wastewater Flow (MGD) ADW AWW MWW pHWW(2) 6.681 6.681 6.681 11.664 - 2.534 6.570 6.570 1.565 15.203 62.760 0.040 0.510 4.000 6.681 10.820 28.964 84.994 Increase - 1979 to 2010 Population Increase (14,350 ! 100 gpcd) 1.435 1.435 1.722(3) 3.588 Planned University Increase (4) 0.665 0.665 0.665 1.664 Planned Industrial Increase (4) 0.315 0.315 0.400 0.787 unforeseen Industrial and Governmental Increase (5) 0.400 0.400 0.400 1.000 Subtotal 2.815 2.815 3.092 7.039 TOTAL -YEAR 2010 9.496 13.635 32.056 92.033 (1) From Facilities Plan, Vol. VI, Pg. A-9. (2) Using a peaking factor of 2.5. (3) Based on 120 gpcd to account for greater infiltration during MWW conditions. (4) Based on Facilities Plan projection (year 2000) + lot. (5) These flows represent 20t of the peak monthly water use of the largest water uses in the Study Area, exclusive of the University. ADW means Average Day Dry Weather Flowrate AWW means Average Day Wet Weather Flowrate MWW means Maximum Day Wet Weather Flowrate PHWW means Peak Hourly Wet Weather Flowrate 3-7 ■ Table 3.1 Hydraulic Design Condition Source Existing(1) Theoretical Sewer Infiltration Footing Drain Tile Inflow Subtotal Wastewater Flow (MGD) ADW AWW MWW pHWW(2) 6.681 6.681 6.681 11.664 - 2.534 6.570 6.570 1.565 15.203 62.760 0.040 0.510 4.000 6.681 10.820 28.964 84.994 Increase - 1979 to 2010 Population Increase (14,350 ! 100 gpcd) 1.435 1.435 1.722(3) 3.588 Planned University Increase (4) 0.665 0.665 0.665 1.664 Planned Industrial Increase (4) 0.315 0.315 0.400 0.787 unforeseen Industrial and Governmental Increase (5) 0.400 0.400 0.400 1.000 Subtotal 2.815 2.815 3.092 7.039 TOTAL -YEAR 2010 9.496 13.635 32.056 92.033 (1) From Facilities Plan, Vol. VI, Pg. A-9. (2) Using a peaking factor of 2.5. (3) Based on 120 gpcd to account for greater infiltration during MWW conditions. (4) Based on Facilities Plan projection (year 2000) + lot. (5) These flows represent 20t of the peak monthly water use of the largest water uses in the Study Area, exclusive of the University. ADW means Average Day Dry Weather Flowrate AWW means Average Day Wet Weather Flowrate MWW means Maximum Day Wet Weather Flowrate PHWW means Peak Hourly Wet Weather Flowrate 3-7 ■ I I i Table 3.2 DESIGN WASTE LOADINGS .-' Pooula!!on-Tear 2010 Projected Value Peaking Factor Design Value Recldents 63,700 -! Out -of -Town students 3,000 . - Flora - MGD .. ADW - Average Dry Weather 9.496 AWW - Average Wet Weather 13.635 WWW - Maximus Net Weather 32.056 _..- PBMW - Peak sour Wet Weather 92.033 _ Orgenie Loadings - lbs/dw BODS ! - -- Msideats - 63,700 1 0.17 10,829. 1.58 17,072 Out-of-Town Students -3,000 ! 0.05 150 2.5 375 - Industrial 6,386(1) 1 16386 Governmental 1,528(2) 1 1528 Iowa City Water plant - University Nater Plant --� TOTAL6� , 9 - 1.97 33361 Susended Solids - lbs da Mi ants - 63,700 ! 0.20 12,740 2.7 36398 Out -of -Torn Students -3,000 ! 0.06 180 2.7 406 - Industrial 5,022(1) 1 5022 Government 1,371(3) 1 1376 - Iowa City Water Plant - _ University Water plan '- TOTAL9Z�'j, ]�- 2.11 —EYBa Urge" le and Ameol■ rosen 1-lbs/dew (TEN ndent Resi- 63,700 8Mlt 0.036 2,293 2.2 SOaS n Students -3,000 80.018 56(1) 2 2 , 119 Industrial 407 Governmental SS1(2) 1 551 TOTAL -Y;-305 1.65 -313'F (1) Existing maximus loads plus 156. - - (2) Existing masimua loads plus planned expansion plus, 15t. (3) Existing ea:imus loads sinus the water plants plus SOt. I -- l Chapter IV Development of Alternatives Based on the definition of needs, the following criteria must be met by any alternative developed to meet the future needs of Iowa City. 1. Capable of providing service to designated planning area I 2. Provide useful life of twenty years 3. Consideration given to extending useful life to 40-50 i years 4. Relieve sewer back-ups and surcharging S. Provide stormwater flow treatment 6. Produce effluent meeting IDWAWM requirements y Alternatives meeting these criteria were developed and analyzed. Fourteen alternatives were developed. These alternatives ranged from renovation of the existing facility to construction of new facilities at a new site. To assist with 7; planning for financing of the selected improvements, all current construction cost estimates were projected forward to the "base year" of 1990 utilizing the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index of 5400. This index is commonly used by the engineering profession to adjust costs for planning purposes and use of the 5400 index reflects an average 5 percent per year increase in construction costs between now and 1990. Comparison of various alternatives solely on the basis of "how much does it cost to build" runs the risk of trading lower construction costs for increased annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. For example, a particular alternative may have a low construction cost as a result of the use of less expensive materials, however, this initial savings may be greatly offset by 4-1 1 t t 3, 'I j, r -' high annual 0&M expenses associated with keeping the equipment running during the design life of the improvement. For these reasons, it was agreed that the economic comparison of alternatives would be based on their present worth cost. The i ! I present worth cost of an alternative represents the construction cost plus the theoretical sum of money which, when invested at an assumed interest rate for the required service life - in this i case 7 percent per year for 20 years - would be sufficient to pay the annual 0&M expenses. Table 4.1 summarizes the total' present worth costs for the fourteen alternates initially reviewed. Table 4.1 j i Present Worth Cost ALTERNATIVE COST `! lA 62,256,000 $60,448,000 2 $49,860,000 i 3 $42,858,000 4 $59,958,000 5 $50,840,000 55A $37,953,000 $37,227,000 8 $39,355,000 jl 9 $36,218,000 9A $38,024,000 $34,192,000 10 -, 11 $61,220,000 $41,875,000 — I From the development of alternatives and the review of present worth cost analysis the following factors resulted in the least cost alternatives: 1. Using the existing treatment facility to the maximum extent possible I ^i 2. Providing stormwater treatment at the existing treatment site menf 3. Using forcemaine in lieu of gravity sewers 4-2 /73Z I The existing treatment facility consisting of primary and secondary treatment with anaerobic digestion is in generally good condition. Some renovation is required to upgrade the plant to a condition to meet the future needs of the City with consideration given to the City's needs beyond the planning period. Sufficient land area is available to meet the .twenty year planning period. Stormwater treatment consisting of a combination of both equalization and on-line treatment at the existing site allows for the construction of smaller downstream sewers. In other words, treatment and disposal is cheaper than transportation, treatment and disposal at a central site. Additionally, a portion of the on-line stormwater treatment system can be used to provide a supplement to the secondary wastewater treatment system during low flow periods. The use of forcemains and pumping stations allows the construction of smaller sized pipelines. While there is an operating cost associated with the pumping stations, the operational cost savings associated with the gravity sewers does not offset the reduced construction costs for the life of the project. Construction of the higher cost alternatives can only be justified if the existing wastewater treatment site is to be used for some other purpose. When the land value becomes so high, or City priorities are changed, the plant must be relocated to allow redevelopment of the area. ■ Chapter V Evaluation of Alternatives Having defined fourteen alternatives all capable of meeting the future needs of the City of Iowa City, it became important to devise a method of ranking the alternatives. The fourteen alternatives were assembled into four categories or families of alternatives. The categories were as follows: 1. A new treatment facility and abandonment of the existing site - Alternatives 1 and lA J 2. Satellite facilities - Alternatives 2, 6, 7 and 11 3. Use of existing facilities - Alternatives 8, 9 and 9A J 4. Combinations of existing and new treatment facilities - Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 5A and 10 _1 Each alternative was described in detail, cost estimates prepared Jand advantages/disadvantages developed. From these families of alternatives, four alternatives were choosen by the City for further study. The four alternatives were 2, 6, 8 and 11. -J Appendix A contains the Phase I report which describes each alternative in detail. J _ A three step process was then used to determine the most desirable alternative. This process, which is discussed below, has also allowed a check and balance procedure to evolve. INITIAL SCREENING The first step in the screening process was a detailed review of the four alternatives. Each alternative was ranked on the basis of the following criteria: 1.' Financial -including construction cost, operation and maintenance cost, and present worth 2. Technical -including mechanical reliability, process control, and impact of industrial flows 3. Environmental considerations 4. Implementation considerations S. Flexibility -including rapid growth, geographical changes in growth pattern, and changes in effluent standards This initial screening process resulted in the deletion of Alternative 6 from further consideration. Appendix B contains the Phase II report which descirbes the initial screening process in detail. CONSTRUCTASILITY AND CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE REVIEW yj An independent review of the three alternatives was performed. Infrastructure, inc. This review was performed by Fluor Transportation and The Fluor review resulted in slight J adjustment of the cost estimates. Most this review provided independent confirmation importantly, of tthe original -' cost estimates. The closeness of the estimates indicates that the original screening of alternatives was based on valid _ assumptions. ,- Findings of the Fluor study indicate alternatives 8 and 11 to be similiar in cost. Table 5.1 summarizes the cost estimates. Table 5.1 Construction Cost Estimate Review Alternative MBE Estimate Fluor Estimate 2 $49,746,000 8 $35,029,000 $49,272,000 11 $40,379,000 $31,696,000 $33,911,000 5-2 173.2 i I I I 1 t i I I 4_ 1.' Financial -including construction cost, operation and maintenance cost, and present worth 2. Technical -including mechanical reliability, process control, and impact of industrial flows 3. Environmental considerations 4. Implementation considerations S. Flexibility -including rapid growth, geographical changes in growth pattern, and changes in effluent standards This initial screening process resulted in the deletion of Alternative 6 from further consideration. Appendix B contains the Phase II report which descirbes the initial screening process in detail. CONSTRUCTASILITY AND CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE REVIEW yj An independent review of the three alternatives was performed. Infrastructure, inc. This review was performed by Fluor Transportation and The Fluor review resulted in slight J adjustment of the cost estimates. Most this review provided independent confirmation importantly, of tthe original -' cost estimates. The closeness of the estimates indicates that the original screening of alternatives was based on valid _ assumptions. ,- Findings of the Fluor study indicate alternatives 8 and 11 to be similiar in cost. Table 5.1 summarizes the cost estimates. Table 5.1 Construction Cost Estimate Review Alternative MBE Estimate Fluor Estimate 2 $49,746,000 8 $35,029,000 $49,272,000 11 $40,379,000 $31,696,000 $33,911,000 5-2 173.2 i � i I I 1.' Financial -including construction cost, operation and maintenance cost, and present worth 2. Technical -including mechanical reliability, process control, and impact of industrial flows 3. Environmental considerations 4. Implementation considerations S. Flexibility -including rapid growth, geographical changes in growth pattern, and changes in effluent standards This initial screening process resulted in the deletion of Alternative 6 from further consideration. Appendix B contains the Phase II report which descirbes the initial screening process in detail. CONSTRUCTASILITY AND CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE REVIEW yj An independent review of the three alternatives was performed. Infrastructure, inc. This review was performed by Fluor Transportation and The Fluor review resulted in slight J adjustment of the cost estimates. Most this review provided independent confirmation importantly, of tthe original -' cost estimates. The closeness of the estimates indicates that the original screening of alternatives was based on valid _ assumptions. ,- Findings of the Fluor study indicate alternatives 8 and 11 to be similiar in cost. Table 5.1 summarizes the cost estimates. Table 5.1 Construction Cost Estimate Review Alternative MBE Estimate Fluor Estimate 2 $49,746,000 8 $35,029,000 $49,272,000 11 $40,379,000 $31,696,000 $33,911,000 5-2 173.2 � i I I 1 t i I I 4_ i In addition to the construction cost estimate review, construction methods and materials were reviewed. No significant construction problems were identified. Some areas of sewer construction are congested and wet soil conditions are ; expected. Construction conflicts at the existing facility involve maintaining present levels of treatment during construction; however these conflicts will not result in a significantly increased construction period, Appendix C contains the complete report by Fluor Infrastructure and Transportation Inc. 5-3 73z r, J1 J _j -I -1 In addition to the construction cost estimate review, construction methods and materials were reviewed. No significant construction problems were identified. Some areas of sewer construction are congested and wet soil conditions are ; expected. Construction conflicts at the existing facility involve maintaining present levels of treatment during construction; however these conflicts will not result in a significantly increased construction period, Appendix C contains the complete report by Fluor Infrastructure and Transportation Inc. 5-3 73z Chapter VI Selected Plan This section will describe the selected plan based on the findings of the initial screening, detailed review, and constructability and construction cost review. Alternative 11 is the recommended plan of action. While the cost of alternative 11 is slightly more than alternative S, the facilities included as part of alternative 11 will provide the City with increased flexibility to respond to future changes in growth patterns or possible changes in effluent standards. Recommended Plan Collection/Transportation System - As indicated in Figure 6-1 wastewater flows will be diverted away from the upper end of the Rundell Street Trunk Sewer and pumped southward by a new lift station at the Pine Street site. As the force main crosses the high point near Highway 6, it converts to a gravity line and continues south along the Sycamore Street extension. The lowest reach of the Southeast Interceptor System will be constructed from the Fairmeadows Lift Station to the west. These two new sewer systems converge and carry flows to a new treatment site along Sand Road. Relief sewers will be constructed for future development in the Village Green area. Also, the University Heights and Outfall Relief Sewers will be constructed and sewer rehabilitation will proceed as recommended in the Facilities Plan. Treatment System - The recommended plan incorporates two sites for the treatment of wastewater flows generated within the Study Area. The existing plant will be rehabilitated and expanded to treat additional flows from the design storm event as shown in Figure 6-2. This expansion will require abandoning the existing 6-1 A I ' EXISTING W WTP i PROPOSED (©x) 9,990 FT. •PUMPING STATION 27' DIA. 6 (20 MOD) 27" ... 4•[00 FT. 27' DIA. .. 24" 7 9,600 FT. i 24' DIA. •�; ..J PROPOSED 64" ,••'� wwT6.600 FT. •.,•'``��ts .. _I O 64' DIA. .•'PES .• oil, ID • bt -#ONCE MAIN . 'r-) .••� �66AvITT ,..,•.•.•..••..••••• 690,110 141 PEAK HOUR MET OIATNEA FLOW SPLIT O [OUALIEATION LOCATION AND VOLUME i I I FIG.6-1.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR SEWER SYSTEM 1^ I Iuml nnl =®) I Illnl..l Illw..r Iwl �. .1YnH H W nnl l' ' � Il Hlll llrllr � I -- �I Innmm Imnn STORMWATER CLARIFIER L } I. tum Irr nmol FP BUILDING . RIT TANK ylm.nl SAND FILTER BUILDING Mill, 'lull - DIV. Box ~ HIIIHtHI P,ttOM eNo nw.nwmlr w OV I ; k PUMPING BTA I N W u.. I I BFP-Bolt Filter Pros I , FIG.6-2.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR EXISTING WWTP SITE Bue MBO by Vwmtn II Klmm. 6-3 i sludge lagoons and installing belt filter presses for sludge handling. Pumping the sludge to lagoons at the Sand Road site is _- not cost-effective. Stormwater treatment facilities, consisting of clarification and sand filtration, will then be constructed. _ The sand filters will also be used occasionally for "polishing" of the trickling filter effluent prior to discharge. Existing facility rehabilitation will provide new bar screens and grit ! tanks, increased influent pumping capacity, digester conversion, methane gas utilization, and miscellaneous structural and ! mechanical repairs/replacements. The satellite treatment facility, located along Sand Road, (Figure 6-3) will treat wastewater flows from the east and southeast regional areas. The j j treatment process will consist of an activated sludge system designed to meet the 30-30 effluent requirement. Equalization will be utilized at both treatment sites to dampen the peak f ! flowrates resulting from infiltration/inflow sources during storm j events. Digested sludge at the Sand Road plant will be dewatered 11 in sludge lagoons and sludges from both treatment sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. Figure 6-4 and Table 6-1 summarizes other features and design criteria for the recommended treatment alternative. 6-4 I c I i j sludge lagoons and installing belt filter presses for sludge handling. Pumping the sludge to lagoons at the Sand Road site is _- not cost-effective. Stormwater treatment facilities, consisting of clarification and sand filtration, will then be constructed. _ The sand filters will also be used occasionally for "polishing" of the trickling filter effluent prior to discharge. Existing facility rehabilitation will provide new bar screens and grit ! tanks, increased influent pumping capacity, digester conversion, methane gas utilization, and miscellaneous structural and ! mechanical repairs/replacements. The satellite treatment facility, located along Sand Road, (Figure 6-3) will treat wastewater flows from the east and southeast regional areas. The j j treatment process will consist of an activated sludge system designed to meet the 30-30 effluent requirement. Equalization will be utilized at both treatment sites to dampen the peak f ! flowrates resulting from infiltration/inflow sources during storm j events. Digested sludge at the Sand Road plant will be dewatered 11 in sludge lagoons and sludges from both treatment sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. Figure 6-4 and Table 6-1 summarizes other features and design criteria for the recommended treatment alternative. 6-4 I c I i N I _ I I � I X X PUMPING STATION i a � J I PRELIMINARY TREATMENT INFLUENT I- 1 I i X PRIMARY CLARIFIER 1. ' I K EO LIZATION ASHD _ I I R ' I} r eol I J AERATION TANKS j f j ,-� ANAERISIC DIGEST ER 6 COMPLEX 6I - I J IFINAL CLARIFIER TO RIVER I v K t f X SLUDGE LA000 REA K K 58 K j APPROX. SITE AREA : 28 ACRES � f FIG.B-3.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR SAND ROAD SITE j 6-5 - - i ... 1 1 . i - - i ... -. i i PRIMARY INFLUENT -' i CLARIFIER i j J INFLUENT RECIRCULATED FLOW TRICKLING SECONDARY EFFLUENT FILTER CLARIFIER I SLUDGE RETURN SINGLE STAGE I TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS I OPTIONAL r-- PRIMARY I SAND EFFLUENT CLARIFIER FILTER WASH WATER SUPPLY PRIMARY EFFLUENT FILTRATION FIG.E-4.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS 6-6 m - J i i RECIRCULATED FLOW TRICKLING SECONDARY EFFLUENT FILTER CLARIFIER I SLUDGE RETURN SINGLE STAGE I TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS I OPTIONAL r-- PRIMARY I SAND EFFLUENT CLARIFIER FILTER WASH WATER SUPPLY PRIMARY EFFLUENT FILTRATION FIG.E-4.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS 6-6 m RAW MIMA11r WASTEWATER CLARIFIER SLUDGE AEIIATIDN TANK `J r SECONDARY EFFLUENT CLARIFIER WASTESLUDGE S I RETURNSLUDGE I CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE (PLUG FLOW FIG.6-4.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR i TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS }i 1' I . i -�I i. I, 1 ,.I i `i RAW MIMA11r WASTEWATER CLARIFIER SLUDGE AEIIATIDN TANK `J r SECONDARY EFFLUENT CLARIFIER WASTESLUDGE S I RETURNSLUDGE I CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE (PLUG FLOW FIG.6-4.RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR i TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS }i 1' I . i i. I, 1 ,.I Table 6-1 Recommended Plan Basic Design Criteria • EXISTING WWTP SITE UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS (Existing and Proposed Expansion) Sewage Pumps 1-3 MGD @ TDH = 401 N/A 1-5 MGD @ TDH = 401 2-8 MGD @ TUB = 401 Primary Clarifiers 2-4510, 10.51 SWD 1,150 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1-7510, 10.51 SWD Trickling Filters 4-14010, 7' Rock Media 26.2#/1000ft3/d Final Clarifiers 1-60'0, 10.51 SWD 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) ij 1-7510, 10.51 SWD Anaerobic Digesters 1-4010, 261 SWD Det. time = 28d 1-6010, 251 SWD 0.10-0.40 # volatile solids�fO j 1-7010, 241 SWD Belt Filter Press 15,500#/d 1,200 #/meter/hr (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD @ TDH - 401 N/A 2-10 MGD @ TDH = 401 2-25 MGD @ TDH = 401 Equalization Basin 5 MG N/A Primary Clarifiers 2-9310, 10.51 SWD 1,490 gpd/ft2 (pHWW) Sand Filter 4,900 ft2 5-10 gpm/ft 2 7 PHWW Peak Hour Wet Weather 6-8 1732- Table 6-1 Recommended Plan Basic Design Criteria _ I PROPOSED SAND ROAD SITE I UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS Sewage Pumps 1-1 MGD @ TDH = 50' N/A I. 1-5 MGD @ TDA = 50' 3-10 MGD @ TDH = 50' -' Equalization Basin 3 MG N/A Primary Clarifiers 2-65'0, 10.5' SWD 1,500 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) I Aeration Tanks 4-75' x 751, 15' SWD 30# BOD/1000 ft3; 1 : Final Clarifiers 2-7310, 7.5' SWD 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1 i Anaerobic Digesters 2-4010, 25' SWD Det. time = 28d 0.10-0.40 # Volatile Solids/ft3 Sludge Lagoons 200,000 ft3 N/A i i I PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather 6-9 II l 73 z j • I 1 Chapter VII Implementation Implementation of the selected plan should be based on satisfying existing needs, identified needs or to provide service at the least cost. Since it appears at this time that the project will be entirely funded using local funds, the project should be segmented and constructed in phases to meet needs of the service - area and to provide economical service. _I _ The most immediate needs are the areas where sewer backups _I occur. The recurring problems in the Rundell street area and selected areas in the southeast portion of the City need to be _I resolved. �j Resolving the sewer capacity problem creates another problem. J Excess flows must be treated prior to discharge to the waters of :i the state. An excess flow treatment system needs to be J constructed at the existing wastewater treatment plant. Some improvements are required at the existing plant site to allow construction of the excess flow treatment system. Other improvements at the existing plant need to be made to improve the operating efficiency of the treatment processes and to minimize operation and maintenance costs. These represent the most immediate needs. Expansion of wastewater collection and treatment into areas beyond the current area served should be timed to correspond to actual need. It may be desirable to provide temporary service until sufficient development has taken place to warrant the expenditure of funds to provide full service. Local improvements funded as special assessment projects may be a method to reduce the funding required by Iowa City to install service into new areas. 7-1 t .. j s i i- The cast of money is also a factor in the timing and size of improvement projects. At the current time, USEPA funding is not available and does not appear to available to Iowa City in the foreseeable future. A chance does exist that a project ahead of Iowa City may not proceed. If this occurs, Iowa City may receive grant funding. The improvements should be structured to allow a portion of the project to be set aside for possible grant assistance if such funds become available. To implement this project, the following should be completed: J 1. Concurrence reached as to the necessary improvements 2. Detailed cost estimates prepared ._J 3. Financing arranged - 4. Previously completed engineering work reviewed to determine what work can be salvaged 5. Complete required engineering work 6. Bid and construct project a To comply with the 1988 deadline imposed by the USEPA and to obtain the most economical project, fast tracking of the construction sequence is recommended. Those portions of the previously completed engineering work that are salvaged may be -- constructed initially. Equipment purchases with long lead times should be evaluated and directly purchased by the City. ,,. -- ---.. -, Improvements involving stormwater treatment at the existing facility should be undertaken prior to expanding the capacity of the collection system. i L� The final report of this study will address potential staging or phasing of improvements included in the recommended plan and will present a preliminary plan for implementing the recommended wastewater collection, treatment and disposal alternative. 7-3 �73� � I i, i 1ff I i 1` I II' I I I I I VI I Improvements involving stormwater treatment at the existing facility should be undertaken prior to expanding the capacity of the collection system. i L� The final report of this study will address potential staging or phasing of improvements included in the recommended plan and will present a preliminary plan for implementing the recommended wastewater collection, treatment and disposal alternative. 7-3 �73� i 1ff I i i I II' i. f� 1 i Appendix A PRASE I REPORT ' /73.z- .. . R ____ t 0 - January 31, 1985 Metcalf Uddy, Inc. Engineers 8 Planners 65 W. Algonquin Road. Suite 500 Arlington Heights. Illinois 60005.4422 (312)228-09DO Mr. Charles J. Schmadeke, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Schmadeke: Attached is the Phase I report covering the Investigation and Evaluation Phase of our agreement dated October 24, 1984. Comments from the Wastewater Committee have been incorporated into the text as discussed at our meeting January 25, 1985. I �I We are prepared to meet with the City Council to discuss this report at your request. Phase II of our study cannot begin until the City's alternatives have been identified and verified .i by the Council. J We appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Iowa City and look forward to the next phase of our study. very truly yours, Lawrence P. Jawo ki Project Manager /mr I i I i I. I i ( f I � I'll _I F: Pr• NJ Silver Spin; MD : Honobm .(x ro.. Pam alto : Sen Bernardino I Irvine. CA I CmcegP I Houston I Auam, I Somerville. /7.3,2 - II Table of Contents Chapter I Introduction Chapter II Findings and Conclusions Chapter III Phase I Basis of Alternative Development Historical Review Design Conditions Effluent Conditions Collection System Needs Site Information Alternatives Introduction Costs Treatment Alternative Descriptions Alternative 1 Alternative lA Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 5A Alternative 6 Alternative 7 Alternative 8 Alternative 9 Alternative 9A Alternative 10 Alternative 11 Summary Appendix A — Cost Curves Page 1 Pri 3 3 6 13 14 15 18 18 19 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 17� I` i ,j r, { I J� `i I i I I, Table of Contents Chapter I Introduction Chapter II Findings and Conclusions Chapter III Phase I Basis of Alternative Development Historical Review Design Conditions Effluent Conditions Collection System Needs Site Information Alternatives Introduction Costs Treatment Alternative Descriptions Alternative 1 Alternative lA Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 5A Alternative 6 Alternative 7 Alternative 8 Alternative 9 Alternative 9A Alternative 10 Alternative 11 Summary Appendix A — Cost Curves Page 1 Pri 3 3 6 13 14 15 18 18 19 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 17� i ,j r, { 1 I, Chapter I Introduction This report evaluates several different alternatives for the transportation and treatment of wastewater generated within the designated service area of the Iowa City wastewater treatment facilities. The complete report will consist of three phases leading to a recommended pian. Phase I comprises a screening of treatment/transportation alternatives on a conceptual basis. Thirteen alternative solutions are presented. All alternatives presented have been developed to meet both short-term and long-term goals. Each of these alternatives provides treatment service for a twenty year period. Sewer systems developed for each alternative are based on fully developed areas following the intended land use identified in the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan (1983). Phase II will evaluate in detail the six most favorable pians identified in Phase I. This evaluation will lead to the selection of three plans to be investigated in Phase III. Phase III will evaluate the three selected plans on a basis of cons tr uctabil ity and financial implications. The most favorable plan will become the recommended plan. This report contains only the Phase I effort. Following a review of this material, additional studies will be undertaken to complete Phase II. i I i I. 1 i J I . I } y I �:I i J. _i i r i I I I, ( ~ Chapter II Findings and Conclusions 1. The Iowa Department of Air, Water and Waste Management should be requested to perform load allocation studies on the Iowa River. 2. Additional flow monitoring is recommended to properly size stormwater treatment and/or storage facilities and necessary transportation systems. 3. Stormwater flow equalization or treatment at critical locations in the collection system can provide cost savings by reducing pipeline sizes. 4. Alternatives 1A, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 11 are recommended as the alternatives to be. studied in detail. These alternatives provide a range of alternative solutions using combinations of treatment sites, conveyance alternatives and treatment methods. -2- i i i I I. 1 I . } y I �:I i Chapter III Phase I The purpose of this Chapter is to review previously completed engineering studies, to identify design conditions for development and evaluation of alternative plans, and to develop and evaluate alternative plans using different - combinations of treatment sites and transportation 1 techniques. This chapter is organized into two main sections. These are: 1 1. Basis of Alternative Development j _ 2. Alternative Plans I. BASIS OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT f Historical Review During the last several years, a considerable engineering effort has been undertaken by Iowa City to develop and implement a public works program aimed at improving the transportation and treatment of wastewaters generated within i `I the service area of the Iowa City wastewater treatment ( , system. This engineering effort has been partially funded by grants from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Iowa Department of Water, Air and Waste �I Management (IDWAWM). Additionally, final engineering plans 1 - and specifications have been completed and submitted for = review to the IDWAWM. A small portion of the interceptor sewer system known as the River Corridor Sewer has been 1 constructed. i' 1 1 i, s i i , p. The Iowa City wastewater collection system, like many other systems, has been used for purposes other than transportation of wastewaters. Over the years extraneous sources of water not normally requiring treatment have been connected to the system. These sources are: 1. Roof drains 2. Inter -connections with storm sewer system 3. Foundation drains These sources of water not requiring treatment must be included in the treatment system once they are mixed with other wastewaters. Annually these extraneous sources do not represent large volumes of water. They do however, result in large instantaneous flow rates that require sewerage systems to be oversized. This oversizing occurs both in the collection and treatment portions of the sewerage system. Figure 3-1 illustrates how Iowa City compares with other cities where extraneous waters have been prevented from entering the collection system. From Figure 3-1, communities the size of Iowa City would expect maximum wastewater flows to be 2 to 3 times the average wastewater flow. The ratio for Iowa City of peak hourly wet weather flow to average dry weather flow is 9.7. When comparing the peak hourly wet weather to average wet weather flow the ratio is still 6.7. These high ratios result in construction of sewers up to 2 1/2 times larger than those used by comparable communities where the extraneous water has been prevented from entering the sewers. It is costly and difficult at this time to either construct adequately sized pipelines or to eliminate extraneous water from the system. Iowa City has an ongoing program to eliminate roof drains and inter -connections with storm sewers. These programs should be continued. M The Iowa City wastewater collection system, like many other systems, has been used for purposes other than transportation of wastewaters. Over the years extraneous sources of water not normally requiring treatment have been connected to the system. These sources are: 1. Roof drains 2. Inter -connections with storm sewer system 3. Foundation drains These sources of water not requiring treatment must be included in the treatment system once they are mixed with other wastewaters. Annually these extraneous sources do not represent large volumes of water. They do however, result in large instantaneous flow rates that require sewerage systems to be oversized. This oversizing occurs both in the collection and treatment portions of the sewerage system. Figure 3-1 illustrates how Iowa City compares with other cities where extraneous waters have been prevented from entering the collection system. From Figure 3-1, communities the size of Iowa City would expect maximum wastewater flows to be 2 to 3 times the average wastewater flow. The ratio for Iowa City of peak hourly wet weather flow to average dry weather flow is 9.7. When comparing the peak hourly wet weather to average wet weather flow the ratio is still 6.7. These high ratios result in construction of sewers up to 2 1/2 times larger than those used by comparable communities where the extraneous water has been prevented from entering the sewers. It is costly and difficult at this time to either construct adequately sized pipelines or to eliminate extraneous water from the system. Iowa City has an ongoing program to eliminate roof drains and inter -connections with storm sewers. These programs should be continued. M Other problems result from the entrance of extraneous water into the collection system. The most common problems are sewer back-ups into basements and discharge of wastewater from the collection system at low lying locations. In terms of compliance with environmental regulations, the uncontrolled by-passing of wastewater during minor storm events is not allowed. To comply with the regulations, any sewer system flows resulting from a storm with a frequency less than a 5 - year storm must receive full treatment. Figure 3-2 defines the characteristics of the 5 -year storm. As previously discussed, Iowa City has been soliciting Federal and State aid to assist in the engineering and construction of the needed improvements. Working within the guidelines of the USEPA and the IDWAWM, Iowa City has remained in the grants program and currently is ranked as the sixth community in the State of Iowa to receive Federal and State funds. However, the first five communities are expected to take all of the funds available to the State for the next several years. Current USEPA requirements stipulate the need for all communities to be in compliance with the NPDES permit conditions by July, 1988. This compliance requirement is to be met regardless of the availability of Federal and State grants. Therefore, it does not appear probable that grant assistance will be available to the City for implementing needed improvements. Design Conditions In the engineering studies completed to date, detailed evaluation of community needs have been undertaken. These studies parallel the comprehensive planning completed by the Iowa City Department of Planning and Program Development. The purpose of the review of community needs conducted as part of this study is only to update the previously completed work (done in the period 1978-1980) to the current time frame. For 0M / 73a- ■ z O W 0 j 4 O RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES PER HOUR FIG. 3-2 RAINFALL INTENSITY Source: lows City Public Works Dept. -7- 73 1111111ma, i Ir PRECEDING DOCUMENT n 4 50 60 2 7 4 5 6 B 10 12 16 24 O MINUTES DURATION HOURS �: 1 y I i A' i D j� i 4 50 60 2 7 4 5 6 B 10 12 16 24 O MINUTES DURATION HOURS �: j. i A' i D j� 2 11� D r r � y m z N r Nino 0 Ell IN p n ca N N 1 � A V T U v\e i A g t N O P { II{r 4 50 60 2 7 4 5 6 B 10 12 16 24 O MINUTES DURATION HOURS �: j. i i j� 11� Nino 0 Ell IN MEN v\e 4 50 60 2 7 4 5 6 B 10 12 16 24 O MINUTES DURATION HOURS �: j. i i j� 4 50 60 2 7 4 5 6 B 10 12 16 24 O MINUTES DURATION HOURS �: 1 this study it is assumed that new treatment facilities will not be completed until 1990 and should serve the community until 2010. Required sewer interceptors will be sized.to meet the needs of their service areas when fully developed. This may occur after the year 2010. All alternatives will be evaluated on the basis of meeting both short-term and long- term needs of the community. Population. Figure 3-3 illustrates the projected population growth within the service area as defined in the Facility Plan by Veenstra and Rimm. The service area is established from natural geographical barriers, areas served by other facilities, and sufficient area to allow for orderly growth of the community. Figure 3-4 shows the boundary established as the service area. The population growth curve shows a 298 J growth to the design year 2010 from the 1980 population of 50508. This is a compounded annual rate of 0.758 per year. Loadings. Population growth, historical data developed in the Li operation of the existing wastewater treatment plant, and recommended sewer system rehabilitation projects have been utilized to develop estimates of future hydraulic, organic, suspended solids, and nitrogen loadings for the facilities. Hydraulic loading rates have been identified for various ri conditions and are summarized in Table 3.1. '7 Organic, suspended solids and nitrogen loadings are summarized in Table 3.2. The loadings shown are annual average values. LI An estimate of the peaking factor and resulting daily maximum loading are included in the table. The daily maximum loading is important in properly sizing wastewater treatment facilities. 77 From Table 3.1 the determination of a peak hourly wet weather flowrate is shown based on flow estimates from the Facilities s /73�— 7 e 0 0 i. I, 4: �: II I! I� e4,e7e 'N �• YEAH 4000 O v e 1� C r a�°j . S7o,eoo 30 1� a�0 v e = c QVr 00.41 9 00.670 I 0 ` A > 1 z 6 i m C) O 6 w Z V1 x O :.. O > 46 Elio O _m O y 4 QP eo.lao �Y•�.• N VO �{ 35 ,0 •,. 61. 6'A aEN r 56.189 �•.•• GON.P 30 e 0 0 i. I, 4: �: II I! I� e4,e7e 'N �• YEAH 4000 1� a�°j . S7o,eoo 1� a�0 QVr 00.41 00.670 Elio QP eo.lao �Y•�.• N VO • ,0 •,. 61. 6'A aEN 56.189 �•.•• GON.P •'•� 54.017 ' 49,400L150,501 4e.eeo 4r,ee0 / HIPJ MICAL DATA 000, 4 1,60 / /4e V133,440 OO O p p O O O N N N N N N N I a O V V 0 d O p G O O O O O O A O 0 O N O N O N O 01 O 01 O V YEAR i. I, 4: �: II I! I� OO O p p O O O N N N N N N N I a O V V 0 d O p G O O O O O O A O 0 O N O N O N O 01 O 01 O V YEAR I i Table 3.1 Hydraulic Design Condition • source Wastewater Plow Existing(i) tmrp) 1 ARE AWW Theoretical MW PHWW(2) 6.681 6.681 Sewer Infiltration 6.681 11.664 - - 2.534 _ Pooling Drain Tile 6.570 6.570 1'-- - In£lov 1.565 15.203 62.760 _, - 0.040 0.510 4.000 Subtotal 6.681 10.820 28.964 84.994 i - Increase - 1979 to 2010 ( Population Increase 1 ! (14,350 ! 100 gpcd)1.435 1.435 1.722(3) 3.588 '�- " Planned University Increase (4) 0.665 0.665 0.665 1.664 . Planned Industrial Increase (4) 0.315 0.315 0.400 0.787 Unforeseen Industrial and ' -� Governmental Increase (5) 0.400 0.400 I 0.500 1.000 _ Subtotal 2.815 2.815 3.092 7.039 L. i TOTAL -YEAR 2010 9.196 13.635 32.056 92.033 - I' I -1 (1) From Facilities Plan, Vol. VI, Pg. A-9, iI (2) Using a Peaking factor of 2.5. (3) Based on 120 gpcd to account for granter infiltration during MNW t conditions. i. (4) Based on Facilities Plan projection (year 2000) 4 101. - (5) These flows represent 20a of the peak monthly water use - -' Of the largest water uses in the Study Area, exclusive of the University. I, -� ADW means Average Day Dry Weather Flowrate AWW means Average Day Net Weather Flowrate MWW means Maximum Day Wet Weather Flowrate r ' . PRIM means Peak Hourly Not Weather Flowrate j Table 3.2 DESIGN WASTE LOADINGS Population -Year 2010 — Value Factor ueaign Value Residents 63,700 Out -of -Town Students 3,000 Plows - MGD ADW - Average Dry Weather 9.496 AWW - Average Wet Weather 13.635 MWW - Maximum Wet Weather 32.056 PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather 92.033 Urgenic Loading! - lba/dav BODS Reaidenta - 63,700 @ 0.17 10,829 1.58 17,072 Out -of -Town Students -3,000 @ 0.05 150 2.5 375 Industrial 4,386(1) 1 14386 Governmental 1,528(2) 1 1528 Iowa City Water Plant - University Water Plant TOTAL 16,893 1.97 33361 Suspended Solid!- lbs/day Ree dents - 63,700 @ 0.20 12,740 2.7 34398 Out -of -Town Students -3,000 @ 0.06 180 2.7 406 Industrial 5,022(1) 1 5022 Government 1,374(3) 1 1374 Iowa City Water Plant - University Water Plan TOTAL 19,316 2.14 41250 _Organic and Ammonia Nlt[ogan (TAN)-lbs/dav Resident - 63,700 @ 0.036 2,293 2.2 5045 Out -of -Torn Students -3,000 40.018 54 2.2 119 Industrial 407(1) 1 407 Governmental 551(2) 1 TOTAL -Mur— 1.85 551 -TM (1) Existing maximum loads plus 151. (2) Existing maximum loads plus planned expansion plus 151. (3) Existing maximum loads minus the water plants plus 501. Nei e , Plan and a peaking factor of 2.5. It is believed however, that this peak hourly wastewater flowrate of 92 MGD may be overestimated since past operating experience at the Iowa City plant indicates peak flowrates of less than 50 MGD are more representative. In addition, October of 1984 was the wettest month for Iowa City since the Civil War. Flooding and associated problems at the Treatment Plant were not encountered as would have been expected'if the peak hourly wet weather flow were indeed 92 MGD. j In the previous engineering studies, the recorded maximum flow i rate was 38 MGD. Currently in place sewer capacity can i support the higher value of 92 MGD if all sewer lines are flowing at capacity. The new River Corridor Sewer is believed,. to flow at less than maximum capacity during 5 -year storm events. It is recommended that additional flow monitoring of total flows in the sewer system be undertaken. This information can be collected and utilized prior to the final I i design of improvements. Effluent Conditions j The Iowa River is the major drainage way within the service area for the Iowa City system. This river is classified by j the IDWAWM as a Class B receiving water. No drinking water is i taken from this river downstream of Iowa City. Because of the classification of the river and its ability to assimilate wastewater, the stream is defined as an effluent limited segment. The current effluent requirement for this classification requires the discharge of less than 30 mg/l of biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids as well as ammonia nitrogen levels of less than 10 mg/l in the summer and 15 mg/l in the winter. The USEPA is studying the need to modify this requirement. The IDWAWM should be requested to undertake a waste load allocation study to determine: 1) if 1 I -13- I higher effluent concentrations are justifiable; and 2) at what level does the stream become water quality limited. This evaluation will identify the minimum degree of treatment required to protect the Iowa River from adverse environmental impact. Wastewater treatment facilities could be located with I discharge points into tributary streams of the Iowa River. An example would be a plant discharging into Snyder Creek. Discharges into these streams must comply with the 30-30 standard and will also be required to meet more stringent ammonia standards. These discharge limits are established on a case by case basis. For this study it is assumed that complete nitrification will be required at facilities not J discharging directly into the Iowa River. -� Collection System Needs Iowa City faces two problems with respect to the _ transportation of wastewater by the existing system. First, during storm events the capacity of the existing system is exceeded. This results in uncontrolled discharges or sewer back-ups. Secondly, new service areas will be added to the system. As new areas are added, sufficient capacity must exist for the new wastewater flowrates. The wastewater must also be transported economically. Growth areas Figure 3-4 illustrates the previously proposed interceptor sewer construction. Major growth areas are located along I-80, in the southeast and northeast portions of the City, and in the western portion of the City particularly along Highway 1. The area to the north along I-80 is adequately served by the recently constructed River Corridor sewer. Development along Highway 1 is adequately served with the existing system. As development occurs to the southwest -14- additional capacity will be required. This additional capacity could be provided by a new sewer crossing the river near the southern City limits. This sewer is not needed in the near future. Development in the southeast is more critical as the existing system is operating at capacity and land development projects have been proposed. Capacity Limited Areas In addition to the southeast area described above, sewer capacity limitations exist in the Rundell Street Trunk, in the Southeast Trunk, and in the Lower Muscatine Road Trunk. B&B Engineering Services Inc. has evaluated the Lower Muscatine Road Trunk. They concluded the sewer is currently at capacity but that additional capacity could be achieved by replacing critical segments of the trunk. Other localized problems exist and should be corrected as a part of street or other utility improvement projects. In developing alternative solutions, the above mentioned capacity limitations and growth areas must be considered and included in the required improvements. Site Information Wastewater treatment facilities can be provided at several different locations. In this report four sites have been considered. These are: 1. Existing Wastewater Treatment Site 2. Proposed Sand Road Site 3. A site located south of the Sand Road Site 4. A site located south of the Heinz Lift Station Other sites were evaluated and eliminated from further consideration. Moving further south to the confluence of f Snyder Creek and the Iowa River allows for development of a ! larger service area but also requires more sewer line construction. Sites along the west side of the Iowa River do ^ not provide any advantages not found along the east side of the river and a major river crossing would be required to utilize sites on the west bank. Finally, locating a new plant north of the existing site is not feasible due to the topography in the northern part*of the City. The existing site is located south of Kirkwood Avenue and is bounded by the Iowa River, Ralston Creek and Highway 6. This site is limited by natural barriers; however, sufficient land I area is available to construct the required improvements. The land area occupied by the existing sludge lagoons and dewatering beds could be utilized in the treatment of wastewater and stormwater by adding new sludge processing 1 facilities. Wastewater flows generated south of the present sewer system limits must be pumped to be treated at the existing site. -- i The previously proposed Sand Road Site increases the service i area without the need for pumping stations. This site !, requires the construction of deeper than normal sewers due to j the the crossing of watershed boundaries. A site located further south along Sand Road at the southern limits of the + service area minimizes the need for deep sewers in the I southeast region. A more southerly site requires slightly longer lengths of sewer construction. To minimize the construction of large size sewer lines, treatment of wastewater near the point of origin has been evaluated. A site near the Heinz Lift Station would allow t treatment of wastewater from the southeast area of Iowa City, Treatment could continue at the existing site for the i wastewater flowing by gravity to this site. If needed, another treatment site could be utilized at or near the Sand Road Site. -16- Since a significant portion of the wastewater flow is from storm events, treatment of excess flows at sites other than the main treatment facility is feasible and may be cost effective. Flow equalization basins allow the use of smaller sewer lines and require a minimum of labor to operate. All of the above mentioned sites will be developed into treatment alternatives in the following sections. Locations of the southeast interceptor sewer will be subject to the recommendations of the Facilities Plan regarding identified archeological areas. The community layout diagrams are therefore subject to these conditions and are intended for purposes of comparisons between alternatives. Advantages and disadvantages of each site will be discussed in more detail in the Alternative Descriptions. -1]- �/3� i i f I j �> I f f; i f � i, i i ALTERNATIVES Introduction Fourteen alternatives, illustrated and discussed in the following text, have been developed to satisfy several objectives. These objectives include providing equivalent secondary treatment for all wastewater flows generated during the design storm event within the Study Area during the year 2010, meeting a 30-30 effluent standard, relieving the current surcharged sewer conditions, opening new areas in the south and southeast for residential, industrial and commercial development, and providing the City with an operable system well beyond the twenty year study period. The individual alternatives presented are not all- inclusive, but collectively they do represent a composite of treatment sites and collection schemes. Attractive alternatives identified during this phase of the study will receive detailed evaluation in Phase II of this project. Costs Cost estimates have been prepared which include construction costs and operation and maintenance costs projected over twenty years using an inflationary rate of seven percent. The estimates were computed for each alternative based on flowrates, volume, or linear foot of in-place sewer pipe depending on the alternative component. All costs indicated are present worth, year 1990 dollars (ENR -5400). The ENR number is a widely accepted cost index used to estimate future or past construction costs. It is updated on a weekly basis in the Engineering News Record magazine. The present worth value represents the sum total of the capital costs and the present day value of the operation and maintenance costs over the study period; in this case, twenty years. The present worth is the money required initially to fund all construction costs, with enough money remaining to cover all operation and maintenance costs over the twenty year period, -18- after it is invested at an assumed interest rate. Operation and maintenance costs include items such as labor, materials, chemicals, and energy. Using present worth cost values to compare alternatives is required so that labor- or energy - intensive systems are evaluated fairly and not given a favorable bias due to lower construction costs. The objective of Phase I was to compare the costs of various alternatives, some using lift stations extensively, and it was therefore necessary to utilize a present worth analysis. It is important to recognize that these cost estimates are not absolute and should be used for comparative purposes only. Although monetary cost comparisons are not the sole basis for alternative selection, relative costs are an important factor. System reliability, post -study period planning, and site availability are just some of the non -economic considerations to be considered. There are some cost items that were dropped from the analysis either because they are common to .all alternatives or negligible relative to the other cost components. General sewer rehabilitation, land costs, and miscellaneous structures would be examples of these items. Actual total project present worth values MAY BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER, as determined in the -Phase II study. Construction phasing is another relevant factor that will be addressed in subsequent reports. This present analysis was based on collecting, transporting, and treating 100 percent of the design year wastewater flows. Treatment Treatment costs were developed for three general families: secondary treatment of wastewater, stormwater treatment, and small -flow treatment. Secondary and small -flow treatment can be categorized as activated sludge or fixed film systems. More specifically, the small -flow system curve represents a composite of extended aeration, contact stabilization, and rotating - biological contactors. These treatment systems have historically been utilized most frequently for small, packaged -type treatment -19- plants. Stormwater treatment curves incorporate available data on primary effluent filtration and underdrained rapid infiltration land treatment. Both systems are generally cost- effective for treating large quantities of dilute wastewater and achieving a 30-30 effluent quality. Due to the nature of wet weather flows in Iowa City (very high hydraulic peaking factors), equalization is an important feature in the treatment plan. With equalization, new facilities can be down -sized to treat reduced peak flows during storm events. Collecting more information on the plant hydrograph is imperative before detailed equalization studies can be performed. The hydrograph associated with the design storm will allow an equalization basin to be sized for proper hydraulic peak reduction. This effort must precede any detailed treatment process design. Although present wastewater samples indicate that nitrification is not a concern in the Iowa City Study Area, the situation may be altered by future industrial discharges. Therefore, any new treatment plant must have the flexibility to address a future potential need for nitrification. Expansion of any magnitude at the existing site will require utilization of the land currently occupied by the sludge lagoons. Belt filter presses will be used in the solids handling train to make more land area available for expansion. Ultimate disposal for all options will be land application, rather than landfilling as recommended in the Facilities Plan. -20- I - plants. Stormwater treatment curves incorporate available data on primary effluent filtration and underdrained rapid infiltration land treatment. Both systems are generally cost- effective for treating large quantities of dilute wastewater and achieving a 30-30 effluent quality. Due to the nature of wet weather flows in Iowa City (very high hydraulic peaking factors), equalization is an important feature in the treatment plan. With equalization, new facilities can be down -sized to treat reduced peak flows during storm events. Collecting more information on the plant hydrograph is imperative before detailed equalization studies can be performed. The hydrograph associated with the design storm will allow an equalization basin to be sized for proper hydraulic peak reduction. This effort must precede any detailed treatment process design. Although present wastewater samples indicate that nitrification is not a concern in the Iowa City Study Area, the situation may be altered by future industrial discharges. Therefore, any new treatment plant must have the flexibility to address a future potential need for nitrification. Expansion of any magnitude at the existing site will require utilization of the land currently occupied by the sludge lagoons. Belt filter presses will be used in the solids handling train to make more land area available for expansion. Ultimate disposal for all options will be land application, rather than landfilling as recommended in the Facilities Plan. -20- Alternative Descriptions ,i i' i I Alternative Descriptions ALTERNATIVE 1 Treatment System - A new secondary treatment plant will be constructed at the Sand Road Site. The treatment facilities at the existing plant will be abandoned as all wastewater flow generated in the Study Area will be treated at the new site. Flow equalization will be provided at the existing plant thereby reducing the size of the outfall sewer. Bypassing during the 2- inch/1-hour storm event will be eliminated, while effluent qualities will meet the 30-30 BOD and SS standards. Sludges will be digested, dewatered, and land applied. Collection/Transportation System - Sewer rehabilitation and construction will proceed as directed by the Facilities Plan. Additionally, relief sewers will be constructed within the Ralston Creek south branch drainage area as needed to eliminate surcharging. Construction of the Southeast Interceptor System will allow the City to abandon the Village Green, Heinz, and Fairmeadows Lift Stations. The Outfall Sewer System will convey wastewater flows from the existing treatment plant site to the Sand Road location. Flow in the Rundell Street trunk sewers will be diverted and development opportunities will exist in the southeast and south regions of the Study Area. COMMUNITY LAYOUT _21_ /73Z I M N EXISTING FINE ST. WWTF LIFT STATION ABANDONED 0G TO ... 1 �? 21- . . rn�rvo" - .- W W TP ,. ...00 J FP .'JOS 6S ........................ o. ... ALTERNATIVE t1 -22- LEGEND FORCE MAIN GRAVITY •EWER i i .J �i i I Alternative #1 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization New Secondary Treatment Plant Effluent Sewer SE Interceptor Segment Outfall Sewer Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future SE development Provides additional treatment capacity Eliminates need for lift stations Room for plant expansion Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Provides long-term solution Cost $6,260,000 31,800,000 1,741,000 14,140,000 4,843,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 62,256,000 Disadvantages Cost Extensive sewer. construction This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. ALTERNATIVE lA Treatment System - This system will be similar to Alternative 1 except that the new treatment plant site will be located further south, just outside the Study Area boundary. This site, not considered in the Facilities Plan, will serve the Study Area by gravity flow, while remaining out of the 100 -year flood plain and other environmentally sensitive areas. Collection/Transportation System - By relocating the proposed treatment plant to the south, the cuts required for the installation of the Southeast Interceptor system can be reduced. In addition, the length of effluent sewer linking the treatment plant with the Iowa River can be reduced by over 800 feet. These features more than offset the additional costs incurred by extending the Outfall and SE Interceptor System further south. COMMUNITY LAYOUT ' �• � ' � J— .. Or1 tl. dv ; ..:"V : _ �f Thr ce �� \ 1. i !•`�, �..:..:� .. .•0 r.� .. '.AT.,LTIDY• <. /1%�•, .act �� t% ./ h'•' 1\ 1 MI L'`I♦,.T.11 Y�O •�;Y /ILn,�TLT144DM/�\\.�✓,�,\ II (( ii��nn • 1 � 1 ADPOlic ! f LICIVAID 1 1 v�owwm . 1 -24- ALTERNATIVE f1A -25- i I Alternative #lA COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization New Secondary Treatment Plant Effluent Sewer SE Interceptor Segment Outfall Sewer Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future south and southeast development Provides for additional treatment capacity Room for plant expansion Eliminates need for lift stations Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Drains entire Study Area by gravity Provides long-term solution Cost $6,260,000 31,800,000 746,000 12,731,000 5,439,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 $60,448,000 Disadvantages Cost County involved to obtain treatment plant site This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -Z6- / 73z I I J Alternative #lA COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization New Secondary Treatment Plant Effluent Sewer SE Interceptor Segment Outfall Sewer Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future south and southeast development Provides for additional treatment capacity Room for plant expansion Eliminates need for lift stations Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Drains entire Study Area by gravity Provides long-term solution Cost $6,260,000 31,800,000 746,000 12,731,000 5,439,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 $60,448,000 Disadvantages Cost County involved to obtain treatment plant site This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -Z6- / 73z ALTERNATIVE 2 Treatment System - East and southeast regional flows will be collected and transported to a wastewater treatment facility situated at the Sand Road location. This secondary treatment plant would receive raw wastewater, treat these flows to achieve a 30-30 standard, and discharge the effluent into the Iowa River. The existing treatment plant would be expanded to meet the remaining Study Area wastewater flows. This expansion would include flow equalization. A separate stormwater treatment train will operate in parallel with the existing facilities to meet the hydraulic requirements of the design storm. All flows will receive treatment to meet the 30-30 effluent standard. Sludges generated at both treatment plant sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. Collection/Transportation System - The Southeast Interceptor System will be constructed to transport flows to the Sand Road treatment site. This sewer system will divert flows away from the Rundell Street Truck Sewer and will also provide sewer capacity to accommodate residental and commercial development in the southeast portion of the Study Area. Regional relief sewers will be constructed in the Memory Garden area to reduce surcharging occurrences. COMMUNITY LAYOUT /73-2- j ALTERNATIVE 02 Alternative #2 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization Stormwater Treatment New Pumping Capacity for Existing Plant Sludge Handling New Secondary Treatment Plant Effluent Sewer SE Interceptor Segment Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Cost $4,601,000 5,088,000 5,408,000 1,315,000 14,840,000 996,000 14,140,000 1,202,000 2.270.000 $49,860,000 Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Increased construction Allows for future BE development cost Provides additional treatment Limited room for plant capacity expansion at existing Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year WWTP site storm event Operational complexity Utilizes existing facilities due to two treatment Eliminates need for lift stations sites Room for plant expansion at new plant Long-term community needs can be satisfied This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -29- 1%3,2— " ALTERNATIVE 3 Treatment System - The existing treatment plant will be expanded to provide additional hydraulic capacity so that the trickling filters are operating at their maximum loading rate. Some flow equalization will also be provided. The excess flows that occur during the design storm event will be directed to the Sand Road site for treatment. The Sand Road treatment plant will also receive flows from the Southeast Interceptor System. All wastewater flows will receive secondary treatment to meet the 30- 30 discharge standard. Collection/Transportation System - Major construction will include the Southeast Interceptor and Outfall Sewer Systems. Other construction will be minor relief sewer work to alleviate surcharging occurences. The SE Interceptor system will divert flow away from the upper end of the Rundell Street Trunk Sewer and open up the Southeast region for development. Additionally, the existing lift stations in the region (Heinz, Fairmeadows, Village Green) will be abandoned. COMMUNITY LAYOUT -30- /7.3z F EXISTING ►INE ST. WWI► LIFT STATION •••• IF ... 12" t� 6, �O PROPOSED 64" ,.• WWTP ,•� 0 J•Gy i• ••••••• •••• ••,•• LEGEND Foote[ MAIN "NAVITY vEwEIt i n J I I I I i II ' I I I _ I I I _ EXISTING ►INE ST. WWI► LIFT STATION •••• IF ... 12" t� 6, �O PROPOSED 64" ,.• WWTP ,•� 0 J•Gy i• ••••••• •••• ••,•• LEGEND Foote[ MAIN "NAVITY vEwEIt Alternative $3 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item I— J Existing Plant Modifications $4,584,000 (incl. increased pumping capacity) WWTP site Flow Equalization 4,601,000 Sludge Handling 1,315,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 9,835,000 Effluent Sewer i I SE Interceptor Segment 14,140,000 Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 SE Interceptor -Upper Reach j Outfall Sewer I Alternative $3 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Existing Plant Modifications $4,584,000 (incl. increased pumping capacity) WWTP site Flow Equalization 4,601,000 Sludge Handling 1,315,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 9,835,000 Effluent Sewer 1,317,000 SE Interceptor Segment 14,140,000 Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 SE Interceptor -Upper Reach 2,270,000 Outfall Sewer 3,594,000 Total $42,858,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for plant Allows for future SE development expansion at existing Provides additional treatment WWTP site capacity Outfall sewer not used Eliminates by-passing during continuously 5 -year storm event Operational complexity Eliminates need for lift stations Extensive sewer Room for expansion at new WWTP construction Utilizes existing facilities Requires future storm - Allows future abandonment of water treatment or existing treatment facilities storage at existing site This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. -32- ALTERNATIVE 4 Treatment System - The existing treatment plant site will be dedicated to stormwater treatment. Flow equalization will also be utilized at this site. The dry weather flows will be directed to the Sand Road treatment plant. This facility will also treat the flows contributed from the Southeast Interceptor System. Wastewater flows at both treatment sites will receive secondary treatment and effluent qualities will meet the 30-30 discharge standard. Collection/Transportation System - The Southeast Interceptor and Outfall Sewer Systems will convey wastewater flows to the Sand Road Facility. Additional sewer work will include relief lines to reduce various regional surcharging. The Southeast Interceptor will divert flows away from the Rundell Street Trunk Sewer and have capacity to accommodate future development in the southeast portion of the Study Area. The three lift stations currently operating in the southeast region can be abandoned. COMMUNITY LAYOUT -33- /73-2-- .......... LEGEND FORCE MAIN CAVITY EWER ALTERNATIVE 04 Alternative t4 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Flow Equalization $ 5,029,000 Stormwater Treatment 5,088,000 Additional Pumping Capacity at Existing WWTP 4,725,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 24,013,000 Effluent Sewer 1,317,000 SE Interceptor Segment 14,140,000 Outfall Sewer 2,174,000 Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 BE Interceptor -Upper Reach 2,270,000 Total $59,958,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Cost Allows for future SE development operational complexity Provides additional treatment Extensive sewer capacity construction Eliminates by-passing during Requires future storm - 5 -year storm event water treatment or Eliminates need for lift stations storage at existing Room for expansion at new WWTP site Utilizes existing facilities Minimizes the size of the outfall.Sewer This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -35- / 73 -Z- I ALTERNATIVE 5 Treatment System - All wet weather flows will be directed to a separate stormwater treatment facility located at the Sand Road site. Additionally all flows generated in the areas served by _ the Southeast Interceptor System will receive treatment at this j location. The trickling filters at the existing plant site will .� be utilized to treat the remaining dry weather flows and flow equalization will also be provided at this site. In all cases, secondary treatment meeting the established 30-30 effluent standard will be used. Collection/Transportation System - Same as previous alternative, except the Outfall Sewer System will be utilized to convey wet weather flow from the existing site to the Sand Road treatment facility. COMMUNITY LAYOUT r t ' I�:. I' I. r t� •ls '. ' X•''i.l-� FIT - �,-• `1'� 16 �;,, `� _ ��� � �'.wr Ernp.• <. .tom/l �'• }} .� i 0 �•j � • Gii.rr.eewt ,.. ,ems- �`•. � \ s. � n.r.rw•I .irr, Ei.r. r O ♦ •� MINTP EE INTER ErT011 i —36- i /7,3.z,I EXISTING PINE WWTP LIFT STATION •••• f?„ i?., A F9 A Wr G� 2 p.+ b• off' .•'• PROPOSED 64" WWTP ••``��~4 ••'PgP 6•' P • illO1 • 5....• •... ALTERNATIVE t5 _37_ LEGEND —FORCE MAIN -GRAVITY EE WER J i Alternative #5 COST ESTIMATE ENR -5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization Sludge Handling New Secondary Treatment Plant Effluent Sewer SE Interceptor Segment Outfall Sewer Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future SE development Provides additional treatment capacity Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Eliminates need for lift stations Room for expansion at new WWTP Cost $5,083,000 1,315,000 20,670,000 1,317,000 14,140,000 4,843,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 $50,840,000 Disadvantages Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP site Operational complexity Intermittent use of Outfall Sewer Extensive sewer construction Requires larger sized Outfall Sewer This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. -38- i I f . , J ( it 1 j i ALTERNATIVE 5A Treatment System - Same as Alternative 3. Transportation/Collection System - Same as Alternative 3 except _ that the Southeast Interceptor System, from the Pine Street location southward, would be converted to a pressure line. A new pumping station at the Pine Street Lift Station site would permit the downstream interceptor to be installed as a force main. This — allows for reduced pipeline construction costs as a result of shallower cuts and smaller diameter pipes. All future connections to this system, however, would require the use of a lift station. COMMUNITY LAYOUT -39- A 73z 1 N�����\/ EXISTING PINE ST. d WWTP LIFT STATION • •• 3O„ ry • YL •1 ClIp N 1: Ir 04 1 1: tell 1 PROPOSED W INTP ' ••••,.•PEE E s ..•....•....•• ALTERNATIVE #6A -40- LEGEND FORCE MAIN .� GRAVITY SEWER Alternative p5A COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Existing Plant Modifications $4,584,000 (incl. increased pumping capacity) Sludge Handling 1,315,000 Flow Equalization 4,601,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 9,835,000 Lift Stations 4,448,000 Effluent Sewer 1,317,000 SE Interceptor Segment 5,493,000 Outfall Sewer 3,594,000 Fairmeadows Branch 496,000 SE Interceptor -Upper Reach 2,270,000 Total $37,953,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for Allows for future SE development expansion at existing 6 Provides additional treatment WWTP site I . capacity Outfall Sewer not used Eliminates by-passing during continuously 5 -year storm event Continuous pumping Room for expansion at new WWTP through SE Smaller pipe sizes Interceptor Future connections to SE Interceptor will involve additional lift stations This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. _41- I 173� ' j ALTERNATIVE 6 Treatment System - With the use of packaged treatment plants, wastewater flows can be divided into three regional treatment zones. The upper portion of the Southeast Interceptor System will convey flows to a Snyder Creek treatment plant. Another packaged plant will be located at the Sand Road site. This will permit gravity flow from future south and southeast development. The bulk of the wastewater flows generated in the Study Area will continue to be treated at the existing treatment plant site. Flow equalization will be provided at this site and a separate stormwater treatment system will be constructed in parallel to the dry weather flow facilities. Any flows that surpass the hydraulic capacity of the expanded trickling filter train will be treated by this parallel stormwater system. Secondary treatment will be utilized at all treatment sites to achieve the 30-30 effluent standard. Collection/Transportation - This alternative involves construction of approximately 75% of the Southeast Interceptor System, with the option of completion at a future date. The Heinz, Fairmeadows, and the Village Green Lift Stations will be abandoned. South and southeast development will be served by gravity flow sewers to the packaged treatment plants. COMMUNITY LAYOUT /73.2- i N ETING INE 6T WW V/Tp LIFTTETATIDN 21" . 14• 64• .' +'e PSNYDERD ,o CREEK FACILITY �.. PROP06ED .•' W W TP •,..`�`5s .••PES • s4,0 14 .................• LEGEND — - - FORCE MAIN — ONAVITV aEWER ALTERNATIVE t6 -43- { 1 I� I I I { I i i I I i i q h ' ---� i ;,,,,' ,i ,' __ , __ I __ -.. _. - � ,_ . i ,. i -, '� -; `_ �. ,. _; { i -, i , -� � -, �; r. �: ,. r � J � _ � . � ! �. �� '-���_ 4 �. { �, .. � 1 �� �. �I ,., . f 'I i _ . i I -' � �_ �.I � _, �`.. i � I -. �, i Alternative #6 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Flow Equalization $4,601,000 Stormwater Treatment 5,088,000 Existing Plant Modifications 6,722,000 Small Flow Treatment 9,083,000 Effluent Sewer 296,000 SE Interceptor Segment 6,334,000 Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 SE Interceptor -Upper Reach 2,270,000 Sand Road Interceptor 1,631,000 Total $37,227,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future south and SE development Provides additional treatment capacity Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Utilizes existing facilities Eliminates need for lift stations Easily expanded into regional system Room for expansion at new WWTP Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP site Increased labor and maintenance Operational complexity Three discharge points This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -44- / 73.Z ALTERNATIVE 7 Treatment System - The existing treatment plant will be expanded to provide additional hydraulic capacity including flow equalization and a separate stormwater system, operating in parallel during wet weather conditions. Two packaged treatment plants will be included in the Study Area. One located at Snyder Creek will treat southeast flows. The other plant will be located at the Sand Road site and treat flows generated by development in the south. Flows at all sites will receive secondary treatment to reach the 30.30 effluent standard. Collection/Transportation System - The upper portion of the SE Interceptor will be constructed to direct flows away from the Rundell Street Trunk. They will be transported to a pumping station along the Fairmeadows Trunk, which in turn pumps the flow to the existing plant site. This sewer will be located along Highway -6 and will be a combination of force main/gravity sewer as topography dictates. The two packaged plants will have corresponding gravity sewers, eliminating the need for the Heinz, Fairmeadows, and Village Green Lift Stations. COMMUNITY LAYOUT 4Wr�e r✓ N'^ARD►DED�1._• i�„• $TAT ON 4•. ,,`a \' \� � Ste\ �' of svlv� ►RO►OEED I• Id. �`�J � � EMYDER DREEN• L .•.. �•�f r 1 ���111 r�Dalrr rr •/k : - i 40 ►RO►OEED ♦``\\111 --_- .. _ lam..- 1• ___, WWTP I jr ',,.���, 0 ' :f o'� i •I I 4F - I lED[ND �•\ 4i..ww•!.'�• n / 1 1��/IMC[ W. - nwu -A5- /73.2- I 0 I EEISTINO W WTV I i I 1 - I I i i I i J ii EEISTINO W WTV I i I 1 - I I i I y4 J I �\ } 1 rr \� I i I I PINE ST. LIFT STATION 'PT,• • JOy ••' ALTERNATIVE t7 _ -46- LEGEND �IOROE MAIN �ORAVITY IIEWER i ti II 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 ' I } 1 1 i 1 I i I I i Alternative #7 J COST ESTIMATE i._ ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) Cost $5,518,000 7,314,000 7,245,000 1,326,000 6,090,000 2,700,000 296,000 478,000 1,153,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 3.763,000 $39,355,000 Disadvantages Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP sites Continuous pumping at lift station Three discharge points This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. _47_ f I ' Alternative #7 J COST ESTIMATE { ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) ~ Item i I Flow Equalization i Stormwater Treatment -' Additional pumping capacity at existing WWTP - Sludge Handling Small Flow Treatment - Lift Station Effluent Sewer Sand Road Interceptor J Snyder Creek Interceptor Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach -i HW 6 Interceptor Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES 11 Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future South and Southeast expansion Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Provides additional treatment _ capacity _ Room for expansion at new WWTP sites Cost Cost $5,518,000 7,314,000 7,245,000 1,326,000 6,090,000 2,700,000 296,000 478,000 1,153,000 1,202,000 2,270,000 3.763,000 $39,355,000 Disadvantages Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP sites Continuous pumping at lift station Three discharge points This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. _47_ f I ' i I i' 1 - ' i i I j i 1 -i 1: I: i ALTERNATIVE 8 Treatment System - All wastewater generated in the Study Area will be treated at the existing plant site. Flow equalization will be provided at this site. A separate stormwater train will provide treatment for wet weather flows beyond the hydraulic capacity of the expanded trickling filter system. All flows will receive secondary treatment to meet the 30-30 effluent standard. Collection/Transportation - The upper end of the Southeast Interceptor System will conduct flows to a pumping station at the Pine Street site. Two more regional pumping stations will be constructed to serve existing and future south/southeast development. All three pumping stations will discharge into force mains that converge at an elevated point along Highway -6. The flows will then travel through a gravity sewer to the existing plant site for treatment. COMMUNITY LAYOUT -48- �J EEISTING PINE ST. �. WWTP LIFT STATION .... E30 PROPOSED %PUMPING STATION % 127" - 03.E 1 -, 110" 1 12' 1 ` 21" 1 PROPOSED i PUMPING STATION O+ PROPOSED I I PUMPING STATION - •� ;10 • • VVI . d •...........••..• LEGEND FORCE MAIN GRAVITY EEwER i r � l 1 I ALTERNATIVE t8 -49- I Alternative #8 COST ESTIMATE ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) i I Item Cost j Flow Equalization $4,559,000 i Stormwater Treatment 9,561,000 Existing Treatment Plant Modifications 8,996,000 i Lift Stations 4,607,000 SE Interceptor -Upper Reach 3,158,000 SE Interceptor Segment 1,032,000 i' ! Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 ! HW 6 Interceptor 2,799,000 i South Interceptor Segment 304,000 . Total $36,218,000 _ i t _ I! ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES � Advantages Disadvantages 1 � - Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for Allows for future SE expansion expansion at existing i +. Eliminates by-passing during WWTP site � 5 -year storm event Continuous pumping at Provides additional treatment lift stations 1 j. capacity Consolidates small pump stations into larger facilities i - Utilizes existing facilities -, Minimizes sewer construction _ Cost This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. i -50- ,i - -- -`� == | ------�'------ -�� ALTERNATIVE 9 Treatment System ~ Same as Alternative 8 Collection/Transportation - South and southeast regional Pumping stations and force mains will convey wastewater flows to an elevated point along Highway -6 where a common gravity line continues to the Pine Street site. At this point,a gravi sewer will be constructed oa1ug tunnel methods where �ueoeasaz�� to transport the flows due west to the existing ' y' plaut site. The upper end of the Southeast Interceptor system contribute to the flows directed west by the new sewer. COMMUNITY LAYOUT i N EXISTING PINE ST. •' W,WTP 48" LIFT STATION ' TUNNEL GRAVITY Ir SEWER 1 � 1 1 � 1 � zrr 1 12" •• 1 � 1 1 PROPOSED 1 PUMPING STATION PROPOSED �,•'•� PUMPING STATION ,. •4s •••WEA .•'tOC 6 .......,,,..•••' ALTERNATIVE t9 -52- LEGEND — FORCE MAIN ��• GRAVITY FEWER _ Alternative t9 I _ COST ESTIMATE _1 ENR -5400 (JAN. 1990) ,! Cost ost i Flow Equalization $4,559,000 — Stormwater Treatment 9,561,000 Existing Treatment Plant Modifications 8,996,000 1 -^ Lift Stations 1,907,000 i I SE Interceptor -Upper Reach 2,270,000 SE Interceptor Segment 1,032,000 { South Intereptor Segment 1,304,000 Fairmeadows Branch 1,202,000 { -. 7,193,000 Tunnel � I $38,024,000 Total f J -i ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES I. Advantages Disadvantages i J_ Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for 5 Allows for future SE expansion expansion at existing ` Eliminates by-passing during WWTP site - 5 -year storm event Continuous pumping at provides additional treatment lift stations 4 capacity Requires tunnel Consolidates smaller pump stations construction through into larger facilities dense residential Cost area This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. i i i -53- .. I. i ALTERNATIVE 9A Treatment System - Same as Alternative 8. Collection/Transportation System - Similar to Alternative 9, except that a third pumping station will replace the tunnel/gravity sewer. A force main would head due west and enter the existing treatment plant site at a point that minimizes the _ need to repump this flow. I — COMMUNITY LAYOUT -54- - Yl LbW LrL •n Oslo tITAT10N •j, .-• �`� �I` a // lY1 9717IM• t tel•• •: ,1•. . '1 I i\ y••• vi I:�\ �•".b �` ` QINYtIDDM n�I1 �'�-Yl1Y/ti D1IlIDY\ lY1(YTIII Y. 'y O• •%:�' �� �. _ '4 �Z.. -.'j.,�----' . �• 7 �f „� \ S •�� Its —JIB �� � ^ C'��--+ ii' � .,Moroi v, •I rYMrINO �• til J ►IlOroiro rUWING r n ST1ITIONIy. 1. �TATK)N cj 0 -I - ----- -- •�z USEND •• "\ �.'....�.•�r•`J4 I�// r ! I Y� rr�lap Y.YI -54- .4 " -':; � 7;3.�. j. i is i ,i i ,.. ,. i. -i I� .� �� 'I`. _-_: ; �,; ... i �.. �� � -' f .. { ,.. i �: .: � ! ;; ..: t � I i ,, . f '',. �. i c . i r I � i �— -� �, t i ��'jj i '1 JJ^ r '� � � J� i _� { _i I li I �.. i _ V � 7;3.�. j. i is i ,i i ,.. ,. i. -i I� .� �� 'I`. _-_: ; �,; ... i �.. 1 ; f .. { ,.. i �: .: � ! ;; ..: t � I i ,, . f '',. �. i '� �., i . i r I � i I I J r i i �j 1 i � t I .. i I ! !. I I . I I J J n I J EXISTING VINE ST. WWTp LIFT STATION 00" P.O. PROPOSED C" " PUMPING STATION ' 21" 1 ��- 72•. ... 1 - 1 1 -• - t . 21" • 12' - 1 -- ��a• ; PROPOSED 1 PUMPING STATION PROPOSED PUMPING STATION .• tie :/? • PES • 1 � e ••. ALTERNATIVE t9A -55- -F-END �fORd �QRIEW 1 I r i I � 1 i � t I .. i I ! !. I I . I I i i _I i i :J �i J i -1 i J i Alternative 19A COST ESTIMATE ENR -5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Flow Equalization Stormwater Treatment Existing Treatment Plant Modifications Lift Stations SE Interceptor -Upper Reach SE Interceptor Segment South Interceptor Segment Fairmeadows Branch Pine St. Interceptor to Existing WWTP Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future SE expansion Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event Provides additional treatment capacity Consolidates smaller pumping stations into larger facilities Cost Cost $4,559,000 9,561,000 7,316,000 5,162,000 2,270,000 1,032,000 1,304,000 1,202,000 1,786,000 $34,192,000 Disadvantages Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP site Continuous pumping at lift stations This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. -56- ALTERNATIVE 10 Treatment System - Dry weather flows will be treated at new facilities constructed at the Sand Road site. The existing plant site will be dedicated to wet weather flow treatment using flow equalization. All flows will receive secondary treatment and effluents will meet the 30-30 discharge standard. Collection/Transportation System - The lower portion of the Southeast Interceptor System will convey flows to the Sand Road Treatment Facility. The upper end -of the SE Interceptor System will divert flows from the Rundell Street Trunk to a pumping station at the Pine Street site. From there, it is pumped to a gravity sewer that connects to the existing treatment plant site. The Outfall Sewer System will be constructed to link the existing and Sand Road treatment facilities. This line will be sized to convey dry weather flows. COMMUNITY LAYOUT -57- / 73.z E%ISTINO PINE ST. W IIVTP LIFT STATION 0/ PROPOSED PUMPING STATION 27•• 127' 1 � 6 .••PE" • yV0 �e 00,00 .............• ALTERNATIVE #10 -58- LEGEND FORCE VAIN NNAVITV FEWER I i Alternative #10 i COST ESTIMATE _ ENR=5400 (JAN. 1990) 'J Item !: Flow Equalization Stormwater Treatment j i i Additional pumping capacity at - existing WWTP New Secondary Treatment Plant - Lift Station Effluent Sewer i BE Interceptor Segment Outfall Sewer Fairmeadows Branch SE Interceptor -Upper Reach :I BW 6 Interceptor Total ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Allows for future South and Southeast expansion Eliminates by-passing during 5 -year storm event -2 Provides additional treatment .- capacity J Room for expansion at new WWTP site Minimizes size of sewer lines Cost $9,278,000 5,088,000 6,510,000 24,013,000 2,700,000 596,000 4,228,000 2,174,000 1,202,000 3,158,000 2.273.000 $61,220,000 Disadvantages Cost Limited room for expansion at existing WWTP site This plan is not recommended for additional evaluation. -59- I /73az t i ! -I 4. I !: is j i i i i Alternative 11 Treatment System - The existing treatment plant site will be upgraded and a stormwater treatment system will be constructed in parallel to process wet weather flows. A new treatment facility will be constructed at the Sand Road site to treat wastewater generated in the eastern regions of the Study Area. All flows will receive secondary treatment to meet the 30-30 discharge standard. Collection/Transportation System - The upper reach of the Southeast Interceptor System will covey flows to the Pine Street Lift Station site. From this point, a force main and gravity sewer will run due south, connecting to the lower portion of the SE Interceptor. The Fairmeadows Lift Station will be abandoned and the Heinz Lift Station will be upgraded to meet increased flows resulting from industrial development. COMMUNITY LAYOUT = , � � , • ; i . H."r• _�::r•' a ice: •ww,r T ION ,�.'•• PROPOSED IGUMPINO STATION' 1 `•' ."`_l^ -a_ _ � • ••F ..i \i •. Cj'iitllir�i wt. y - Sux:i"-�1. y/ ,� •T .. � `'ti... 1 I M\V ply L�I tTa10 •'�,/J r -'�ftiti J� ter. I. \\;fir � � ,.•. - 40 PROPOSED • ' �' .,�T, ,4e '. ^� WINTIN LEOEND �� .. ...,...... V 141 I f �rinttu MANNlvffv wet -60- 73 z RINE ST. UFT STATION 4 • _ '�q. � VOy ._ ALTERNATIVE 0 11 LEGEND SOROEj YRASEW COST ESTIMATE ENR -5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Flow Equalization $4,900,000 Stormwater Treatment 7,000,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 6,600,000 Lift Stations 2,600,000 Existing WWTP Modifications 9,536,000 Heinz Road L.S./Sewer Improvements 1,851,000 Gravity Sewers 8,500,000 Force Main 888,000 Total $41,875,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for Allows for future development expansion at existing Utilizes existing facilities WWTP site Reduces sewer costs Utilizes a nes lift Eliminates bypassing during station design storm event Operational complexity Costs due to two treatment sites This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -62- /732 I i i i J a J -I I COST ESTIMATE ENR -5400 (JAN. 1990) Item Cost Flow Equalization $4,900,000 Stormwater Treatment 7,000,000 New Secondary Treatment Plant 6,600,000 Lift Stations 2,600,000 Existing WWTP Modifications 9,536,000 Heinz Road L.S./Sewer Improvements 1,851,000 Gravity Sewers 8,500,000 Force Main 888,000 Total $41,875,000 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Relieves Rundell St. Trunk Limited room for Allows for future development expansion at existing Utilizes existing facilities WWTP site Reduces sewer costs Utilizes a nes lift Eliminates bypassing during station design storm event Operational complexity Costs due to two treatment sites This plan is recommended for additional evaluation. -62- /732 Summary Present worth cost estimates for each alternative have been developed and are summarized in Table 3.3. In addition, a present worth value for the Four Phase Plan has been prepared for comparison with the alternatives that have been developed. Using the costs detailed in the July 27, 1983 Veenstra s Rimm report, the .phased cost was updated and adjusted to the same basis as the other estimates. While each of the alternatives that have been discussed include distinguishing features, there are similarities between various alternatives that result in the identification of four major groups or classes of alternatives. These groups are based on the location of the wastewater treatment facilities and are as follows: 1) A new treatment facility and abandonment of the existing site - Alternatives 1 and lA 2) Satellite facilities - Alternatives 2,6,7 and 11 3) Use of existing facilities - Alternatives 8,9, and 9A 4) Combinations of existing and new treatment facilities - Alternatives 3,4,5,5A and 10. Although the cost of an alternative is a significant issue in the selection process, the least expensive solution may not be the best solution for Iowa City due to non -monetary factors such as potential for increasing the service area, long term treatment capabilities, etc. Therefore, the selection of alternatives for investigation in greater detail during Phase II of this study should reflect a range of technical approaches. The following paragraphs briefly describe specific alternatives recommended for further investigation in Phase II. a 1 In the group of alternatives involving new facilities, Alternative lA was chosen because it made better use of the topography. In the group of alternatives involving satellite facilities, Alternatives 2 and 6 allow for the evaluation of approaches using two or three facilities. Alternative 6 is more attractive than Alternative 7 since interceptor sewer construction can be minimized. Alternative 11 is a low-cost, flexible plan. In the group of alternatives involving utilization of the existing facilities, Alternative 8, while not the least costly, provides less complex operation and involves the use of smaller sized pipe. In the group of alternatives involving combinations of new and existing facilities, Alternatives 4 comprises smaller interceptor sewer lines. Alternative 5A, the least costly, was not recommended for further evaluation because it utilizes a common pressurized pipeline. This type of situation results in several design and operating problems for pumping stations. Additionally, new service areas would have to be pumped into the pressurized pipelines. The recommended alternatives provide a mix of solutions to be investigated in further detail. This mix of solutions allows comparison of a wide range of alternatives during the second phase of the study. -64- 1 I 1 1 I 7. Table 3.3 COST SUMMARY TOTAL PRESENT WORTH' ALTERNATIVE YEAR 1983 (ENR=3950) YEAR 1990 (ENR 5400) #1 45,539,000 62,256,000 #lA 44,217,000 60,448,000 i i #2 36,472,000 49,860,000 i J #3 31,350,000 42,858,000 #4 43,858,000 59,958,000 #5 37,189,000 50,840,000 j #5A 27,762,000 37,953,000 I1 #6 27,231,000 37,227,000 #7 28,787,000 39,355,000 j i#8 26,493,000 36,218,000 #9 27,814,000 38,024,000 #9A 25,011400 34,192,000 #10 44,781,000 61,220,000 #11 30,631,000 41,875,000 ? Proposed Four Phase Plan 49,082,000 67,100,0002 I' � FOOTNOTE: j 'The total present worth value represents the sum I total of the capital cost and the present day value 1 i, — of the operation and maintenance costs over the study period; in this case, twenty years. The present worth is the money required initially to fund all , construction costs, with enough money remaining to _ cover all operation and maintenance costs over the I _ i invested at an is i nve twenty year study period, after it I assumed interest rate. Operation and maintenance costs include items such as labor, materials, chemicals, and energy. 2Costs as detailed in the July 27, 1983 report, by Veenstra and Rimm adjusted for an ENR=5400. � J - -65- (. .: J J i �� J J 100 1.0 10 FLOW (MGD) PRESENT WORTH, STORMWATER TREATMENT ENR -5400 W126% CONTINGENCY —68- 100 17.3 --)- I 0.5 1.0 5 10 20 50 100 VOLUME (MG) DETENTION TIME -1 DAY PRESENT WORTH, FLOW EQUALIZATION ENR=6400 W/25% CONTINGENCY -70- i I i I —j i � 1 I 1 1: r i i t i f I i Gravity Sewer Pipe (In-place Costs) Pipe Diameter (in 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 42 48 54 60 72 84 Jacked Sewer Pipe Unit Cost ($/ft 151 196 240 278 316 384 453 500 547 636 767 856 1062 1404 1857 48 (in) 25 $/ft. in -dia. PW @ ENR=5400 W/258 contingency -7.1- f , r i i t i f I r C' f I. Force Main Pipe (In-place Costs) ?_iP_eDiameter (in 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 24 27 30 36 unit Cost ($/ft. 38 59 79 100 102 103 105 196 247 298 352 PW @ ENR -5400 W/258 contingency -72- i f j i I i i i . Force Main Pipe (In-place Costs) ?_iP_eDiameter (in 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 24 27 30 36 unit Cost ($/ft. 38 59 79 100 102 103 105 196 247 298 352 PW @ ENR -5400 W/258 contingency -72- i f j i I i i . 1 i t i i ! Appendix B PHASE II REPORT i J �J J J� iJ I CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA REPORT ON WASTEWATER PLAN -ALTERNATIVE STUDY PHASE II APRIL 5, 1985 METCALF & EDDY, INC. / ENGINEERS M4616 -a BOSTON / NEW YORK / PALO ALTO / CNKJ10O 9 Metcalf Uddy, Inc. Engineers 9 Planners 85 W. Algonquin Road. Suite 500 ArlinglDn Heighls. 111inDill 60005-4422 (312)228.0900 April 5, 1985 Mr. Charles J. SChmadeker P.E. Director of Public Works City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Schmadeke: Enclosed is the revised Phase 11 report which details the further analysis of the four alternatives selected during the Phase I investigation. This report has been revised to reflect the comments and suggestions made by the City staff during Our meeting on March 27, 1985. We are prepared to discussour report in greater detail at the City's convenience. After three alternatives are selected by the City from the Phase 11 report, the next phase of our effort will focus on the financial and constructabilLty aspects of these alternatives. We appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Iowa city and look forward to discussing this report in greater detail. Very truly yours, Lawrence P. Jawo Project Manager LPJ/jpP Boston I New York I PBID Allo I Safi Safnardifto Imne. CA I ChleagO I Houslon I Allonla Somerville, NJ Silver Spring. MD Honolulu Table of Contents - Findings and Conclusions Chapter II - Evaluated Alternatives Chapter III - Sewer System Description J Chapter IV - Unit Process Selection .. I P - Equalization - Cost Estimate I `! Chapter VII - Alternative Description Alternative 2 Alternative 6 Alternative 8 Alternative it Chapter VIII - Alternative Evaluation i J i i ! Page 1 2 3 5 9 16 21 24 34 45 51 61 I Introduction This report evaluates four different alternatives for the transportation and treatment of wastewater generated within the designated service area of the Iowa City Water Pollution Control Plant. This report contains the second of three study phases leading to a recommended plan. Phase I contained a conceptual screening of thirteen alternatives. From this study, the City selected Alternatives 2, 6, 8, and 11 for the Phase II evaluation. The Phase II study looks at these four alternatives in greater detail. Unit processes for wastewater treatment are determined, site plans are developed, and costs for the complete project are estimated. Both construction and total present worth costs are calculated. This evaluation will lead to the selection of three alternatives for Phase III investigation. Phase III will appraise these three selected plans on the basis of constructability and financial implications. The most favorable plan will become the Recommended Plan. This report contains the Phase II effort only. Following a review of this material, additional studies will be undertaken to complete Phase III. -1- i , Chapter I Findings and Conclusions i. 1. Alternatives 2, 8, and 11 are recommended as the alternatives �. to receive the financial and constructability evaluation. , This selection was based on technical merit, environmental ' impact, financial assessment, and implementation procedures. 2. Regardless of the alternative, activated sludge is the most — cost-effective treatment process to achieve a 30-30 effluent quality at new treatment facilities. I. 3. When loaded properly, the existing trickling filter system can consistently achieve a 30-30 effluent quality. _ +, J4. Cost-effective stormwater treatment can be accomplished through the use of clarifiers and high -rate sand filters. .' �. Pending State approval, rapid infiltration land treatment is a cost competitive alternate. i i 1 ' i _2 iC Chapter II P Evaluated Alternatives The Phase I study involved evaluating thirteen alternatives designed to meet existing and future transportation/treatment requirements within the Iowa City Study Area. In accordance with the scope of work, six alternatives were recommended for further study. These alternatives provided a range of solutions using combinations of treatment sites and conveyance systems. On the 7 recommendation of the Iowa City Wastewater Committee, the City J Council elected to eliminate the two most costly recommended alternatives from the Phase II evaluation. As a result, this phase will evaluate four alternatives. The Phase I report recommended obtaining additional flow monitoring data from critical points in the system and requesting 'j that the Iowa Department of Water, Air and Waste Management J (IDWAWM) perform a waste load allocation study on the Iowa River. At the time of this printing, IDWAWM has acknowledged receipt of the City's request that a waste load allocation study _ be conducted and a final decision on effluent standards be made by the Department. Development of additional flow monitoring data should be undertaken prior to initiation of final designs. i -- j During the Phase II analysis, Metcalf and Eddy met with City staff to review the status of the project, discuss the Phase II - effort, and establish current needs for sewer additions. Proposed interceptor routing and connections were also discussed. This meeting concluded with a topographical survey of the proposed treatment plant sites and the east-southeast service area. Development priorities in the southeast area are towards the Village Green area north of the Chicago, Rock Island, and j Pacific Railroad tracks and the area contiguous with Sycamore Street in the south region of the Study Area. -3- f I i I J -I � I i --I J i I - I i j i I i I J -I � I j --I J i I - I i Treatment priorities exist, as well. The City must eliminate bypassing occurrences during the design storm event while maintaining the established effluent quality, currently a 30-30 discharge standard. Both the sewer additions and the treatment capacity expansion need to be cost-effective and compatible with growth patterns beyond the twenty year study period. The Phase II study consists of a detailed evaluation of Alternatives 2, 6, 8, and 11. Sewer routes, treatment processes, site plans, and design data were developed for each of. the selected alternatives. In addition, a more detailed cost estimate was performed using all components except for land costs, which are incidental. Based on this study, three alternatives are recommended for constructability and financial review. i i 1 f -I j L' j i I + 1 ' 1 Chapter III Sewer System Description Overview The most important element of improving wastewater treatment facilities for the City of Iowa City is the development of the main collection sewers (interceptor sewers). Two key considerations are the location of the treatment plant and the extent (or cost) of the interceptor system. In the four selected alternatives (2, 6, 8 & 11) Alternative 8 is the only plan where the wastewater is treated solely at the existing treatment site. This plan requires the use of major wastewater pumping facilities. These pumping stations are required to move the wastewater from outlying watersheds to the main watershed served by the existing system. Alternatives 2, 6 6 11 develop interceptor systems that take advantage of gravity drainage in the outlying watersheds. These alternatives allow three different approaches to developing the interceptor sewer system. All three alternatives have the potential to provide a central wastewater treatment facility at the southerly site with a discharge directly to the Iowa River. This can be accomplished by the future construction of the Outfall Sewer linking the existing treatment plant site with the proposed southerly site. All of the alternatives in the Phase II study include construction of the University Heights and the Outfall Relief Sewers bringing additional wastewater flows into the existing plant site. The sewer rehabilitation work recommended in the City's Sewer System Evaluation Survey report is also common to all alternatives. i Reduced sewer capacities are suspected in the influent lines to the existing treatment plant due to solids deposition. During high flow periods, the wastewater backs up into the influent i sewers primarily due to the high elevation of the pumping i facility wet well. This condition contributes to the problems encountered in the Rundell Street *Horseshoe Sewer. New pumping facilities would correct the solids deposition problem, possibly increasing the capacities in the existing sewers. Continued elimination of extraneous inflow and infiltration sources through proper maintenance and code enforcement can also be a cost- effective method for increasing the existing sewer capacity. i j Alternative 2 I The primary premise of this alternative is to divert the wastewater flows at the upper end of the Rundell Street sewer to the new wastewater treatment site. All diverted flow would be I transported by gravity. Additionally, flow at the existing "- Fairmeadows, Heinz and Village Green pumping stations will be — diverted to the new treatment facility. The existing pumping i stations will be abandoned. is This alternative follows the concepts developed by Veenstra s Kimm as presented in the Facilities Plan. A pumping station at the upper end can be utilized to reduce the depth of cut. This issue will be resolved in the next phase if this alternative is I selected. i i - Location of the lower portion is subject to siting of the new E wastewater treatment plant. Locating the sewer further south can make better use of the terrain and reduce the extent of excavation required to install the pipeline. I -6- t Alternative 6 Alternative 6 is similiar to Alternative 2 except a portion of the sewer between the Snyder Creek Facility and the new Southerly Wastewater Treatment Plant has been eliminated. After proper treatment, discharged wastewater is transported to the Iowa River in existing surface waterways. In effect, this alternative trades the cost of the lower portion of the Southeast Interceptor Sewer for a third treatment plant. This section of omitted sewer may be constructed at a future date to consolidate treatment sites. Alternative 8 This alternative provides wastewater treatment at the existing wastewater treatment plant. To convey the flow from new growth areas and excess flows from existing areas a new pipeline system is required. Due to the topography, a pressurized pipeline is required from each of the three major drainage areas. Pumping stations are required to convey the wastewater to a common point near the intersection of Sycamore Street and U.S. Highway 6. Gravity flow from this point into the existing treatment site can be achieved. One disadvantage of pressurizing the interceptor system is that all subsequent tie-ins will require pumping stations. This is an energy -intensive proposition and may result in undesirable operating conditions For instance, the multiple Pumps utilized for such a pressurized system would require careful selection based on operating under varying head conditions. Additionally, discharge from several pumping stations into the sewer system may amplify flow variations observed at the treatment plant. J J J i 1 j 1 i ; I i Alternative 6 Alternative 6 is similiar to Alternative 2 except a portion of the sewer between the Snyder Creek Facility and the new Southerly Wastewater Treatment Plant has been eliminated. After proper treatment, discharged wastewater is transported to the Iowa River in existing surface waterways. In effect, this alternative trades the cost of the lower portion of the Southeast Interceptor Sewer for a third treatment plant. This section of omitted sewer may be constructed at a future date to consolidate treatment sites. Alternative 8 This alternative provides wastewater treatment at the existing wastewater treatment plant. To convey the flow from new growth areas and excess flows from existing areas a new pipeline system is required. Due to the topography, a pressurized pipeline is required from each of the three major drainage areas. Pumping stations are required to convey the wastewater to a common point near the intersection of Sycamore Street and U.S. Highway 6. Gravity flow from this point into the existing treatment site can be achieved. One disadvantage of pressurizing the interceptor system is that all subsequent tie-ins will require pumping stations. This is an energy -intensive proposition and may result in undesirable operating conditions For instance, the multiple Pumps utilized for such a pressurized system would require careful selection based on operating under varying head conditions. Additionally, discharge from several pumping stations into the sewer system may amplify flow variations observed at the treatment plant. Alternative 11 In this alternative excess flow from the Rundell Street area would be pumped a short distance to the south along Sycamore I Street until gravity flow could be achieved into the new wastewater treatment site. Other flow will be diverted from the southeast area by abandoning the Fairmeadows Pumping Station. By eliminating surcharged sewer conditions in the Rundell Street area, it is estimated that the Lower Muscatine Road Sewer and the Lower Muscatine Road Trunk will have sufficient capacity to serve j the projected growth in the southeast area. Some sewer — rehabilitation will be required for the sewers serving the Village Green area. s ;. L /73Z J Chapter IV Unit Process Selection Introduction. The intent of Chapter IV is to provide information _ regarding unit process selection and to discuss operational parameters. It may function as the starting point in a planning effort but it is certainly not a collection'of answers from which deviation is not allowed. Many factors contribute to the selection of unit processes to achieve secondary quality effluent. Some of the important variables include flow and load j - variation, temperature range, effluent standards, site constraints, cost variation, existing tankage and equipment, and new equipment availability. Each factor must receive consideration before the most suitable process can be identified. The Phase II study included a careful evaluation of I the treatment alternatives available for five different cases� , summarized below: j i 1. Dry weather flow, existing WWTP site - Alternatives 2,6,8,11 2. Wet weather flow existing WWTP site - Alternatives 2,6,8,11 3. Snyder Creek WWTP - Alternative 6 - i 4. Sand Road WWTP - Alternatives 2, 11 i 5. Sand Road WWTP, small flow - Alternative 6 I Case 1. The existing trickling filter treatment system still represents a considerable investment. Abandoning these facilities in lieu of a new plant is not cost' effective and, I therefore, the dry weather flow will continue to receive secondary treatment through this existing system. Some structural rehabilitation and mechanical replacement will be necessary, however, to ensure adequate operation through the I twenty year study period. I - I -9- i Trickling filters are aerobic fixed film biological systems in which primary effluent flows downward over a bed of media (Iowa City utilizes rock media) upon which a biomass growth has developed. The biological organisms use the organic compounds in the wastewater as a source of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus for new cell growth and as an energy source, oxygen is supplied to the process via air currents that pass through the media. As the biomass accumulates, it reaches a thickness such that the layer closest to the media is no longer aerobic. At this point, the biomass will slough off to be removed along with the influent solids in the settling tanks. This is a continuous process of biomass growth and sloughing. The secondary sludge, also called humus, is then pumped to be co -settled in the primary clarifiers. Recirculation is used during periods of low wastewater flow to maintain sufficient flow rates to keep the trickling filter media wet, prevent biomass from clogging the media voids, keep the rotary distributors turning, dilute shock loads, maintain dissolved oxygen levels, and provide new seed organisms. The advantages of a trickling filter system include low operating costs, simplicity, and low sludge production. Drawbacks are lower quality effluent, inflexibility of operation, higher construction costs, and space intensive layouts. The basis of selection for Case 1 is the presence of the existing tankage and equipment and the fact that, when loaded properly, a 30-30 effluent can be consistently produced. Case 2. Excess flow generated by the design storm event must receive treatment to meet the established effluent quality standards. This will be accomplished with a separate wet weather treatment system consisting of clarifiers and high -rate sand filters. This process, referred to as primary effluent filtration (PEF), has proven to be cost effective in treating large volumes of relatively dilute wastewater. -10- i i Trickling filters are aerobic fixed film biological systems in which primary effluent flows downward over a bed of media (Iowa City utilizes rock media) upon which a biomass growth has developed. The biological organisms use the organic compounds in the wastewater as a source of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus for new cell growth and as an energy source, oxygen is supplied to the process via air currents that pass through the media. As the biomass accumulates, it reaches a thickness such that the layer closest to the media is no longer aerobic. At this point, the biomass will slough off to be removed along with the influent solids in the settling tanks. This is a continuous process of biomass growth and sloughing. The secondary sludge, also called humus, is then pumped to be co -settled in the primary clarifiers. Recirculation is used during periods of low wastewater flow to maintain sufficient flow rates to keep the trickling filter media wet, prevent biomass from clogging the media voids, keep the rotary distributors turning, dilute shock loads, maintain dissolved oxygen levels, and provide new seed organisms. The advantages of a trickling filter system include low operating costs, simplicity, and low sludge production. Drawbacks are lower quality effluent, inflexibility of operation, higher construction costs, and space intensive layouts. The basis of selection for Case 1 is the presence of the existing tankage and equipment and the fact that, when loaded properly, a 30-30 effluent can be consistently produced. Case 2. Excess flow generated by the design storm event must receive treatment to meet the established effluent quality standards. This will be accomplished with a separate wet weather treatment system consisting of clarifiers and high -rate sand filters. This process, referred to as primary effluent filtration (PEF), has proven to be cost effective in treating large volumes of relatively dilute wastewater. -10- i f I � I ------------ _ The clarifiers are used to achieve low cost first stage removal - of raw solids and that portion of the Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) associated with the settled solids (usually 258 - 408). In addition, free oil and grease and other floating solids can be removed. Clarification is provided ahead of the sand filters to reduce the solids and BOD loads on this process. The high -rate sand filters will remove most of the remaining solids and BOD to reach the discharge requirement. A pilot study using PEF was conducted at the Iowa City wastewater treatment plant from September 1983 to March 1984. The process operated with minimal maintenance costs while producing consistant effluent results under a variety of loading conditions. The sand filters will also be used occasionally as additional treatment for the effluent from the trickling filter secondary clarifiers to provide additional pollutant removal prior to final discharge. 'j Case 3. An aerated lagoon has been selected to provide secondary J treatment for the wastewater transported to the Snyder Creek site facility. With no site contraints, an aerated lagoon is the most J cost-effective treatment option. If in the future the City should decide to consolidate treatment at the Sand Road site, as j the proposed interceptor system suggests, restoration at the Snyder Creek site would be inexpensive. Additionally, the investment loss incurred by abandoning these facilities would be minimized. The lagoon itself will be operated in the aerobic -anaerobic mode, with the contents not being completely mixed. As a result, a - large portion of the incoming solids and the biological solids produced from waste conversion settle to the bottom. As build up occurs, a portion of the solids will undergo anaerobic decomposition. The effluent is, therefore, more highly _ I stabilized than the discharge from a completely mixed lagoon. The I _ upper aerobic zone of the lagoon serves to minimize odor ; I. problems. The liquid and gaseous products from anaerobic -11- decomposition are carried to the surface by mixing currents and utilized by the aerobic organisms. Minimal process control is required to maintain a stable process producing a high quality effluent. Regular discharge of biologically toxic materials from industries may require pretreatment before entering the lagoon. In the event of a slug load, the aerated lagoon offers substantial dilution capacity. This will mitigate adverse effects on the treatment process. i - - After passing through the aerated lagoon, the wastewater will enter a rock filter designed to polish the lagoon effluent. The rock filter consists of a submerged bed of medium sized rocks, i usually 3 to 6 inches in diameter. The lagoon effluent passes vertically through the filter, the algae becoming attached to the j — rock surface. The operation and maintenance of this process is extremely simple and represents a key advantage for a satellite facility. The effluent from the rock filter would meet the 1 I i discharge standards established by the State. The elimination of any solids handling facilities is another economically attractive result of using aerated lagoons at the Snyder Creek site. .J I Case 4. Based on its much smaller construction cost and its slightly lower present worth value, activated sludge was chosen for the secondary treatment process at the Sand Road site. Low land usage, high degree of flexibility, and superior and reliable effluent qualities are additional advantages of the activated sludge process. The most significant disadvantages are the — complexity of operation and the power requirements. At the Sand - Road site, however, this power requirement is mitigated by the — topographic contours. The site is relatively flat and pumping costs associated with a fixed film system would be greater than those resulting from the activated sludge system (due to the ' ! greater head loss). The activated sludge process is a suspended growth biological treatment process in which a mixture of influent wastewater and _ -12- I I i , recycled secondary sludge is aerated and mixed in tanks and •then transferred for separation in secondary clarifiers. The secondary sludge contains a mixture of aerobic and facultative bacteria which are able to utilize the organic compounds present in wastewater as a food source. In the process,. a portion of the organic compounds are removed from the wastestream. In the secondary settling tank the biological mass and entrapped influent suspended solids are removed and excess quantities are wasted to the sludge system. For nitrification or nitrogen removal, additional biological treatment stages can be added. Likewise, as community growth or treatment site consolidation occurs, system capacity can easily be expanded. Facility construction would include flexibility to operate in the conventional activated sludge, step .aeration, and contact stabilization modes of the activated sludge process. This permits the City to adjust to varying influent conditions without sacrificing effluent quality. One option available to the City would be to install multiple packaged treatment systems as described in the following Case 5 text. This provides short-term treatment (minimal investment left after the twenty year study period) at an construction cost savings of approximately $2 million. However, a life cycle cost analysis shows no economic advantage for using the packaged treatment systems in this application. Case S. Due to the small flow transported to the Sand Road Site under this alternative it is not cost effective to construct the nucleus of a permanent treatment plant. As indicated in Figure 4-1, a packaged plant consisting of an activated sludge system operating in the extended aeration or contact stabilization mode would provide the most cost-effective secondary treatment. This system is easily expanded by adding multiple units in parallel. Site disturbance is minimal so that future construction, if desired, would proceed unhindered by this proposed small flow treatment system. -13- I w.. EEe rnrt�••uu:.r a— - Summary. The treatment systems described in this chapter are further illustrated by the figures in Chapter VII - Alternative Descriptions. Effluent standards may impact some process selection or operation, and existing soil profiles at the Snyder Creek site can affect the practicality of using an aerated lagoon. Likewise, depending on soil conditions and State approval, rapid infiltration land treatment may be a cost- effective alternative for wet weather flow treatment at the existing plant site. These matters should be investigated and finalized prior to initiating any design effort. However, no significant impact on alternative selection is expected to result from these future considerations. Chapter V Equalization Flow equalization can provide an important function in the design and operation of a wastewater treatment system. Data presented in the Iowa City Facilities Plan suggests that there are definite benefits, both operational and economic, associated with providing equalization at the various treatment sites. The influent flow data is characterized by uncommonly high hydraulic peaking factors, evident for short periods of time. By reducing these peaks, flow equalization permits the use of smaller unit processes and allows these treatment systems to operate under more uniform conditions. An equalization basin acts to reduce or eliminate hydraulic peaks and in many cases will also cause a reduction in the peak solids loadings, as well. Although any design effort would require additional and accurate hydrograph data, equalization basin capacities can be estimated using the flow information presented in the Facilities Plan. Figures 5-1 and 5-2 illustrate the hydrographs used during the Phase II study to determine peaking factor reductions and storage volumes. Due to the profiles of the existing and proposed sewers and the elevation contours of the existing and proposed treatment sites, excessive influent flows must be pumped into the equalization basin. At the existing treatment plant site, the flows will then either proceed by gravity to the stormwater clarifiers or be pumped back through the trickling filter system once the influent flow rate permits. The Sand Road site basin will receive excessive flow for storage until such time that it can be passed through the treatment plant. All equalization basins will be sized so that 100 percent of the flows generated by the design storm event will receive equivalent secondary treatment to meet the required effluent standards. I 0.1 AUGUST 16, 1877 AUGUST IS, 1877 FIG. 5-1. WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT UNIT HYDROGRAPH _ I 1 I L, --I , J j. 1 1 1J I i ' I r J I I 0.1 AUGUST 16, 1877 AUGUST IS, 1877 FIG. 5-1. WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT UNIT HYDROGRAPH _ I 1 I AUGUST 16, 1977 FIG. 5-2. DOWNSTREAM SOUTHEAST TRUNK UNIT HYDROGRAPH /73,7- i AUGUST 16, 1977 FIG. 5-2. DOWNSTREAM SOUTHEAST TRUNK UNIT HYDROGRAPH /73,7- Physically, the basins will be constructed from earth berms, a - bentonite liner, and riprap reinforcement along the inside slopes. Figure 5-3 shows a sectional view of a typical berm. Frequency and duration of use may require the installation of mixing devices inside the basins. Their purpose would be to prevent solids deposition, retard anaerobic conditons, provide - organic load uniformity, and provide some aeration throughout the basin. Two operating conditions are possible. First, the basin could be lined. This would allow a washdown to occur after each storm event without creating an erosion problem. If base conditions are favorable (stable, well -drained sand or gravel), -' an asphalt liner could be used. Otherwise, a cement or soil I cement would be required. The second and least costly option would be to operate the basin in the wet -bottom mode. This would i limit erosion and weed growth, however the potential for odors Jmay make this option an undesirable choice. ; i If required, the equalization basins can function in a dual role. With the additional expense of providing a structural cover over the basin, it may serve as a parking facility or a ! recreational area, including tennis and/or basketball courts. i Although the additional construction costs would be substantial, in some cases the extra benefits achieved may justify this type i of construction. Site availability and proposed land use are two i considerations that may warrant the construction of dual purpose equalization basins. E i i Cost Estimate Treatment system cost estimates for Phase II of the study were based on information published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) intended for use by engineers and planners to develop and compare costs associated with structural control alternatives. Cost data is generalized rather than site specific, and best utilized for comparative analysis only. A detailed cost analysis will be included in the Phase III effort. The Phase II estimates for sewer construction were based on historical bid tabulations compiled by the EPA and are once.again intended for general comparative purposes. The unit costs as indicated in the Phase I report included all costs associated with sewer construction: excavation, backfill, pavement replacement, restoration, manholes, pipe, utility relocation, mobilization, and contractor's overhead and profit. Costs were adjusted to reflect increased difficulty for construction due to the reported wet conditions. Detailed soil analysis is required before the designs are finalized. Multipliers were utilized to reflect varying installation conditions. For example, the uncongested or open country installation multiplier was 0.67, resulting in a one-third reduction in the unit cost as listed. All Phase II cost estimates are escalated to reflect dollars in the year 1990 which represents the estimated mid -point of construction. To accurately escalate the costs, the ENR Construction Cost Index (CCI) was utilized. Assuming a modest inflation rate based on current trends of less than 58 annually, the ENR CCI for the year 1990 is estimated to be approximately 5400. This value was used to develop the Phase II estimates. The current 20 -Cities Average ENR CCI was 4176 (Feb. 14, 1985). -21- /Z3a- Phase II cost estimates include all items except land. Land costs will vary from site to site and, depending on future expansion plans, larger than immediately necessary tracts may be purchased. These land cost are relatively insignificant, however, and would amount to somewhere between $100,000 and $360,000 based on $4,500 per acre. Construction costs, annual operation and maintenance (0&M) costs, and total present worth costs are all identified in this report. The total present worth comparison takes into account the varying expenses due to operation and maintenance of the total treatment system. This will help identify energy or maintenance intensive elements and account for reduced construction costs in lieu of increased 0&M expenses. In addition, the alternative costs found in Chapter VII, Alternative Descriptions, include allowances for contingencies and project costs. The contingency is used to account for unknown conditions that may be encountered during construction and for the accuracy of the cost curves used to determine the construction costs. The additional factor for project costs is to cover administrative, legal, and engineering fees, as well as fiscal expenses incurred during construction. The present worth value represents the sum total of the capital costs and the present day value of the 0&M costs over the study period; in this case, twenty years. The present worth is the money required initially to fund all construction costs, with enough money remaining to cover all 0&M costs over the twenty year period, after it is invested at an assumed interest rate. These 0&M costs include labor, materials, energy, and chemicals. The construction costs identified in the Phase II analysis were based on collecting and transporting 100 percent of the ultimate wastewater flows, while treating that portion generated by the -22- / �3z is i may be constructed in a phased manner, is spreading the cost of the completed system over several years. it The cost item J design storm event in the design year. In actuality, some of the i may be constructed in a phased manner, i. J design storm event in the design year. In actuality, some of the -23- 1 proposed alternatives may be constructed in a phased manner, spreading the cost of the completed system over several years. it The cost item "Existing Plant Expansion" in Chapter VII includes a new pumping facility with bar screens and a belt filter press installation for sludge dewatering. "Existing Plant J Rehabilitation" costs cover upgraded grit tanks, digester conversion to a single stage, high -rate system, and miscellaneous J improvements such as replacing gate guides, gratings, rotary 7 distributors, methane gas utilization, clarifier effluent launders, and concrete repairs. -23- 1 ' it r 1 F Chapter VII Alternative Description i _I { i Chapter VII Alternative Description - Alternative 2 _. Collection/Transportation system - The Southeast interceptor System will be constructed to transport flows to the Sand Road treatment site. This sewer system will divert flows away from - the Rundell Street Trunk Sewer and will provide additional sewer capacity to accommodate future residential and commercial development in the southeast portion of the Study Area. Also, 7 the University Heights and Outfall Relief Sewers will be j constructed as proposed in the Facilities Plan. Sewer - rehabilitation will continue in accordance with the 4 recommendations of the Sewer System Evaluation Survey, primarily in the downtown area. The Heinz, Fairmeadows, and Village Green Lift Stations will be abandoned. I i Treatment System - Alternative 2 incorporates two sites for the u treatment of wastewater flows generated within the Study Area. 4� The existing plant will be rehabilitated and expanded to treat additional flows from the design storm event. This expansion will require abandoning the existing sludge lagoons and installing belt filter presses for sludge handling. Pumping the �. sludge to lagoons at the Sand Road site rather than dewatering _! the sludge at the existing site is not cost-effective. Stormwater treatment facilities, consisting of clarification and j sand filtration will then be constructed. Existing facility rehabilitation will provide new bar screens and grit tanks, increased influent pumping capacity, digester conversion to a single -stage high -rate system, methane gas utilization, and miscellaneous structural and mechanical repairs/replacements. Provisions will be included to enable effluent from the secondary i- clarifiers to be routed to the sand filters for additional i - "polishing" prior to discharge. The satellite treatment facility, located along Sand Road, will treat wastewater flows from the east and southeast portions of the service area. The treatment process will consist of an activated sludge system designed to meet the 30-30 effluent requirement. Sludge lagoons -24- L. /73o,2— i ■ will be utilized for dewatering the digested sludge. Equalization will be utilized at both treatment sites to dampen the peak flowrates resulting from infiltration/inflow sources during storm events. This will result in a capital cost savings j during construction of the facilities. Sludge at both treatment - j sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. i _y5_ h !!N TIND r'MT► •�'� Ta" PROPOSED i�" •.,• WWT► •,.• �i� , LEGEND , •� • ... raot rA1H (S) PEAK NOUN WIT WEATHER FLOW $PLOT O ROUALIEATION LOCATION AND VOLUME ALTERNATIVE #2 -26- i i Z, . --• ,Illtl. bltl alm w.1 IW nn Ylln W Y I Y.1+1 .+n unvlYY vn mu+ I.NYI nllll YY Y tW 11111 1 111111. 111111 Ilill 1111w I , IIYIIIII IIIm WInIwY -' � nllw Y mm Y. 1 nmu. l Ys 1Yrr muw BTORMWATER IWnIY CLARIFIER I I 4 1 {Y� IYw1 nplln m YI FP BUILDING RIT TANK IYY YrI SAND FILTER BUILDING m Yn wrn +rn . . Irml nYm DIV. 807 OSB` nn wnw ql — lYl lsllr � W OVF PUMPING BTA I N F BFP-5011 Filter Pars EXISTING WWTP SITE - ALT. 2 B..• Met) by Van01n A Klmm. i - 1 i I � I I - N J i i PUMPING STATION K i. - I PRELIMINARY TREATMENT INFLUENT K II PRIMARY CLARIFIER K EO LIZ TION K I ASIN' I i i 6 i O AERATION TANKS ANAEROBIC DIG TER CB j COMPLEX FINAL CLARIFIER I ITO RIVER - K I >< SLUDGE LA0C REA I - I K j i j 1�-f Kr�t�K K \56) � APPROX. SITE AREA : 26 ACRES SAND ROAD SITE - ALT. 2 1. -28- EXISTING WWTP SITE i UNIT DESCRIPTION (Existing and Proposed Expansion) Sewage Pumps 1-3 MGD a TDR = 40' 1-5 MGD) TDH = 40' i 2-8 MGD a TDH = 40' - Primary Clarifiers 2-4519X, 10.5' SWD 10.5' SWD Trickling Filters 4-140'9f, 7' SWD Final Clarifiers 1-60'0, 7.5' SWD 1-75'(X, 7.5' SWD Anaerobic Digesters 1-4010, 26' SWD J 1-60% 25' SWD 1-70% 24' SWD JBelt Filter Press 15,500#/d i. . (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) " J Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD 1 TDH = 401 2-10 MGD a TDH - 40' 2-25 MGD a TDH = 40' _ i Equalization Basin 5 MG _j Primary Clarifiers 2-93% 10.5' SWD I Sand Filter 4,900 ft2 ; PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -31- Alternative 2 DESIGN LOADINGS N/A i gpd/ft 1x150 2 (PHWW) � 26.2#/1000 ft3/d 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. times - 28d 0.10 - 0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 1,200 #/meter/hr N/A N/A 1,490 gpd/f t2 (PHWW) 5-10 gpm/ft2 1 s I j' I UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS Sewage Pumps 1-1 MGD a TDB = 50' N/A 1-5 MGD a TDH = 50' 3-10 MGD i TDH = 50' Equalization Basin 3 MG N/A Primary Clarifiers 2-6510, 10.5' SWD 1,500 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Aeration Tanks 4-75' x 75', 15' SWD Final Clarifiers 2-73'91, 7.5' SWD Anaerobic Digesters 2-4019!, 25' SWD Sludge Lagoons 200,000 ft3 PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -32- 30# BOD/1000 ft3 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. time = 28d 0.10-0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 N/A j; i 1 I - Alternative #2 L 1. 1 i � I i. 1 I Existing Plant Rehabilitation Existing Plant Expansion j 1 I - Alternative #2 $38,266,000 5,740,000 5,740,000 $49,746,000 J CONSTRUCTION COST I $49,746,000 i I — i i i Cost $2,233,000 5,045,000 1,757,000 2,080,000 7,534,000 19,617,000 $38,266,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost O&M ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH $1,317,400 $13,951,000 TOTAL PRESENT WORTH COST $63,697,000 i COST ESTIMATE, ENR = 5400 i � I Item 1 I Existing Plant Rehabilitation Existing Plant Expansion j Equalization J Stormwater Treatment System i Sand Road Treatment Plant -' Sewers $38,266,000 5,740,000 5,740,000 $49,746,000 J CONSTRUCTION COST I $49,746,000 i I — i i i Cost $2,233,000 5,045,000 1,757,000 2,080,000 7,534,000 19,617,000 $38,266,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost O&M ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH $1,317,400 $13,951,000 TOTAL PRESENT WORTH COST $63,697,000 i i � I I I i i 'I (" Alternative 6 Collection/Transportation System - Major sewer work includes construction of approximately 758 of the Southeast Interceptor fj System and the Outfall Relief and University Heights Sewers. Piping in the lower portion of the Southeast Interceptor will be sized for the possible future extension of this interceptor to eliminate the Snyder Creek treatment facility. Due to the construction of the SE Interceptor, the Heinz, Fairmeadows, and Village Green Lift Stations will be abandoned. This region will drain by gravity to the Snyder Creek treatment facility. New sewer capacity will eliminate overloading in the Rundell St. and Fairmeadows Trunk Sewers, as well as provide residential and industrial development opportunities in the southeast region. A new branch sewer will be constructed along the south extention of Sycamore St. providing sewer service for residential growth in that region. Rehabilitation of existing sewers will continue as recommended in the Sewer System Evaluation Survey. Treatment System - Wastewater flows will be treated at three different locations. The trickling filter facilities at the existing treatment plant site will continue to treat a significant portion of the total flow generated within the Study Area. The existing plant would be upgraded as described in Alternative 2. Additionally, a separate stormwater treatment system will be constructed in parallel to the dry weather flow facilities at this site. An equalization basin will be utilized to dampen the peak wastewater flows during a storm event. This results in a cost savings associated with the construction of smaller capacity treatment systems. Wet weather flows will receive treatment through a primary effluent filtration process. The constructed portion of the SE Interceptor system will convey wastewater flows to a treatment facility along Snyder Creek. This facility will utilize an aerated lagoon biological treatment process to -34- /73z ■ ■ � i i r " i ■ ■ achieve discharge standards. Likewise, another small flow treatment plant with sludge lagoons will be constructed at the Sand Road site. See Chapter IV for discussion of the treatment process selection. All new treatment systems will produce effluents meeting the 30-30 discharge standard. -35- 173Z I 1 i i Jff i i _J s _ .J � I _I i i J j I I I 1 i � I _ I - achieve discharge standards. Likewise, another small flow treatment plant with sludge lagoons will be constructed at the Sand Road site. See Chapter IV for discussion of the treatment process selection. All new treatment systems will produce effluents meeting the 30-30 discharge standard. -35- 173Z I 1 i Ir j i i' s � I I' 1 f I i; 1 I • I , J EXISTING WWTP I I 21" . 12•• 61' PROPOSED �o+ SNYDER CREEK FACILITY (26%) PROPOSED Q WWTP --i (2%) •' p��° .• O — LEGEND i go go " FORCE MAIN :tj ............... ••'.•• .m AvITT • WEWIR M PEAK NOUN WET ... WEATHER FLOW SPLIT I O EOUALIZATION -- LOCATION AND VOLUME I I i � I- ---- -- --- ALTERNATIVE t8 -36- m -1 I —I loom i� w n nnuou unmm� lin muY �' Lrrr.lr Fr wmn n i rnm Y. 1 nml Y.1 �n ,uu mnY I 'u'r"' BTORMWATER CLARIFIER - •�, ' Y.II IYYr • 1 . j Ilt-rn r.Y Yn — O4Op FP WILDING ' :: unY rn RIT TANK SAND FILTER BUILDING nYllll rmllll . olv. Box Yur nYam N end nn nrw rml t 013 I I k ; PUMPING BTA 1 N i r j BFP-Batt Filter Proms �,... _ EXISTING WWTP SITE - ALT. 6 ! Base Map by Vaanatra I Klmm. I ,_37_ i 73 r i APPROX. SITE AREA : 25 ACRES SNYDER CREEK SITE - ALT. 6 -38- �93.z , M O O \88, SAND ROAD SITE - ALT. 6 -39- .1 JI M O O \88, SAND ROAD SITE - ALT. 6 -39- .1 I INFLUENT PRIMARY J CLARIFIER INFLUENT RECIRCULATED FLOW TRICKLING FILTER SECONDARY[!:FLUENT CLARIFIER SLUDGE RETURN I I I SINGLE STAGE I I I TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS OPTIONAL - J I PRMWRY I BAND EFFLUENT CLARIFIER FILTER WASH WATER SUPPLY PRIMARY EFFLUENT FILTRATION TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 8 FLOOD BASIN � p �IaJ�T PERCOLATION (UNSATURATED 10 {MpERDRAMI3 RO RNEW-ZONE) GROUNDWATER RAPID INFILTRATION LAND TREATMENT PRIMARY CLARIFIER roq TANKIONI CONTATANKT SLUDGE RETURN CONTACT STABILIZATION ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS SECONDARY CLARIFIER TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 6 WASTE J I ^j I ^I J I FLOOD BASIN � p �IaJ�T PERCOLATION (UNSATURATED 10 {MpERDRAMI3 RO RNEW-ZONE) GROUNDWATER RAPID INFILTRATION LAND TREATMENT PRIMARY CLARIFIER roq TANKIONI CONTATANKT SLUDGE RETURN CONTACT STABILIZATION ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS SECONDARY CLARIFIER TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 6 WASTE 4,900 ft2 I PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather I i Alternative 6 DESIGN LOADINGS N/A 1,150 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 26.2#/1000 ft3/d 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. time - 28 d 0.10 - 0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 1,200 #/meter/hr N/A N/A 1,490 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 5-10 gpm/ft2 EXISTING WWTP SITE UNIT DESCRIPTION (Existing and Proposed Expansion) Sewage Pumps 1-3 MGD a TDH = 401 1-5 MGD ? TDH = 40' 2-8 MGD 1 TDH = 40' Primary Clarifiers 2-4510, 10.5' SWD 1-75'0, 10.5' SWD Trickling Filters 4-14010, 7' Rock Media i Final Clarifiers 1-6010, 7.5' SWD _ 1-75194, 7.5' SWD _ Anaerobic Digesters 1-4010, 26' SWD 1-6090, 25' SWD -.. 1-7010, 24' SWD _. Belt Filter Press 15,500#/d t, (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) - Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD 1 TDH = 40' 2-10 MGD a TDH = 40' 2-25 MGD a TDH = 40' - Equalization Basin 5 MG J Primary Clarifiers 2-9310, 10.5' SWD 4,900 ft2 I PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather I i Alternative 6 DESIGN LOADINGS N/A 1,150 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 26.2#/1000 ft3/d 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. time - 28 d 0.10 - 0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 1,200 #/meter/hr N/A N/A 1,490 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 5-10 gpm/ft2 UNIT Sewage Pumps Aerated Lagoon Rock Filter UNIT PROPOSED SNYDER CREEK SITE Alternative 6 DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS 2-3 MGD ! TDH = 40' N/A 3-10 MGD a TDH = 40' 16 MG (4.9 Ac) 0.7-1.4 #02/#BOD removed 1,800,000 ft3 1.5-5.5 gal/d/ft3 PROPOSED SAND ROAD SITE DESCRIPTION Sewage Pumps 2-2 MGD ! TDH = 50' Contact Stabilization (Packaged Plant) 1-3019#, SWD = 10' Alternative 6 DESIGN LOADINGS N/A 60# BOD/1000 ft3 pHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -43- �73z J i I _ J J I 1 j J ' J 1 UNIT Sewage Pumps Aerated Lagoon Rock Filter UNIT PROPOSED SNYDER CREEK SITE Alternative 6 DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS 2-3 MGD ! TDH = 40' N/A 3-10 MGD a TDH = 40' 16 MG (4.9 Ac) 0.7-1.4 #02/#BOD removed 1,800,000 ft3 1.5-5.5 gal/d/ft3 PROPOSED SAND ROAD SITE DESCRIPTION Sewage Pumps 2-2 MGD ! TDH = 50' Contact Stabilization (Packaged Plant) 1-3019#, SWD = 10' Alternative 6 DESIGN LOADINGS N/A 60# BOD/1000 ft3 pHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -43- �73z I -44- 1 ....... .... .. M Alternative 96 COST ESTIMATE, ENR = 5400 Item Cost Existing Plant Rehabilitation $2,233,000 Existing Plant Expansion 5,045,000 Equalization 1,757,000 Stormwater Treatment System 2,080,000 Snyder Creek Treatment System 2,809,000 I. Sand Road Treatment Plant 1097,000 Sewers 12,750,000 $28,071,000 $28,071,000 Subtotal 4r211,000 Contingency (158) 4,211,000 Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) $36,493,000 Total Construction Cost CONSTRUCTION O&M TOTAL,PRESENT COST ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH WORTH COST ji $36,493,000 $1,035,700l 81000 $47,461,000 -44- 1 ....... .... .. M i�- J I I I Alternative 8 Collection/Transportation System - Relief sewers would be constructed in the southeast region so that both the Fairmeadows and the Village Green Lift Stations could be abandoned. These gravity lines would direct flows to a new pumping station located near the present-day Heinz Road Lift Station. This new station would convey flows through a force main along Highway 6. A second lift station located at the Pine Street site would divert flows away from the Rundell Street Trunk, eliminating surcharged conditions within the "Horseshoe Sewer" area during the design storm event. This flow would meet the new force main at a high point along Highway 6, south of the Pine Street site. A third pumping facility would serve future development south in the Sycamore Street area. All new force mains converging at Highway 6 would form a single gravity sewer continuing to the existing WWTP site. The University Heights and Outfall Relief Sewers, and sewer rehabilitation work, would be completed as proposed in the Facilities Plan. Treatment System - All wastewater flows will receive treatment at the existing WWTP site. The existing facilities will be upgraded to include new pumping facility, bar screens, grit tanks, digester conversion, methane gas utilization, and miscellaneous structural and mechanical work. A new sludge processing system will allow expansion onto the areas currently occupied by the sludge lagoons. Pumping the sludge to lagoons at a remote site rather than utilizing on-site belt filter presses for dewatering is not cost-effective. The upgraded treatment process will continue to be the treatment system for average day wastewater flows. During a storm event, excess flows will pass through an equalization basin and a stormwater treatment system. This treatment system will consist of clarification and sand filtration. All wastewater flows resulting from the design storm event will receive treatment to meet a 30-30 effluent standard. Sludges will be dewatered and land applied for ultimate disposal. -45- NN EXISTING PINE 8T. WWT► LIFT STATION C� 130 PROPOSED •••• O %PUMPING STATION is i 1 Eg 127" l 1 1 41" ' 0.1 PROPOSED PUMPING STATION o � I i PROPOSED •••• i . — i PUMPING STATION ` LEGEND ,. ,• �.�►ONCl YAM .-.� E[W[A t1I FEAR NOVA WET WEATNEN FLOW 00 -LIT -'. O EDUALIZATION _ LOCATION AND VOLUME 1 I I ALTERNATIVE t8 I I -46- _ �3P-7- i / BFP-Bell Filter Press EXISTING WWTP SITE - ALT. 8 Bass Map 6Y Y*entire i Nlmm. FLOOD BASIN PERCOLATION (UNSATURATED UNDERDRAWS ITO RNEW "7� _ i ZONE) GROUNDWATER RAPID INFILTRATION LAND TREATMENT WFLUENT As i II i E ENT i CLAPRIMARY FER FILTER V f I WASH WATERRISUPPLY OPTIONAL _ PRIMARY EFFLUENT FILTRATION RECIRCULATED FLOW I INFLUENT CLARIFIERTFLTERG � SCLARIFIERY i E i i II i I i i I i' SLUDGE RETURN i SINGLE STAGE i TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 8 i (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD 1 TDH = 40' 2-10 MGD j TDH = 40' 3-25 MGD a TDH = 40' Equalization Basin 7 MG Primary Clarifiers Sand Filter 3-9610, 10.5' SWD 6,500 ft2 PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather _qg_ N/A N/A 1,490 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 5-10 gpm/ft2 EXISTING WWTP SITE Alternative 8 UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS (Existing and Proposed Expansion) Sewage Pumps 1-3 MGD a TDH = 40' N/A 1-5 MGD i TDH = 401 2-8 MGD ) TDH = 40' Primary Clarifiers 2-4510, 10.51 SWD 1,150 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1-7510, 10.51 SWD Trickling Filters 4-140'9X, 7' Rock Media 26.2$/1000ft3/d Final Clarifiers 1-60'0, 7.5' SWD 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1-75'{X, 7.5' SWD Anaerobic Digesters 1-40% 26' SWD Det. time = 28d 1-60'(X, 25' SWD 0.10-0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 1-70%24' SWD Belt Filter Press 21,500#/d 1,200 #/meter/hr (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD 1 TDH = 40' 2-10 MGD j TDH = 40' 3-25 MGD a TDH = 40' Equalization Basin 7 MG Primary Clarifiers Sand Filter 3-9610, 10.5' SWD 6,500 ft2 PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather _qg_ N/A N/A 1,490 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 5-10 gpm/ft2 I i `� Alternative 48 J COST ESTIMATE, ENR 5400 J. 4,042,000 Item 4.042,000 i Existing Plant Rehabilitation J Existing Plant Expansion I Equalization CONSTRUCTION Stormwater Treatment System COST Lift Stations $35,029,000 j J Sewers Cost $2,233,000 6,792,000 1,255,000 2,876,000 3,268,000 10,521,000 $26,945,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost O&M ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH $1,125,000 $11,914,000 -50- TOTAL PRESENT WORTH COST $46,943,000 /73.2- i i $26,945,000 J. 4,042,000 4.042,000 $35,029,000 J CONSTRUCTION COST $35,029,000 j J Cost $2,233,000 6,792,000 1,255,000 2,876,000 3,268,000 10,521,000 $26,945,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost O&M ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH $1,125,000 $11,914,000 -50- TOTAL PRESENT WORTH COST $46,943,000 /73.2- i Alternative 11 i j Collection/Transportation System - Wastewater flows will be diverted away from the upper end of the Rundell Street Trunk Sewer and pumped southward by a new lift station at the Pine Street site. As the force main crosses the high point at Highway 6, it converts to a gravity line and continues south along the Sycamore Street extension. The lowest reach of the i — i Southeast Interceptor System will be constructed from the Fairmeadows Lift Station to the west. These two new sewer systems converge and carry flows to a new treatment site along Sand Road. Relief sewers will be constructed for future _ development in the Village Green area. Also, the University Heights and Outfall Relief Sewers will be constructed and i sewer rehabilitation will proceed as recommended in the Facilities Plan. Treatment System - Alternative 11 incorporates two sites for — the treatment of wastewater flows generated within the Study Area. The existing plant will be rehabilitated and expanded to treat additional flows from the design storm event. This expansion will require abandoning the existing sludge lagoons i and installing belt filter presses for sludge handling. Pumping the sludge to lagoons at the Sand Road site is not i cost-effective. Stormwater treatment facilities, consisting of clarification and sand filtration, will then be constructed. The sand filters will also be used occasionally - for "polishing" of the trickling filter effluent prior to discharge. Existing facility rehabilitation will provide new 4 _ bar screens and grit tanks, increased influent pumping capacity, digester conversion, methane gas utilization and miscellaneous structural and mechanical repairs/replacements. The satellite treatment facility, located along Sand Road, will treat wastewater flows from the east and southeast regional areas. The treatment process will consist of an activated sludge system designed to meet the 30- 30 effluent requirement. Equalization will be utilized at i 1 both treatment sites to dampen the peak flowrates resulting from infiltration/inflow sources during storm events. Digested sludge at the Sand Road plant will be dewatered in sludge lagoons and sludges from both treatment sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. j ' I i , i I f -1 J `1 I J I_ J i I --i -52- I _ 1 - i t } I i I j 1 both treatment sites to dampen the peak flowrates resulting from infiltration/inflow sources during storm events. Digested sludge at the Sand Road plant will be dewatered in sludge lagoons and sludges from both treatment sites will be land applied for ultimate disposal. j ' I i , i I f -1 J `1 I J I_ J i I --i -52- I _ 1 - i EXISTING W WTP ](0 %) •PROPOSED PUMPING STATION go 1 L i v E� .• PP •�JO� LEGEND •i •• a go - FORCE NAW ....... ..•'• OAAVITT ... SEWER (S) PEAK HOUR WET WEATHER FLOW SPLIT O EQUALIZATION LOCATION AND VOLUME _ uu4. utt\ It n{.... II41 i nmlal [wnm wunrn i 40: Im41. n nn nn.. I i s {ylnlll IIII4.YM .{IY 1111 111rn MYn�. .l � - l E. II44 .. 1 1 :1 IIYw STORMWATER CLARIFIER ! 1y{ I uwu11 e..n 1 J. 4wm FP BUILDING i . —i. NIT TANK SAND FILTER BUILDING i iviil. iv In DIV. 80K t PUMPING BTA 1 N F n 1 { I . i I � BFP-Bolt FIItNr Press 1 ) - EXISTING WWTP SITE - ALT. 11 B\t• MOP by ; Voomtrn A Klmm. i, 1 I r J I' J PRELIMINARY TREATMENT m PRIMARY CLARIFIER I I J I ITO RIVER I X 40 I RATION TANKS \ ANAER001 DIGESTER COMPLEX FINAL CLARIFIER SLUDGE APPROX. SITE AREA : 26 ACRES SAND ROAD SITE - ALT. 11 J I' J PRELIMINARY TREATMENT m PRIMARY CLARIFIER I I J I ITO RIVER I X 40 I RATION TANKS \ ANAER001 DIGESTER COMPLEX FINAL CLARIFIER SLUDGE APPROX. SITE AREA : 26 ACRES SAND ROAD SITE - ALT. 11 1 I I I I i 1 IE i I I I I _I I i I I i i I. i - i i RECIRCULATED FLOW INFLUENTPRIMARY TRICKLING SECONDARY EFFLUENT CLARIFIER FILTER CLARIFIER SLUDGE RETURN 8NGLE STAGE I I t TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS I OPTIONAL - - i PRIMARY I SAND INFLUENT EFFLUENT CLARIFIER FILTER WASH WATER SUPPLY PRIMARY EFFLUENT FILTRATION TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 11 -56- �73Z I I I I I 1 IE i I I I I i I I i I i i i FLOOD BASIN holy COLATION (UNSATURATED UNDERDRAWS (TO RIVER)_ - - ZONE GROUNDWATER WASTEWATER RAPID INFILTRATION LAND TREATMENT PRIMARY CLARIFIER SLUDGE AERATIDN TANK V SECONDARY EFFLUENT CLARIFIER WASTESLUDGE - 1 �RETURNSLUDGEE CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGEIPLUG FLOMACTIVATED SLUDGEIPLUG FLOM I • TREATMENT PROCESS SCHEMATICS - ALT. 11 I t -57- i j PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -56- EXISTING WWTP SITE Alternative 11 UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS (Existing and Proposed Expansion) i I 1-3 MGD a TDH = 401 N/A PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -56- EXISTING WWTP SITE Alternative 11 UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS (Existing and Proposed Expansion) Sewage Pumps 1-3 MGD a TDH = 401 N/A 1-5 MGD ± TDH = 401 2-8 MGD ± TDH = 40' Primary Clarifiers 2-4519!, 10.5' SWD 1,150 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1-7590, 10.5' SWD Trickling Filters 4-14019X, 7' Rock Media 26.2#/1000ft3/d Final Clarifiers 1-6010, 7.5' SWD 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) 1-7519X, 7.51 SWD Anaerobic Digesters 1-4010, 261 SWD Det. time = 28d 1-6010, 25' SWD 0.10-0.40 # volatile solids/ft3 1-7010, 24' SWD Belt Filter Press 15,500#/d 1,200 #/meter/hr (Proposed Stormwater Treatment System) Sewage Pumps 1-5 MGD ± TDH - 40' N/A 2-10 MGD a TDH = 401 2-25 MGD f TDH = 40' Equalization Basin 5 MG N/A Primary Clarifiers 2-9310, 10.5' SWD 1,490 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Sand Filter 4,900 ft2 5-10 gpm/ft2 PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -56- PROPOSED SAND ROAD SITE Alternative 11 J Aeration Tanks 4-75' x 751, 15' SWD I J Final Clarifiers 2-7319(, 7.5' SWD Anaerobic Digesters 2-4010, 25' SWD I r Sludge Lagoons 200,000 ft3 30# BOD/1000 ft3 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. time = 28d 0.10-0.40 # Volatile Solids/ft3 N/A I I J i PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -59- 1 1 i i J j UNIT DESCRIPTION DESIGN LOADINGS Sewage Pumps 1-1 MGD 3 TDH = 50' N/A 1-5 MGD a TDH = 50' 3-10 MGD 1 TDH = 50' Equalization Basin 3 MG N/A - Primary Clarifiers 2-6510, 10.5' SWD 1,500 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) J Aeration Tanks 4-75' x 751, 15' SWD I J Final Clarifiers 2-7319(, 7.5' SWD Anaerobic Digesters 2-4010, 25' SWD I r Sludge Lagoons 200,000 ft3 30# BOD/1000 ft3 1,200 gpd/ft2 (PHWW) Det. time = 28d 0.10-0.40 # Volatile Solids/ft3 N/A I I J i PHWW - Peak Hour Wet Weather -59- 1 1 i Alternative #11 COST ESTIMATE, ENR = 5400 Item Existing Plant Rehabilitation i Existing Plant Expansion — Equalization J Stormwater Treatment System i Sand Road Treatment Plant Lift Station Sewers Cost $2,233,000 5,045,000 1,757,000 2,080,000 7,534,000 1,091,000 11.321,000 $31,061,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost 0&M TOTAL PRESENT ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH WORTH COST $1,335,400 $14,142,000 $54,521,000 STD /70.2- —I $31,061,000 4,659,000 4,659,000 $40,379,000 CONSTRUCTION COST $40,379,000 Cost $2,233,000 5,045,000 1,757,000 2,080,000 7,534,000 1,091,000 11.321,000 $31,061,000 Subtotal Contingency (158) Administrative, Legal, Engineering (158) Total Construction Cost 0&M TOTAL PRESENT ANNUAL PRESENT WORTH WORTH COST $1,335,400 $14,142,000 $54,521,000 STD /70.2- Chapter VIII Alternative Evaluation Financial. Construction cost estimates for the alternatives selected for the Phase II study ranged from $35,029,000 to $49,746,000. Alternative 2 was the most costly primarily due to the larger quantity of sewer installed. Additionally, this cost included the nucleus of a new central wastewater treatment facility, something lacking in Alternatives 6 and S. Alternative 8 invests mostly in a new collection/transportation system, Alternatives 6 and 11 primarily fund new treatment facilities, and Alternative 2 does both, thus the significantly higher cost. Alternatives utilizing the activated sludge process for treatment will have higher operating costs due to the power requirement. Likewise, collection systems dependent on pumping stations will display increased costs over gravity systems. The present worth (PW) cost reflects the sum of construction and the operation/maintenance (0&M) costs over the twenty year study period. Construction costs, annual and present worth operation and maintenance expenses and total present worth cost for each alternative are summparized in Table B-1. Financial ranking, worst to best: Construction 1. Alt. 2 2. Alt. 11 3. Alt. 6 4. Alt. 8 0&M 1. Alt. 11 2. Alt. 2 3. Alt. 8 4. Alt. 6 Total Present Worth Cost 1. Alt. 2 2. Alt. 11 3. Alt. 6 4. Alt. 8 Technical. All the alternatives under discussion in the Phase II study accomplish the same technical goals - - collect all wastewater to reduce flooding and eliminate bypassing of untreated wastewater during the design storm. These objectives -61- 6 36,493,000 1,035,700 10,968,000 47,461,000 8 35,029,000 1,125,000 11014,000 46,943,000 i' 11 40,379,000 1035,400 14,142,000 59,521,000 i. i 0 are met using tested, reliable methods while avoiding unproven innovative and alternative technology. Technical evaluation of - the alternatives comprised assessement of treatment process reliability, mechanical reliability, and the potential effects on, or by, industrial development under each alternative. Reliability of the treatment process is defined as the inherent ability of the process to respond to variations in influent characteristics. As an example, the activated sludge process is capable of producing the required 30-30 effluent characteristics under a relatively wide range of influent loadings. In addition, the potential need to reduce ammonia -nitrogen levels (nitrification) would most readily be achieved by the activated -� sludge process. The trickling filter process is rather limited in the range of influent characteristics that can be tolerated will still achieving the required effluent standard. The aerated = lagoon process included as part of Alternative 6 is close to the reliability of the activated sludge system as a result of the long detention time associated with this process. - The mechanical reliability evaluation reflects the "equipment I complexity" of each alternative. The activated sludge process, - which incorporates aeration blowers, diffusers, and in some cases — supplemental mixing, represents a variety of mechanical equipment _. and a potential reduction in mechanical reliability. The aerated lagoon process is less complex, however aerators are still required. The trickling filter process is relatively simple from an equipment standpoint and consequently possesses a high degree of mechanical reliability. i The impact of industrial development was evaluated from the perspectives of potential impact of the alternative on industry and impact by industry on the alternative. These perspectives relate to the ability of the treatment system to respond to characteristics of industrial discharges and the associated I � ' f i 0 effect that a particular industrial discharge might have on a specific treatment process. For example, a new "heavy" industry locating in the eastern part of the identified service area could _ contribute a significant percentage of the total wastewater flow and load to the Snyder Creek treatment facility included as part of Alternative 6. This same industry would not have as great an impact on the treatment process under Alternative 8 where all wastewater from the entire service area is treated at a single I facility. i An additional consideration associated with the impact of —I industrial development is the ability of the treatment process to adapt to the wastewater characteristics that are likely to be J discharged by industries. As discussed under the process reliability evaluation the ranking of the treatment processes in terms of ability to adapt to varying influent conditions comprises activated sludge as 'highest ranked followed by the aerated lagoon and trickling filter. The technical ranking presented below for industrial impact represents a combination of the evaluation of significance of an industrial discharge on a ! particular alternative and the ability of a particular treatment I process to adapt to an industrial discharge. Ji 1 i Technical ranking, worst to best: ! Process Mechanical Industrial Impact 1. Alt. 8 1. Alt. 11 1. Alt. 6 i 2. Alt. 6 2. Alt. 2 2. Alt. 6 3. Alt. 11 3. Alt. 6 3. Alt. 2 3. Alt. 2 4. Alt. 8 3. Alt. 11 Environmental. The objective of the environmental assessment was i to determine impacts the alternatives would have on the environment. To determine this impact, they were compared to the existing environmental conditions. i -64- There are two basic types of impacts: primary and secondary. Primary environmental impacts are those related to construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed facilities. They would include damage to historical, archaeological, and recreational areas; damage to surface water quality due to construction; and displacement of households. Secondary impacts include changes in land use, population, and economic growth resulting from the alternative implementation. Secondary impacts also include changes such as air and water pollution and damage to sensitive ecosystems. Table 8-2 compares various factors associated with the four alternatives under discussion. Flood plains, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, endangered species, and coastal zones were deemed "no impact" and omitted from consideration. Environmental ranking, worst to best: 1. Alt. 6 2. Alt. 8 3. Alt. 2 4. Alt. 11 Implementation. The four alternatives evaluated in Phase II vary from each other in several ways. Alternative 6 requires obtaining two sites for satellite treatment plants, Alternatives 2 and 11 one each, while Alternative 8 makes use of the existing site exclusively. While identical in treatment requirements, Alternatives 2 and 11 differ significantly in interceptor routings with Alternative 2 requiring additional easements for the increased amount of interceptor sewer. Securing these new sites or easements may prove to be difficult depending on their location (within or outside the corporate limits), number of present owners, proximity of adjacent residences, etc. Staging construction efforts in the attempt to spread the costs over a -65- /7.3A, Alternative Environmental Issue 2 6 8 11 Fish and wildlife 0 0 0 Cultural resources 0 0 0 0 Land use + + + Agricultural land 0 Recreational open space 0 0 0 0 Public facilities and services Air quality I. Water quality Noise 0 Odor Solid waste + 0 _J Social and economic + +3 Total +1 -1 0 Key: ++ major beneficial impact, + beneficial impact -- major adverse impact, - adverse impact 0 no impact TABLE 8-2 -66- longer period of time may be applicable to some of the alternatives. Phasing opportunities will be studied in greater detail during the Phase III Report effort. Implementation ranking, worst to best: 1. Alt. 6 2. Alt. 2 3. Alt. 8 4. Alt. 11 Flexibility. Flexibility to respond to changing parameters is an important element of any planning effort. A higher growth rate than anticipated may occur, with the City reaching its projected population growth in less than the twenty year planning period. Another change may occur if geographical growth patterns and pressures change. This may result in an excess capacity of public facilities and services in some areas while insufficient capacity exists in other areas. The ability to adjust to population dynamics varies within the alternatives under discussion. Alternative 8 is limited by both the single plant location and the site area available for expansion. Alternative 6 is limited due to the drainage area served by the Snyder Creek treatment facility. Alternatives 2 and 11 offer the highest degree of flexibility to receive unanticipated quantities of wastewater from anywhere within the Study Area. A change in effluent standards requiring a higher degree of treatment could make a system dependent on trickling filters obsolete. Activated sludge treatment performance could more readily be adjusted to meet more stringent effluent standards, including nitrification if necessary. Treatment for Alternatives 2 and 11 are identical, thus their common ranking. C"B i � n X- i F 3 4 2 4 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 -68- 24 26 30 / 73�- Flexibility I- I I, 7 1 3 4 2 4 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 -68- 24 26 30 / 73�- Flexibility I- 3 4 2 4 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 -68- 24 26 30 / 73�- Flexibility ranking, worst to best: Rapid Growth - Geog. Change - Eff. Standards Change - Construction 1. Alt. 8 1. Alt. 8 1. Alt. 6 2 2. Alt. 6 2. Alt. 6 2. Alt. 8 3. Alt. 11 3. Alt. 2 3. Alt. 2 J 4. Alt. 2 4. Alt. 11 3. Alt. 11 1 Indust. flows 3 iEnvironmental Summary. The overall result of this evaluation are summarized i 7 below and indicate that the most favorable alternative is Flexibility Alternative 11 followed by Alternatives 2, 8, and 6. Refer to Rapid growth Table 8-3 for additional considerations. Geogr. change 3 Eff. stndrd. change 3 TOTAL Alternative J 2 6 8 11 3 4 2 4 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 -68- 24 26 30 / 73�- Financial -� Construction 1 -� O&M 2 y PW 1 Technical J Mach. reliability 2 Process 3 Indust. flows 3 iEnvironmental 3 I Implementation 2 Flexibility Rapid growth 4 Geogr. change 3 Eff. stndrd. change 3 TOTAL 27 3 4 2 4 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 3 4 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 2 3 -68- 24 26 30 / 73�- i i i TABLE 8-3 - A SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS _ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES Alternative Advantage Disadvantage 2. Existing plan availability. Operational complexity (WWTP). Treatment flexibility. Eliminates lift stations. 6 Some use of existing plans. Uncontrolled eastern growth. Eliminates lift stations. Limited drainage area to Low sludge production. Snyder Creek WWTP. 8 Central WWTP. Limited room for expansion. i Max. utilization of Continuous pumping. existing WWTP. Operational complexity (sewers). 11 Treatment flexibility. Operational complexity (WWTP). Appendix C FLUOR REPORT / 7- � 1 '- i CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CONSTRUCTABILITY AND CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE REVIEW WASTEWATER PLAN - ALTERNATIVE STUDY PHASE III Fluor Transportation and Infrastructure, Inc. Contract 400102 21 August 1985 GENERAL Fluor Transportation and Infrastructure, Inc. has performed a construc- tability and construction cost estimate review of three wastewater treatment plans, Alternatives 2, 8 and 11, as described in Metcalf & Eddy's Phase II report. The following table summarizes the results of our construction cost estimate review: Estimated Alternative No. Construction Cost 2 $49,272,000 8 $31,696,000 11 $33,911,000 The findings are consistent with those presented in the Phase II Report in that Alternative A2 has the highest construction costs, followed by Alternatives All and A8. The cost estimates for this Phase III study were based on preliminary engineering data presented in Metcalf and Eddy's Phase II Report. The data provided a basis for estimating preliminary material quantities for civil, structural, and piping work. The electrical and control systems work was factored. The material and equipment items were priced using Fluor's in-house historical estimating data and/or obtaining telephone quotations from vendors. The construction costs were developed from Fluor's in-house data, adjusted to reflect the construction trades total wage rates in Iowa City. All Phase III cost estimates are escalated to the year 1990 using the ENR Construction Cost Index. This represents a modest inflation of 5 percent annually. The description of the alternatives, process schematics, conceptual site layout illustrations, unit descriptions and design loadings developed by Metcalf and Eddy, served as a basis for developing "typical" facilities for each of the alternatives. These representative facilities served as a basis for proceeding with our reviews. Without detailed design drawings, allowances were made for ancillary systems, undefined units, and electrical and control systems. The Veenstra & Himm, Inc. (V&E) drawings for the sewers of the University Heights and Southeast Interceptor Systems served as the basis for evaluating those systems. 041/26280 1 GENERAL 2 i y The existing plant rehabilitation work has been reviewed and estimated by Metcalf & Eddy; however, grit chamber modifications/additions were included in the review performed by Fluor. When considering the existing wastewater treatment plant site, "Existing Plant Expansion," "Equalization," and "Stormwater Treatment System," (separate entries in the Phase II report) have been combined into a single entry in the Fluor review. It is felt that these three elements - form an integrated triangle such that, without one of the elements, the alternative becomes unacceptable. The pump (lift) stations of Alternatives 8 and 11 are assumed by Fluor I to be "packaged" lift stations, having a separate wet well, and force — main excavation not to exceed eight feet. These will be discussed in _ further detail for each Alternative. Wherever equipment needs could be clearly defined, manufacturers' representatives were contacted for the purpose of obtaining pricing information, FOB Iowa City. In the absence of detailed design require- ments, we have estimated equipment costs on the basis of standard units, with reasonable assumptions for any necessary ancillary systems. J It is anticipated that all deep excavations will require dewatering. j Hence, this has been provided for in the cost estimates for the sewer systems, the pump stations, and the treatment plant sites. i Overall construction durations for each of the alternatives are dependent upon such key elements as project phasing, design and construction —i contract packaging, amount of parallel construction operations, fast tracking philosophies, and so on. At this time, we have insufficient information to make proper assumptions in these areas and therefore, have not made an estimate of construction duration per alternative. We have however, provided estimates for each of the elements within the alternatives. These estimates can be used in the development of various scheduling alternatives. Sewer Systems The University Heights Sewer System (as designed by V&K), and the northern portion (V&K Drawing Sheets 22, 23, 24 and 30 through 43) of the Southeast Interceptor System are common to the three alternatives considered in this phase of the study. The costs of these improvements have been estimated and are included in the cost summaries. i 041/26280 I I GENERAL 3 The University Heights Sewer System consists of approximately 5,200 feet of pipe, ranging in size from 8 -inch diameter to 30 -inch arch pipe. The deepest excavation indicated is 27 feet; however, most of the excavation is shown to be between 12 and 16 feet. The drawings call for 480 feet of pipe augering. We recommend that the need for pipe augering be closely examined and minimized by either alignment changes or practical construction methods. An alignment change between Manholes 17 and 18 (V&K drawings - Sheet 9) so as to cross the railroad tracks further south and at a more perpendicular angle would eliminate 70 feet of augering. This would require at least one additional manhole. The pipe slope would have to be reduced slightly but would still be adequate. The practicality of augering 50 feet of 20 -inch ductile iron pipe across Riverside Drive (V&K Drawing - Sheet 4) must be weighed against a 12 foot open cut excavation. If traffic flow is the prime concern, off-peak hours, weekend, or night operations are cost effective, viable alternatives. The installation of the University Heights Sewer System appears to be a fairly straight forward construction effort requiring approximately four months to complete. The northern portion of the Southeast Interceptor System consists of approximately 8,800 feet of pipe, ranging in size from 12 inch to 48 -inch diameter. Most of the excavation appears to be between 10 and 15 feet. The drawings call for approximately 720 feet of pipe augering/jacking. Of this amount, approximately 310 feet is associated with street crossings. If these crossings can be open cut, a modest cost savings could be achieved. Connecting to existing sanitary sewer systems will require careful planning, adequate backup equipment, and the use of state of the art materials and procedures for the quick execution of the work, thereby minimizing worker exposure to raw sewage. The con- struction of this portion of the Southeast Interceptor System could be accomplished in nine months. 041/26280 / 73.Z ALTERNATIVE #2 4 Existing Plant The stormwater treatment system, equalization facilities, and expansion of the existing plant segments of the work to be performed at the site of the existing wastewater treatment plant include the following principal elements: • New pumping station (containing five sewage pumps) • Additional grit removal facilities (detritor tanks) • A 5 million gallon equalization basin (assumed by Fluor to be 300' x 150' x 15' SWD) • Sludge dewatering facilities (assumed to be 45' x 150' building of block construction housing three- two meter belt filter presses; chemical storage, mixing, and feed equipment; conveying equip- ment; and controls) • Two stormwater clarifiers (93' dia. x 10'-6" SWD) • Filtration facility (a 4,900 sq. ft. rapid sand filter housed in a 60' x 90' building of block construction) • Flow diversion box • Digester conversion (existing 70' dia. conventional digester to be converted to a high rate system, including methane gas utilization, and draft tube mixing) • Interconnecting piping • Control systems. For cost estimating purposes, illustrative examples of the above elements were used wherever possible for the purpose of establishing quantities and man-hours as a function of unit complexity (i.e., detritor grit tanks and circular clarifiers). Construction activities within an operating facility often pose challenges to the most resourceful of contractors. Success is dependent upon a close cooperative working relationship between the operating staff and the contractor(s). Successful performance of the work requires careful planning, detailed scheduling, thorough preparations, and the availa- bility of the necessary materials, equipment, and personnel. 041/26280 / 7.3 ■ i ALTERNATIVE N2 5 Existing Plant Interferences, both known and unknown, always plague construction efforts in an operating facility. The proposed pumping station, shown Iwest of the existing pump house, is situated on top of the 21 -inch plant bypass line. The resolution of this known interference during the detail design engineering phase of the project may impact construction logistics by requiring maintenance of the bypass capability during construction. The proposed Belt Filter Press (BFP) Building is situated in the northeast portion of the sludge lagoon west of Filters 2 and S. The BFP J Building is to be constructed between a 30 inch RCP filter bypass line and an 8 inch sludge line. If the sludge line is to be relocated, temporarily, the planning and the performance of work requires coor- dination and cooperation between the plant operators and the contractor(s). j The proposed grit tanks are located to the south of the existing grit J facility and within 40 feet of the waste gas burner. Here again, con- struction operations will have to be coordinated with plant operations. Once the digester has been emptied and cleaned, the conversion process, including removal of piping and supports, installing the draft tube and related piping for gas mixing, and modifications to external gas handling i facilities should be fairly straight forward. Completion and start-up of the BFP Building eliminates the need for the sludge lagoons and releases these areas for the construction of the equalization basin, stormwater clarifiers, and sand filter building. Completion of the Belt Filter Press Building should be a high priority for both design and construction. It is estimated that the work to be performed at the existing wastewater treatment plant, as part of Alternative N2, will require approximately 10 months to complete. This assumes concurrent construction activities and does not include modifications and rehabilitation work reviewed by Metcalf & Eddy. Sand Road Treatment Plant The proposed Sand Road Treatment Plant is to be constructed on a -- 26 -acre site located east of Sand Road and immediately south of the Iowa City Corporate Boundary. New facilities constructed on a vacant flat site afford opportunities for construction planning and multiple ope- rations unencumbered by existing facilities. Dewatering of deep exca- vations is the only problem foreseen at this time. 041/26280 I ALTERNATIVE #2 6 i Sand Road Treatment Plant Fluor's estimate and constructability reviews are based on the following i principal elements of this proposed facility: • Pumping Station and Preliminary Treatment Facility consisting of a building of block construction, having a grade level floor area of 7,500 square feet, an influent sump, trash racks, two comminutors, parshall flume, five sewage pumps, two detritor grit separation tanks and control systems i• Preliminary clarifiers consisting of two 65 -foot diameter units, 10'-6" inches SWD. 1 J • Aeration facility - four tanks, each a 75 foot square unit (Fluor assumed use of air diffusion equipment). J• Final clarifiers consisting of two 73 foot diameter units, 10'-6" SWD. • Chlorination/De-chlorination facility (assumed by Fluor). • Anaerobic digesters consisting of two 40 -foot diameter units 25'-0" SWD (Fluor assumed fixed roof, draft tube mixing for high -� rate operation, gas utilization for heating ancillary gas handlin J and a 2,100 square foot control building of block construction). • Sludge lagoon, 200,000 cu. ft. capacity. I • Equalization basin, 3 million gallon capacity (assumed 200 feet square by 10'-0" SWD). • Return activated sludge pump station. 7 • Ancillary systems and equipment. i • Control systems. • Approximately 2,000 feet of 54 -inch diameter outfall line to the river. Phase II Report process and unit descriptions, design loadings, con- ceptual layout, and representative unit illustrations were used as a basis for developing the construction estimates. It is estimated that the Sand Road Wastewater Treatment Plant can be constructed in eighteen months. i I � 041/26280 i� I ■ ALTERNATIVE #2 7 Sewers J The Southeast Interceptor System consists of approximately 47,800 feet of pipe, ranging in size from 12 -inch to 54 -inch diameter. The 7,800 feet of the northern portion of this system has already been discussed, as it is common to all alternatives. Of the remaining 40,000 feet of pipe to be installed, approximately 9.5 percent will be jacked/augered for seven railroad track crossings, two crossings of Highway 6, three street crossings, and property protection. This includes pipe sizes varying from 12 -inch to 54 -inch diameter. iThe extent of the Southeast Interceptor permits the abandonment of the Fairmeadows, Village Green, and Heinz Lift Stations. The shoring and dewatering requirements of deep excavations slow progress and add to the cost of construction. All of the sewer pipes in this portion of the system require excavation in excess of 10 feet, much J of the excavation is in excess of 20 feet, with 45 feet being the maximum cut. Fortunately, much of the deep excavation does not occur in roadways, thereby minimizing traffic disruption and interference with, and potential damage to, utility services. Part of the 54 -inch influent sewer, east of the proposed Sand Road Plant, does, however, require excavation in Vogt Road. The first 13,000 feet of the Southeast Interceptor System, east of the proposed Sand Road site, requires excavations in excess of 30 feet. By taking a more southwesterly route from Manhole SE -23 (V&K drawings - Sheet 12), the excavation for this portion of the interceptor could be reduced by as much as 20 feet in many areas. This realignment would necessitate entering the Sand Road site from the south, instead of from the east or, selecting a new site, approximately three quarters of a mile south of the currently proposed site. Shallower excavations reduce construction costs now and facilitate access in the future for connections and/or repairs. Duration of construction activities for the Southeast Interceptor Sewer System, as currently proposed, is estimated at twenty-four months. 041/26280 II /73 I _i 8 i J ALTERNATIVE #2 ' Summary Item Cost Existing Plant Rehabilitation $ 2,233,0001 Existing Plant Expansion2 Equalizations 5,454,000 Stormwater Treatment System J Sand Road Treatment Plant4 s 7,161,000 Sewers 23,054,000 Subtotal $37,902,000 — Contingency (15%,)1 5,685,000 ' I Administrative, Legal Engineering (15$)1 5,685,000 - I TOTAL Construction Cost $49.272.000 I ' i i J 1From M&E's Phase II Report slncludes new grit removal facilities, excludes new bar screens. '-' sAssumed intermittent use of basin would render unlined basin _ acceptable. If liner is required by regulatory agency and/or the j City, add $52,000. 4Fluor assumed the two digesters to have fixed roofs. If floating roofs are required, add $150,000 per digester. i5 i Add $165,000 for basin and lagoon liners. I 041/26280 # ALTERNATIVE #8 9 Existing Plant The concept of this alternative is to expand and upgrade the existing wastewater treatment plant so as to render it capable of accommodating sewerage flows from within the limits of the study area for the next 20 years. The principal elements of this expansion and upgrading effort include the following: • New pumping station (containing six sewage pumps) • Additional grit removal facilities (detritor tanks) • A seven (7) million gallon equalization basin (assumed by Fluor to be 325'x200'xl6' SWD, parallelogram in shape) • Sludge dewatering facility (assumed by Fluor to be a 45'x150' building of block construction, housing four -two meter belt filter presses; chemical storage, mixing, and feed equipment; conveying equipment; and controls) • Three storm water clarifiers (96' diameter x 10'-6" SWD) • Filtration facility (6,500 sq. ft. rapid sand filter) • Digester conversion (existing 70' diameter conventional digester to be converted to a high rate system, including methane gas utili- zation and draft tube mixing) • Interconnecting piping • Control systems Previous comments regarding the basis for estimating, the complexities of performing construction activities in an operating plant, and the need for intelligent resolution of interferences are applicable to this alternative. The capability of the new pumping station to pump to and from the equalization basin suggests a somewhat sophisticated installation. The intermittent operation of the stormwater clarifiers and possibly the sand filters offers a potential for additional costs for ancillary systems and equipment to provide for the activation/deactivation of said facilities. This condition could be circumvented by the recycling of final effluent. Equipment selection can affect both cost and schedule. The use and delivery of motor operated valves versus alternative equipment can 041/26280 ,0 l ALTERNATIVE #8 10 Existing Plant impact the cost and construction schedule for the diversion box. The incorporation of hydrasieve screens into the treatment process may offer cost and schedule advantages. The design phase of this project can impact the construction phase and overall project cost. _! i Lift Stations i Alternative #8 requires the installation of three lift stations. The —' 20 mgd capacity Pine Street lift station has been reviewed in the dis- cussion of Alternative #11. Two additional lift stations are required as part of Alternative #8: a 5 mgd capacity lift station, to replace the Fairmeadows and Village Green lift stations, would be constructed in the southeast region near the Heinz lift station; and a 2 mgd capacity lift station to support - development to the south, along Sycamore Street. The size of these two lift stations make them ideal candidates for packaged units, having separate wet wells constructed from large dia- meter reinforced concrete pipe. This approach provides for simplicity of -i design, ease of construction, and a cost effective means of providing sewer service to the communities involved. The provision of standby power has not been included in our estimate; however, a portable unit i for use when and where needed may offer a cost saving alternative to permanent standby power generation facilities at these lift stations. The force main sizing presented in the Phase II report should be closely examined for the purpose of optimizing the relationship between pumping requirements and -. pump capabilities. This can lead to equipment cost savings, the selection of more efficient units, and lower operating costs. The Fluor estimate combines the pump station and associated force main construction costs as a single line entry. We estimated the length of the force mains for the Pine Street Lift Station, the Southeast Lift Station, .. and the Sycamore Street Lift Station to be 3,500, 10,000, and 6,500 linear feet respectively; sizes as shown in the Phase II report; and maximum excavation not to exceed eight feet. Assuming concurrent construction activities, the three lift station and force mains could be completed in four months. i ! 041/26280 / i i ti ■ ALTERNATIVE #8 11 i Sewers I The sewer system for this alternative consists of approximately 27,800 feet of pipe: 7,500 feet of 33 -inch diameter, 4,900 feet of 21 -inch Jdiameter, 7,200 feet of 12 -inch diameter pipe, and the northern portion of the Southeast Interceptor, common to all alternatives. The alignment is the same as that for the Alternative #2 Southeast Interceptor in this area. For conservative estimating purposes, Fluor assumed the same profile as that shown for the Southeast Interceptor. Included are approxi- mately 1,150 feet of pipe angering/jacking required for eight railroad 1 track crossings, one crossing of Highway 6, street crossings, and property protection. The depth of excavation appears to be 20 feet throughout most of the sewer system. JIt is estimated that the construction of this limited sewer system can be completed in ten months. i j ALTERNATIVE #8 11 i Sewers I The sewer system for this alternative consists of approximately 27,800 feet of pipe: 7,500 feet of 33 -inch diameter, 4,900 feet of 21 -inch Jdiameter, 7,200 feet of 12 -inch diameter pipe, and the northern portion of the Southeast Interceptor, common to all alternatives. The alignment is the same as that for the Alternative #2 Southeast Interceptor in this area. For conservative estimating purposes, Fluor assumed the same profile as that shown for the Southeast Interceptor. Included are approxi- mately 1,150 feet of pipe angering/jacking required for eight railroad 1 track crossings, one crossing of Highway 6, street crossings, and property protection. The depth of excavation appears to be 20 feet throughout most of the sewer system. JIt is estimated that the construction of this limited sewer system can be completed in ten months. i ALTERNATIVE #8 Summary Item Existing Plant Rehabilitation I J Existing Plant Expansion2 Equalization3 Stormwater Treatment System 1 Lift Stations Sewers l Subtotal -I Contingency (15%,)3 J Administrative, Legal, Engineering (159.)3 TOTAL Construction Cost 12 Cost $ 2,233,0003 7,290,000 2,996,000 11,863.000 $24,382,000 3,657,OOD 3,657,000 3 696 000 'From M&E's Phase II Report -I 2Includes new grit removal facilities, excludes new bar screens. _I 'Assumed intermittent use of basin would render unlined basin acceptable. If liner is required by regulatory agency and/or the City, add $55,000. _i 041/26280 M ALTERNATIVE #11 13 Existing Plant Work to be performed at the existing wastewater treatment plant, as part of Alternative #11, is the same as that required for Alternative #2 (refer to Alternative #2 for details). Sand Road Treatment Plant The proposed Sand Road Wastewater Treatment Facility for Alterna- tive #11 is the same as that proposed for Alternative #2 (refer to Alternative #2 for details). Lift Station J Alternative #Il, as developed by Metcalf and Eddy, requires a 20 mgd lift station for the purpose of relieving the Rundell Street sewer. The J Pine Street Lift Station may be located south of the CRI and P Railroad tracks, in the vicinity of Manhole SE -52 (V&I{ drawings -Sheet 22). The - lift station will discharge to the south, through a 27 -inch diameter force main, approximately 3,500 feet long and assumed to be installed along an existing roadway, to a high point south of Highway 6. Therefrom, the sewage will flow south by gravity through approximately 4,900 feet of 27 -inch diameter sewer, installed along the Sycamore Street extension, connect to a reduced version of the Southeast Interceptor, and be treated at the proposed Sand Road Treatment Plant. It was assumed I that excavation for the force main would not exceed 6 feet. Fluor assumed the lift station to be a buried packaged unit, complete with four pumps, motors, controls, internal piping, and ancillary systems such as lighting, ventilation, dehumidifier, and alarms. A i — separate wet well could have to be constructed, complete with inter- connecting piping to the pumps. Not included are provisions for standby power and a mechanically cleaned screen, both of which may be advisable, having an estimated cost of $115,000. I The estimated duration of construction activities for the lift station and force main is four months. i I — 041/26280 i Iy b e ALTERNATIVE #11 14 Sewers The Southeast Interceptor System of Alternative #11 consists of approxi- mately 9,200 feet of pipe consisting of 24 -inch and 54 -inch diameter pipe. The 5,600 feet of 54 -inch diameter pipe follows the same alignment as does the same portion of the Southeast Interceptor System of Alternative #2. For conservative estimating purposes, we assumed the same profile and kept the 3,600 feet of 24 -inch diameter pipe at a similar profile. The 5,500 feet of 27 -inch gravity sewer was estimated with an average excavation of eight feet. For comments pertaining to the deep excavations along Vogt Road, see Alternative #2. The incorporation of the Pine Street lift station and the maintaining of the Fairmeadows, Village Green, and Heinz Lift Stations eliminate the need for 30,800 feet of the Southeast Interceptor of Alternative #2. Adding approximately 5500 feet of 27 -inch gravity sewer, of relatively shallow depth, provides for a net savings of approximately 25,300 feet of interceptor construction, at relatively deep depths. This causes the Alternative #11 sewer construction cost estimate to be approximately 48 percent lower than that of Alternative #2. i /73z . ... ........ ... ............ I I 1 I 1 d ALTERNATIVE #11 Summary is Item Cost Existing Plant Rehabilitation $ 2,233,0001 Existing Plant Expansion2 Equalization3 5,454,000 Stormwater Treatment System Sand Road Treatment Plant 7,161,000 Lift Station and Force Main 1,170,000 Sewers 10,067,00 Subtotal $26,055,000 Contingency (15$)1 3,913,000 Administrative, Legal Engineering (15;)1 3,913,000 TOTAL Construction Cost $33.911.00D 'From M&E's Phase II Report ZIncludes new grit removal facilities, excludes new bar screens. 3Assumed intermittent use of basin would render unlined basin acceptable. If liner is required by regulatory agency and/or the City, add $52,000. 4Fluor assumed the two digesters to have fixed roofs. If floating roofs are required, add $150,000 per digester. a Add $165,000 for basin and lagoon liners. 041/26260 1 17 I b City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: September 13, 1985 To: City Council From: Larry Baker Re: Utility Franchise Fee In our previous discussions about the merits of a franchise fee we have debated the issue in terms of whether or not the fee was actually a tax and whether the goal of a large sale energy conservation program actually justified such a fee. I would like to make a new proposal concerning the fee. First, however, I think we need to avoid another debate about the semantics of "fee" versus "tax." Let us admit that the "fee" is indeed an indirect tax. It will most probably be passed back to the consumers of Iowa City. The question then becomes: "Why is such a tax justified?" I could now argue that a large scale energy conservation program warrants such a tax. Conservation programs for the City have proven to save money and thus justify their initial investment. Such programs, funded on a large sale by the franchise tax, could also be extended to every citizen of Iowa City and in the long run prove to be beneficial to the very people who paid the tax in the first place. I could argue that point -- but 'I won't. After much reconsideration, I see two major obstacles to such a large program. First, we could accomplish the same goals with less of an investment. It is not necessary to have $400,000.00 a year for such a program especially since the income from such a tax is regenerated every year. Second, and more pragmatic of a reason, such a large program will not get the support from a majority of the Council and, quite honestly, I doubt that the voters would approve such a one dimensional tax if it were presented to them. A new justification for the tax is now needed. Hence, this memo. The City has to generate more revenue and not just for energy conservation. We could po nt to a dozen programs or departments that will be needing additional funding in the future. More cuts from the Federal level make such funding problems more acute. The franchise fee/tax is a viable option to consider as a funding source. However, we cannot simply present the tax to the voters and say that the revenues will be going to some as yet undetermined necessity. Much like the campaign to pass a hotel/motel tax, we must justify the franchise tax on the basis of what specific programs we feel have some priority in the city budget. I would like to present the following four-part program to be funded by the franchise tax. I do this merely to re -open debate. At the meeting at which we discuss the franchise I hope you will help refine this tentative approach. /733 1-- q Note: For the purposes of simplifying this proposal, I have assumed a gross revenue of $400,000.00 from the gas and electric tax. ENERGY CONSERVATION: Twenty-five percent of the tax to fund such a program. This is the minimum that will still make such an idea workable. The pros and cons of the program have been debated many times. But, the fact remains: energy conservation works and it is, to use a term heard many times, cost-effective. Charges of this creating another level of bureaucracy are unfounded. At the most, we would need to expand the current half-time energy coordinator to a full-time position. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: l Twenty-five percent to set up a fund to be used for economic development. Two parts of such a program might be: a source for low-interest loans to businesses wishing to expand or relocate (had such a program been in exis- tence two years ago the City would be in a position to help Economy Advertis- ing in its efforts to relocate on the south side of Iowa City, help needed more now because of Economy's failure to secure a similar low-interest loan from the State); and a source of money to supply infrastructure construction j of sewers, streets, etc., for any new business wishing to locate in Iowa City. I do not see this 25% being gen. to First Capitol Development but rather being used as a selling tool by TRANSIT: I. We all know the crunch is coming. How do we keep fares down and still maintain our current system? Twenty-five percent of the franchise tax will make a difference. i PARKS AND RECREATION/ART AND CULTURE: i I would like to see us put twenty-five percent of the tax back into P&R, but with a difference. Have the money disbursed through the Parks and Recreation Commission, with Council approval, much like COBG funds are disbursed through CCN. Individual citizens, neighborhood groups and even the city staff can all make requisitions to be considered by P&R. The money could be used for parkland aquisition, equipment to develop parks, equipment to maintain existing P&R programs or other need as presented to and approved by the P&R i Commission. I include "Art and Culture" because I think local artisans and art groups should be able to approach P&R with specific proposals to advance the arts in Iowa City. --- ---- ------ ------- ----- - - - --- i The above are for your consideration. I think they offer a chance for broad public support of the franchise fee/tax. I bc5/5 cc: City Manager RCC Parks and Recreation Ray Muston I � I I /13� 17.3 b a City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: September 12, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager .' RE: Sidewalk Cafes and Use of Public Ways The City Council has discussed the issue of sidewalk cafes and the use of the sidewalk to open up lower levels of stores for additional business. Enclosed are pictures of the mall in Boulder, Colorado. Boulder has developed very attractive sidewalk cafes and lower level businesses with entrances from the Plaza. i I I i i i l I: I I.' j i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: September 13, 1985 TO: Chairpersons, Boards and Commissions FROM: Mayor John McDonald RE: Annual Meeting of City Council and Chairpersons of Boards/Commissions The annual meeting of the City Council members and chairpersons of all boards and commissions is planned for Wednesday, October 2, 1985, at 3:30 P.M. at the Highlander Inn. Each board/commission chairperson should be prepared to give a presenta- tion not to exceed five minutes on the accomplishments of the board/ commission during the past year, problem areas for the board/commission, and efforts being made during this next year. A dinner is planned for 6:30 P.M. Please contact Lorraine Saeger (356-5010) concerning your attendance at this meeting no later than September 25, 1985. cc: City Council City Manager 175S : I i + i { I j i I City of Iowa City �- MEMORANDUM Date: September 13, 1985 To: City Council From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance-nou v`;xc iRe: Financing Procedures for Administrative Office Building On July 11, 1985, Dale Helling and I submitted a memorandum to the City Council providing background information on lease purchase financing which we proposed to use to finance the administrative office building project. A copy of that memorandum is attached. We have continued to have conversations concerning lease purchase financ- ing with Ken Haynie and John McKinney representing the City's bond counsel firm and with Wayne Burggraaff and Dave Dirks representing Evensen Dodge, the City's financial advisor. It is the opinion of both firms that this financing procedure, including certain changes made this year in the Iowa Statute governing lease purchase financing, is well-suited for this type of project. As you know, an architect has not yet been selected and preliminary plans do not call for beginning construction work on the administrative office building until April, 1986. Initially our plan was to enter into a lease purchase agreement at about the same time. However, in view of potential legislation which may be introduced in Congress next month concerning various aspects of tax-exempt financing, we now believe it advisable to start much sooner on the steps leading up to a lease purchase arrangement. Such an accelerated schedule would, if necessary, permit the City to enter into a lease purchase agreement by the end of this year. Briefly, this is the background on the potential federal legislation. In November, 1984, the Administration submitted the Treasury's tax plan recommendations to Congress. A revised version, frequently referred to as "Treasury II" was submitted to Congress in May, 1985. These proposals contain many far-reaching changes which would have a significant adverse effect on a City's ability to issue various forms of tax-exempt debt. At the present time, these proposals do not contain any specific items which would, at least on the surface, adversely affect the City's ability to enter into a lease purchase agreement. However, legislation has not yet been completely drafted nor introduced. Congressman Rostenkowski, who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, has indicated that it is his intention to draft and introduce such legislation yet this year (probably in October). He has also indicated tht the specific form of the legisla- tion may deviate from the Treasury II recommendations. Therefore, at this time, we do not know exactly what this legislation will contain. Moreover, assuming legislation is introduced this year, we do not know when Congress will act. It is likely that this type of legislation will remain under consideration for a period of many months before action, if any, is taken. In the past, legislation regulating tax-exempt debt issuance has been introduced with a January 1 effective date with no I I C action taken until late in the Spring of the year. Because of the potential retroactive implementation date, it was not possible during that period of months for those forms of tax-exempt instruments to be utilized. We do not know whether the same set of circumstances will occur with respect to legislation on Treasury II. Neither do we know at this time whether or not legislation will contain any specific provisions which would be harmful for a lease purchase arrangement. Due to these uncertainties and in order to protect the City's position with respect to potential usage of lease purchase financing, we believe that we need to accelerate our schedule. While we may find that an accelerated schedule is not necessary later this year, we would like to be in a position of acting on the basis of an accelerated schedule so that it would be possible to complete the lease purchase transaction by year end. Since a lease purchase agreement involves negotiated financing, we would like to proceed with issuing requests for proposals and take the prelimi- nary steps leading up to selection of an underwriter. Towards this end, we have prepared an attached preliminary schedule which would permit the City to follow a reasonable process leading up to execution of a lease purchase agreement before the end of December. The initial steps would involve issuing a request for proposal and evaluating those proposals. This schedule has been reviewed with the City's bond counsel and financial advisor. All agree it would be in the City's best interest to begin following this procedure so that the City has assurance that it will be able to utilize lease purchase financing for the administrative office building project. I would point out that while we will be starting the procedure very shortly, it does not require any Council action until after the City Council has selected an architectural firm and taken the necessary actions to proceed with the office building project. Unless otherwise directed by the Council, I will proceed with the attached proposed schedule. bj4/1 I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: July 11, 1985 To: City Council From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Financeo Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Re: City Office Space Needs City staff has been reviewing a proposal to prepare a prospectus for new office space construction on the Civic Center site, a turnkey project which would be financed with IRBs. However, during a meeting with bond counsel last Tuesday, another lower cost financing alternative was brought to our at- tention. This alternative involves the sale of Certificates of Participation to finance a lease purchase arrangement. In a lease purchase agreement, the interest component of the lease payment made by the local government is tax-exempt income for the lessor. In a large lease purchase arrangement such as the City's proposed office building, a commercial bank, specialty lease financing company or underwriter enters into the lease with the government and then sells Certificates of Participation to interested investors who share in the tax-exempt interest income. The interest rates on the Certificates of Participation are lower than IRB rates and will therefore lower the City's cost for new office space. This financing alternative would also give the City more control over the building construction. The City would hire an architect to design the building and bid the construction similar to other City capital improvement projects. The City would work with its financial advisor and bond counsel to prepare a lease purchase agreement and to sell the Certificates of Participa- tion. A trustee would be selected who would have control of the Construction Fund. Net proceeds from the purchase of the Certificates of Participation will be deposited in the Construction Fund. The Construction Fund will be used to. pay the cost of constructing and equipping the new building. Any monies remaining in the Construction Fund after paying all construction costs will be credited to the obligation of the City to pay basic rent allocable to principal under the lease purchase agreement. This alternative is very attractive for several reasons. It enables the City to maintain full control over the actual building construction and greatly streamlines the process as compared to the turnkey alternative previously discussed. The Certificates of Participation can be sold at a public sale or through a negotiated sale; the market will need to be studied to determine the most favorable sales method. This alternative also provides for a competitive bid situation for the construction project. Another benefit is the City's direct control of the financing vehicle. Should interest rates decrease or other funding become available to the City in say five years, the City would have the option to call the Certificates early and restructure its financing of the project. With a turnkey project that uses IRB financing, it is doubtful that any cost saving financing alternative will be available to the lessor to replace their IRB financing in the future. 2 The City's bond counsel recommends pursuing the use of Certificates of Participation for this project. The recent lease purchase legislation passed by the state legislature provides the legal authority for this type of financing. Discussion with an underwriter this week does indicate that a favorable market now exists for Certificates of Participation. Since the Certificates are rated in the same manner as G.O. bonds, it is likely that the City could obtain a very high rating and consequently a very good interest rate on the Certificates. Our research into this alternative shows that in all likelihood it presents the second lowest financing vehicle available to the City for this project. Only G.O. bond financing would be lower. This alternative was discussed with the City Manager on Wednesday, July 10, 1985, and he concurs with our recommendation to defer action on the turnkey project prospectus and, instead, pursue financing with Certificates of Participation in a lease purchase arrangement. We will be at the informal meeting on July 15, 1985 to discuss further this financing option with the Council. bj4/3 1734 I i I. is j' i 1 I 2 The City's bond counsel recommends pursuing the use of Certificates of Participation for this project. The recent lease purchase legislation passed by the state legislature provides the legal authority for this type of financing. Discussion with an underwriter this week does indicate that a favorable market now exists for Certificates of Participation. Since the Certificates are rated in the same manner as G.O. bonds, it is likely that the City could obtain a very high rating and consequently a very good interest rate on the Certificates. Our research into this alternative shows that in all likelihood it presents the second lowest financing vehicle available to the City for this project. Only G.O. bond financing would be lower. This alternative was discussed with the City Manager on Wednesday, July 10, 1985, and he concurs with our recommendation to defer action on the turnkey project prospectus and, instead, pursue financing with Certificates of Participation in a lease purchase arrangement. We will be at the informal meeting on July 15, 1985 to discuss further this financing option with the Council. bj4/3 1734 I i I. is j' i I' ;I i I i i i � j i j I I 1 PRELIMINARY LEASE PURCHASE FINANCING SCHEDULE September 16 - 20, 1985 September 29, 1985 September 30 - October 10, 1985 October 17 - 18, 1985 October 21 - November.29, 1985 December 3, 1985 December 11, 1985 December 17, 1985 IA27.85A/30 Prepare and mail a Request for Proposal to underwriters. Underwriter proposals due. Review of proposals by City, Bond Counsel, and Financial Consultant. Underwriter interviews and final selection. Preparation of documents, Offering Statement, and other financing arrangements. Rating presentation meeting with Moody's. Pricing of Certificates of Participation. City Council approval of Lease Purchase Agreement. i Y City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: September 11, 1985 To: City Council and Airport Commission From: David Brown, Assistant City Attorney Re: Airport Lawsuit I Our office is pleased to report to you a successful defense in the case I. of Iowa Cit Air art Alliance Inc., et al. V. City of Iowa City. et al. The Peti ioners in said case were seeKing a Writ of Mandamus ram e Court directing the City to remove what the Petitioners deemed an airport "hazard" from the clear zone of Runway 17, to designate Runway 17/35 as the primary runway, and to implement a plan to ensure future FAA funding. Trial in this matter was held during the first week of March, 1985, * and was tried by then City Attorney Robert Jansen and me. The Court, in its decision filed September 6, 1985, determined that a Writ of Mandamus should not be issued in this case for the reasons 1) that petitioners failed to establish that the Respondents(the City) acted arbitrarily or capriciously or abused their discretion by permitting the i building of the Ranshaw project and 2) that a Writ of Mandamus would not serve to achieve the results sought by the Petitioners. tp3/7 cc: Neal Berlin, City Manager f' • I ' 1. i i I b Johnson County Council of Governments �410 E VvWhirgtcnSt. law City, law 52240 r f Date: September 11, 1985 To: Iowa City City Council From: Marge Penney, Human Services Coordinator Re: Summer Food Service Program for Children Provided by Trinity Episcopal Church and Sponsored by the City of Iowa City The following information summarizes the sunnier lunch program that was provided at Willow Creek/Mark IV from June 17 -August 9, 1985. Total Meals Served (includes meals served as seconds) 2,934 Total Children Served (duplicated count) 2,330 Average Number of Children Served per day 1st week 41 8th week 68 (66% increase) The program was successful in providing free lunches to low-income children as well as serving as an additional opportunity for contact between the Willowcreek Neighborhood Center staff and the families living at Mark IV. Selection of Willowcreek/Mark IV as the lunch site aided in identification of appropriate children for this program, and the cooperation of the Neighbor- hood Center staff enhanced the quality of the project. Both the paid staff and the volunteers from Trinity Episcopal Church did an excellent job. The food was wholesome and nutritious, and the children loved it. I recommend City sponsorship of a group willing to implement this program in the future. cc: Elizabeth Alden Canon Robert E. Holzhamner Diane Sturek bjl/20 /73f i. _1 i i I .. i RECEIVED SE° :31985 Johnson County Board of Health Diactor L. Graham Dameron. MPH September 11, 1985 Barra of Health May Beth Dewey, MD Kehh Hemingway Evelyn C. Weber Card Petro w&Q of Orval Yoder City of Iowa City Mayor John McDonald b City Council Members Civic Center Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor McDonald 6 Council Members: Johnson County Health Department in conjunction with the Governor's office on Highway Safety and the State Department of Health, is launching a community wide program to increase the usage of car safety restraints. We would like to invite you to attend an informational meeting concerning the benefits of being involved in such a program. This meeting will be held Tuesday, September 24, at the Johnson County Health Department beginning at 6:45 a.m. and ending promptly at 7:30 a.m. 'A continental breakfast will be served. The agenda for the meeting is enclosed. If you are unable to attend, please send a representative. Please join in; we look forward to discussing this community effort with you. Sincerely, QAA� Sher wn /Joan rano :X,- JA'i Health Educator Graduate Student Slot/JR/ jkw Enclosures Health Center 1105 Gilbert Court Iowa City, Iowa 52240 I (319) 351.3085 /739 R i t i J i i i I iy, j.. i i , i Agenda 1. Welcome 2. overview of state vide activites. Cheryl Neverman, Governor's Officer Highway Safety 3. Proposals for lova City/Coralville Seat Belt Promotion Activities 4. Questions/Discussion i i I, i j i i . is i I' KENNETH O: GILMORE Editor -in -Chief August 23, 1985 Dear Mayor McDonald: Municipal budgets are subject to greater scrutiny than ever, especially in light of proposed tax -law revisions. Because of that, we'd like to call your attention to a proof of an article appearing in the September issue of Reader's Digest --"We Can Lowei Local Taxes." It describes the approach taken in Phoania and neighboring Arizona cossunities, where the esphasis has been on privatization of public services at considerably lower coat. I hope you will find that this article merits your consid- eration and encourages or prompts debate, and perhaps provokes some innovative solutions in your community to this growing problem of budget costs and taxation. With every good wish, The Honorable John McDonald Mayor of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City. IA 52240 PLEASANTVILLE, NEW YORK 10570 1704 j i I r: , i 'I t USRD SEP t985/FOB Iaabj 48 pages Ctd AG ` — page 39 FINAL PAGES STORY 32 Dspl y' We Can S`°Lower Local �0* lop Taxes As pressures mount on municipal budgets, Phoe- nix and other cities are proving that taxpayer dollars can be saved even as more and better services are provided i BY ltstsnr yrr=MWM /�j'1w rectus soutimst of Across Arizona, rapid growth L tratment� nesrin newwaste-water and pppt4to��mv� 8 approachesproviding completion in the Fan-gmwing dry government service, with-pnvad- of Chudler.'Bmtue it will be a ration'- contrudog out to the pri. privately owned and operated facil- rate sector—so the centerpiece. nr--tire first in the naom to serve a Nowhere have changes been more city this size-aspayers will save rapid a fir -reaching dun in Phoe- about st million a year. nix, the nindt-largest city in the s to eeighlwring Mesa, janimri- United States. to ionovadom al services were turned over to a which product more servim with ! privateamuracmrint98t:Nowthe frwer resources, ate appatmt in city's buildings amkept pristine for subtle but signifrantways: Sa5o,coo less than when the city In new residmdal construction, performed the service. for example, a single city inspector s In Scottsdale, adjoining Phoe. checks for structural safety, compli- nix, the first U.& dry to use a ante with electrical and plumbingg pprirare cappany for fare protection standards, soundneu of medtaniral bouo of better -than -avenge fire- systems, and adherence to the ron- response time, at les than half the ing code—asks which in many cit. cost in cities of comparable siu ies involve four or more impeucm 3: USRD SEP t985/FOB tub] Page 41 FINAL PAGES i 48 page Ctd AG STORY ;aMain wE CW LOM LOCAL rAym 41 To keep politics our of the bid. ' ding adtyaudiroreraowted pressure on our departmeac We had Working to coat re our per. the of municipal depart. meats, estimated equipment and formance against•, there were no real incentives. Now employees Iabor coats, then prepared the city's have been seized by a competitive scaled bids. PublicWorksloft to spirit - private eontracton on the fort four The result: last year Public Omuu= let for "11911 collection in Works outbid five contractors for various parts of the city. But these the right to collectin one radR ��gt6mcdfenseni secdonofthe city, beam�thenext. m 1Nws department low ett bidder by almasc u mBGon roan psoducdvm a year. This win ave taxpayers • Private•seetor management new rahoolop and other were added At. SU minion over the life of the can. tract 'Morale among our employ. g an skyrocketed,- Jensen tridon and naosfen red, sxd the psotdly.•Wednmveseddtstwe� number aFsanitstian emdovee by compere with the Private senor.• store than a third But ggest turttatound says Jensen came in employees' amttsdca 'Before mo- Since tgyg, Phoenix has placed 43 major costrawupforbid—for such saki a landfill operation. reacting out, there was little ane median maintroance wore, 1 ■ USRD S_FP t985/70B [aab) —�� pages # FINAL PAGES .1 IF _- t 48 pages Cud AG STORY 3a Main WE CAN toa'Ee Lacdt. TAXES advanced technology more quickly. city employee. "But we must re - To craure that municipal ®- member," caution' Robert W. ployces do not bar an unfair but. Paoe, Jr, author of Currily biac� den from contracting out, Phoenix City Hag "that it,' nes anti -labor transfers affectedemployees tooth. to make city services more effi. • er departments and requires con. eiene Its pro -consumer and pro- tractors to offer available job' to taxpayer.' i4► wFwaarf'■ � ^jri�jtr�e�j�f+iia weirL. r pag.2i0 La -N .Vier lie Kid the BaM �r was a 000e av■noo to watch a talk to Ham Rima. I --link hear ball game in the Bronx. The sat war what Sam said, but I saw lions Rima • -d, and the Yanks' Pan Guidry was reads uses his pndta, turn and give pitchin Joying9oyTahat wen fav of art, es- the kid the 6eLL TMSkid's ey■tLit ufs� � kid in 96st OUL isoiag• a foul bag seas the beat" crowdwee, an in fe hit in out direction. A boy of about cls p i and yellin,.I.e n the kid rise was grabbed reaching for it when the bull tbeMFI He pvegthe kid rht bawl' with �l7� aseammed glasses. Ywu: sissies. Wiwi was gm■utng mete even lee VY[ the kid was taau Crushed. CaG[rnlrn[ than the dame. He had an as oversised 1'aakee cap Then a orange thing bePPend A that came down ser hies eye and a mess ie the haat rew who ale aught 6aaebaa glee flat was t- bur for a Pout bees gat up and gave k m the him. He sterid the kind of kid kid. Another t-aderoue Cerise Cray other kid an the black ban up raked the left -field —,A - daily.. la the bonom of die ninth, a young the kid dedy'omaaoe shouted: "Gin men with a Fu Mandanmurtadte was d tiw 6.111" The duet war taken laving. As he p used the kid, he took up by others around ata: "Give do kid a boa from hig podia. Fere, kid— the beat Gin the kid the bulB" Mes another." he yelled, !lipping the Hors Rima shook his head andput boll in the air. Surprisingly. the kid dw boa in his porker. Ya, iming after sing Mote than. inning, the chant continued, until it Hm Hundreds of fans who had berm � s� throughout the borer left- halfheartedly watching a routine Sam sen &mesh` and slop pis` By the seventh ioninp the kid mutt waster' -the bock. And the kid! have had a stomachache. People He had data hills in his glove and a around him were buying him peanuts, big grin on his face. ands and ire cram. Than Sam. Cor of —t+. t est i., Tis M �w own: the fellow I was with, went over tot. Y>s r.► M I MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING September 4, 1985 Items for the agenda of September 10 will include: Set public hearing on Vista Park Village Second consideration of ordinance amending Large Scale Residential Development regulations Second consideration of ordinance regarding Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone procedures Second consideration of ordinance regarding definition of high-rise and low-rise buildings Second consideration of rezoning of Braverman Center i Final consideration of sign regulations Recommendation of Planning and Zoning Commission regarding priority work items and an amendment to Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone Public hearing on G.O. Bond issue Resolution to approve proceeding with issuance of bonds Appointments to Broadband Telecommunications Commission and Board of Electrical Examiners and Appeals First consideration of Nuclear Free Zone Ordinance Resolution reclassifying positions in Housing and Inspection Services Department and in Pollution Control Division A memorandum from the City Manager was distributed to the staff with an attached article, "Discipline without Punishment", which will be reviewed at the staff meeting of September 11. The staff was requested to read the article and consider the questions listed in the memorandum. Department heads were invited to bring other staff members to take part in these discussions. The City Manager reminded the staff that they should clip articles of general interest concerning staff development to be discussed at staff meetings. The person who provides the article will lead the discussion. Along with the articles, two or three questions or thoughts to serve as guidance should be submitted. Articles should not be of great length. Prepared by: 1 Lorraine Saeger A H MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING September 11, 1985 Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetings were distributed to the staff for review and discussion (copy attached). The staff was advised that a special formal Council meeting will be held on September 17 before the informal meeting. The agenda for the special meeting will include all planning and zoning items which remain from the meeting of September 10 (which includes final consideration of the Braver- man Center rezoning request), a resolution setting a public hearing regarding the parking system revenue bonds, and second consideration of the Nuclear Free Zone Ordinance. The City Manager cautioned against sending out memoranda or letters which are unsigned. For a great many reasons, it is very important that everything issued from a department be signed and dated. It should be clear who originated the material. A memorandum was distributed to the staff which requests submission of articles regarding staff development for discussion at staff meetings. It also listed articles which will be considered in the near future. Anne Carroll presented an article, "Discipline without Punishment", for discussion by the staff. Prepared by: Jau j Lorraine Saeger Informal Council Meeting DATE. _ September 1x85 PENDING COUNCIL ITEMS A W i I i Informal Council Meeting DATE. _ September 1x85 PENDING COUNCIL ITEMS A W w �O° SUBJECT Qw �� REFERRED DATE ai5) Q COMMENTS/STATUS ro Due apo az w ix- w a Economic Development Update 9-9 City Manage Council wishes discussion to include . corridor committee and corridor development. Notify Ray Muston. Campus Security Building - 9-9 City Manage When will offices be moved and existing building torn down? Erdahl Friendship, Seventh Avenue & 9-9 Public Work Schedule time when Traffic Engineer Wales can meet Council members at the intersection. 510 South Clinton 9-9 H&IS What are alternatives (and costs) to raising sidewalk grade as proposed by Hall Engineering? Has' rade already Inspection Costs 9-9 H&IS How would costs increase if inspec- tions include checking foundation lines for elevation; check location on property; amending site plan proce 7 Invite candidates to Council meetings Council Candidates 9-9 Assistant C ty Mana r include meeting with department heads on October 1 and with board/commissio Capitol Improvement Project 9-9 Public Work Include paving of alley between Dodge and Lucas formerly deleted from assessment project. Staff Committee 9-9 P&PD Discuss with City Manager use of staf committee to assist in developing ordinances re. urban environmental requireme�ntsT-0�nd $Rea spa Regular Council Meeting �i DATE. September 10. 1985 PENDING COUNCIL ITEMS SUBJECT ¢w REFERRm GATE a25 ¢ COMMENTS/STATUS a-2 z °� TO DUE gpw o w a He. high-rise/ low-rise buildings: Zoning Ordinance Amendment 9-10 P&PD Passed and adopted. Informal Agenda 9-10 Assistant C ty Mana r For September 17: I. Sewage Treatment Plant 2. Economic Development Update Parking Revenue Bonds 9-10 Finance Did hearing motion include refunding of these? Did certification of project include Sidewalk Assessment Project 9-10 Public Work driveway apron? City Engineer contact City Manager. Question.of appointment of same City and County Commissions 9-10 City Clerk person to similar or parallel bodies at both County and City level referred to Rules Committee. Auditor's Convention of Repre- 9-10 City Clerk Notify County Auditor of sentatives appointment of Mayor McDonald Reclassifications 9-10 Human Relat ons In future include a summary "comment" with agenda items. Arrange for Don Zuchelli to meet Redevelopment of 64-1a 9-10 City Managd with Council. Also arrange conferenc call. IOWA CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 17 1985 Strategic Plan for First Capitol Development A strategic planning outline was drafted to guide activities of First Capitol Development and to serve as a communications tool in the fall of 1984. The draft was circulated to members of the FCDI Board, Task Force Members and interested individuals. The modified plan is provided in the document provided. Accomplishments 1984-85 Accomplishments through April 1985 are summarized on the Annual Report included with your materials. In addition to those listed, addtional recent accomplishments which should be noted include the following. a. The City staff application to the Match Foundation for assistance with a marketing and development plan for Clear Creek Office -Research Park will have substantial inport for the community. b. Tax abatement ordinances in Iowa City, Coralville, Johnson County, North Liberty, and Lone Tree have been enacted.Johnson.County communities which have not enacted property tax abatement ordinances include Solon, Hills, Oxford, Tiffin, Swisher, and Shueyville. c. Local governments which have joined in the First Capitol Development area development program include: Iowa City Hills Coralville Riverside Johnson County West Branch North Liberty Kalona Lone Tree Other participants who have not yet made formal commitments of financial support include Oxford, Solon, Swisher and Tiffin. Wellman has requested a presentation before the City Council and is considering the feasibility of joining the First Capitol Development A preliminary inquiry has also been received from Washington. d. The Iowa legislature passed enabling legislation proposed by First Capitol Development to include Research facilities for property tax abatement. This new provision should be advantageous in attracting "sunrise" industries as well as traditional manufacturing and distribution centers. e. The First Capitol Development Venture Capital Club was the first such club organized in Iowa. f. First Capitol Development hasworked with representatives of Cedar Rapids on selected economic development projects and activities including the General Motors Saturn Project, legislative lobbying activities, and other mutually beneficial programs. g. Marketing materials and programs implemented include: 1. Presentation folio of strengths and resources 2. A slide presentation on the local need/impact of economic development 3. Video Tape for GM Saturn for Iowa City and for Joint Iowa City/Cedar Rapids proposal 4. Fund raising case statement to support private fund drive 5. Area ads have been placed in US Real Estate Register and Business and Industry publications h. The private industry fund drive has been initiated with an annual goal of $120,000 for a five year period. Pledges to date total more than $400,000. i. We are now working with more than 100 prospects in various stages of interest and potential. Goals and Objectives for 1985-86 POLICY AND INFRASTRUCTURE a. Complete Fund Drive to support five year program b. Develop formalized relationships for corridor development strategies with Cedar Rapids/Linn County representatives c. Resolution of Iowa City Waste Water Treatment Facility Issue d. Confirmation of Scott Blvd/Local Road Extension - e. Development plan for Clear Creek Office/Research Park f. Enactment of new zoning classification for office/research/manufacturing g. Resolution of Utility Franchise agreement h. Implementation of guidelines.for development of public lands (Airport industrial zone) i. Implementation of Iowa City revolving loan plan via community block grant funds J. "Streamlining" the development/approval process k. Council resolution on economic development I a i I i I I I 1. Integration with Regional Development Council MARKETING MATERIALS AND PROGRAMS tea. Complete inserts for Iowa City brochure b. Complete three -fold flyer for area promotion/handout �c. Complete area development brochure (County focus) d4 Complete computer information systems installation ! I e. Complete area Video Tape presentation. /f. Complete Buildings and Sites Folio ,g! Revise/Print inserts for Presentation Folios h. Implement direct mail contact with "Hi Tech Prospects" i. Establish telemarketing program to develop qualified leads GENERAL a. Prioritization of resources/ shift emphasis to external prospect development and cultivation b. Follow through, follow through, follow through... TARGET INDUSTRIES The State Industrial Development Commission has targeted the following industry codes for emphasis in the State marketing program: 2821 Plastics, materials, etc 2831 Biological Products 2834 Medicinal chemicals and botanical products 3551 Food products machinery 3622 Industrial Controls 3674 Semiconductors and related devices 3761 Manifold business forms 7374 Data processing services The First Capitol Development Marketing Task Force has endorsed the desirability of including similar industries in the Iowa City/Johnson County marketing plan. The following additional industries were targeted for inclusion in First { Capitol Development industry priorities. 367 Electronic Components 3662 Radio and TV Equipment 28 Chemical Products 252-357 Office and Computer Equipment 283 Drugs and Pharmaceuticals 384 Medical Instruments and Supplies 63 Insurance i (! 3811-25 Scientific Instruments I ■ The marketing task force also endorsed the principle of focusing attention on industries with potential interest in University of Iowa strengths in laser technology, human biology, bio -medical engineering, computer aided design systems, manufacturing productivity systems and other University research strengths. 1 Circle 621 on Roador Service Card. 1.2 Business 1-acllitics/.lune I Uri IA Spcc'Ld A11v(•n SIl)9 Sr•c•IIrnA 7V,:, - Where They Grow Profits Setter Lasers. microbiology. Robotics, CAD so0ware. Thal•s what Ihcyre growing in Iowa Ihese days. Utilizing some of the bust brains In the country, nourished by IoNva1 s colleges and universities. Inspired by this gracious land to create environments it which striving for excellence, Is it pleasure, and focal(,(] at the crossroads of malar transpurtn. tion. Iowa Is fertile with 2 I st cell tury growth. 'rhe energy, integrity, and ten• achy with which this state began continues to provide Industry it fertile soil for profils. now more than ever before in Its history. ITEM: 'I lie income front it new stoic lottery will be used for eco. nomic development. Including hay towns of principal and in. Icrasl on business loans that henofit Inc;J communities. I'1'I;m. 'I'hc Iowa Legislature recently repcalcd the state's •vu tax on new machinery and cquipnumt. ITEM: Iowa now offers it lax credit for the creation of new Jobs. rl'I3AI: contrary to popular opl. Non, Iowa s industrial produc. tlon exceeds agricultural produc- tion by 37, atones. Add to tills that Iowans are leaders In the nation In high srhoul gradmalon rates. In col- Icgc cnaancc It -SI Scott's. and In hachclor dcgrecs awarded per u'umbnu•d un putir 651 IA Special Advertising Section) BUSIneSS FaCIlI11C5/Anne I9M5 1.3 A bit of Silicon Valley in Cedar Rapids it's nearer to cornfields than It is to palm trees and its employees drive ten minutes to work instead of foray -flue on a congested free- way. But In other ways. Elec- Ironic Technology Corporation has brought a bit ofSllicon Valley to Cedar Raplds, Iowa. for a greatly reduced cost and in- creased product security to customers Makers of semi-cusrorn lnte- grated circuitry, ETC originally planned tohandlesmallaccounis But soon maforcompanles were seeking out the advantages of this midwestern shop. ln fact, the company received one million FOR BUSINESS Corporate Center 56 acres in 8'est DesAloines' most prestigious off re park. FOR LEASE • ._� 66,000 sq. ft. building Is All brick ■ Flexible Ooorplans ■ 6 corner oMces per floor ll Superior location ■ Many amenities occupancy: Spring 1986 or Build to Suit 6 additional buildings possible totaling 500,000 sq. ft. INDUSTRY ,^ I Interstate Acres r A Industrial Park Planned Park, Lyout in Pnnrelocation y y NOW AVAILABLE: ■ 100,000 sq. ft. ■ Adjacent to Interstate BO & 35 ■ Generous Parking ■ Rail Available '9 ■ Divisible Into 10,000 sq. ft. units "....SltesAvallable: ■Buildtosull ♦ ■ Tax Abatement ■ I.R.B: s In place Oil COMURCIAL BROKERS 2423 Ingersoll Des Moines, Iowa 50312 515/247-4900 Circle 612 on Reader Service Card. 1-4 Iit1SII1CS5 PaciIIIIcS/.lune 1985 dollars worth of orders In the first six months—an enure one half yeorahead of schedule And two of the first orders came from for- tune loo companies. one reason for the success Is the pricing edge ETC can pass On to customers "A California firm would haue to pay three rimes our annual square foot cost fust to lease the land for a building," says Scoff A. Clark president and general manager of ETC But another factor Is the pro- duct security ETC's stable work force provides According to Con- troller Tom Sova, "fortune 100 companies come here because, in California, engineers are sub- ject to the 'revolving door' syn- drome" At ETC turnover is low, meaning clients don't have to worry about product confident- Iality. ETC Isobviously proud of Its .Iowa location. in fact that's one of the major selling points in the company brochure. 'The figure you get from us is always a turn- key price," it says -'No hidden costs no surprises It's fust the mnu husiness Is done In Iowa." IA Spcclal Advertising Section) 100.000 population, and you have an ideal environment for success. A Determined People Whether native-born or trans- planted, Iowans share one key attribute: determination. The sin. gle-minded energy that built this land on the prairie now turns toward building a place where industry and its people flourish. Among the blessings of this rich land are natural wonders and ethnic treasures that enrich both work and leisure. The pioneers who tamed this heartland brought a heritage of hard work creativity, and dedication to excellence. Continuing generations of busi- ness leaders carry it on. Education for Achievement At the University of Iowa ties. plials, scientists have recently been acclaimed for break. throughs in research on Alz- heimers disease. Such leadership Is not new for this, the largest university -owned teaching hos- pllai In the natlon. Nor Is It new to the University, which Is also a leader In laser technology. its Iowa Laser Facility Is one of a very few In the United States, and Is available to non. IA Special AdvertiSing Section) University users on a per -hour fee basis. Among those taking advantage of its analytical cap. abilities have been N.V. Phillips, Eindhoven, the Netherlands: Dow Chemical, Midland, MI.: and Voughl Corp.. Dallas, TX, The University's Technology innovation Center helps new and existing businesses by supply- ing office space along with re- search, marketing, and other University resources to help In development. The school backs this nourishment by example: CADSI, a corporation that licen- ses and sells computer-aided design software, is composed of professors of engineering who developed the software and can remain on campus to teach and continue to develop business. Three hours' drive west of Iowa City is Iowa State University in In our package you'll find a special surprise. Cedar Rapids, Iowa is a crackerjack city. With the perfect package of elements your company needs to profit and thrive. A skilled and productive labor force. Training programs and financial and tax incentives. Transportation facilities. Affordable and cooperative utilities and city services. Look further and you'll discover some special surprises for a metro area of 150,000. Like more engineers per capita than any other city in the U.S. Nearly $500 million in foreign exports per year. One of the top school districts in the country. A full symphony orchestra and 70 city parks. These are just some of the things that make Cedar Rapids the 'perfect package' for businesses on the move. If you'd like to learn more, call Ken Caldwell COLLECT AT 319/398-5317. Economic Development Department P.O. Box 4860 Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52407 Circle 614 on Roader Service Card. Business Facilities/June 1985 1.5 HIGH PRODUCTIVITY IS NOTHING NEW TO CEDAR VALLEY productivity. Based on work ethic. Implemented in work skills. And improved by training and educational resources. It's the driving force behind profits. It always has been. In the Cedar Valley area, our brand of dynamic productivity has stood the test of time. The necessary elements arc here for your company to use: • A total workforce of 107,000 in a six county area • A significant pool of skilled labor currently available • Training programs available to industry through Hawkeye Institute of 7tchnology including statistical process control • Simble training grants available through the state of Iowa • University of Northern Iowa's doctorate degree in industrial technology • Connection to the interstate highway system • Quality health care at low and declining rates • Just -in -time delivery of supplies (currently provided to the four John Deere manufacturing facilities in our arca) • More than 800,000 square feet of industrial and warehousing space currently available far lease or purchase These are just some of the masons Cedar Valley's brand of productivity measures up to world class standards. For more information call Bill Hall, CID, (319) 273-6414. Cedar Valley Economic Action Company S-rl y ono, un,..nn> w ennl..r„ 1—a. a.mr rnu.. Ln,n ra.m Ceder F.H. Ind..mnl ikv- man Arnnlum • R'nl.vl... I,.Innmd th"'I n✓nl A..unnm • 14.A 1W.A rnumy Fninnmir IMvdnpmntl 6ninrll Circle 613 on Reader Service Card. I -r I3uslness I'nGlhles/.lune I t)H5 (A SpeClal Advenlsing Section) � Ames, where the science and technology story is equally excit- ing Decades ago a pioneer In development of computer, reowned for Its agriculture and engineering schools, Iowa State has, logically, built on this leader. ship in proposing a Center for Nondestructive Evaluation to test materials and structures for safety. The first of Its kind In the nation, the Center is enthusiastically sup. ported by Industry. As a high. tech research education resource. Its explorations extend Into fields fertile with possibilities for buss. ness: biotechnology, microelec- tronics and turbomachinery. Another short hop across the state, at the Univershy of Nonhem Iowa In Cedar palls, accounting recruiters flock to talk with grad. uates who tie for the second highest pass rate of accounting graduates anywhere In the coun. try, with a laudable G I.5% pass rate on the national CPA exam. Across Iowa, 34 private col. leges and universities match this educational excellence In their own ways, while 15 community colleges train students in techni. cal fields. No wonder Iowa for years has been recognized as the most Ilterate state in the country! Intelligence Applied to Business with all this Intellectual ferment It's not surprising Iowans apply the latest technology to making a profit. The Maytag Company, for example. has aggressively Incorporated microprocessors Into Its laundry and dishwashing_ equipment. making It more trouble-free yet more flexible in use. In waterloo, the John Deere Tractor Works bonsis a sime-of. the -an assembly plant in which robots controlled by computers do a major part of the work. Cen- terpiece of the facility is a ]III(- that lncthat turns I 000 -pound raw cast - Ings into transmission cases. A worker pull the casting on the line and punches In a code: the computer takes over the machin. Ing. Pacing competition of high quality, low cost foreign pro - (A Special Advertising Section) ducts became the concern of the Iowa Produclivily consortium. They capitalized on the hreak- through work of Iowa -born W. Edwards Deming who forged the key to high productivity now used by Japanese industry. The result, a course in SPC—Stallslical Pro- cess Control—called " Transfor. mation of American Industry". Ifs easily available through Iowa's community colleges. Creative solutions to the eco- nomic crunch are Just as easy to discover. The Iowa Business Growth company was the nation's flrsl stalewidc develop. meal company certified under the SBA 503 I.oan Program. Since May. 1 on I, it has been providing long-term, fixed -asset financing al low interest rales to help small businesses. A second, private sector effort is led by the Iowa venture Cnpi- lal Fund. Aulhorized In I um:l by the Legislature. II raises it fund privalely through Ilmficd partner- ship Investnttnls, then reinvests that money In growth -oriented Iowa businesses In addition. around the state various busi- ness groups are developing their own, local, packages of private sector funding inlnnded to back bank loans for small business. Focusing on the future, the Iowa Legislature worked diligently to develop a new package targeted specifically toward ucononNc growth. Signed Into law by Governor Terry E. Bransind In April, Its provisions spur busi. ness In several ways. Sachs, son9ce, and use Imes on purchase or rental of kndUS- ICont(nued on Ingle I.I of BUS111e55 FoCilitIVS/.lune 1985 1.7 /292- First We Listen to You.... Because we recognize that you know your business needs.... And whatever your commercial real estate needs, Hubbell's team of professionals will examine the entire market to meet them. • Industrial • Office • R&D • Warehouse Call one of Hubbell Realty's professionals today. ®®1.01313011 MICHAEL C. HUBBELL HUBBELL REALTY COMPANY 205 HUBBELL BUILDING DES MOINES, IOWA 50309 (515) 243-3228 V 1-8 Rusincss Fin CilitiCS/.IIIIIU 1985 Employees are a A ready supply of agricultural resources, reasonably priced utilities, and a high-caliber work force contribute to satisfaction and success at the new Cargill cormmilling plant In Eddyvllle, Iowa. General Alonager Larry Plllard saystheplantwasa 104 million. dollar capital Inuestment for Cor. gill, built to bring their high -fruc- tose corn syrup operation to the western pan of the corn belt. Cargill worked with the state to refurbish a branch of the Chicago Northwestern Railroad near the plant. "There's no question trans- portation Is an important pan of Working well You might say that G. E. and Carroll, Iowa, share a mutual admiration. "We've received 100 percent cooperation from the business people In Carroll, " says Donrinch, managerofmanufac- luring engineering at General Electric And In return. G. E. enr ploys more than 450 Iowans. This division of G. E., which manufactures appliance con. Irols moved to Carroll In 11) 72 to relieve the growing pains of their Illinois facility. When the call). puny looked fur a new slle, they found In Carroll an ennpty build - Ing that rout(] be occupied lin. mediately, plus nn Industrious work force. IA Speclol Advertising Sc•clionl / 2 V'2- boon to Cargill our business,"Pillardsays: "Here we're located in reach of two major rail lines" Access to quality employees hasbeen a boon to theplant. too, Pillard says. "They're well edu- cated. Interested In the success of the company, and they're motluialed." The plant counts other Iowa characredsticsamong Its benefits loo. 1t relies on Iowa coal to generate its plant. on Iowa corn for the raw material used in their corn syrup. And on Iowa's jobs training program for savings in start-up costs together "We have a wonderful group of people here." says Finch. The company makes the most of its predominately female workforce Involving them In quality control projecls and actlon groups that address company contents. Filch Gies lite (axes in l ourrt as another plus for their Carroll plant. The taxes here, lie says. are comparable to those for (heir Illinois operation. Favorable tax rates, good fa. cilitles, anti o quality work force— ICs a combination that. for G. 13.. lights up the contpany:s bonont lit w IA Special Adverlising Seellonl CENTENNIAL WAREHOUSE CORPORATION OFFERS: 0 260,000 square feet of warehouse space that can be subdi- vided to individual specilicalions. 0 100 acres of unde- veloped land availa. ble for light manu. facturing or assembly of goods. 0 On-line computer system. 0 24-hour monitored security system. 0 In-house closed circuit television monitoring, O Outside storage. WAREHOUSE SPECIFICATIONS: 0 Concrete and steel construction. 0 5 -Inch thick concrete reinforced floors. 0 22 -toot high walls with 24 feet of clearance at peak. 0 4040 -tool bay spacing. 0 Concrete block side walls up to 10 feet high to minimize damage. 0 Facility is built dock high. OTHER FEATURES: 0 Experienced person- nel. 0 Forklift trucks with paper roll clamps, carton clamps and pull packs. 0 Automatic sprinkler system. 0 Electronic/hydraulic truck door levelers. 0 Rail service. 0 Plenty of off-street parking. 0 Individual front and rear entrances. 0 Easy access to ware. house from interstate highways. 0 Slatewide freight de- livery service. PUBLIC UTILITIES INCLUDE: 0 Electric—Iowa Power. 0 Gas—Iowa Gas. 0 City of Des Moines Water 8 Sewer. IOWA FOMIGN TR"EZONB Foreign Trade Zone a 107 Centennial Warehousing Corporation. 10400 Hickman Road Des Moines, Iowa 515-278-9517 Fred T. Caruthers, Jr. President 13USIIICSS I-nCilifies/Juno I9H5 41) 7f -z t a; ; WHAT WEDO Research ': Procure: Develop: Build to Tuft ConsulL- � •: Flevtse' � t"OrrOYI• Finalize: Leaser^ Menaggee Satisfy. WHAT NW ' Call KVI - N 1 wdomIW're a canctructbn.COMMY i ilRe ra managanknt HIM. - Whether it'sari office complex; neighborhood shopping center, R & Dor industrial, we can customize the needs of, your individual project. Big or small.. Top to bottom. Start to finish, Thiat includes site selection, market research and building lostiit: Revisions, details, even leasing'and managing after the fact Arid we're flexible enough to offer your company any combination of development and building options.. i You see, few companies even attempt ,all of these functions: One does them all well Commercial Float Estate, omolopmont and Management Specialist For more Information, contact: George W. Venloichor, President 11308 Davenport Street Omaha, NE 68154 (402) 330.5240 Circle 623 on Reeder Service Card. I.I () BUSInt :tis 1'acllllivs/.lune 1985 Icunrinuc(l frons purge 1-7) trial machinery, equipment, and computers after July 1, I u85, will be refunded. After June :30, 1987, the tax will not be collected. e Businesses which enter it Job training agreement and in- crease employment by 10%. and new businesses, may take a credit against personal or cor- porate income tax e l'he exemption on personal property valuations for 1985- 1089 has been doubled; per- sonal property is completely exempt In 1987-88. 'These points are just the latest in a long Iowa history of financial and tax advantages for business. They include: • Single Factor Corporate Income Tax. Iowa is the only state wuh this structure, under which only profits from products delivered in the state are taxed, Products sold outside Iowa are exempt, e open Pon Warehousing. Companies can store, divide, package, and change an Item within the state without paying property taxes unless the Item is delivered within the state, a Ire. mendous advantage to dis- tributors who shop bulk but have to break down quantities for final delivery. • Revenue Bonds. City coun. cils can authorize, without refer- endum, Industrial revenue bonds. which companies can usr to finance land. buildings. and equipment And Iowa has plenty of Industrial revenue bond finan- cing avallable today! • Ucductlon of Federal Tax. I Ialf of the Federal Income tax can he deducted from net Income to arrive at lowu'f'axable Income. • Industrial Training For new industry. or an expansion, the state will become it partner in training for operation of machin. cry or for an employee to hc- con)e semi -skilled at it specific job lova s unique training pro• gram pays half the workers sal- ary for up to one year. plus all cosi.~ for instruction, r'ollsuha111s. and classroom spare. • Itlglll to Work. wodwi:s fire free tr) choose whether w join a union or not, (A special vivvrilsing srufloni Y-;_1 Adding New Dimensions to The Heartland In Iowa's "Mississippi Mountains," a ski trip is a fifteen minute drive. Some of the Midwest's most popular boating and fishing is at this city's front door. And you'll find a rich legacy of restored Victorian architecture, two medical centers (two HMO's), the kind of quality educational system you'd expect in the stale that leads in literacy, and three colleges all offering graduate programs. Quality products (and profits) conic easier where quality of life abounds. Two of Dubuque's len largest industries built new plants since 1982. Two others doubled in size, and all len have made substantial capital commitments in the same period. Their view of the future saw an abundant water supply, sewage treatment capacity already in place, low stable energy costs, and an available labor force that brings the sense of quality and productivity with them when they conic to work. Consider that workplace amenity is something you may need to attract your employee of the future, then take a look at Dubuque. That employee may already be here. You should talk to the people who have hired your kind of worker in your kind of place. DA Call UITTRMO (319)557-9200 RL GREATER DUBU OF DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 880 LOCUST STREET DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001 Clrclo 611 on Roador Sorvlco Card.. 17K--?— The high cost of health care, now a national concern, became an Iowa Issue In the early 1980's. At that time, leading Central Iowa companies banded together to Investigate the causes and ex- plore options for lowering their costs. The result: today, statewide, health care costs have de- creased dramatically. So much so that Blue Cross of Iowa has Implemented Its first ever across. the -board cut In premiums, made possible because of cost con- tainment success. That's a real bill of health for business. it's the kind of thinking In which Iowa businesses flourish) 35II City, OWN, OWN CONFUSED ABOUT SITE LOCATIONS? We realize it's no laughing matter... May we offer a solution?... Northgate Corporate Park NCP in Iowa City, Iowa • Just minutes away from The University of Iowa • Easily accessible and affordable sites, from two acres to thirty acres. • On Interstate 80 with 1500 feet of Interstate 80 frontage; 200 miles to Chicago; 225 miles to Omaha • 5 miles from Interstate 380; 290 miles to Minneapolis; 280 miles to St. Louis • 10 minutes to municipal airport handling corporate flights; 20 minutes to scheduled commercial airport • 80,000+ highly motivated, educated people within 5 miles of site; 300,000 within 25 miles SOUTHG E DEVELOPMENT N'' 3255 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 337A195 Circle 619 on Header Service Card. 1.12 Business Facilities/June I o s Location, Location, Location Iowa's geographic position leads to easy transportation to and from almost anywhere. As the Intersecting point for the countrys only Iwo transcon- tinental highways—Interstates 35 and 80—Iowa Is Ideally located for trucking Six Class I railroads cross the state making one -day delivery available to about/ of the nation. Bordered on the east by the Mississippi and the west by the Missouri River, the slate Is also well served by barge transport. And there's no point more than 30 car -minutes from an airport that accommodates a corporate Jet. Convenient transportation has been key to creation of f=oreign Trade Zone x 107 in Des Molnes, Part of five-year-old Centennial warehousing It includes more than a quarter million square feet of warehouse space and an additional loo acres of land available to companies Import. Ing finished goods, components and raw materials who wish to avoid formal customs pro- cedures and duty prior to leave Ing the zone. Foreign trade Is eased In it second way. At least 14 expon management companies operate (A Special Advertising Section) The University of Our most important resource .The University of Iowa, in Iowa City, is more than a recognized cultural center and home of nationally ranked Big 10 athletic teams in women's and men's athletics. Our University is a focus for state of the + art technology and product development in cooperation with induslli� .Programs of interest to industry revolve around more than 40 research centers and institutes including: The Electron Probe Microanalysis Facility The High Field Nuclear Resonance Facility The Weeg Computer Center The Particulate Material Processing Sciences Program The Protein Structure Facility The Large Scale Fermentation Facility The Technology Innovation Center The Electron Microscopy Center The Laser Fadlily The Center for Computer -Aided -Design The largest university owned leaching. research hospital in the United States ■We also offer additional competitive assets: A productive labor force. Strategic position to midwestern markets Financial incentives through tax and train. ing programs MORE THAN 1400 ACRES OF SITES IN OFFICE/RESEARCH AND INDUSTRIAL PARKS We invite you to join our expanded business development campus. For more information, please call or write Ray Muslon of First Capitol Development, our area develop. ment organization. First Capitol Development, P.D. Box 2567 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 319.3543939 / Circle 619 on Reador Service Card. fA Spedtll Advenlsilig Sccllon) 13USInCSS P.1cIIIIICs/June 1985 1.13 /7S« - \•anulge of 11CP ronin}; ur insure the ideal enrironnivill for quality office parks. first ul use OW zon- ing to adrantag;e.'I'ho Mid- r\nn•rica drool developed Hel;cncp \Voss. it planned cor- porate conueuniq' That imcgraws vig ill offtcc buildings. a land- scaped, sculpwre-enhanced podcstrian mall. Piazzas, glass. canoplod aaiums. and ample III the slate. among Ihcnl Tho Iowa Iisport-Imporl Trading Company. Iorll cd Ill 1!I8:11l\' the Ituan Conal niers. No strangm to loicign transections. a Ituan company, Iuulkcrs Told. put logolivr the first Joint Venose het\roen the Chinese gnvcrrn nuns and the t'nilvd sellvs: Pearl rover m nufacalring. located in a western suburb. more recently it was III(, first hank in the countq• al fisc the joint tilt.\/layout Im. poo hank Working; capital t ivar- anlee. 'I'hc envlrnnnu•ntrll contrihu. tion it quelily husincss location makes to prculuetivity Is nc. Wunvbdg ed across the state. as InIib Iin}s Ire n•nov:1l vI cn5 lIV •ly. sad CWHIenre in new construe. tion develops I:Irililios c Icstg;ncl l to nurture corporate success. in \\•1•.91 1115 %loilles*. 1111. 1'1+111 and Zone (:nlllmission took ad. I-14 1i11.9I111•SsI'acllilles/.lune1!)85 I:\ Special Arivetnnlsiny;Sectit ol9 parking In a sophisticated pro- fessional environment. I ]ere, worldwide conn mun(callons are its avallal)le its transportation: it built-in stale -of - the -art computer and tcicranr nwnicalfons system puts word processing. accounting, spread- sheet modeling. it message cen- ser, telex, video and tele -confer- encing facilities at an executive's fingertips. In cedar Rapids, the exciting environment for growth fins nur- lured Teleconnect, a fast grow- ing long-distance telephone ser- vice company. Growing from a $ I million company in its first year to estimated billings of S57 million in its fihfi year, the cont• pany finds the future of its tech- nological growth even more promising Maintaining quality environ• ments that attract and feed such growth is important to Iowans. who care about how they live ddK HAVE THE ENERGY TO TAKE YOUR COMMU WELL INTO THE FUTURE:' ill When you're investigating a new location for your company, it's important to know the energy to turn the wheels of industry will be them when you need it. In our service area, dependable electric energy is a fact, not an empty promise. Iowa Public Service Company has the coal-fired gener- ating capacity to keep the power going for years into the future. And, your investment capital will earn your com- pany a 25% discount on electric demand charges. But them are many more reasons to contact IPS about your next move. For instance, the cost of natural gas is well below the national average. We have sites available in both Iowa and South Dakota, and can assist you with facility planning. II you're looking for good locations, big energy incen- tives and the productivity to give your business a fresh start, look toIPS. Fill Gwmhum, MarW of Am oetrlo RW For mo2lnlamolion, all or write Glean tarsen Iowa Public Suva Company l G Circle 321 on Header Service Card. IA Special Advertising Sectl0n) 13usiness 1-acilltics/June 1985 1-15 /7�4z and how people lir(• with than. For those who move to This slam, thyro are similar. Iirtfle locations In bo found. simply waiting for IIIc visionary to develop Them. lawns beautiful land is also rich in people and potential. - I I - Spirit for Growth The innoyioion and ciciermina. lion that chamcteriao Iowans are Ito hexer (:monnplifiod than in hubuquo. the Mississippi Itiver city Ihm has hoot nu•Ittiono(I in I llllnt•fal6 jokes. No one—in Ihi knowpokes Ion al huhogoe any Iongvr. In a lime of recission, the city has noor. ishid cnormous productivity and growth. • '1 Hurn olyne Corporation. it subsidiary of Sybron IHochisivr, When Spew -y Cnrporatlon open- ed a plant fn clearLake. Iowa. six 1/ears apo, they made the perfect match. They had been looking for an existing Jactllp/ to corn/ sonne of the work load from the Sperm operation In A1lnnesota. They wanted east/ (1CCL'FS 10 (1 hlghwag, rend It tuns Important that the faclllp/ be toll yin Iso ntileS of (heir MI[n nesota hend- quarters what they found was a Wild- ing that needed Homily nn ren- ovation, was adjacent In Inter - start -35 and Ies.S than aoo hours front the Tloin C'Mes. and had room for expansion. And as o hams, they mere ahle to hire sixty employees who had been artmking at the plant doing slnn- llnr a cork Ji Ir a rllJlr'rrnl rompun!/ and Iherefo re needed Iiule train. Ing. Ili Iitsilluss pacilitic :s/.Il im- I!IAG (A Spcclnl.%(I% I'I'Ilsing Sccliolll / 7 `/'2 SpemJ Is the„only'compufer ::,'!-manufacturer and "software de. velonerin Iowa,"says Judy Cog ' ncda managerofpubllc reldtlons In the systems product division., draw from, rhe labor pool In Clear Lake'and A1ason City, and we recruit from the University of Iowa. Iowa State, the North Iowa Community college, and local uoaech schools. :"M fact"says Cognetfa, "some graduates of Iowa state Univer. spy's computer science depart. stent are working as our Clear - : Lake facility develnping software sold worldwide." For Sperry, file eager and de. pendable work force has been one more bonus In an already Ideal match ht Iowa. IA spcclal mlverilsing st,coonl NYI manufactures electronic lab equipment. According to Don Sanders, vice President of Finance, in I nal the company began an expansion of office and factory space that doubled Its square footage. "we're now in the final stages of building the new facility;' says Sanders. "and because of the expansion our production is much more effici- enl:' • CyCare, the United States' largest provider of medical data processing services, has main. rained its headquarters in his home town Dubuque, while add. Ing 12 other offices across North America. "We're up and coming to the Fortune SOOT" says Susan Tag- gart, Manager of Marketing Com. uthern Iowa looks better now than it did in 1970:' "Why? Because we still have hard working, productive Iowans working for us and understanding government peo- ple working with us," states Ronald Friedman, President, Everco Industries, Inc. Ron's sold on southern Iowa. In the past 15 years Everco's Ottumwa produc- tion facility has been ex- panded five times. Now it is nearly four times its original size. W're Iowa Southern Utilities. And we're sold on southern Iowa, too, Look to us for your next expansion project or move. We offer complete, confidential location services for our entire 15 county service area. Be like Ron Friedman on your next move. Consider southern Iowa. �IOWA SOUTHERN UTILITIES COMPANY 300 ShenGn Avenue eemevme. lows 57544 NO 1515) 437-4100 We're looking better every da Circle 325 on Header Service Card. o0,llE P(4/,yF A0 10s Y o m a a � 3 n Z c a a 9y0 pRaCRE55 o0�y�� • A place to live and grow • Reliable & low cost labor force • Good access to both rail & truck transportation • Development sites available • Vocational&Universities close by For more information please call: Belle Plaine Development Commission 708 13th Street Belle Plaine, Iowa 32208 (319) 444.2161 Circle 616 on Reader Service Card First U.S. Plant "No one knows how big we can get." says Jose Garza. vice presidentforAlexlcan operations at Pino in Sioux City. Iowa. But expansion is certainly on the minds of people at Ihls Mexican. based company. which opened its first plant outside Alexlco last year. Out ofall file possible locations for a new plant, why did Iowa get the and? "Aly partner traveled all over the country looking for a Place 10 locale, "says Garza "We decided on Sioux City because file raw materials were avail- able. the facilities were already here, and file labor was aval4 able. IYe could find capable peo. pie who have been in the meat business." Pino now employs forty -flue people at its Sioux City plant. but that number may increase soon. "The idea Is to keep growing," Garia says. "And we think this is the best place to stay." Our city is alive with growth and change and exuberance. More than $640 million in new construction projects reflect the commitment of business and industry to the future of Des Moines. If the sites and sounds of grow4h and stability appeal to your business sense, our booming city should be your next home. To find out how you can build a better future in the growing Des Moines area, call Brian Flynn, Greater Des Moines Chamber, (515) 286.4962. munications, "and our stock is doing very well, loo:'. • The Dubuque industrial Center houses the national head. quarters for A.Y. Macdonald and Frommel) Industries. Strong educational facilities support this industrial strength. The University of Dubuque and Loras and Clarke Colleges have enjoyed continued success and attracted bright, talented people to Dubuque. Clarke, for example, on Header service Card. (A Spe(7lnl Advertising Section) %7-o NA Des Moines goes Greyhound When Greyhound decided to merge its accounting and audit- ing operations front ifan other cities, they Chose Des .lfoines trr house the new facilities. "Tile ed• ucufional considerations tuere most Important in our decision,'. says Herb Doherty, director of public relations. For Greyhound. three con. is recognized by Cycare as one of the bcsl conlputcr schools in the arca. Quality of I.h•ing A brind ne%e 1985 sludq ranks Iowa first among tilt fitly stales Ill quality of lire. In the study. Iowa was compared to the national average and the other 49 slates In 23 different data areas, includ- ing such factors as education. public safety, environment. and sideration Included ibe fact flat they love receiver] fine coop. eration from the ciry and (lie community college, which is conveniently located mut pro. vklfs the facilRy hue need to truill our employees in Greyhounds uccounting procedures'* says Doherty. While their new building was under construction. Greyhound mounted a massive recruitment program In fill tion to 700 job openings. The results of that [)to. (train reinforced their faith In file Iowa pool of labor. "We're a People -Intensive operation," Do- herty says, "and we've been Impressed will) the high quality Of file employees we've hired:- Modem ired - Modem one story 113,600 sq, ft. building on 23 acres. „BINSWANGER MIDWEST Ghee, Plaza, Chicago, IL 60631 • 312.693.7770 „New York. NY • Phila., PA • Allanm. GA • Charlolle. NC Raleigh, NC WmslomSalem, NC ColumOia, SC Dallas. TX • Orlando. FL • Oeford. MS • Denver. CO London • Brussels • Rollerdam • Amsterdam • Pans COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE IA special Advcr icing Section) Uncle awe on Header Service Card, Business I-acilltles/.lune 11.785 1.1 fh /71. health care. The swdq confirms what Iowans have known for Years. In addition to outs!anding under- grmivare and pose -graduate educational opportunities. the state is rich in « ecreation. On the cast. Dubuque boasts Sundown. the states finest snow skiing arca, and the Mississippi Refie Itiver bowl, popular for river sightsec- ing. On the wesi, unique loess hills grace the Missouri and shvhcr canyons rich In wildlife, and easily accessible for hiking and camp ing. Des Moines boasts the nnid. west's most active louring ballet company. I lancher Auditorium in Iowa city and C.Y. Stephens in AITIVI'S n•gularly attract the fined national and international orch- estras and performers. 'These Ihrrc dtics as well its many others across Iowa boast pro. fessional and semi-professional orchestras and their own an centers. Each August. locwans cycs turn to Ihe. skies over Indianola whcrc brightly colored hol nir balloons proclaim the International I lot Air Balloon Championships. Alnuasl SIMUI aneously. Ihou- sands of bicyclists are clipping 1-d0 1illSlnctiS l'aelfillcSIA Inc HIM5 Ihcir rear wheels In the Missouri River as they embark on the In- iernntionallydamous Des Moines m-tlisler:s Grcat Bicycle Ride A- cross lows. Gaining and losing riders as it goes. the Ride ends seven days later, as cyclists dip their front Ilres in the Mississippi. Generous reservoirs. sparkling lakes, and clear streams provide milple boiling and fishing. In fact. tilt- reservoirs each have their own sailboat racing and cruising fleets—halfway between the Iwo occims! While across the stile festivals ihuund, from the Grant wood \rl festival In Stono City. to IA Special Advcnising Section) —� Steamboat Days in Burlington, The 131x (Belderbeck) Festival In Davenport, tulip festivals in Orange City and Pella, and the Old Threshers' Reunion in Mi. Pleasant, which showcases steam -driven threshing machines and other farming tools of the pioneer days. Quality of life can be measured In one other—imponam—way: the sheer beauty of the state. Rip. Pies of green waves In an Iowa cornfield at the height of the season, gentle rolling pas. turelands, the hills of Northeast Iowa brilliant with fall foliage, Iree- shaded campuses and Ivy. covered buildings, plus a collec- tion of gracious old mansions. Quality of life can be tasted, too. In Iowa -made products with national significance such as Maytag Blue Cheese. And at Aunt Maude's restaurant In Ames, which The New York Times cited as a restaurant that would fit Into Greenwich Village, Georgetown, or Ghlrardelli Square "without standing out at all as a refugee from the cornfields" Growth. In the beginning II was the rich land which accounted for the harvest. Now, the richness of the (A Special Advertising Section) heritage and the people, utilized with Increasing creativity, ac- counts for the growth. This 1980's growth is of a new sort. It builds on tenacity, Innova. tion, and intelligence. The new growth Is in business, thriving within the state, and delivering to those who Invest, a healthy profit. • Our Economic Development staff has over 35 years experience in the site location process. • A staff of nearly 200 is at your dis- posal to provide all of your engi- neering needs. f• Thoughly researched and prequali- fied client communities with existing sites and buildings are available. • Many of our locations offer incentives that include training, financing, and tax exemptions. • Locations available include those offering incentives such as training, financing and tax exemptions. • Tailored relocation packages can be designed to meet your time frame. For further information, contact Dennis Holcomb: In Iowa: 800-272-6436 Elsewhere: 800-445-0110 on Reader 13usiness 1-aclillics/June 1985 1.2 1 �7� For More Information . Mark Kapfer Rob Selplelon Iowa Development Commission Clinton Area Dcv. Corp. 600 East Court Ave- Suite A P.O. Drawer 229 Des Moines, Iowa 50300 Clinton, loWo 52732 515-281-6785 319.242-4.536 Gary Owens Neal Broderick I.P.C. Iowa Power I lubbell Realty Company 823 walnut Strent/P.O. Box 657 2o5 I lubbell Building Des Moines, Iowa 50303 Des Moines, Iowa 50309 515-281-2329 515-243-3228 Brian Flynn Fred Camtllers Greater Des Moines Chamber of Iowa Foreign Trade Zone a 107 Commerce c(o Centennial Warehouse Corp. 8001iigh Street 104001iickman [load Des Moines, Iowa 50307 Des Moines, Iowa 50322 515.286.4050 515-278-9517 Dan DOtemore Dick Redmond Dubuque Econ. Dev. Commission The Mid-America Group 880 Locust 2929 w'estown Parkway Dubuque, Iowa 52001 West Des Molnes. Iowa 50265 319-557-9200 515.223.6227 Jim Knedler Glenn ]varsen Area Dev. Dept. Iowa Public Service Iowa Southern Utilities 401 Douglas Street Centerville. Iowa 52544 Sioux City. Iowa 51 102 515.437.4400 712-277-7710 to" as a center for business and Industry has much to WM offer. Our labor force IS strong. �s+ne Wave got plenty of lend it ware build on. Iowa's school system —cr e ranks among the highest in the 'a.. a country, but our taxes and cost of living are low ... so are our Illlnd. energy rates. The Iowa -Illinois service area has some of the lowest gas rates In the country. Look Into our service areas — Ft. Dodge, Ceder Rapids, Iowa Cly, Onumwa and the Ouad Cities. You'll find more for less in Iowa. For more Information call or Write: John Wetzel Community Development Supervisor Davenport, npo Second 2801 7n. wn dlmx .a.mwm.m Devonport, fovea 52601 .'�� a wb M M IM cumxwn (319) 32WI35 IMrICIIICIMN.ey ." Circle 622 on Reetler Sorvlce Card. Ken Caldwell Cedar Rapids Chamber of commerce P.O. Box 4860 Cedar RapldS, Iowa 52407 :119-398-5317 BIII 1 tall Cedar valley Ecorl Action Company Seeley I tall, University of NOnhern Iowa Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614 319-273-6414 Doug Seidenberg Iowa lieally Commercial Brokers 2423 Ingersoll Ave. Des Moines. Iowa 50312 515.247-4900 James R. Kinnelt II Council Bluffs Econ, Dcv. Fund P.O. Box 1565 Council Bluffs. Iowa 51502 712-325.1000 Bob Tllys Belle Plaine DCV. Commission 1529 Sunset Drive Belle Plaine, Iowa 52208 319-444-2161 I larley L Thornton Shive-Battery Engineering 2323 Dixon Street/P.O. BOX 3267 Des Moines, Iowa 50316 515-265.9947 Ray A. Muston First Capital Development. Inc P.O. Box 2567 Iowa City. Iowa 52244 310.354.3939 Rarry R. \volt Southgate Development 325 East Washington Street Iowa City. lOwa 52240 319-337.4195 Del F. White Muscatine County Econ. Dev, Council P.O. BOX 341 Muscntlnc. Iowa 52761 316.263.6373 John welzcl Iowa-Illinols GRE 319 l elh Street flock Island, Illinois 61201 319.326.7135 Frank Kullg KA'. International 1 1 308 Davenport Street Omalla, Nebraska 68154 402-330.5240 1 ;7 r-� 1. :: •� V '4'c'i_.�. An Iowa location will enable you to achieve peak levels of profitability in record time. You'll reach all your markets more efficiently from Iowa — and your company will pay no income tax on profits from sales outside our state. On top of that, we've repealed sales and use taxes on industrial machinery, equipment and computers. We've also initiated tax credits for new jobs and eliminated personal property taxes. Iowa's financial incentives, excellent quality of life, free worker training and high productivity can help your company reach new heights. For a qualified guide, contact Gary Owens, Iowa Power, I?O. Box 657, Des Moines, IA 50303, (515) 281-2329. Circle 924 on Reader Service Card, ■ "k— n�.,.�a.n 61 SpocUd Advertising Seclion) Buslness I-acllitles/Juno I tuts 1.23 /7fZz ONLY IN IOWA Only Iowa has a tax structure that excludes corpo- rate income taxes on profits from sales outside our state. This important feature—resulting from our unique single factor income tax— has captured the attention of industry worldwide. And that's not the only financial incentive we offer. Recently. Iowa repealed sales and use taxes on indus- trial machinery, equipment and computers. We've also initiated a tax credit of $672 for each job created, and eliminated personal property tax assessments beginning January 1, 1986. A favorable tax structure is only part of the reason industry is attracted to Iowa. Our free training pro- gram, combined with well-educated workers, creates a level of productivity that ranks among the highest in the nation. An unmatched quality of life and a government which actively pursues economic devel- opment all help make Iowa a state where we grow profits — better. For more information about growth opportunities in Iowa, contact the Iowa Development Commission, 600 East Court Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50309, or phone 151512813000. WE GROW PROFITS Circle 320 on Roador Sorvlce Card. 1-24 BUSincss FildliliCS41UI$' 1985 BETTER, / 7�4z First Capitol Development, Inc. P.O. Box 2567 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 J Draft September 17, 1985 U L A turn of the century Initiative representing Coralville, Iowa City, Johnson County and The University of Iowa f t 5 I Iowa City Council September 17, 1985 1 Strategic Plan for First Capitol Development, Inc. (E) 2 Accomplishments 1984-85 2.1 Research and Profile Information (E) 2.2 Local Government Policy/Commitment (E) 2.3 Marketing Materials/Programs (E) 3 Prospect Activity and Results 3.1 Historical Profile (E) 3.2 Prospects June 84 -March 85 (E) 3.3 Expansions/Locations (E) 4 Goals and Objectives for 19B5 -B6 4.1 Policy and Infrastructure Initiatives 4.1.1 Iowa City/Cedar Rapids Corridor (E) 4.1.2 Long Term Funding (E) 4.1.3 Waste Water Treatment Capacity (E) 4.1.4 Scott Blvd/Local Road (E) 4.1.5 Clear Creek Project (E) 4.1.6 Office/Research/Manufacturing Zone (E) 4.1.7 Guidelines for Public Land:Development (E) 4.1.8 Council Resolution on Economic Development (E) 4.1.9 "Streamlining" the Development/Approval Process (E) 4.1.10 City Revolving Loan Program (Black. Grant) (E) 4.1.11 Regional Development Council (E) 4.2 Marketing Materials and Strategies 4.2.1 Inserts for Iowa City Brochure (E) 4.2.2 Three -fold flyer for area direct mail (E) 4.2.3 Area development brochure (E) 4.2.4 Area Video Tape Presentation (E) 4.2.5 Buildings and Sites Folio (E) 4.2.6 Area Information Systems Files (E) 4.3 Prioritization of Resources and Programs (E) 1 FIRST CAPITOL DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL REPORT " 1904-85 _ APRIL 26 1985 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 1984-85 — Following formal organization of First Capitol Development in the Spring of 190?, a nuxber of program objectives were reviewed and outlined for 1994-55. Priority concerns addressed in oar initial planning included the following objectives for 1984-85. ._ 1. FCDl should act to organize and implement a strategic plan for co:mnfty economic development based an previous research, — community recomeendations, and identified strengths and deficiencies. 2. FCDI shcuid.proceed to promote the commitment and support of local government agencies including: lama City Council, Caralville, City Council, and Johnson County Supervisors as well as Chambers of Commerce of both Iowa City and Coralville. " 3. FCDI should act to organize and promote broad community participation in economic development plans, strategies and programs. - 4. FC01 should act to encourage the enactment of state authorized — property tax abatement ordinances in appropriate local government Jurisdictions. - - 5. FCDI should act to encourage enabling legislation for economic i I development in the State in general and Johnson County in particular. Specific legislative initiatives should focus _ on local tax millage set aside for econoeic development and - — property tax abatement for office/research facilities. i 6. FCDI sbcuid act to encorage and promote participation of Johnson County municipalities in FCDI as an area wide economic develcpment organization, _ 7. FCDI should act to mark with staff of the Iowa Development i Coamissien on economic development programs and to update local cceaunity materials and resources to support IDC staff j activities, S. FCDI should proceed to produce necessary materials for •- prospect development based on identified community I strengths and prospect needs. r' 9. FCDI should develop a marketing promotion strategy to ++ target industries and corporations uniquely suited to , ccmnunity strengths and resources. r 10, FCDI should Implement an existing industry program to t encourage and support expansion of existing industry in � i i_ i i ii i r - Iowa City, Coralville, and Johnson County, Il. FCDI should organize and implement a private fund drive to complement local government fuading...to support marketing activities and programs. ACCOMPLISHMENTS— 1984-85 Following is a summary of accomplishments related to objectives outlined for First Capital Development during 1954-55. I. Preliminary review of economic development research has been caapleted including statistics and trends for each of the following, al Iowa City/ Johnsen County prospect history; 'bl Industry location decision factors; cl Competitive analysis of advertising in national site location publications; dl Comparative analysis of Iowa business climate relative to neighboring states; and El Comparative analysis of Johnson County business factors relative to Other Iowa communities. A strategic plan for FCOi economic development initiatives has been developed and distributed to board members and task force representatives based on research review. 2. Local governments have pledged commitment and fiscal support to FCDI including; low& City Councill Coalville City Council; and Johnson County Supervisors, The University of Iowa has pledged commitment of support and cooperative services to the FCDI economic development program, The Technology Innovation Center has been successfully established with tenants in residence beyond initial expectations, The Scall Business DevelOpment Center has provided direct services to a number of new business entrepreneurs. University of Iowa staff have been particularly helpful in the development of comprehensive data and presentation materials in support of the area and state wide proposal to the Saturn Project. Initial steps have been taken for an area development liaison with representatives of the Cedar Rapids Committee of loo. 3. Community participation and involvement in the FCDI economic development program has been stimulated through the organization of task forces defined in the strategic plan. Actions of the task forces have been incorporated in ongoing development &cttvities. 4. Property Tax Abatement Ordinances have been enacted in each of the following local governeentsi City of Coralville; City of Iowa City; Johnson County; and City of North Liberty. S. Proposed legislation for local tax aillage set aside and tax abatement for office/research facilities was drafted in appropriate legislative committees. The local tax millage set-aside proposal was defeated in committee in favor of the more general local option tax legislation and as a consequence of •opposition to a proposed enactment by city councils rather than a voter referendum, As of April 25, there was still some hope that the tax abatement extension for office/research facilities would be submitted through the house ways and means committee. 6. Representatives of Johnson County municipalities have organized through the Rural Business Task Force to directly participate in the•FCDI economic development program. Participation has included representatives from the following communities. Oxford Nest Branch North Liberty Lane Tree Solon Riverside Hills 1. FCOI worked with the Iowa Development Commission on 'Sell Jolla' trips to Minneapolis, Chicago, Milwaukee and Chicago during the previous twelve months. Followup direct mail materials were forwarded to leads identified as part of the program. A followup visit to Minneapolis health care related firms was made in Fall 1494. - The Quick Reference Guide for Iowa City has been updated I o reflect current wage statistics and available tax abatement programs. B. The following materials have been prepared to present the University of Iowa, Iowa City, Coralville and Johnson County economic development programs to targeted decision makers. a) A presentation folio of community strengths and resources, b) Video Tape presentations for Iowa City Saturn Project and a second Video Tape far the Cedar Rapids -Iowa City Joint Saturn proposal. c) A slide presentation (with script) for presenting the need for economic development to local groups and opinion leaders, K Now 1 dl A fund rasing case folio for presentation of the private fund drive to prospects. Advertising has been strategically placed in the U.S. Real Estate Register and the April 1985 issue of Business and Industry to expose the FCDI area development program as an alternative for business expansion. Four responses have been received to the U.S. Real Estate Register ad. A Venture Capital Club is soon to be announced through the leadership of Rayne Hester, Dain Bosworth, to promote contacts between investors and entrepreneurs in our community. A computer inventory of all available buildings in Iowa.Aas been programmed far planning and evaluation of available space. A local developer has taken action to build a spec building in the Business Development Park to enhance the marketing program for area development. 9. The FCDI marketing task farce has completed a review of . general marketing strategies and target industries unique to community strengths and resources. Specific recommendations are incorporated in FCDI budget proposals for 1985-86. 10. An existing industry program has been implemented via the Chaaber of Commerce Economic Development Couittee. 11. The Fund Drive Task Force has organized the framework for a private fund drive to support the FCDI economic development program. The goal for the drive has been established, a general chairman has agreed to serve, and initial calls have been made on key prospects. The formal kick-cff for the drive is scheduled for May 1985. FIRST CAPITOL PROSPECT CONTACTS JUNE 1981 THROUGH MARCH 1985 A major factor in the economic development program is the timeliness and degree of fallowthrough with prospects who make contact with the community. Response must be prompt and tailored to the client's specific needs to the degree possible. Consequently, each prospect Inquiry can require several hours of tine. HISTORICAL PROSPECT PROFILE During the period between January 1979 and April 30, 1981, we can document 35 different industry prospects which made contact with the Iowa City area. The referral sources of prospects were as follows: Iona Development Commission 17 Self Initiated g University Faculty Referral 1 .. Real Estate Broker Contact 1 _ Fantus Client 1 Existing Industry Referral 1 — Referral from lama Electric 1 Clearly, the Iowa Development Commission has been the primary source of referrals for industrial j location in (oma City, — I Aamnq those 35 prospects fcr industrial location or expansion, . four either purchased land or located in lama City: — Rhiting Company- 801 (postponed plans to build) Millard Rarehouse- III TEATS, Inc. 1027 Hollywood Blvd. Oscar Mayer DDI (postponed plans to build) — A number of other prospects elected to locate in other Iowa communities for reasons cited by followup i contacts summarized below. gat Decision Factor Ottumwa Unknown Osceola Expanded existing plant Mason City Availability of clerical pool — f' Muscatine Competitive natural gas Cedar Rapids Lower office lease costs !. Harlan Expanded existing plant Corning Lower wage costs i Other plant locations mere tracked to neighboring states. -, Quincy, III. Local firm turned dawn service I. Lincoln, Neb, Transferred project to existing plant Minneapolis Unknown In short, 11 of the original 35 prospects did In fact expand or locate, Of the remainder, several are still potential prospects as the economy recovers, PROSPECT ACTIVITY JUNE 1984—MARCH 1985 During 1981.1985, a number of inquiries and contacts have been made for industry location and L e.pansion in the Iowa City, Caralville, Johnson County arra. SUMMARY OF REFERRALS JUNE 84—MARCH B5 .� Iowa Development Commission 11 Self Initiated Referral 10 L Existing Industry Referral 7 University Faculty Referral 1 r Iowa Illinois and Electric Ref, 1 Real Estate/Legal Broker 2 TOTAL 32— i i I U ;I IN 1 I I W i I �` �(•..��� _ (r•�, =tC9:wvli NE W —tQ.;115.:1.5.�.6`A..'l.N..�....'.i...5(.I.Y.[�.T.tfavi'IlY1L1I� maxca9 �rla:me6M.S.9..+.p.rt..).a.S.R.S.f.i.C.a..s..c.t.[.n..¢.i..m...v..n.t.s..u U md I i .............�....... f�+......x........ ....... o •� X...r...... o �•'S.' 1 ul w O ♦a i i � r....�......ra......•.... ......... h-1 d ❑ tl b........ 41 0 r /' pp N O @q L•1 ......37.......q.....�......•U...,..•W........F..... n.u1..•. E)....... Q...... Rn. gp 1 F- L M.:........ 40 $ F-� 3............................................................................... q. � I lt�r ra r ........................... LL! :Ell Pf (; O UTY V-014 N'I`I•I tID (' 1 �E:, I I i First Capitol Strategic Plan Preliminary Draft January 5, 1985 Section I: Background and Status Analysis INTRODUCTION Economic development is a complex concept involving a number of interdependent factors and issues at the state and local community level. To develop and sustain an effective economic development strategy, community leaders must develop a comprehensive understanding of those elements which define the parameters which limit their options for action and those which offer competitive advantage for development. Economic development may be defined as a deliberate strategy or program to identify potential futures for the local community and to intentionally implement programs to influence those alternative outcomes. The basic intent is to became aggressively involved in changing or influencing factors or conditions which can cultivate desirable alternatives. To react to or follow the status quo is to become dependent upon economic trends and market conditions with no opportunity for control. An economic development program requires attention to environmental trends which effect our future alternatives, strengths and weaknesses inherent in our community economic base, targeted strategies which can accentuate strengths and reduce or eliminate deficiencies, and specific programs or actions to .implement targeted strategies. Several of these factors have been examined at the state and local levels over the past several months. State Trends and Programs The most recent report on Iowa economic growth was released in December, 1984, We Are Iowans First: A Report of the committee for lawa-s ruture urowtn. finis report is one of a series concerned with the economy of Iowa and its effect on the quality of life we enjoy. Excerpts from the special task force -appointed by the Governor in August 1984 include the fallowing observations. "The economic problems we have been facing in Iowa, jparticularly since 1979, are largely characteristic of the entire upper Midwest. With the single exception of Minnesota, the gap in the Midwest's economic performance j relative to the rest of the nation continued to widen this FCDI Flan I r past year. Because of its ailing economy and aging industrial plants, the region long known as the corn belt is now being described by some as the 'rust belt-. "Changing economic structure and recent recessionary period have produced higher unemployment and have halted population growth, as northerners moved both south and west in search of more attractive job markets. The two-year period from 1980 to 1982 shows net outmigration from the five -state area (Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin) of 650,000. Most of these people went to the three fastest-growing states in the U.S.: Texas, Florida and California." "Since 1973, Iowa has lost 19 percent of its jobs in the 'goods -producing' sector of the economy, compared to a five percent loss nationally. Most of Iowa's losses were felt in the construction category and the following classes of manufacturing: machinery, electrical equipment and food products. Iowa was able to to manage a 5.9 percent growth in overall employment only because 'service -producing' jobs rose by;16.6 percent."- "Job losses in the recession of 1979-83 were more severe... 116,000 non-agricultural jobs were lost over that period." .. The Governor's task force recommended three core proposals for economic development at the state level: (1)Formation 'of --an- Iowa -Partnership for Economic Progress with leadership representation from state and local government',' agriculture, business, labor and education; (2) Development of a World Trade Center in Iowa; and (3) Creation of a Private Philanthropy Council. The three care proposals are integrated with priority action recommendations of the task force including: 1. Analyze growth opportunities in new agricultural enterprises; 2. Enact state lottery with funds earmarked for economic development; 3. Explore the potential for additional college and university research and development programs; 4. Assure an adequate road system for economic development: 5. Establish an "economic development bank"; 6. Establish an Iowa office in Washington, D.C.; 7. Re-evaluate the 4% sales/use tax on new manufacturing machinery and equipment; S. Continue and complete the personal property tax phase-out; FCDI Plan 2 i 9 1 9. Assure a competitive unemployment insurance program; - 10. Attract health-related industries and services. A fundamental finding in the task force report was - that "Iowa's volatile and declining economy is in dire need of strong, corrective, immediate actions. A consensus on those actions must quickly emerge." I Local Community Trends and Proorams -- National and state economic trends and market conditions have not gone unnoticed by business, educational and government leaders of Coralville, Iowa City and Johnson County. A Johnson County task farce was established to consider economic development as a major priority of the local community in 1983. City Council, University and local business leaders focused on factors critical to the future of our economic stability and quality of life. . It was recognized that economic development in the L _ future will be more competitive and subject to changes in •-, the marketplace. Success will become even. more dependent 7 upon our desire and ability to respond clearly and consistently to prospective clients in a timely manner. The economic transformation noted at the national and state levels was also evident in Coralviile, Iowa City and Johnson County. During the period 1979 through 1984,.the . - number of jobs in construction had declined by 590 (34 percent), service jobs had declined by 750 (12 percent) and Y agricultural jobs had declined by 210 (10 percent). I' Declines in these areas were offset by increases in government employment (including University of Iowa)of1890 — .l ( 9 percent) and retail trade of 180 ( 3 percent). The impact of the mix of employment and economic sectors in the Johnson County was accentuated by projected stabilization and decline in university enrollments and related economic factors in the near future. University and government related jobs were expected to decline as a --' consequence of federal and state intitiatives to limit further pressure on government revenues and the projected decline in university enrollments. University enrollment ! was projected to decline by as much as 20 percent within they, next five years. I I Distribution of Johnson County employment in 1984 -- i included less than 9 percent in manufacturing. The largest segment of employment in the non-government sector was in retail trade (34.5 percent). It was noted that the future _ i stability of retail and commercial business in Johnson FCDI Plan 3 I W4 ■ ■ I County would become even more dependent upon diversification in industrial employment.as university growth leveled off and declined. Retail and commercial business is dependent upon basic industry to generate demand for retail and commercial services. The local leadership task force recognized the critical need for an aggressive initiative to stimulate diversification of employment opportunities for citizens of Johnson County. Specific strategies and recommendations included: 1. Organization of an independent non-profit corporation to promote economic development as a commitment of local government, the University of Iowa, and business leadership of the county; 2. Stimulation of broad based community involvement in and understanding of our joint economic development goals; and 3. Identification of strategies to accentuate our unique community strengths and eliminate obstacles to desired economic development outcomes. First Capitol Development, Inc. (FCDI) was chartered in 1984 to provide the organizational structure for our community economic development program. Members of the Board oi.FCDI.worked to complete organizational representation and other enabling mechanisms during 1984-85. The material which follows was intended as background and guidelines for next steps in the Coralville, Iowa City, and Johnson County "Turn of the Century Initiative" for economic development. FIRST CAPITOL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES March 1985 (Draft) 1. Improve the business climate of Iowa City and Johnson County by correcting weaknesses such as tax abatement policy, infrastructure capacity, the availability of targeted financial incentives, and misunderstanding of basic community development initiatives. 2. Stimulate the identification and recruitment of new industry, expansion of existing industry, and the development of new induustry from local research and development initiatives. FCDI•Plan 4 ■ 3. Market advantages of Iowa City, Coralville and Johnson County to attract and retain businesses and stimulate travel and tourism to the community. 4. Accentuate and build upon community strengths in area such as educational testing and measurement, business services, health care, information/ communications systems, and cooperative University research and development centers. A.ORGANIZATION FIRST CAPITOL BOARD STRUCTURE Current First Capitol Board configuration includes representation of: i Iowa City Government Greater Iowa City Chamber of Commerce Coralville Chamber of Commerce Coralville City Council University of Iowa Johnson County Supervisors Johnson County Towns CORPORATE TAX STATUS First Capitol Development has been registered as a non-profit 501c(6) corporation by the Internal Revenue Service. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION/INVOLVEMENT - - The board is structured to assure oversight and policy review by participating agencies. Broader community participation and involvement is intended through the organization and implementation of nine task forces with i designated tasks or functions. The general framework of the nine task forces, advisory to the board, should be structured under a general theme unifying representation from Coralville, Iowa City and Johnson County... with an intentional commitment to the future. For i example, Johnson County 2000; Turn Of The Century Initiative; The Committee of 100; etc.. Local Incentives The local incentives task force should consider and FCDI Plan 5 .w I recommend policy related to government and private resources to attract new business and foster expansion including: I. The capacity of infrastructure (sewers, streets, utilities ,zoning) to promote new business... and essential strategies to provide that infrastructure; 2. Policy guidelines to govern the provision of tax abatements and other forms of publicly funded incentives; 3. Policy guidelines to govern the role of First Capitol and/or participating .jurisdictions in the purchase and/or control of land for future development; 4. Policy and procedural guidelines related to the provision of venture capital and financial packaging to support business development; 5. Policy and procedure to "expedite" the decison making process to accommodate new business prospects; and 6. Policy and strategies for coordinated development of-theJohnson/Linn counties "corridor." First Capitol Fund Raising - - The FundRaising Task Force should establish the structure and strategy for a fund drive to solicit private funds from businesses and individuals. .The economic development fund drive should have a theme consistent with the area mission of First Capitol Development, Inc. and include consideration of: 1. Timing and goal to assure support of the economic development program for a period of not less than five years; 2. A schedule of events to complete the drive within an appropriate time frame; and 3. A structure to assure the participation of a broad base of community support and involvement with visible commitment of significant community leaders. Prospect Networking FCDI Plan 6 9 N The Prospect Networking Task Force should recommend procedures and actions to identify and enroll broad community participation in the identification and cultivation of business and industry prospects consistent with area development objectives. The goal is to cultivate a network of personal contacts with desirable prospects. Community Education/Development The Community Education/Development Task Force should identify and implement strategies and programs to inform the• community of economic development objectives. The objective is to assure broad understanding of coordinated purposes and benefits. Possible strategies include: 1. A speakers program to systematically present the goals of community development to area service clubs and arganizations;(Completed '84-Slide/Script) 2. Outline and implementation of a systemic public relations program to develop broader community awareness of the contributions of existing industry to our local economy and quality of life; and 3. Planning and distribution of a newsletter to keep community leaders informed of economic development issues and activities.(Implemented September 85) Promotion and'Marketina The Promotion and Marketing Task Force should recommend marketing objectives for new business recruitment including strategies related. to: 1. Integration of programs with the Iowa Development Commission marketing plan; 2. Identification and focus of targeted industries and businesses consistent with area strengths and resources; 3. Recommended use of advertising to promote area development; 4. Action to complete an integrated package of promotional materials to be used in direct mail and personal contacts with prospects; S. Policy to integrate economic development, travel and tourism, and other community development strategies into a coordinated and complementary communications FCDI Plan 7 s iprogram; 6. Development and production of a video-tape presentation for the economic development program; _I and -- 7. Design and production of supportive material for the community contact network (eg: the "Brief Case I Promoter" via Cedar Rapids). -' Research and Information Systems ) The Research and Information Systems Task Force should recommed policy and procedure necessary to assure accurate J and timely information to: 1. Monitor the status of prospects; -1 2. Identify and monitor competitive position; S.•Assure timely and consistent information for planners and decision makers; 4. Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of .`� economic development strategies; and S. Identify opportunities for strengthening programs and strategies. FCDI Plan 8 Facilities and Sites The Facilities and Sites Task Force should recommend policy and procedures for the identification and presentation of available sites and buildings available for business location or expansion. The purpose is to provide an organized and attractive inventory of available resources for review by prospective clients. Specific tasks might include: 1. Inventory of community sites and buildings for industrial development; 2. Packaging a common format for presentation of sites and buildings including statistical summaries, site drawings/plats, and photos; and 3. Identification of zoning issues related to future development alternatives. Current Industry Development The Current Industry Development Task Force should recommend and implement procedures to monitor the concerns and needs of existing business and industry. The purpose is to act as a liaison for developmental assistance and problem resolution. Activities may include: 1. Schedule periodic meetings with existing industry leaders; 2. Identify and consolidate general issues of concern related to prospective expansion plans and enabling actions; 3. Sponsor corporate meetings of existing industries to demonstrate community appreciation for their contributions and eagerness to work together on future expansion plans and activities; and 4. Stimulate referrals of potential expansion or location prospepcts from clients and business associates of existing industries. Rural Business Task Force The Rural Business Task Force is intended to assure active participation and representation of Johnson County business representatives from small cities and towns in First Capitol Development planning and programs. Objectives would include: 1. Periodic meetings of rural community representatives to monitor economic development concerns and activities; FCDI Flan 9 2. Development of a format to incorporate small town .data and sites in First Capitol information systems and promotional materials; and 3. Procedure to provide rural community representation an the FCDI Board of Directors. STAFFING Current staffing for First Capitol Development is essentially limited to the executive officer, one full-time secretary/staff assistant and contributed assistance from individuals and organizations with other primary purposes. Staff assistance for economic development in Coralville and Johnson County is limited. Some service functions may have to be developed to represent those components in the area plan. B. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES TAX POLICY Coralville, Iowa City and Johnson County were the only communities among the major metropolitan communities of Iowa without approved state property tax abatement program. (Enacted Fall 1984) State corporate income tax policy in Iowa is not competitive with contiguous states. We need to lobby for a more favorable business climate at the state level. Long term local development may be dependent upon local option tax for the county which could be designated for economic development purposes. (Local sales tax option authorized by legislature in 1984-85) LAND POLICY The competitive cost of land is a primary factor in site location decisions. We need to define our position relative to public control and ownership of land for future development. Existing public lands (such as that held by the Airport Commission) should be reviewed for possible industrial development advantage. FCDI Plan 10. I FINANCIAL INCENTIVES (LOANS/SUPPLEMENTS) Eligibility for state incentive programs varies •among communities included in the First Capitol area program. Each participating governmental agency should review and define parameters under which they will sponsor applications to state and federal programs. All must then be incorporated within a coordinated program. TRAINING PROGRAMS The Iowa Jobs Training Program is one of the most attractive training programs available. We must take advantage of this incentive quickly and be sensitive to means of improving the program to maintain the existing advantage. UNIVERSITY LINEAGES The Technology Innovation Center (TIC) and Small Business Development Centers are very valuable assets to the area development program. A community contact network for prospective business expansion is particularly dependent upon participation by university faculty and research staff. High tech industries will be particularly _interested in direct relationships between their technical and scientific staff with university departments and research centers and institutes. ,First Capitol can be helpful in the promotion of the University of Iowa as a leading research university and of its importance to the future of the community as well as the state. (Business Facilitiesad, June 1985) C.FINANCING CURRENT COMMITMENTS Current financial commitments to First Capitol include: Local Government (1985-86) City of Iowa City $40,000 (50489) FCDI Plan 11 City of Coralville 6,400 ( 7698) Johnson County Supervisors 20,000 I North Liberty 2,000 ( 2053) Hills 500 ( 547) Lone Tree ( 3020) Solon Oxford ( 891) Shueyville ( 666) Swisher ( 287) Tiffin ( 652) Riverside f 412) f:alona 500 ( ) 1,676 ( ) Greater Iowa City Chamber 3,750 Coralville Chamber 7,200 Hills Chamber of Commerce 500 FIVE YEAR PROGRAM FOR PRIVATE FUNDS A five year program plan has been proposed to assure sufficient time for program development and implementation. Private funding is essential not only to defray projected costs of programs and strategies but to also encourage involvement and participation from the private sector. The private fund drive was initiated in spring 1985 and includes a five year pledge program beginning with July 1,,1985... through June 30, 1990. Funds from the private funddriveare to be explicitly committed. to development program strategies and activities. Local government and chamber resources are designated for administrative and overhead expenses. Fund drives and economic development resources in comparable communities are reported as follows. CITY AMOUNT TERM DES MOINES $ 500,000 ANNUAL CLINTON (83) $ 820,000 THREE YR BLACKHAWK COUNTY $ 500,000 THREE YR CEDAR RAPIDS (84) $ 590,000 THREE YR COUNCIL BLUFFS(84) $1,000,000 THREE YR QUAD CITIES R 184,000 ANNUAL CHAMPAIGN,ILL $ 128,000 ANNUAL LANSING,MICH. t 100,000(EXC SAL) ANNUAL FCDI Plan 12 / 75Ko2— i I � I I i i i 1 i. ! I � I I The First Capitol Development five year program of $600,000 ($120,000 annual) is conservative when compared with competitive cities. J D.COMMUNITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS AVAILABILITY AND ACCURACY OF COMMUNITY INFORMATION PROSPECT FILES AND STATUS PROFILES COMPETITIVE PROFILES (Local,Region,State) RESEARCH BASE AND ANALYSIS FOR TARGET MARKETING EFFICIENCY Information systems and records should be established on computer files to assure optimum access, flexibility and effectivness. PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS (IDC Certification) i Community Needs Assessment Survey -Needed Action Plan (3 yr) Based on Survey -Needed - Promotional Brochure Quick Reference Guides -Needed Factual Inserts for Presentation -Needed Summary Inserts for Targeted Industries -Needed Community Maps -Needed :. Community Fact File - -Needed Tourism Brochure r .: Available Voc Ed Programs - -Needed .Video Tape -Needed Buiildings and Sites Folio -Needed E.BUILDINGS AND SITES PUBLIC LAND AND DEVELOPMENT - RELATIONSHIPS WITH PRIVATE DEVELOPERS FORMAT AND PACKAGING OF SITE INFORMATION Standard Site Data Sheet Site Drawing for each each site Map configuration within community SYSTEMS FOR COLLECTING/MONITORING SITE INFORMATION F.EXISTING BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY PROGRAM Formation of a "rehearsed liaison team" FCDI Plan 13 i _ � i I I I J i r I � ti i I i i ,I I Iml . ■ 0 J J Program to reflect interest in each existing business Program to provide local assistance and access to local/state government and local support resources Program to provide public awareness of local business contributions Coordination with economic development 6.LOCAL CONTACT TEAM Identification of local contact team representatives for liaison with site visitors when appropriate Development of a rehearsed site visit presentation Identification and equiping of a briefing room to be used for site/community presentations FCDI Plan 14 i "I t i i Section II: objectives and Strategies'� i i i IN Section II: objectives and Strategies'� Objectives: Strategies: Promote a positive image of the community 1. Target advertising in select media; - 2. Distribute materials through community contact network; - 3. Prepare "professional marketing material; - 4. Develop coordinated public relations�- program for economic development; i- 5. Develop relationships with Iowa Development Commission staff; 6. Develop joint planning and economic development strategy with _ { Cedar Rapids leadership. Identify and contact 400 prospects it ..i.. consistent with unique strengths and community resources - 1. Integrate marketing with IDC marketing plan and strategies; �. 2. Direct mail campaigns to target industries with tailored content; 3. Implement complementary Tele -marketing program; 4. Implement intentional referral network via community contact resources; 5. Personal contacts at professional meetings and trade shows;i 6. Host executive visitation programs "�,, in conjunction with Amana VIP, Iowa Athletic events, 1986 World _ - •t - Ploughing Contest, and other, - special events; — f� 7. Host corporate meetings and executive training programs; 8. IDC "Blitz" Programs i L. i FCDI Plan 15 • � I t v �I IN I 1 ■ Strengthen follow-through with targeted prospects (objective of 20 site visits from new J business prospects) _ 1. Follow-up contacts through local ! commmunity contact network; j -� 2. Distribute video-tape presentation; 3. Host corporate executive receptions; 4. On-site calls/visitations to corporate -. offices in targeted cities/industries. j . - Strengthen yield of j positive location decisions from - -� site visitations (objective �-. of 5 new locations/ 200 fobs) d. Develop rehearsed and coordinated � jl community visit presentation; I- �j _ 2. Implement competitive package of �. Jlocation incentives; I 7.- 3. Expedite decision process/ I ' ' responsiveness to site prospects J .via timeliness and nature of response; "response J 4. Develop advanced packages" - based on targeted industry needs and! -'� local resources; 5. Develop a coordinated package/folio ,. of local community sites and buildings as well as available services. Strengthen existing business e;tpansion and development program. I° ,i� J ; 1. Implement on-going system to monitor _I needs of existing industry/business ! and available assistance; '. - - 2. Implement systematic public relations program to present the contributions i. of existing business to the community _ and the future; 3. Provide periodic programs on topics, j of interest and value to local business and industry; -� 4. Provide confidential and non-partisan i - assistance for local expansion and _ development. I ; I ' i FCDI Plan 16 � I i J I j I 1 ■ Implement an on-going Economic Development research and policy review program. 1. Identify public and private land available for future development; 2. Develop coordinated city and county zoning plans and strategies for future development; 3. Implement local property tax abatement program consistent with exisiting state guidelines; 4. Establish joint planning task force with Cedar Rapids leadership; 5. Computerize all essential information files and market research data; b. Develop coordinated information systems to collect and monitor city, county and inependent data; 7. Provide essential strategies to assure essential infrastructure for future development; S. Implement electronic link to commercial ' - research and clipping service to monitor .trends in economic development. FCDI Plan 17 R I General Motors Corporation Since the announcement on January 8, 1985 that General Motors was creating Saturn Corporation as a new company to manufacture automobiles, the location of its new manufacturing complex has been a matter of intense interest. In a matter of weeks thisinterest expanded beyond GM, with 38 states expres�s,ing this, interest. In addition, scores of national and local civic and political leaders, as well as private individuals, voluntarily offered detailed plans about the advantages offered by their preferred locations. This information, representing a substantial effort by many communities and individuals, has filled more than 80 file cabinet drawers. These data, together with that already on hand at GM's Argonaut Realty, served as a basis for what many have called the largest private industrial project in recent history. To understand how this information helped the Saturn site selection decision requires an understanding of the site selection process. HACRGROUMb The Saturn site selection activity began in December, 1983, well before the announcement that Saturn would be operational or a separate corporation. At that tine, communications between _ "Project Saturn" personnel and Argonaut Realty were established. The first task was to determine and define the criteria for a suitable site. Considerations such as acreage, energy needs, utility requirements, environmental factors, personnel requirements, transportation network requirements, supplier" and other parts sourcing considerations, community factors, and economic climate were all reviewed. During 1984, _ considerable effort was spent in further estimating and refining these criteria. The coordination of this activity was handled through the Site Selection Task Force. This group is an established. committee within GM, charged with the responsibility of recommending sites and locations for GF, activities. This committee is chaired by the Director of Argonaut Realty and consists of members, as required, from various GM staff activities. For Saturn, the following areas of expertise were extensively involved: o Saturn o Argonaut Realty o Capital Appropriations J Genual Weis Buaamp 3044 Wrest Giand Bouievaie Deuod Mnotupan 40202 /75f7- M o Personnel Administration o Employe Benefits o Legal - I i o Argonaut Architecture, Engineering 6 Construction o Public Relations o Industry Government Relations I o- Logistics o Marketing and Product Planning o Energy Management o Tax Section - o Industrial Relations o Environmental Activities o Materials Management/Purchasing A unique aspect of Saturn was the early and continuing participation in the site selection process by representatives j of the United Automobile Workers. I An important accomplishment of this committee was the formulation of the preliminary Saturn requirements. These unduly meant exclusionary. comprehensive, They covered the bassite criteria and were sent to all states expressing an interest in Saturn. In addition, 'each discipline lent its expertise in estimating, researching, and evaluating information regarding this project asrequired. In many cases, each discipline invested hundreds of man-hours in the effort. A significant distinguishing feature about the Saturn site selection activity has been the high degree of publicity surrounding the project. As a result, large numbers of state and local proposals were received, including offers of various types of incentives. Literally hundreds of phone calls, and j letters poured into GM during the first few days following the January 8, 1985 announcement of Saturn's creation. To handle _ the deluge, the states, where appropriate, served as coordinators and initial screeners. In these instances, each state designated officials to serve as Saturn site contacts to handle inquiries from within their state. By working with these contacts, those interested in offering a site proposal could then present their'best case for Saturn. I As proposals were received, state officials designated J contacts for specialized areas, e.g., corporate income tax, property tax, workers' compensation, etc. These contacts served as a valuable resource in helping the Site Selection Task Force members understand and correctly interpret the information provided. To insure proper control of the information provided to GM by the states and to make certain that the documents were reviewed, a sticker coded system was established to channel the infor,gatio6 to the proper personnel. Once the data was received, the information was identified, marked with a coded sticker, dated, sent to the respective staffs for review and returned to the high security room. where the files are maintained. In this manner, every effort was made to treat each state fairly and impartially. In addition, GM made every effort to respond in writing to all who .submitted letters and i information regarding the Saturn site selection project with the J following limited exceptions: mass mailings (in which case a letter to the editor of the local newspaper was sent), crank letters, and where letters were sent to multiple _GM officers, Jonly one response was made, SITE AND COST EVALUATION y A critical determining factor in theanalysis was that the facility had to be located where geographically sensitive or 1 location -related costs were minimized. Some of the costs that were considered included: o Construction o Unemployment compensation o Workers' compensation o Health care benefits o Electricity o Natural gas o Water o Waste water treatment o Inbound freight o Outbound freight o Local property taxes U o State sales/use tax o State income tax o Franchise/inventory and other miscellaneous state taxes —I A computerized model was developed and used to analyze all cost data. The model comprehended both initial and start-up costs as well as annual recurring costs over a long term period of operation. The various cost factors were entered and used to calculate such standard financial statistics as net present value and an .average cost per unit. By design, the model was capable of generating different projections as different cost assumptions were introduced. /;?�X 1 ■ I - 3 - As proposals were received, state officials designated J contacts for specialized areas, e.g., corporate income tax, property tax, workers' compensation, etc. These contacts served as a valuable resource in helping the Site Selection Task Force members understand and correctly interpret the information provided. To insure proper control of the information provided to GM by the states and to make certain that the documents were reviewed, a sticker coded system was established to channel the infor,gatio6 to the proper personnel. Once the data was received, the information was identified, marked with a coded sticker, dated, sent to the respective staffs for review and returned to the high security room. where the files are maintained. In this manner, every effort was made to treat each state fairly and impartially. In addition, GM made every effort to respond in writing to all who .submitted letters and i information regarding the Saturn site selection project with the J following limited exceptions: mass mailings (in which case a letter to the editor of the local newspaper was sent), crank letters, and where letters were sent to multiple _GM officers, Jonly one response was made, SITE AND COST EVALUATION y A critical determining factor in theanalysis was that the facility had to be located where geographically sensitive or 1 location -related costs were minimized. Some of the costs that were considered included: o Construction o Unemployment compensation o Workers' compensation o Health care benefits o Electricity o Natural gas o Water o Waste water treatment o Inbound freight o Outbound freight o Local property taxes U o State sales/use tax o State income tax o Franchise/inventory and other miscellaneous state taxes —I A computerized model was developed and used to analyze all cost data. The model comprehended both initial and start-up costs as well as annual recurring costs over a long term period of operation. The various cost factors were entered and used to calculate such standard financial statistics as net present value and an .average cost per unit. By design, the model was capable of generating different projections as different cost assumptions were introduced. /;?�X 1 ■ I 4 - Each employe benefit cost item, (unemployment compensation, workers' compensation, and health care expenditures) was analyzed using Saturn business plan data and individual state input. It was assumed that Saturn would have an exemplary safety record allowing a self-insurance approach to workers' compensation, where permitted by law. For health care benefits, GM experience rating was used as the basis for cost estimates and projections. In addition to the cost, the availability and quality of health care service was reviewed as part of each community evaluation. State taxation .practice and policy was a second major cost area examined. The tax estimates for each state involved considerable research, analysis, and verification. Tax calculations used Saturn business plan data as a starting point. Potential tax liabilities were then based on the ` respective state laws. Tax incentives offered by various states were only included _ in the computer model if: 1) the incentives were available under existing law and 2) the incentives were in common use or had been tested in the highest court in the state. Tax incentives that did not meet these criteria were analyzed for possible impact on a state's ranking but were not included as _ part of the basic data for the model Personal taxation, including residential property, sales and income taxes of Saturn employes was also examined as a quality of life factor. A third major cost area was logistics costs. Roth inbound material and outbound finished product freight costs were analyzed. Logistics cost was a critically important factor in the overall cost analysis. ` Inbound freight costs considered a number of factors. As a starting point, a parts list for the developmental Saturn vehicle was used to determine which components and raw materials would require movement to the site. A preliminary sourcing plan was used to determine the potential origins of raw materials and manufactured components. Freight rates were estimated and reviewed. The inbound cost analysis was completed for major -; cities in all states expressing an interest in Saturn. In addition, local sourcing was examined and considered. Analysis of outbound freight costs was based on estimated market penetration, various assumed distribution patterns, and "least cost" shipping methods. Market penetration and sales distribution patterns were estimated using industry wide new small car registrations, domestic "J" car sales, and imported small car registrations. ■ - 5 The analysis and evaluation of energy and utility costs Involved a significant amount of research due in large part to the need to make or verify utility jurisdiction determinations. To help accomplish this review, an independent outside utilities consultant was employed to: 1) provide jurisdictional information, 2) determine unit cost rates, and 3) provide a futuristic outlook involving potential rate increases and a review of the long range economic viability of various utility .. companies. The last major cost items analyzed were construction and site preparation costs. Construction cost estimates included labor page'rate and productivity differences compared to a base estimate to construct the Saturn manufacturing complex. Site preparation costs included such items as cut and fill to level the site, rock removal, and any foundation cost penalties such Jas the need to provide pilings, lime stabilization, and snow load modifications. The site preparation estimates were prepared as part of the site team visits to the various potential sites. In addition to studying construction costs, real estate, engineering and financial representatives quietly visited proposed sites in order to evaluate other physical and intangible features. j in each instance, the following items were assessed: 1) The relationship between the site and the surrounding communities and the potential to minimize any J unfavorable impact on these communities, their social Institutions, the neighbors in the immediate plant site area, and the environment. 2) A variety of considerations including physical compatibility of the site to the Saturn design, the location of property lines, number of owners and •types of property involved, the amount of landscaping and buffering that may be required and the potential for supplier developments were considered. 3) The site's relation to existing infrastructure such as roads; rail systems, and utilities. While an effort i was always'made to minimize the cost of these items for all concerned, the magnitude of this project - which in some respects equalled the infrastructure needs of a city of 40,000 - meant that special arrangements would be needed in most locations. 4) The final, major area of site-specific assessment was 1 concerned with the particular costs and problems related to the physical characteristics of the specific site. Here the site was checked for flood and drainage problems, earth removal, leveling, blasting /7 A II ti requirements, environmental sensitivities, ability to avoid clearing large stands of forests, presence of cemeteries and pipelines, inactive or active land fills, and, finally, the need for soil compacting and stabilization. An important part of the site selection process involved an industrial relations evaluation. This evaluation examined four broad factors that affect workforce competitiveness: 1) competitiveness of labor costs, 2) the productivity of the work ex availability ofteskilled humanscresources. cThe atlaborndcost ^ competitiveness factor was analyzed using such, measures as average hourly earnings, unemployment costs, workers' compensation costs, strike benefit laws, and plant closing Paws. The productivity environment was analyzed by using average hours worked per week, value added per manufacturing employe, manufacturing unemployment growth, and absenteeism. The labor climate was analyzed using work stoppage history, innovative local contracts, active Quality of Work Life programs, grievance rates, disciplinary layoff ratios and contract ratification votes. The availability of skilled human resources was assessed by the unemployment rate, labor force ` size, labor force growth, manufacturing skilled trades percentages, and high school graduation rate. COMMUNITY EVALUATIONC OUnr TTY no LTFP CONIMPRATTONS As a further means of evaluating the various communities under study, GM performed an exhaustive review of metropolitan V areas by using •off the shelf" information, data supplied by the various states, GM past experience in the communities and an outside consultant. The purpose of this review was to assess the impact of "quality of life" factors present in the community. Quality of life considerations are those physical, social, economic, educational and cultural factors that contribute rovidinthe maximum satisfaction tand li njoy ent. When clinked vin with dcreative production and engineering capabilities and enlightened labor—management respect and understanding, the combination is a powerful force in creating a work place environment that fosters high levels of productivity and also provides the highest achievable standard of living. In the review, emphasis was placed on the effects on the community of the addition of 6,000 employes, some of whom will be hired locally and some of whom will be hired from GM plants throughout the country. The possibility of blending Saturn employes' needs with the existing populace and facilities were examined. There was recognition that the sheer size of the .I - 7 - facility superimposed on a particular community, as well as the nature of its operations, might alter the physical, social and economic balance which attracted Saturn in the first place. An additional complication was the fact that many facility suppliers might relocate nearby the Saturn further impacting the community and straining the community's infrastructure. 'Housing markets, school systems, physical environment, local fiscal conditions, and support networks, such as police, fire and health care, were all considered as important elements. These elements were considered in relation to their size, performance, adaptability, and long-term trends. Intangible influences such as local acceptance of basic industry, recep' ivity to a potentially large population increase, a strong existing work ethic, open housing and racial harmony were recognized as essential characteristics of a desirable site. The study considered availability of recreational facilities, - arts and culture restaurants, and other ksamenities1efor s woprkers and infacilities, itheir families. Such natural features as climate, terrain, vegetation, water and open space contribute to a satisfactory working and living environment. A related ant import consideration was the convenience of a given rt variety of recreational activities. locationa An important part of the community evaluation process was a J quiet, first-hand visit to various communities by Saturn representatives with diverse backgrounds to assess the compamajoribiliof the assist in community unitand evaluations awasn obtainedAdditioonally, a contracting the services of an outside consultant. Teams from garnered consuvisual fimpc ssions,irm made ieand vreviewed wed studies conducted and analyses of published material J bearing upon the quality of life of the various communities. Field visits were made by research teams for periods which depended -'upon the size and complexity of the individual metropolitan areas. Each research team was deployed with specific tasks including, data collection, a series of local 1 interviews, visual inspection, and local issues investigation. These general categories for study were the same for all communities. Local newspape'ts and other periodicals constitute an important public record of a community, its values, attitudes and life-styles. Consequently, in each city, a team member was assigned the research task of surveying newspaper files to review issues of significance. Questions raised through this �- periodical survey were pursued during the course of personal interviews, by a review of public documents, or were simply reported as concerns. The interview process, which was undertaken without reference to Saturn, was designed to obtain a comprehensive Understanding of the community from a cross-section of its /9f�� — e — people. Interviewees were selected because of their familiarity with the area, demonstrated levels of responsibility and professional standing, or other special expertise. Interviewees included public officials, particularly those knowledgeable in municipal budgets or planning/zoning matters, representatives of private industry, including personnel directors and industrial facilities managers, and economists from financial and academic institutions. Housing specialists and educational administrators were also surveyed in each city. Representatives of minority groups were specifically sought out. An analysis of the local economic patterns included the structure tof local :economic bases, recent changes and trends, and the distribution of occupational skills. Sensitivity to business cycles was also considered because the automobile industry is prone to cyclical swings which would exaggerate recessionary effects in any local economy already sensitive to national business cycles. Job opportunities for family members Ad an expanding .services sector were sought as positive features of the local economy. Various quantitative indices were related to attitudes toward major industry, the history of local labor/management relations, and the distribution of available skills. In summary, the objective was to evaluate whether an acceptable economic "fit" between the prospective Saturn facility and each area existed. Affordable housing was a primary concern. Field teams investigated ludin thedistributi distribution of single-family vse multiifamily unitexistnstock, s, and rates of increase for home -prices and apartment rents, the index of all housing -related costs for each area, and the age housingand condition of neighborhoods, both inthe units. hentralcity andin n thesuburbs ted r each metropolitan area to ascertain the variety of housing opportunities available. excellenceEducational assigned evaluating. the overallquality oVerioritin life in the community mmunities ` studied. In addition to gathering statistics on student/teacher ratios, expenditures per pupil, and performance on objective tests, field teams visited representative schools, compared city schools to those in surrounding communities, considered the availability of private and parochial systems, and sought indications of educational trends. Vocational education at the secondary and junior college level wasaddressed. The presence and influence of a major university was also weighed. Progressive, responsible management of municipal affairs was considered a favorable quality of life indicator. City budgets, financial reports and official statements were obtained and compared. Field teams reviewed city planning documents and zoning resolutions for appropriateness in managing growth and land use issues. Age and capacity of infrastructure were checked, as well as adequacy for future growth. The field teams - 9 - highlighted such danger signals as excessive dependence upon uncertain intergovernmental revenues, future exposure to higher taxatiog, and inadequate funding of basic services. Municipal bond ratings were obtained from recognized specialists. Evidence of cooperation among government agencies was considered, as well as the degree of collaboration between the business and civic communities. The field teams organized their findings into eleven categories, grouping over one hundred distinct quality of life elements relating to each metropolitan area. In analyzing the field teams' findings, the consultant's role yas advisory to senior Saturn executives. i SUMMARY J �a In conclusion, selecting the proper location for a significa usiness decision. Theindustrial lsite expansion selection is wasa especially dcritical ifficult because of the voluminous amount of data which had to be analyzed. Every site selection decision is influenced by unique circumstances, many factors and tradeoffs. There is no "perfect" site. The decision involves analyzing and balancing many factors to arrive at the best possible site. The Saturn decision process was no different in this regard. The process J was carefully thought out and based upon factors critical to the long term economic competitiveness of Saturn Corporation products. Every effort was made to ensure the process was thorough, fair and impartial. The Task Force realized the importance of this decision not only on Saturn's future but on each and every state interested in Saturn. Each proposal was presented independently and received the same serious consideration. The proposals were evaluated in confidence by the Site Selection Task Force. GM did not play one state against another in order to gain incentives. The outside iconsultants provided both counsel and 'a valuable third party perspective on various parts of the site selection process. The end result of the search was the selection of the best site possible for this specific, unique plant. The assistance and professionalism of the people from all of the states involved in the site selection was invaluable and very much appreciated. We hope all states will have benefited by this J process. Ideally, each state which participated had a chance to benefit because of the opportunity to review its own resources, make changes, build a team for future economic development efforts and develop a strategy for the future. The task was formidable. The analysis was exhaustive. The results j mission promise o of building great future r Saturn in c intheU.S.U S.aworld class competitive car and sharing its processes with all of GM. /7f�x �- i i � i i � i � -j �,;: j I i �� �:. ., �.: :.:,; Ii ;ff i I I ��j MONROE .... .... .. 'am iiiiiiiiiiio own ai 11 ill l t MONROE JE W1 men JEF ERSON BIG CEDAR JOHNSON COUNTY 630 .2.422 I GROVE 465 2.212 Is OLON ...... TOWNSHIPS AND POPULATIONS MADISON dXFOR 345 NEWPORT Incorporated D uaEen 793 Cities 8 population b 1,449 PENN GRAHAM Coralville 7.698 WORD 4:1TY CLEAR 452 Hills 647 Iowa City 50.489 Lone Tree 1.020 EEK North Liberty 2.053 1,644 Oxford 666 HARDIN ro 0A an SCOTT � Shue ills 287 Solon 8911 Total# .489 Swisher 662 Cities 336 Tiffin 65.790 UNION WE 1,411 University Heights 412 Rural Population 1,068 Johnson County 15,759 81.549 EAST 671 UCA 7 .288 UCAS 454 1900 comm f4urn. Poplaflns uoans included In IM tWift In Inn PIhIP 119unn On the mp. CkxmM1Im lIn Clear cmk' Penn. and wain Lms lo.,hips. 1,, Clry On,,WIM LOR,NhIp or gRar ILIBERT' PLEASANT 1 LINCOLN WASHINGTON SHARON 024 VALLEY 295 1.124 1.210 Lu 339 I. LONE TREE C3 FREMONT 1.541