HomeMy Public PortalAboutPKT-CC-2018-01-09Moab City Council
January 9, 2018
Pre-Council Workshop
**6:00 PM**
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
7:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY CENTER
(217 East Center Street)
Page 1 of 240
Page 2 of 240
Moab City Council
Regular Council Meeting
City Council Chambers
Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 6:00 p.m.
6:00 p.m. PRE-COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Council Expectations Discussion
Rules of Procedure Review
Review of Form of Government and Powers & Duties
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
SECTION 1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1-1 December 12, 2017
SECTION 2: MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
SECTION 3: ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
SECTION 4: CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
SECTION 5: PUBLIC HEARING (Approximately 7:15 PM)
5-1 Public Input on Proposed Resolution #03‐2018 – A Resolution Modifying Waste
Hauling Rates
SECTION 6: SPECIAL EVENTS/VENDORS/BEER LICENSES/SOLICITORS
6-1 Approval of Permits for Seekhaven Puttin’ on the Ritz Fundraising Event to be held
on February 10, 2018 at the Grand Center
6-2 Approval of Permits for Canyonlands Half Marathon to be held at the Center Street
Gym on March 15 and 16, 2018 and Swanny City Park on March 16 and 17, 2018
6-3 Approval of a Class II Beer License for Ryan Bird, d.b.a. Moab Garage Company
located at 78 North Main Street
6-4 Granting of Local Consent for a Limited‐Service Restaurant Liquor License for Moab
Garage Company located at 78 North Main Street
SECTION 7: NEW BUSINESS
7-1 Introduction to Code Compliance Personnel and Process
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Main Number (435) 259‐5121
Fax Number (435) 259‐4135
www.moabcity.org
Page 3 of 240
7-2 Request for Approval of an Exception to Procurement Code for a purchase with
Honnen Equipment in an amount not to exceed $11,758.30
7-3 Approval of Proposed Resolution #04‐2018 – A Resolution Adopting a Sanitary Sewer
Master Plan
7-4 Appointment of the 2018 Mayor Pro‐Tem
7-5 Appointment of the Council Member Responsible for Reviewing the Bills Against the
City of Moab
7-6 Approval of Modifications to the 2018 Moab City Council Meeting Schedule
7-7 Approval of Proposed Resolution # 05‐2018 – A Resolution Approving the Easement
Agreement for Emergency and Construction Access to Properties Along the 200
South Right‐of‐way
SECTION 8: OLD BUSINESS
8-1 Approval of Proposed Resolution #02‐2018 – A Resolution Revising Miscellaneous
Culinary Water Use Fees and Clarifying Rates for Multiple Residential Dwellings that
share a Water Meter
8-2 Approval of Proposed Resolution #01‐2018 – A Resolution Establishing Storm Water
Utility Rates
SECTION 9: APPROVAL OF BILLS AGAINST THE CITY OF MOAB
SECTION 10: ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations during this meeting should
notify the Recorder’s Office at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259‐5121 at least three (3) working days
prior to the meeting. Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
Page 4 of 240
Page 1 of 5
December 12, 2017
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ‐‐ DRAFT
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 12, 2017
Regular Meeting & Attendance: The Moab City Council held its Regular Meeting on the above date in
the Council Chambers at the Moab City Center, located at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah. A
recording of the meeting is archived at http://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html.
Pre‐Council Workshop: Mayor David Sakrison called the Workshop to order at 6:30 PM. In attendance
were Councilmembers Rani Derasary, Heila Ershadi, Tawny Knuteson‐Boyd, Kyle Bailey and Kalen Jones.
Also in attendance were City Manager David Everitt, City Recorder/Assistant City Manager Rachel
Stenta, City Attorney Chris McAnany, City Engineer Chuck Williams, Public Works Director Pat Dean, City
Treasurer Jennie Ross, Special Projects Manager Amy Weiser, Planning Director Jeff Reinhart,
Communications Director Lisa Church, Development Services Manager Sommar Johnson, Recorder
Assistant Eve Tallman and Parks, Recreation, and Trails Director Tif Miller.
The Workshop began with a discussion of the recently‐adopted ordinance regarding idling vehicles and
overnight parking. Weiser noted some confusing language. She added Councilmember Jones had
pointed out a need for consistent language.
Councilmember Bailey mentioned correspondence received from an unsuccessful bidder for the
Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) project.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd asked about the pool toy being requested; she requested information
about how the staff would track fiscal accountability with increased pool revenues. Terry Lewis, staff
member from the Moab Recreation and Aquatics Center, explained the implementation schedule and
noted users would pay extra on days the Witbits is in use. Councilmember Jones asked if the staff had
been in contact with other facilities using the Witbits and the answer was yes.
Councilmember Derasary reported that she had met the new Code Compliance officer. City Manager
Everitt confirmed the City had hired Mona Pompili and citizens with complaints and requests for code
enforcement may contact her.
Mayor Sakrison asked if the Entrada landscape plan is in compliance. City Planner Reinhart stated the
project is not yet to that stage. He added the developer has a bond, and they won’t get their Certificate
of Occupancy until the landscaping is completed. Councilmember Derasary added that she had a
discussion with neighbors with suggestions. Reinhart stated he passed the feedback along and he can
update Council on progress. He added that the Council approved the plan so there would not be a need
to remove landscaping already installed.
City Engineer Williams explained the Pack Creek project change order. He mentioned more concrete
was needed than originally planned, and the funds are expected to be reimbursed from a Department of
Environmental Quality grant.
Councilmember Bailey asked about the Main Street road project. Williams explained the purpose and
timeline for the project. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd asked for updates to be posted on the City’s
Facebook page. Bailey asked about the cost and Williams said it was $2 to 4 million, not using City funds.
Page 5 of 240
Page 2 of 5
December 12, 2017
Regular Meeting Called to Order: Mayor Sakrison called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at
6:57 PM and Councilmember Bailey led the Pledge of Allegiance. Approximately 75 members of the
public and media were present.
Citizens to be Heard: There were no citizens to be heard.
Student of the Month: Mayor Sakrison was presented with the Helen M. Knight School “Mayor of the
Century” award by Principal Taryn Kay. She thanked Mayor Sakrison for his many years of leadership.
The Mayor spoke about his thirty years in service to the community, and noted retiring Councilmember
Bailey’s 31 years of service and retiring Councilmember Ershadi’s four years of service and presented
them with plaques.
Presentation of the Annual Audit: John Haderlie presented Mayor Sakrison with a gift of appreciation.
He next submitted the Annual Audit for the City of Moab for Fiscal Year 2016‐2017. He noted that the
audit date is based upon June 30, 2017 and that in all required areas, the City was in compliance with
state code regarding financial reporting.
Haderlie next presented a report on City financial matters of concern to the auditors, including personal
use of government vehicles and fringe benefits. He explained that any type of compensation is
considered taxable income and there are procedures to follow to allay concerns with the Internal
Revenue Service. Haderlie stated there were 27 vehicles being used and taken home by employees,
with only two being considered “on call” vehicles, and the beneficial usage should be considered taxable
income by the employees, and may impact individuals’ income taxes. He explained clearly marked public
safety vehicles are exempt in most cases.
Approval of Minutes: (:55 on recording)
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd moved to approve the minutes of the November 14, 2017 meeting with
corrections. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. Councilmember Derasary abstained
because she did not attend the meeting. The motion carried 4‐0 aye, with Councilmembers Bailey,
Jones, Ershadi and Knuteson‐Boyd voting aye.
Public Hearing: At 7:26 PM, Mayor Sakrison opened a public hearing for Proposed Resolution #01‐2018
– A Resolution Establishing Storm Water Utility Rates and Proposed Resolution #02‐2018 – A Resolution
Revising Miscellaneous Culinary Water Use Fees and Clarifying Rates for Multiple Residential Dwellings
that Share a Water Meter.
City Manager Everitt presented the proposed storm water rate changes and reminded the Council that
the increase is reflected in the budget. Everitt continued with an explanation of the proposed
improvements to the recently‐approved culinary water rates, including changing the Bed and Breakfast
rate to commercial, removing the special rate for volunteer fire fighters, and how to address shared
residential meters. Everitt pointed out that the fire fighter rate was unfair to any other vital community
volunteers who do not receive special consideration. Mayor Sakrison asked about the fire line rate, and
Everitt acknowledged there is confusion about this rate. Treasurer Ross confirmed no one is being
charged this rate.
Councilmember‐elect Mike Duncan asked if the increased rates would be used for operational costs and
existing infrastructure. Everitt confirmed the funds would be used for maintenance and upgrades for
Page 6 of 240
Page 3 of 5
December 12, 2017
existing infrastructure. Duncan next asked if the City’s system were to expand, would rates increase
again. Everitt explained there is a current culinary water master plan process underway, and a rate study
is a part of the planning process. Everitt also clarified that impact fees cover new services and are
distinguished from utility rates for current customers, and both costs are being studied.
Mayor Sakrison asked about the cost of the Stewart Canyon infrastructure project.
Consent Agenda: (1:10 on recording)
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember
Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones,
Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye. The following items were approved:
1) Request for Approval of a Sole Source Purchase to Recreonics, Inc. for a Witbits Sports
Modular Aquatic Play System in an amount not to exceed $16,605.
2) Request to Set a Public Hearing Date of January 9, 2018 for the Proposed Waste
Hauling Commercial Rate Changes.
3) Request for Approval of a Sole Source Purchase to Precision Concrete Cutting for a
Sidewalk Trip Hazard Repair Bid in an amount not to exceed $25,000.
4) Approval and Award of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Monitoring
System for the City of Moab Culinary Water Department to Dorsett Technologies in an
amount not to exceed $150,000.
5) Request for Approval of Three Public Utility Easement Agreements for 500 West Utilities.
New Business: (1:11 on recording)
Annual Audit—Accepted
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Bailey moved to accept the Annual Audit of the City of Moab for
Fiscal Year 2016‐2017. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 aye, with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Storm Water Master Plan—Adopted
Motion and Discussion: City Engineer Williams described the City’s storm water system and the
proposed plan. He noted that the City’s projects represent a $6 million need with about $2 million being
accounted for with the 100 South project and the Stewart Canyon project. He also mentioned that the
adoption of the Plan will enable the City to pursue funding opportunities, such as those offered by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Councilmember Jones asked about reconstruction of
streets and lowering the crowns in order to increase flow capacity, and whether that element is included
in the Plan, and Williams confirmed that it was. Councilmember Bailey asked about how the storm water
is managed, and cited the example of Las Vegas, and asked if that municipality reuses storm water.
Williams explained that Las Vegas is able to capture storm water in large box culverts under the streets.
He did not know if the water was reused for irrigation. Everitt commented that this Plan represents
bringing the City’s infrastructure to a baseline level. Councilmember Jones asked questions about flow
capacity and also about the ability to remodel fully‐developed downtown properties in view of storm
water retention requirements. Jones also mentioned that the Water Conservation Board and the
Watershed Council would appreciate the opportunity to review this proposed Waste water
management plan, and Councilmember Derasary also brought up the possibility of revising the Plan
within the next five years, if desired. Williams agreed that the Plan can be amended at any time.
Page 7 of 240
Page 4 of 5
December 12, 2017
Vote: Councilmember Derasary moved to adopt the Moab Storm Water Master Plan (October 2017).
Councilmember Ershadi seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey,
Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Parked and Idling Vehicles—Tabled
Discussion: Councilmember Jones noted he had communicated with staff about wording and
consistency with the rest of the code. City Attorney McAnany explained that the code is being revised
and corrected on a chapter‐by‐chapter basis.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to table until January 9 the motion to approve
Proposed Ordinance #2017‐39 – An Ordinance Amending the City of Moab Municipal Code, Title 10
Vehicles and Traffic. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. The motion to table passed 5‐0
with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Regional Water Board Vacancies—Discussion
Councilmember Bailey stated he is an appointed member of the Grand County Water Special Service
District. Bailey clarified the appointment is at the discretion of Council and he has been on the board for
many years. Mayor Sakrison remarked on the importance of this board and invited future
Councilmembers to think about this assignment.
2018 City Council Meeting Schedule—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve the 2018 Moab City Council Meeting
Schedule. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. Councilmember Derasary brought up
annual conflicts with state‐wide meetings and specific Council meeting dates. Councilmember Knuteson‐
Boyd suggested alterations to the schedule could be adopted by the incoming Council. The motion
passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
2018 Moab City Holiday Schedule—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd moved to approve the 2018 Moab City Holiday
Schedule. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers
Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Interlocal Agreement for County‐Wide Recreation Services—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Proposed Resolution #62‐2017 – A
Resolution Approving an Interlocal Agreement as to the provision of County‐wide Recreation Services,
by and among the City of Moab, the Grand County Special Services Recreation District and the Grand
County School District. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0
with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Old Business: (1:45 on recording)
Slot Canyon Renovation Project—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Proposed Resolution #63‐2017 – A
Resolution Approving the first amendment to the Development Improvements Agreement for the Slot
Canyon Renovation Project at 245 Williams Way. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. City
Planner Reinhart explained the proposed action. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey,
Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Page 8 of 240
Page 5 of 5
December 12, 2017
ROUFA Subdivision Boundary Line Adjustment—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Proposed Resolution #61‐2017 – A
Resolution Approving a Boundary Line Adjustment for Lots 1 and 2 of the ROUFA Subdivision and the
Improvements Agreement for Public Improvements as Submitted by Chad Harris. Councilmember
Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones,
Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Pack Creek Bank Grading Project Change Order—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Change Order #1 for the Pack Creek
Bank Grading Project. Councilmember Bailey seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Budget Amendment—Approved
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd moved to approve Proposed Resolution #58‐2017 – A
Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2017‐2018 Annual Budget. Councilmember Bailey seconded the
motion. City Manager Everitt gave a brief overview of updated changes. Councilmember Jones noted his
skepticism about the cost of a workplace study proposed in the budget and said he proposed pushing
that item to a later budget opening with the hope that staff could articulate the need for the funding.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd pointed out the line item is a placeholder and Everitt confirmed this
step commits funding for the study and that the scope of the study, sometimes referred to as a desk
audit, could be worked out at a later date. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones,
Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi and Derasary voting aye.
Mayor and Council Reports:
Mayor Sakrison reported that he attended the meeting of the Utah League of Cities and Towns (ULCT).
Councilmember Jones reported on a reorganization of the Housing Task Force. He also noted he
attended a Dark Skies meeting.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd mentioned attending the ULCT meeting upstate.
Councilmember Derasary reported on a Trail Mix meeting. She noted there is Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding available for 2018. She also noted the ULCT meeting, and said she attended
the League of Women Voters’ meeting at which Chief Winder spoke.
Mayor Sakrison mentioned that the Association of Governments (AOG) will meet on the last Thursday of
January in Moab.
Approval of Bills Against the City of Moab: Councilmember Derasary moved to pay the bills against the
City of Moab in the amount of $1,464,979.58. Councilmember Bailey seconded the motion. The motion
carried 5‐0 aye, with Councilmembers Bailey, Ershadi, Jones, Derasary and Knuteson‐Boyd voting aye.
Adjournment: Councilmember Bailey moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Derasary
seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd,
Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye. Mayor Sakrison adjourned the meeting at 8:30 PM.
APPROVED: __________________ ATTEST: ___________________
Emily Niehaus, Mayor Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder
Page 9 of 240
1
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 5‐1
Title: Public Hearing: Waste Hauling Commercial Rate Changes
Date Submitted: January 3, 2018
Staff Presenter: David Everitt
Attachment(s):
‐ Monument Waste disposal cost data
‐ Proposed rate changes
‐ Solid Waste SSD proposed 2018 rates
Recommended Motion: I move to close the public hearing regarding the
waste hauling commercial rate changes.
Background/Summary:
The City of Moab contracts with Monument Waste to haul residential and
commercial waste to the Grand County Solid Waste Special Service District’s
(“the District”) landfills. The District is increasing its tipping fees at the
Klondike Landfill in 2018, and Monument Waste requests that the City raise
the rates for commercial pickup to cover that increase.
The current contract with Monument Waste states in Section II(8):
"Contractor may apply in writing for consideration of a special
rate review should an unforeseen event or circumstance arise
which jeopardizes the economic operations of the Contractor. A
special rate review application may be considered at the option of
the City if one or more of the following applies:…..b) Landfill tip
fees change by more than 10 percent."
And according to Section II(9):
“A change in Contractor rates, pursuant to Section 8, above, shall
be vested in the discretion of the City Council following a public
hearing. At least 15 days prior to the public hearing, the
Contractor shall submit to City staff complete and accurate
Page 10 of 240
2
financial data showing its operating costs, revenues, and rate of
return for operations under this Contract…."
The attached rate sheet and explanation of Monument Waste’s costs
provide a rationale for the proposed increase.
Page 11 of 240
1
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 03-2018, A RESOLUTION MODIFYING
WASTE HAULING RATES
The following describes the intent and purpose of this resolution:
A. The City is under contract with Monument Waste Services, LLC (“Contractor”) to
provide for the collection of solid waste within the City of Moab.
B. The Grand County Solid Waste Management Special Service District is increasing its
tipping fees at the Klondike Landfill in 2018, and Monument Waste requests that the
City raise the rates for commercial pickup to cover that increase.
C. The current contract between the City and the Contractor states in Section II(8):
“Contractor may apply in writing for consideration of a special rate review should an
unforeseen event or circumstance arise which jeopardizes the economic operations
of the Contractor. A special rate review application may be considered at the option
of the City if one or more of the following applies:…..b) Landfill tip fees change by
more than 10 percent….”
D. The Contractor currently disposes approximately 12,000 tons at the Klondike
Landfill annually, with the City of Moab commercial and residential collections
representing approximately 54% of that amount.
E. The City has water rate setting authority pursuant to Moab Municipal Code
§8.04.030; and
F. The City finds that the following rate structure is reasonable and consistent with the
objectives and policies described above.
Therefore, the City hereby enacts the waste hauling rates in Schedule A, attached.
Passed and adopted by a majority vote of the City Council. The rate changes will take
effect February 1, 2018.
______________________________
Mayor Emily S. Niehaus Date
Attest:
______________________________ ______________
Rachel Stenta, Recorder Date
Page 12 of 240
Attachment A: Waste Hauling Rates
Page 13 of 240
Page 14 of 240
R:\Notices\2018\waste hauling rates ph.docx
CITY OF MOAB
PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED WASTE HAULING
RATE CHANGES
The City of Moab will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at
approximately 7:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moab City Offices at 217
East Center Street, Moab, Utah.
The purpose of this hearing is to solicit public input on Proposed Resolution #03-
2018 – A Resolution Modifying Waste Hauling Rates.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special
accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder’s Office at 217
East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259-5121 at least three (3)
working days prior to the meeting.
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Published in the Times Independent, December 28, 2017 and January 4, 2018.
Page 15 of 240
Title: Approval of Permits for Seekhaven Puttin’ on the Ritz Fundraising Event to be held February 10, 2018 at the Grand Center.
Fiscal Impact: This event takes place at the Grand Center and does not require any city services. The special event, park and alcohol permit fees provide revenue to the city.
Staff Presenter(s): Carmella Galley
Department: Administration
Applicant: Seekhaven
Background/Summary: The Seekhaven Family Support Center has submitted all of the required applications to hold the annual Seekhaven Puttin on the Ritz Fundraiser, utilizing the Grand Center. Please note that several of the required/permits are contingent upon other approvals. The event is a fundraiser for the support center, which provides services to Moab and Grand County residents. The following approvals are needed:
•Approval of a Special Event License
•Approval of a Class IV Special Event Beer License
•Approval of Local Consent for a state-issued Special event Beer Permit
•Approval of a waiver of Special Event License in the amount of $200(note that the waiver of alcohol fees is not permitted by the CityCouncil’s fee waiver)
Options: Approve, deny, or modify.
Staff Recommendation: The City Special Events Committee has reviewed the applications for the required permits and licenses for the event. We have conferred with the coordinator for the event and are of the opinion that there are no issues.
Agenda Summary Sheet Council Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 6-1
Page 16 of 240
Recommended Motion: “I move to approve Seekhaven’s Puttin’ on the Ritz on February 10, 2018 at the Grand Center.”
Attachment(s):
• Special Event License Application
• Class IV Special Event Beer License Application
• Application for Local Consent for a Special Event Beer Permit
• Letter requesting fee waivers
• Fee Waiver Policy
Page 17 of 240
Page 18 of 240
Page 19 of 240
Page 20 of 240
Page 21 of 240
Page 22 of 240
Page 23 of 240
Page 24 of 240
Page 25 of 240
Page 26 of 240
Page 27 of 240
Page 28 of 240
Page 29 of 240
Page 30 of 240
Page 31 of 240
Page 32 of 240
#: 6-2
Title: Approval of permits for Canyonlands Half Marathon to be held at Center Street Gym on March 15 and 16, 2018 and at Swanny City Park on March 16 and 17, 2018.
Fiscal Impact: Law enforcement and Public Works services are needed for this event. The special event permit, park and beer permit fees provide revenue for the city, as does the sales tax generated by the purchase of goods and services by the participants of the event
Staff Presenter(s): Carmella Galley
Department: Administration
Applicant: Mad Moose Events/Justin and Denise Ricks
Background/Summary: Mad Moose Events has submitted all of the required applications to hold the annual Canyonlands Half Marathon, utilizing Swanny City Park, the Center Street Gym and the City right-of-way. The Special Event Permit entails the closing of 400 North Street. Approval of the Special Event License and the Special Event Beer License applications assume approval of the locations for the beer garden. The Canyonlands Half Marathon is a long-standing event with established protocols and procedures and excellent coordination with the City, Grand County and other agencies. This event rarely generates complaints and is well-run. The event provides broad-based benefits to the community, justifying use of Swanny City Park for the event. As per Ordinance 2017-17 Section 5.09.070, City Services Fees may be required for the cost of additional city services. The organizers are aware that additional fees may arise above those already applied to the event. Please note that several of the required/permits are contingent upon other approvals. The following approvals are needed: 1. Approval of a Special Event License
Agenda Summary Sheet Council Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
Page 33 of 240
2. Approval of a Class IV Special Event Beer License 3. Approval of a Park Use Permit for Swanny City Park 4. Conditional Approval of a Park Alcohol Permit for Swanny City Park 5. Approval of Local Consent for a state-issued Special Event Beer Permit 6. Approval of Special Use of Center Street Gym. 7. Approval of Additional Fees for Additional Services
Options: Approve, deny, or modify.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommend approval of all items with the following conditions (new recommendations in italics):
1. Porta-potties should be located on the pavement on 100 West, ensuring that there is no impedance or obstruction of the crosswalk or crossing signs on 100 West. Porta-potties shall not be located on the grass.
2.. No vehicles parked behind center street gym can be parked two vehicles deep – this blocks Emergency Medical Service vehicle access exiting the adjacent Grand County EMS driveway. 3. Approval of the Park Alcohol Permit should be conditioned upon securing State of Utah approval of the Special Event Beer Permit and submitting said permit and documentation to the City. 7. Mad Moose Events shall ensure that no official event organizer consumes alcohol in the approved beer gardens while acting under the auspices of the event. 8. Mad Moose Events, shall ensure that all areas where alcohol is consumed are at least 100 feet away from the Skate Park, the Aquatic Center building, and the delineated playground. 9. Mad Moose Events shall facilitate normal pre-event coordination with city staff which includes Public Works Superintendents and Police Department personnel. 10. We know that flyers on parked cars have been an issue at previous events. We will contact any distributors of flyers. We ask that you make your vendors and participants aware that flyers on vehicles are prohibited and encourage them to drop any flyers off at the City. 11. There will be no staking into or driving onto Swanny City Park grass area.
Page 34 of 240
12. On Friday, March 16 no street closure allowed on 400 North or MiVida until 2:30 PM to accommodate the HMK Early Out dismissal.
13. The City Council adopted an ordinance this past year which includes
assessing fees for traffic control and other city services for special
events. An estimated deposit of such fees will be assessed and paid prior to
the event with a return of excess or payment of any additional fees.
The fees being assessed at this time will include-
• 8 Police Officers for 8 hours at $65 per hour equaling $4160.00.
• 5 Public Works Personnel for 2 hours of Regular time rate at $40 per
hour and 2 Public Works Personnel for 3 hours at Overtime rate at $65
per hour totaling $790.
• $4950 is what the cost would be at this time.
The committee will not request rental fees for the traffic control equipment at
this time for this event unless otherwise suggested by council.
Any of the fee suggestions above can be modified by City Council for this event.
Recommended Motion: “I move to approve Canyonlands Half Marathon for the above
dates and venues, subject to the thirteen conditions outlined in the Agenda Summary for the
Approval of Permits and fees for the Canyonlands Half Marathon”
Attachment(s):
Special Event License Application Class IV Special Event Beer License Application Application for the Special Use of City Parks Park Alcohol Permit Application Application for Local Consent for a Special Event Beer Permit Ordinance 2017-17 Fee Schedule Outline
Page 35 of 240
Page 36 of 240
Page 37 of 240
Page 38 of 240
Page 39 of 240
Page 40 of 240
Page 41 of 240
Page 42 of 240
Page 43 of 240
Page 44 of 240
Page 45 of 240
Page 46 of 240
Page 47 of 240
Page 48 of 240
Page 49 of 240
Page 50 of 240
Page 51 of 240
Page 52 of 240
Page 53 of 240
Page 54 of 240
Page 55 of 240
Page 56 of 240
Page 57 of 240
Page 58 of 240
Page 59 of 240
Page 60 of 240
A.Any person adversely affected by a permitting decision under this Chapter may appeal as
provided in this Section.
B.Appeals of decisions by the Special Events Coordinator, SERC, or the City Council shall be
appealed to the Appeal Authority by delivering written notice to the City no later than seven
calendar days from the date of the decision or order which is the subject of the appeal. The Appeal
Authority shall promptly hold a hearing, and any Appeal Authority decision shall be final.
C.In any appeal proceeding, the Appeal Authority shall only overturn the decision that is the
subject of the appeal if it is found to be arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.
5.09.070 Fees; Hardship Waiver.
A.Special Event application fees shall be set according to the fee schedule established by the
City Council by resolution.
B.If applicable, a park rental fee is due and payable seven days prior to the event.
C.The City may require payment of a City Service Fee to cover the cost for additional City
services arising from an event. Additional City services include, but are not limited to, labor costs
for City personnel, rental costs for the use of City equipment, and other direct costs for the use of
City facilities. The City Service Fee shall be determined on a case by case basis, as required by the
event, and must be paid in full seven days prior to the event.
D.The City may require any applicant to post a cash deposit or other security approved by the
City Attorney to cover all estimated contingent costs prior to the issuance of a Level II Special Event
Permit, as a guarantee against fees, damages, clean up, or loss to public property. The City may
retain any such deposit to cover applicable fees, damages, cleanup costs, repairs to public property
or facilities. The unexpended balance of any deposit shall be promptly returned to the applicant no
later than 30 days from the conclusion of the event.
E.The City may waive fees under this Chapter in the case of a showing of need or financial
hardship by an applicant who is an individual or a non-profit organization, or in the case of an
application for a Speech Event.
5.09.080 Sales Tax Collection; Business License.
A.Unless exempted by Utah law, an applicant for a special event that includes vendor sales
or concessions shall either:
1.provide proof that all vendors have a sales tax license and agree to be responsible
for direct remittance of all sales tax proceeds from the event to the state; or
PAGE 7 OF 9
Page 61 of 240
Page 62 of 240
Page 63 of 240
Page 64 of 240
Special Event City Services Fees
Police Department –
Officers are paid at a flat rate of $65.00 per hour, no matter how many
hours are worked each day. There is a four hour minimum pay per day,
so once the officer is called, used or not there will be a charge for a
minimum of four hours. Vehicles are $65.00 per day and 0.65 cents per
mile.
Public Works-
Department Staff (typically Streets and/or Parks) are paid at a rate of
$40/hour during Regular Work Hours (Monday through Friday 7:00 am
to 3:30 pm) and $65/hour during Overtime Hours or for Emergency
Services. These costs would include the time for loading and unloading
prior to and after an event.
Use of Traffic Control/Safety Equipment would be per item and could
include the following:
36" Cone .40 Per Day
Vertical flats .60 Per Day
Signs w/stand 2.50 Per Day
Barrels .60 Per Day
Candle stick .50 Per Day
Slide Top 5.50 Per Day
Other items and equipment may be necessary and will be assessed as
needed.
Page 65 of 240
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 6-3 & 6-4
Title: Approval of a Class II Beer License for Ryan Bird, d.b.a. Moab Garage
Company located at 78 North Main Street.
Granting of Local Consent for a Limited-Service Restaurant Liquor License for
Moab Garage Company located at 78 North Main Street.
Date Submitted: December 20, 2017
Staff Presenter: Jennie Ross, Treasurer
Department: Treasurer
Background/Summary:
This application is for a Class II Beer License and Local Consent for a Limited
Service Restaurant Liquor License. The Class II Beer License entitles the
Licensee to sell beer in the original containers, on the premises for
consumption on the premises, in accordance with the State of Utah Liquor
Control Act and ordinances of the City of Moab. The Police Chief has reviewed
the application and has determined that the application is in order and there
are no proximity issues. This location has not been licensed previously.
Options: Approve, deny, or modify.
Staff Recommendation: City staff recommends approval of this Class II Beer
License and Local Consent.
Recommended Motion: "I move to approve the Class II Beer License and
Local Consent for a Limited-Service Restaurant Liquor License for Ryan Bird,
d.b.a. Moab Garage Company located at 78 North Main Street."
Attachment(s): Retail Beer License Application
Local Consent Form
Page 66 of 240
Page 67 of 240
Page 68 of 240
Page 69 of 240
Page 70 of 240
Agenda Summary Sheet
Council Meeting Date:
January 9th, 2018
Title: Budget exception for the repair cost on the Air Compressor located at the WRF.
Fiscal Impact: There will be no additional fiscal impact to the overall WRF budget.
Staff Presenter(s): Pat Dean
Department: Public Works
Applicant: Pat Dean
Background/Summary:
The air compressor was in need or repair to make it last until the new plant is up and
operational. The estimate for the repair was thought to be below the $ 10,000.00 threshold
for approval by the City Council. When the actual repair bill was invoiced it was $ 11,758.30,
which is above the $ 10,000.00 dollar threshold needing approval from the City Council so we
are asking for a Purchasing exception for the repair cost associated for the repair of the the
WRF Air compressor.
Where this compressor can and will be re‐purposed following the opening of the new WRF, by
the Sewer Collection department, we fell that spending a bit more money than originally
estimated will be recaptured but extending its use life an additional 5 to 7 years.
Options:
Approve
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Council approve the additional cost for repair and refurbishment of
the existing WRF Air Compressor by Honnen Equipment in the amount of $11,758.30, for the
repair and refurbishment of the Air Compressor located at the WRF.
Recommended Motion:
To approve a purchasing exception for the repair and refurbishment of the existing Air
Compressor for the amount of 11,758.30 to Honnen Equipment Co.
Attachment(s):
‐ Memo re: purchasing procedures
‐ Honnen invoice
Page 71 of 240
Make/Model:
MOAB UT 84532
217 EAST CENTER STREET
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Invoice To Account No:139078
470 KANE CREEK BLVD
MOAB UT 84532
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Deliver To:SERVICE INVOICE
Page:
Payment Type:
Location:
Date:
Work Order No:
Invoice No:
Serial Number:Fleet No:Meter:Eq ID:
2
1 of 3
Account
12/13/2017
164227
JOHN DEERE 4039DF CD4039D102658 2499 102658
Gen-1 Retail Code:
COMPLAINT:
01 REPLACE ENGINE WITH REMAN
CORRECTION:
The service technician pulled the unit into the shop. Removed outer shell and began removing frame work to gain access to engine.
Drained coolant and oil. Removed wires, hoses, etc. off engine. Removed fan shroud and removed fan. Removed hoses and wires off
air compressor section. Removed engine and compressor as one unit. Set engine up on stands and removed compressor section off
the back of it and set aside. Began stripping down old engine and swapping all parts to the new engine. When doing this tech noticed
the new engine had a different style oil pressure regulating valve and also had balancing shafts which the old engine did not. Got with
parts and Deere to make sure the engine that was sent to us was correct. It was. Removed, cleaned and installed parts off old engine
onto new engine. Installed new gaskets on everything. Assembled the remainder of miscellaneous engine components and painted
engine. Installed compressor onto back of engine. Cleaned grease and oil build up out of trailer section. Installed engine in and
tightened mounts. Reconnected all wiring, lines, hoses, etc. on engine and compressor. Installed fan and fan shroud. Filled with
break in oil and coolant. Filled compressor section with ATF per customer request. Put frame work back on and around engine.
Installed shell on unit. Primed fuel system and ran unit. Found unit would not stay running and kept having a fault for engine coolant
high temp. Inspected and found the murphy switch was stuck open. Ordered and replaced switch. Tested and found unit would now
start and run. Ran and checked for leaks. No leaks. Let engine run for a bit to make sure all was good. Rechecked all fluid levels. Unit
is ready for pickup. **Unit has break-in oil in it. Change and sample in 250 hours, at hour meter reading written on oil filter. Use
Deere 15W-40 engine oil.**
OLD ENGINE S/N: CD4039D102658
NEW ENGINE S/N: SE4039D792196
Quantity Net Price Extended Price Taxed IndPart Number Description
NCAP SCREW19H2993 4.00 1.75 $7.00
NCAP SCREW19H3219 8.00 1.14 $9.12
NShaft Key26H27 1.00 1.13 $1.13
NFUEL FILTEAR50041 1.00 12.80 $12.80
NRING GEARR114282 1.00 49.58 $49.58
NWASHERR5003906.00 1.70 $10.20
NSEALING WAR51936 10.00 1.30 $13.00
NWASHERR607466.00 1.56 $9.36
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE->Page 72 of 240
Make/Model:
MOAB UT 84532
217 EAST CENTER STREET
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Invoice To Account No:139078
470 KANE CREEK BLVD
MOAB UT 84532
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Deliver To:SERVICE INVOICE
Page:
Payment Type:
Location:
Date:
Work Order No:
Invoice No:
Serial Number:Fleet No:Meter:Eq ID:
2
2 of 3
Account
12/13/2017
164227
JOHN DEERE 4039DF CD4039D102658 2499 102658
Gen-1 Retail Code:
NCap ScrewR84978 1.00 3.08 $3.08
NGASKETR974551.00 5.00 $5.00
NHose ClampRE32361 4.00 2.41 $9.64
NTHERMOSTATRE337051.00 9.45 $9.45
NCOMPLETE BSE501014 1.00 6,348.60 $6,348.60
NCORE for:Complete Block Assy RemanSE501014-CR -1.00 850.00 ($850.00)
NOIL FILTERT19044 1.00 5.83 $5.83
NHOSET202772.00 11.31 $22.62
NV-BeltT25130 1.00 36.90 $36.90
NBULK HOSETY22328 6.00 0.10 $0.60
NHOSE CLAMP 3/4"TY22465 2.00 0.96 $1.92
NHIGH GLOSS BLACK SPRAYTY25609 2.00 7.59 $15.18
NCOOL-GARD II 2.5 GAL PREMIXTY26576 2.00 34.51 $69.02
NBREAK-IN OIL 10W30 1-GALTY26661 3.00 20.73 $62.19
NDEXTRON 6 ATF QUART75208 4.00 6.82 $27.28
Comments: LANTER FRT
INVOICE# 351457 , 351458 , 351456
PART# T25130
NFREIGHT INP3751 1.00 9.50 $9.50
Comments: UPS GND FRT
TRANSFER# 611779
PART# 26H27
NFREIGHT INP3751 1.00 13.35 $13.35
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE->Page 73 of 240
Make/Model:
MOAB UT 84532
217 EAST CENTER STREET
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Invoice To Account No:139078
470 KANE CREEK BLVD
MOAB UT 84532
MOAB CITY CORPORATION
Deliver To:SERVICE INVOICE
Cust PO No:
Page:
Payment Type:
Location:
Date:
Work Order No:
Invoice No:
Serial Number:Fleet No:Meter:Eq ID:
2
3 of 3
NEED
Account
12/13/2017
164227
JOHN DEERE 4039DF CD4039D102658 2499 102658
Gen-1 Retail Code:
Comments: OUTSIDE VENDOR: MURPHY SWITCH TEMP COOLING
NO/S MATERIALSS3941 1.00 273.07 $273.07
$5,402.88 $6,175.42 Misc:$0.00 Sub-Total:$11,578.30$0.00Labor:Parts:OL&M:
Miscellaneous Charges:
Environmental/Supplies Fee $180.00
Thank you for your business! Remember, Avoid critical downtime and save money by getting your machine inspections done before the heavy work season.
Sales Tax: 7.65%:
Misc:
OL&M:
Parts:
Labor:
*** PROFORMA INVOICE ***
11780906-002-STC
FIDEL LUCEROAdvisor:
Tax Exempt No:
* * * PREVIEW INVOICE * * *
$5,402.88
$6,175.42
$0.00
$180.00
$0.00
$11,758.30Grand Total:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
TERMS: Any disputes must be reported to Service Manager within 10 days of invoice date. NET30 - In the event the same is not fully paid for within 60
days, I agree to pay a monthly periodic INTEREST CHARGE at the rate of 1.5% which is an ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE of 18% on the unpaid
balance. The purchaser agrees to pay reasonable attorney fees if collection efforts are required.
RETURN POLICY: All parts must be new and in resalable condition and returnable to supplier. No restocking fee on stock parts returned within 15 days
of purchase. 15% restocking fee if returned after 15 days on returnable items only. 25% restocking fee if returned after 30 days on returnable items
only. 25% Restocking Fee on Special Order parts returned up to 20 days RETURNABLE ITEMS ONLY. NO RETURNS AFTER 90 DAYS. No returns on
electrical components.
Received by: ..................................................................................................Date: ..............................................Page 74 of 240
Page 75 of 240
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 7‐3
Title: Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
Date Submitted: January 3rd, 2018
Staff Presenter: Chuck Williams, City Engineer
Attachment(s): Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
Options: Approve, deny, or modify.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
dated January 2018.
Background/Summary:
The City of Moab retained Bowen Collins & Associates (BC&A) to prepare a
Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (Plan) for the City’s wastewater collection
system. The purpose of the Plan is to identify recommended improvements
that will resolve existing and projected future deficiencies in the wastewater
collection system throughout the City’s service area. A separate wastewater
treatment plant facilities Master Plan was prepared in February 2015.
This Plan follows a number of other important studies regarding the City’s
wastewater system. In addition to the facilities Master Plan mentioned above,
the City also completed a sewer rate study, impact fee facilities plan, and
impact fee analysis in February 2017. These studies were followed with a cost
of service rate analysis in May 2017. Under ideal conditions, this Plan would
have been updated prior to completing these several studies. However, after
the City identified the immediate need to reconstruct the treatment plant, it
needed to move quickly to identify the financial mechanisms that would be
necessary to fund the plant improvements. Thus, all the financial studies had
to be completed first, followed by this Plan.
Copies of the several financial studies referenced here are contained in the
appendix of this Plan. Fortunately, none of the conclusions contained in this
report represent significant deviations from the assumptions used in the
Page 76 of 240
development of those reports. Where small changes do exist, they have been
identified in this report.
The general scope of this project involved a thorough analysis of the City’s
sewer collection system and its ability to meet the present and future
wastewater needs of its residents. As part of this Plan, BC&A completed the
following tasks.
1) Collected information as needed to develop the sewer master plan
based on the City’s general plan and existing facilities.
2) Updated population projections and estimated growth in sewer flow
to evaluate future growth needs. This included future growth for each
of the contributing agencies that flow through the City to the Moab
wastewater treatment plant.
3) Developed a hydraulic computer model of the City of Moab collection
system to evaluate existing and projected future system deficiencies.
This included calibrating the model using data from the City’s existing
GIS database, water meter data from the City, and flow monitoring
within the collection system.
4) Identified existing operating deficiencies.
5) Identified projected future operating deficiencies.
6) Evaluated alternative improvements for resolving deficiencies
identified in Tasks 4 and 5 above. This included evaluating alternatives
looking at diversion locations and reuse opportunities.
7) Developed a comprehensive capital facilities plan incorporating all
required improvements identified for the collection system.
8) Documented results of the previous tasks in a report with additional
memoranda as needed.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Existing wastewater in the City’s collection system was evaluated based on
treatment plant data and flow monitoring conducted as part of this study.
Projections of future growth in wastewater were developed based on existing
production rates (gallons per day per equivalent residential unit) and
anticipated growth as provided by the City of Moab and other contributing
agencies.
Page 77 of 240
SYSTEM EVALUATION
Based on existing wastewater flow and projected growth in wastewater flow,
the existing and future flows were simulated in a hydraulic model of the City’s
collection system. While the majority of the system under buildout conditions
has ample capacity, some significant deficiencies have been observed in the
model results. Most are the result of growth in the Grand Water& Sewer
Service Area service area and deficiencies follow the main trunk line to the
City’s wastewater treatment plant.
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
To resolve potential deficiencies identified as part of the system evaluation,
several projects have been proposed to address both future hydraulic
deficiencies and the need to service developing areas.
SYSTEM REHABILITATION AND REPLACEMENT
In order to assemble a 10‐year capital improvement plan, it is not adequate to
consider only capacity related improvements. It is also necessary to budget
for the expected rehabilitation and replacement of system components. The
Plan summarizes anticipated costs that will be required to rehabilitate or
replace severe or critical condition pipes in the City.
10‐YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES & BUDGET
The Plan lists improvement projects that are recommended within the next
10‐years. This Plan includes several projects not included in the City’s impact
fee facilities plan. Projects that are maintenance related or fully developer
funded have been omitted from the City’s impact fee facilities plan because
they are not impact fee eligible. Pipes with critical wall conditions were
prioritized first and are mostly funded over the next 10 years. For the
purpose of cost estimating, it was assumed that all critical condition pipes will
require replacement. If rehabilitation is possible through cast‐in‐place pipe,
additional projects to rehabilitate severe wall condition pipe may also be
possible in the 10‐year time frame. As a result, it is recommended that each
condition project be reviewed to determine if rehabilitation is feasible.
Page 78 of 240
The Capital Improvement Budget considers Operations & Maintenance,
Capital Expenditures from Reserves, Capital Expenditures from Loan
Proceeds, Cash Contributions from the Grand Water& Sewer Service Area,
Debt Service and Projected Income with Recommended Rates per year.
Page 79 of 240
Resolution # 04‐2018 Page 1 of 1
Resolution # 04‐2018
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
RESOLVED that MOAB informs the Citizens of Moab of the following actions taken by the Moab
City Council.
1. Reviewed and approved the attached Sanitary Sewer Master Plan dated January 2018.
NOW THEREFORE, WE, THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF MOAB DO HEREBY ADOPT THE
PLAN IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM PRESENTED TO THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND
AUTHORIZE THE APPROPRIATE CITY STAFF TO EXECUTE AND IMPLEMENT THE SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN AS A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR CAPITAL AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAMMING
AS WELL AS FOR FISCAL PLANNING PURPOSES.
This resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage.
Passed and adopted by action of the Governing Body of Moab City in open session this 9th day of
January, 2018.
CITY OF MOAB
By:
Emily Niehaus
Mayor
Attest:
Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder
Page 80 of 240
s
May 2015
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Sanitary Sewer
Master Plan
Page 81 of 240
SANITARY
SEWER MASTER PLAN
Prepared by:Prepared for:
December 2017
Page 82 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES I CITY OF MOAB
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................. ES-1
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1
Growth Projections ........................................................................................................................................................... ES-1
System Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. ES-2
System Improvements ..................................................................................................................................................... ES-2
System Rehabilitation and Replacement ................................................................................................................. ES-3
10-Year Capital Improvement Priorities ................................................................................................................. ES-4
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Scope of Services .................................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................... 1-2
Project Staff ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1-2
CHAPETER 2 – EXISTING SYSTEM FEATURES .................................................................................................... 2-1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1
Service Area ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1
Topography ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2-1
Collection System ................................................................................................................................................................ 2-1
Sewer Collection Pipes ................................................................................................................................................. 2-1
Lift Stations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2-2
Overflows ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Moab Wastewater Treatment Facility ........................................................................................................................ 2-4
CHAPTER 3 – FUTURE GROWTH AND FLOW PROJECTIONS ...................................................................... 3-1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Domestic Wastewater ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-1
Infiltration .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3-2
Inflow ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3-3
Growth Projections ............................................................................................................................................................. 3-3
Wastewater Flow Distribution ....................................................................................................................................... 3-6
CHAPTER 4 – HYDRAULIC MODELING ................................................................................................................... 4-1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Geometric Model Data ....................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Pipeline and Manhole Locations .............................................................................................................................. 4-1
Pipe Flow Coefficients .................................................................................................................................................. 4-1
Sediment and Debris ..................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Overflows ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4-2
Flow Data ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4-3
Total Flow .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4-3
Timing of Flow ................................................................................................................................................................. 4-3
Distribution of Flow ...................................................................................................................................................... 4-6
Calibration .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4-6
CHAPTER 5 – SYSTEM EVALUATION ....................................................................................................................... 5-1
Page 83 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES II CITY OF MOAB
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued
Page No.
Evaluation Criteria .............................................................................................................................................................. 5-1
Existing System Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 5-1
Future System Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................... 5-2
Lift Station Deficiencies ............................................................................................................................................... 5-2
CHAPTER 6 – SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................... 6-1
Collection System Capacity Improvements .............................................................................................................. 6-1
CHAPTER 7 – CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ................................................................................................... 7-1
System Rehabilitation and Replacement ................................................................................................................... 7-1
Concrete Pipe Assessment and Rehabilitation................................................................................................... 7-1
System Rehabilitation and Replacement Priorities ......................................................................................... 7-1
Capital Improvements Budget ....................................................................................................................................... 7-3
10-Year Capital Improvement Priorities ................................................................................................................... 7-3
LIST OF TABLES
No. Title Page No.
ES-1 Projected Peak Month Flows to Moab Treatment Plant (MGD) ..................................................... ES-1
ES-2 Proposed System Improvements ................................................................................................................ ES-3
ES-3 Summary of Rehab/Replacement Costs for Severe and Critical Wall Condition Pipes ........ ES-3
ES-4 10-Year Capital Facility Plan ......................................................................................................................... ES-4
2-1 Sewer Collection System Sizes and Lengths ............................................................................................. 2-2
2-2 Sewer Main Material Percentages ................................................................................................................ 2-3
2-3 Moab Lift Station Characteristics .................................................................................................................. 2-3
3-1 Planning Growth Rates for Agencies within the Moab Service Area .............................................. 3-4
3-2 Projected Growth in ERUs for Service Area .............................................................................................. 3-5
3-3 Projected Peak Month Flows to Moab City Treatment Plant ............................................................. 3-6
4-1 Manholes with Potential Overflow Directions ......................................................................................... 4-2
4-2 Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Total Daily Flow Volumes .................................................................... 4-3
4-3 Moab Service Area Diurnal Patterns ............................................................................................................ 4-5
4-4 Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Peak Flows ................................................................................................. 4-6
4-5 Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Infiltration Flows ..................................................................................... 4-6
5-1 Summary of Sewer Lift Stations .................................................................................................................... 5-2
6-1 Proposed System Improvements .................................................................................................................. 6-1
7-1 Summary of Wall Condition Scores .............................................................................................................. 7-2
7-2 Estimated Length of Uninspected Pipe with Condition Concerns ................................................... 7-2
7-2 Summary of Rehab/Replacement Costs for Severe & Critical Wall Condition Pipes .............. 7-3
7-3 10-Year Capital Facility Plan ........................................................................................................................... 7-5
Page 84 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES III CITY OF MOAB
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued
LIST OF FIGURES
On or After
No. Title Page No.
ES-1 Peak Month Flow to Moab City Wastewater Treatment Plant ........................................................ ES-2
ES-2 Year 2017 Pipe Capacities .............................................................................................................................. ES-2
ES-3 Year 2022 Pipe Capacities .............................................................................................................................. ES-2
ES-4 Year 2030 Pipe Capacities .............................................................................................................................. ES-2
ES-5 Year 2060 Pipe Capacities .............................................................................................................................. ES-2
ES-6 Proposed System Improvements ................................................................................................................ ES-2
ES-7 Condition Project Priorities ........................................................................................................................... ES-3
2-1 Existing Collection system ............................................................................................................................... 2-1
3-1 Seasonal Variation in Total Wastewater Flow ......................................................................................... 3-2
3-2 Peak Month Flow to Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant ................................................................... 3-6
3-3 City of Moab Land Use & Zoning .................................................................................................................... 3-7
4-1 Overflow Locations and Directions .............................................................................................................. 4-2
4-2 Diurnal Patterns ................................................................................................................................................... 4-4
4-3 Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 313 .......................................................................................... 4-9
4-4 Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 290 .......................................................................................... 4-9
4-5 Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 107 ........................................................................................ 4-10
5-1 Year 2017 Pipe Capacities ................................................................................................................................ 5-1
5-2 Year 2022 Pipe Capacities ................................................................................................................................ 5-2
5-3 Year 2030 Pipe Capacities ................................................................................................................................ 5-2
5-4 Year 2060 Pipe Capacities ................................................................................................................................ 5-2
6-1 Proposed System Improvements .................................................................................................................. 6-1
7-1 Sewer Pipe Wall Condition Score .................................................................................................................. 7-1
7-2 Condition Project Priorities ............................................................................................................................. 7-4
7-3 10-Year Revenue and Expenditures ........................................................................................................... 7-6
7-4 10-Year Reserve Fund Balance ...................................................................................................................... 7-7
LIST OF APPENDICES
Title
Appendix A – Northwest Lift Station Alternatives Memo
Appendix B – Lift Station Data
Appendix C – 2017 Flow Monitoring Summary
Appendix D – Model Result Mapbook
Page 85 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES ES-1 CITY OF MOAB
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The City of Moab retained Bowen Collins & Associates (BC&A) to prepare a master plan for the
City’s wastewater collection system. The purpose of this sewer master plan report is to identify
recommended improvements that will resolve existing and projected future deficiencies in the
wastewater collection system throughout the City’s service area.
This executive summary provides a brief summary of the evaluation process and the recommended
system improvements.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Existing wastewater in the City’s collection system was evaluated based on treatment plant data
and flow monitoring conducted as part of this study. Projections of future growth in wastewater
were developed based on existing production rates (gallons per day per equivalent residential unit)
and anticipated growth as provided by the City of Moab and other contributing agencies. Table
ES-1 and Figure ES-1 show projected growth of wastewater in the future.
Table ES-1
Projected Peak Month Flows to Moab Treatment Plant* (MGD)
Year Moab San Juan GWSSA GWSSA
-USU Septage Total
2017 0.80 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.01 1.20
2020 0.83 0.04 0.42 0.02 0.01 1.31
2025 0.88 0.04 0.47 0.07 0.01 1.46
2030 0.92 0.05 0.51 0.12 0.01 1.61
2035 0.98 0.05 0.57 0.17 0.01 1.77
2060 1.22 0.09 0.93 0.17 0.01 2.42
*estimated peak month flow includes both infiltration and domestic production
Page 86 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES ES-2 CITY OF MOAB
SYSTEM EVALUATION
Based on existing wastewater flow and projected growth in wastewater flow, the existing and
future flows were simulated in a hydraulic model of the City’s collection system. Figures ES-2
through ES-5 show the hydraulic performance as calculated by the hydraulic model for sewer
flows as projected through full buildout conditions if no improvements are made to the existing
system. These results assume that sewer flows associated with future development will flow to
the nearest manhole in the existing system. While the majority of the system under buildout
conditions has ample capacity, some significant deficiencies have been observed in the model
results. Most are the result of growth in the GWSSA service area and deficiencies follow the main
trunk line to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. Figures ES-3 and ES-4 help identify how soon
some of the deficiencies will occur. The City also has a number of lift stations that were evaluated
for hydraulic capacity and all appear to have capacity to accommodate growth through buildout
for their respective service areas.
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
To resolve potential deficiencies identified as part of the system evaluation, several projects have
been proposed to address both future hydraulic deficiencies and the need to service developing
areas. Figure ES-6 and Table ES-2 show the projects and associated costs for these projects.
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060Peak Month Flow to Treatment Plant (mgd)Figure ES-1
Peak Month Flow to Moab City Wastewater Treatment Plant
Moab
GWSSA
San Juan
GWSSA - USU
Septage
Existing Capacity
New Treatment Plant Capacity*
*Treatment plant capacity may include many different components, but in general can be
represented as a flow capacity for peak month conditions
Page 87 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-1 - 2017 Existing Deficiences.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2017PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2017)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 88 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-2 - 2022 Deficiences.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2022PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2022)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 89 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-3 - 2030 Deficiences.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2030PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2030)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 90 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-4 - 2060 Buildout Deficiences.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-5
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2060PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2060)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 91 of 240
#*
!.42
3
10 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-6 - Project Improvements.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-6
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
PROPOSED SYSTEMIMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
!.Future Lift Station
#*WWTP
System Improvement (inch)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Existing Sewer Pipes
Spanish Valley
New Northwest Lift Station
Page 92 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES ES-3 CITY OF MOAB
Table ES-2
Proposed System Improvements
ID Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Construction
Cost
Estimate
Engineering
/ Admin
(15 percent)
Total
Project
Cost
Estimate
1.1 100 West1 21 1,700 $755,000 $113,000 $868,000
2.1 Northwest Trunk 15 4,133 $992,000 $149,000 $1,141,000
2.2 Northwest Lift Station2 $320,000 $48,000 $368,000
2 Subtotal Project 2 $1,312,000 $197,000 $1,509,000
3.1 1000 North, 500 W to Rb. 12 1,860 $141,000 $21,000 $162,000
4.1 South Trunk 24 9,770 $4,769,000 $715,000 $5,484,000
Total $6,977,000 $1,046,000 $8,023,000
1 Includes cost of replacing the existing Mill Creek siphon.
2 the required capacity of the Northwest lift station is estimated to be 750 gpm (see Appendix “Northwest Lift
Station Memo”). Cost estimated with “Pump Station Design Manual” (2nd Edition, Sanks et al) figure 29-9 adjusted
to 2017 dollars.
SYSTEM REHABILITATION AND REPLACEMENT
In order to assemble a 10-year capital improvement plan, it is not adequate to consider only
capacity related improvements. It is also necessary to budget for the expected rehabilitation and
replacement of system components. Table ES-3 summarizes anticipated costs that will be required to
rehabilitate or replace severe or critical condition pipes in the City.
Table ES-3
Summary of Rehab/Replacement Costs for
Severe and Critical Wall Condition Pipes
Diameter
(in)
Rehabilitate
Severe
Replace
Critical
6 $219,798 $136,054
8 $871,987 $782,560
10 $58,659 $0
12 $27,125 $310,022
18 $0 $2,524,420
24 $50,991 $0
Total $1,228,560 $3,753,056
Figure ES-7 shows the location of critical condition pipe projects proposed to be completed within
the next 10 years.
Page 93 of 240
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
#*C1C5
C3C4
C9C6C2C8
C70 500 1,000
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 0-7 - Pipe Condition Projects.mxd amckinnon 11/30/2017
ES-7
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
CONDITION PROJECTPRIORITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTHL E G E N D
#*WWTP
Critical Condition Projects
Existing Sewer Pipes
Existing Sewer Pipes
Spanish Valley
Page 94 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES ES-4 CITY OF MOAB
10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES
Table ES-4 lists improvement projects that are recommended within the next 10-years. This table
includes several projects not included in the City’s impact fee facilities plan (see Appendix).
Projects that are maintenance related or fully developer funded have been omitted from the City’s
impact fee facilities plan because they are not impact fee eligible. Pipes with critical wall
conditions are prioritized first and are mostly funded over the next 10 years. For the purpose of
cost estimating, it has been assumed that all critical condition pipes will require replacement. If
rehabilitation is possible through cast-in-place pipe, additional projects to rehabilitate severe wall
condition pipe may also be possible in the 10-year time frame. As a result, it is recommended that
each condition project be reviewed to determine if rehabilitation is feasible.
Table ES-4
10-Year Capital Facility Plan
ID
Estimated
Year of
Construction Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Project
Cost
($2017
Dollars)
0 FYE 2019 City Project -- -- $300,000
1.1 FYE 2018 100 West 21 1,700 $868,000
2.1 FYE 2019 Northwest Trunk1 15 4,133 $1,141,000
2.2 FYE 2019 Northwest Lift Station1 $368,000
3.1 FYE 2020 1000 North, 500 W to Rb2. 12 1,860 $162,000
O&M 1 FYE 2020 Crit. Cond. – Outfall Pipe 21 1,840 $864,800
O&M 2 FYE 2021 Crit. Cond. – 100 W, 200 S 12 430 $163,300
O&M 3 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – Walnut Lane 18 830 $365,700
O&M 4 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 500 West 12 580 $213,900
O&M 5 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 200 South 8 1,100 $351,900
O&M 6 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 100 W, 400 N 8 400 $139,200
O&M 7 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – 200 East 8 280 $102,400
O&M 8 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – Emma Blvd 8 290 $105,800
O&M 9 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – Birch Ave 6 440 $151,800
O&M FYE 2024-2026 Critical – To be determined -- -- $1,294,200
O&M FYE 2025-2026 Severe - To be determined -- -- $1,229,000
4.1 FYE 2026 South Trunk 24 9,770 $5,484,000
Total $13,305,000
1 It is anticipated that this project will be developer funded and reimbursed through a developer agreement.
2 The City will pay the upsize cost for this project with the remainder funded by a developer.
Page 95 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 1-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
The City of Moab has retained Bowen Collins & Associates (BC&A) to prepare a master plan
for the City’s wastewater collection system. The purpose of this sewer master plan report is to
identify recommended improvements that will resolve existing and projected future deficiencies
in the wastewater collection system throughout the City’s service area. A separate wastewater
treatment plant facilities master plan was prepared in February 2015.
PREVIOUS STUDIES
This study follows a number of other important studies regarding the City’s wastewater system.
In addition to the treatment plant master plan mentioned above, the City also completed a sewer
rate study, impact fee facilities plan, and impact fee analysis in February 2017. These studies
were followed with a cost of service rate analysis in May 2017. Under ideal conditions, the
collection system master plan would have been updated prior to completing these several studies.
However, after the City identified the immediate need to reconstruct the treatment plant, it
needed to move quickly to identify the financial mechanisms that would be necessary to fund the
plant improvements. Thus, all the financial studies had to be completed first, followed by this
collection system master plan.
Copies of the several financial studies referenced here are contained in the appendix of this
report. Fortunately, none of the conclusions contained in this report represent significant
deviations from the assumptions used in the development of those reports. Where small changes
do exist, they have been identified in this report.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The general scope of this project involved a thorough analysis of the City’s sewer collection
system and its ability to meet the present and future wastewater needs of its residents. As part of
the Sewer Master Plan, BC&A completed the following tasks.
Task 1: Collected information as needed to develop the sewer master plan based on the
City’s general plan and existing facilities.
Task 2: Updated population projections and estimated growth in sewer flow to evaluate
future growth needs. This included future growth for each of the contributing
agencies that flow through the City to the Moab wastewater treatment plant.
Task 3: Developed a hydraulic computer model of the City of Moab collection system to
evaluate existing and projected future system deficiencies. This included
calibrating the model using data from the City’s existing GIS database, water
meter data from the City, and flow monitoring within the collection system.
Page 96 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 1-2 CITY OF MOAB
Task 4: Identified existing operating deficiencies.
Task 5: Identified projected future operating deficiencies.
Task 6: Evaluated alternative improvements for resolving deficiencies identified in Tasks
4 and 5. This included evaluating alternatives looking at diversion locations and
reuse opportunities.
Task 7: Developed a comprehensive capital facilities plan incorporating all required
improvements identified for the collection system.
Task 8: Documented results of the previous tasks in a report with additional memoranda
as needed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The BC&A team wishes to thank the following individuals from the City of Moab for their
cooperation and assistance in working with us in preparing this report:
Chuck Williams City Engineer
Eric Johanson Assistant City Engineer
Obe Tejada Sewer Superintendent
Greg Fosse Water Reclamation Section Manager
Jennie Ross Accounting
PROJECT STAFF
The project work was performed by the BC&A’s team members listed below. Team member’s
roles on the project are also listed. The project was completed in BC&As’ Draper, Utah office.
Questions may be addressed to Keith Larson, Project Manager at (801) 495-2224.
Jeff Beckman Principle in Charge
Keith Larson Project Manager
Andrew McKinnon Project Engineer, Sewer Modeling
Ben Kirk Project Engineer, Sewer Modeling
Mike Hilbert Clerical
Page 97 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 2
EXISTING SYSTEM FEATURES
INTRODUCTION
As part of this Master Plan, BC&A has assembled an inventory of existing infrastructure within
the sewer collection system. The purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of the
inventory of City’s existing sewer collection system that can be used as a reference for future
studies.
SERVICE AREAs
For the purpose of this study, the City sewer system has been divided into three service areas.
The “City of Moab” service area includes most of the area within the corporate boundaries of the
City. Figure 2-1 identifies the approximate boundary of the Moab collection system service area.
The “Other Agencies” service area includes all growth outside of the Moab service area that is
expected to flow to the City. This could potentially include flow from the Spanish Valley Water
& Sewer Improvement District (SVW&SID) and San Juan County. The “Septage Haulers ”
service area is not associated with a specific area at all, but refers to those customers that will
bring septage directly to the City plant from septic tanks, campgrounds, and pit toilets serving
the recreational areas both in and around Moab.
TOPOGRAPHY
The Moab City sewer system service area is approximately 5 square miles (not including the
“Other Agencies”) and is bordered by the following: Slick Rock Area to the northeast, the
Colorado River to the north and west, and Spanish Valley to the southeast. The topography of
the City generally slopes from east to west with the City’s treatment plant located at the
southwest edge of the City (near the Colorado River). The Spanish Valley slopes from south to
north toward Moab City. Most of the City collection system flows by gravity to the treatment
plant with a few exceptional areas requiring lift stations (2 City owned lift stations, and several
private lift stations).
COLLECTION SYSTEM
Major attributes of the various components of the collection system are summarized in the
following sections.
Sewer Collection Pipes
There are about 30 miles of sewer mains and over 570 manholes in the Moab City Sewer System
that are cataloged in the GIS database. Table 2-1 contains a summary of the sewer pipes for the
Moab City sewer collection system. As can be seen in the table, 55 percent of the pipe in the
system is 8 inches in diameter, with another 20 percent of the system being 6 inches in diameter
or smaller. This represents the vast network of small collection mains in neighborhoods
throughout the City.
Page 98 of 240
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
!H!H
!H
!H
!H
!H
!H!H
!H
!H
!H
#*
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - Existing Collection System.mxd amckinnon 11/3/2017
2-1
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
EXISTING COLLECTION SYSTEM
CITY OF MOABNORTHLegend
#*WWTP
Lift Station
Lift Station
!H Commercial / Institutional
!H City Owned
!H Household
Existing Sewer Pipes
Pipe Size
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Moab Sewer Area Boundary
GWSSA Sewer Area
Moab City Limits
Spanish Valley
Page 99 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-2 CITY OF MOAB
Table 2-1
Sewer Collection System Sizes and Lengths
Diameter
(in)
Length
(ft)
Length
(mi)
Percentage
(%)
3 3,265 0.62 2.09%
4 246 0.05 0.16%
6 31,720 6.01 20.26%
8 87,253 16.53 55.72%
10 8,777 1.66 5.61%
12 6,072 1.15 3.88%
15 4,077 0.77 2.60%
18 12,070 2.29 7.71%
21 1,125 0.21 0.72%
24 746.93 0.14 0.48%
27 324.527 0.06 0.21%
30 913.789 0.17 0.58%
Total 156,589 29.66 100.00%
Table 2-2 shows a complete breakdown of pipe materials and pipe diameters. As the City
continues to rehabilitate and replace older existing lines, it is anticipated that the percentage of
PVC will gradually increase (as this is the preferred material of construction for most new sewer
mains).
Page 100 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-3 CITY OF MOAB
Table 2-2
Sewer Main Material Percentages
Unknown PVC Clay Transite Concrete
Diameter
(inch)
Sum
(%)
3 1.62% 0.47% -- -- -- 2.09%
4 -- 0.16% -- -- -- 0.16%
6 -- 2.62% 9.46% 0.80% 7.38% 20.26%
8 -- 24.44% 1.36% 0.17% 29.75% 55.72%
10 0.03% 1.24% 1.11% 0.07% 3.16% 5.61%
12 -- -- -- -- 3.88% 3.88%
15 -- 0.87% -- -- 1.73% 2.60%
18 -- 2.77% -- -- 4.93% 7.71%
21 -- -- -- -- 0.72% 0.72%
24 -- -- -- -- 0.48% 0.48%
27 -- -- -- -- 0.21% 0.21%
30 -- -- -- -- 0.58% 0.58%
Total 1.65% 32.57% 11.94% 1.04% 52.81% 100%
Lift Stations
Lift station locations are identified in Figure 2-1. Table 2-3 shows the estimated capacity for the
larger City owned lift stations. The City also maintains several household lift stations at various
locations in the City.
Table 2-3
Moab Lift Station Characteristics
Location
Estimated
Total
Dynamic
Lift (ft)
Estimated
Design
Flow*
(gpm)
Number
of
Pumps
Backup
Power
Included
Power
(HP) Model
Lions Park 109 68 2 No 5 KEEN KHG5-2301
500 W Williams Way 9 108 2 Yes 3 Barnes SGV3072L
*capacity estimated based on published pump curves for model type and estimated lift.
Overflows
The City has several overflows that are not used under dry weather flow conditions, but may
function during wet weather to prevent surcharging conditions. In addition, there are a number
Page 101 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-4 CITY OF MOAB
of manholes in the City that have potential overflow pipes that are primarily used for flushing
lines and maintenance. These overflows are discussed more in Chapter 4.
MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
The Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant facility (WWTP) is located at 1070 West 400 North and
was first constructed in the late 1950s. A secondary treatment process was added in 1967.
Additional modifications and expansions have been completed over the life of the plant. The
latest expansion was completed in 1996, which included a new headworks facility, additional
primary and secondary clarifiers, a new septage receiving station, and several other
improvements.
Recently, the City decided to complete replace the existing treatment plant with a new Water
Reclamation Facility (WRF). The WRF is currently under construction and is expected to be
completed in the fall of 2018. The new WRF includes construction of an improved septage
receiving station and screening equipment as part of the primary treatment process. The
secondary treatment process includes a sequencing batch reactor (SBR) treatment process. The
SBR process utilizes an activated sludge process for bio logical treatment of the wastewater.
Solids are settled and dewatered with a belt filter press for disposal. Ultraviolet light is used to
disinfect treated effluent prior to discharge to the Colorado River. The new treatment plant will
have an initial capacity of 1.75 mgd, with a peak hydraulic capacity of 3.4 mgd and has sufficient
space expand in the future as required.
Page 102 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 3
FUTURE GROWTH AND FLOW PROJECTIONS
INTRODUCTION
Before attempting to hydraulically model and evaluate the City’s sewer collection facilities, one
must first have an accurate understanding of wastewater flows. This includes an estimate of both
the quantity and distribution of existing and future flows. The purpose of this chapter is to
summarize the results, assumptions, and process of calculating both existing and future
wastewater flows.
There are three major components of wastewater flow: domestic wastewater, infiltration, and
inflow. Each of these is discussed in detail in this chapter.
DOMESTIC WASTEWATER
Domestic flow consists of the wastewater contributions of residential and nonresidential
customers. Domestic flow from residential and non-residential customers varies throughout the
day. Peak flows are generated during the morning hours as residents or tourists shower and
prepare for the day. There is a smaller peak in the early evening as residents return from work.
Domestic sewer flows are generally lower throughout the remainder of the day and are just a
trickle during the early morning hours when most residents are asleep. Flow from industrial or
commercial customers may vary from this pattern depending on the type of facility.
Two major challenges are encountered when estimating domestic flow. First, the quantity of
wastewater produced varies from area to area depending on the type of water user in the area and
the density of development. Second, domestic flow is not a constant value, but varies in time.
Domestic wastewater is most often developed using estimates of residential and/or non-residential
connections within a City. The City, however, has a large mix of non-residential connections
with a large tourism component that can affect domestic wastewater production patterns. As a
result, relying on the local residential population to account for domestic wastewater would under
predict domestic wastewater. Figure 3-1 shows the average wastewater at the City’s wastewater
treatment plant in 2015 and 2016. Flows to the treatment plant in winter months (December,
January, February) when tourism in Moab is reduced is approximately 50 percent lower than peak
times of the year when flow approaches 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd). Due to the variability
in flows due to the large tourism contribution to Moab, domestic flows for the City will be
projected based on an “equivalent residential unit” (ERU) defined by indoor residential meter
data. The approximate value for indoor water consumption was calculated to be 4,400 gallons per
month (147 gallons per day) per ERU during the peak month of consumption. For domestic
wastewater production, a consumptive use of 10 percent was estimated for Moab based on
treatment plant data, indoor water use, and flow monitoring conducted as part of this study. As a
result, the estimated domestic production from each ERU is 3,960 gallons per month.
Page 103 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-2 CITY OF MOAB
INFILTRATION
The second component of wastewater flow that must be considered is infiltration. Infiltration is
defined as water that enters into the sewer system which is not directly or indirectly related to
either domestic wastewater or to a specific storm event. This flow can enter as a result of open
pipe joints, cracks in pipes, pipes poorly connected at manholes, leaky lateral connections, roots,
etc. Infiltration is generally a function of groundwater levels. Groundwater levels in the service
area fluctuate depending on climate and season. Infiltration rates will correspondingly change
seasonally but will generally be constant during a single 24-hour period. Temporary increases in
the amount of water that enters the system after a storm because of an increase in ground water
will be considered as inflow.
Factors that can affect infiltration include pipe age, material, and number and condition of lateral
connections. Age can contribute to infiltration in two ways. First, older pipes are more likely to
be in poor condition. Cracks, separated joints, and other defects can contribute significantly to
increased infiltration. Second, older pipes do not have the benefit of improvements in
construction techniques that have occurred over time. Gasketed pipe joints, rubber boots at
manholes and laterals, and other improvements have contributed greatly to reducing system
infiltration over time.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1-Jan 31-Jan 2-Mar 2-Apr 2-May 2-Jun 2-Jul 1-Aug 1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec 31-DecWastewater Treatment PlantAverage Daily Flow (mgd)Figure 3-1
Seasonal Variation in Total Wastewater Flow
2015
2016
Page 104 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-3 CITY OF MOAB
Based on overall measurements at the City’s treatment plant, infiltration for the Moab treatment
plant service area appears to be relatively low. Total infiltration was estimated to be roughly 10
percent of total flow to the treatment plant for the peak month (0.12 mgd). This is significantly
less than infiltration to treatment plants in other parts of the State of Utah. Infiltration in the
collection system was identified by comparing indoor meter data to flow data collected at the
City’s treatment plant. Infiltration for GWSSA and San Juan County has been assumed to be
equal to the City of Moab’s. Although infiltration is a function of many different variables (water
table, pipe depth, pipe diameter, etc), projections of future infiltration are simplified by assuming
a specific amount of infiltration per growth in population or ERUs. This assumes the density of
the future collection network is approximately the same as for existing conditions. Based on this
assumption, infiltration per ERU can be estimated as approximately 15 gallons per day.
INFLOW
Similar to infiltration, inflow is also the intrusion of unwanted water into the sewer system. In the
case of inflow, however, this water comes from rainfall and snowmelt instead of groundwater.
Inflow may enter the sewer system through roof and foundation drains, yard and area drains,
manhole covers, and illicit storm drain connections. In the case of the assorted roof and yard
drains, discharge into the sanitary system is against City ordinances. However, illegal
connections often exist and can significantly affect the performance of the sewer system.
Inflow into a collection system can be highly variable and depends on the placement and
construction of sewer collection systems as well as the type of storm events that occur. In
addition, a long record of rainfall and flow monitoring data is needed to accurately predict how
storm events may impact the City’s collection system or treatment plant. T o account for inflow in
the sewer master plan, a portion of the capacity of pipe capacity should be reserved for inflow
when assessing pipe capacity. In other words, a pipe will be identified as having inadequate
capacity at flows somewhat less than the full flow capacity of the pipe. The City of Moab’s
design criteria for pipe capacity includes a 50 percent buffer for depth for pipes 15-inch and
smaller and 25 percent buffer for depth for pipes greater than 15-inch. This buffer provides
capacity for inflow and other unusual flow events including holidays when sewer production may
peak.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Once an understanding of existing wastewater is developed, it is possible to project the growth in
wastewater into the future. Growth projections for the City of Moab, Grand Water & Sewer
Service Agency (GWSSA), and San Juan County growth can be estimated based on the percent
increase from existing conditions. Table 3-1 summarizes the planning rate of growth estimated
for each agency. Growth rates from 2010 to 2035 were provided by each agency. Planning
growth rates from 2035 to 2060 are based on the average growth rate from the Governor’s Office
of Management and Budget (GOMB) for that time frame.
Page 105 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-4 CITY OF MOAB
Table 3-1
Planning Growth Rates for Agencies in the Service Area of the WWTP
Year
GOMB
Predicted
Percent
Growth
for City
of Moab
GOMB
Predicted
Percent
Growth for
Grand
County
GOMB
Predicted
Percent
Growth
for San
Juan
County
City of
Moab
Planning
Percent
Growth
GWSSA
Planning
Percent
Growth
San
Juan
County
Planning
Percent
Growth
2017 -- --
2020 1.11% 1.11% 0.59% 1.10% 2.00% 2.00%
2025 0.93% 0.93% -0.10% 1.10% 2.00% 2.00%
2030 0.93% 0.93% -0.10% 1.10% 2.00% 2.00%
2035 0.73% 0.73% -0.19% 1.10% 2.00% 2.00%
2040 0.73% 0.73% -0.19% 1.02% 2.00% 2.00%
2045 0.76% 0.76% 0.29% 1.02% 2.00% 2.00%
2050 0.76% 0.76% 0.29% 1.02% 2.00% 2.00%
2055 0.88% 0.88% 0.90% 1.02% 2.00% 2.00%
2060 0.88% 0.88% 0.90% 1.02% 2.00% 2.00%
The planning growth rates developed for each agency between 2010 and 2035 is higher than the
predictions of the GOMB. In addition to the projected growth rate within each agency, two other
significant sources of domestic wastewater contribute to Moab’s treatment plant: septage and the
future Utah State University (USU) extension. Table 3-2 summarizes projected growth in ERUs
anticipated for each agency along with increases in septage and contributions from USU
(estimates provided by various affected agencies).
Page 106 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-5 CITY OF MOAB
Table 3-2
Projected Growth in ERUs for Service Area
Year Moab1
San
Juan
County
GWSSA GWSSA
– USU2 Septage2 Total
2017 5,467 0 2,707 0 35 8,209
2020 5,649 263 2,873 135 43 8,963
2025 5,967 291 3,172 473 51 9,953
2030 6,303 321 3,502 810 60 10,995
2035 6,657 354 3,866 1,148 68 12,094
2060 8,320 581 6,343 1,148 83 16,476
1 Growth projections for Moab were provided by Moab personnel through 2035.
Projections between 2035 and 2060 are based on GOMB growth rates. Growth rates
for other agencies were maintained constant through 2060.
2 includes ERUs associated with flow only.
Table 3-2 includes only those equivalent residential units associated with typical residential flows
and does not account for differences in biological oxygen demand associated with nonresidential
uses. The City’s impact fee and rate studies account for these differences. For additional
information on treatment ERUs, the reader should reference those studies. Table 3-3 and Figure
3-2 summarize projected peak monthly flows associated with future growth in the treatment plant
service area.
Page 107 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-6 CITY OF MOAB
Table 3-3
Projected Peak Month Flows to Moab Treatment Plant* (MGD)
Year Moab San Juan GWSSA GWSSA
- USU Septage Total
2017 0.80 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.01 1.20
2020 0.83 0.04 0.42 0.02 0.01 1.31
2025 0.88 0.04 0.47 0.07 0.01 1.46
2030 0.92 0.05 0.51 0.12 0.01 1.61
2035 0.98 0.05 0.57 0.17 0.01 1.77
2060 1.22 0.09 0.93 0.17 0.01 2.42
*estimated peak month flow includes both infiltration and domestic production
The existing treatment plant was designed and constructed with 1.5 mgd of capacity originally.
However, due to high loading rates (of biological oxygen demand), the existing treatment plant
has only sufficient capacity for existing wastewater. The new treatment plant will begin receiving
wastewater in 2018 and has sufficient capacity to accommodate growth through approximately
2035 based on growth projections. There is also sufficient room on the new site if treatment
standards increase and additional treatment facilities are needed.
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060Peak Month Flow to Treatment Plant (mgd)Figure 3-2
Peak Month Flow to Moab City Wastewater Treatment Plant
Moab
GWSSA
San Juan
GWSSA - USU
Septage
Existing Capacity
New Treatment Plant Capacity*
*Treatment plant capacity may include many different components, but in general can be
represented as a flow capacity for peak month conditions
Page 108 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-7 CITY OF MOAB
WASTEWATER FLOW DISTRIBUTION
For hydraulic modeling purposes, projections of future flows must be distributed into the City’s
collection system. For existing conditions, flows were distributed based on winter water use
records in combination with flow monitoring data. Additional detail regarding model calibration
is provided in Chapter 4. For future growth, all flow from the GWSSA & San Juan County was
assumed to follow a new sewer collection line that will eventually be constructed in U.S.
Highway 191 (Main Street).
For growth within the City of Moab, BC&A evaluated the percentage of development for various
parts of the existing City compared to the City’s land use plan. Future growth was then added to
the nearest available collection line assuming future collection lines will be extended to areas.
Figure 3-3 shows the approximate distribution of future growth in the City.
Page 109 of 240
SERVICE AREA
64
205
98
250
497
361
256
160
122
112
36
99
29
87167
42
1148
14
12
43
105
14
19
6
13
16
1010
6
0 1,250 2,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 3-3 - Landuse.mxd bkirk 10/24/2017
3-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
CITY OF MOABLAND USE & ZONING
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
Legend
Growth (ERUs)
10
100
500
1,000
City Limits Moab
Spanish Valley
County Boundary
GWSSA Boundary
Development Status
Developed / Undevelopable
Undeveloped
City Zoning
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
MH/RV-1
RA-1
A-2
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
I-1
RC
SAR
FC-1
Page 110 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 4
HYDRAULIC MODELING
INTRODUCTION
A critical component in identifying required areas in the City collection system where pipes have
capacity deficiencies is the development of a hydraulic computer model. An extended period
simulation (EPS) hydraulic model was developed using Innovyze’s InfoSWMM software using
data provided by the City. The purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of the
methodology used to develop this model.
GEOMETRIC MODEL DATA
There are two major types of data required to develop a hydraulic model of a sewer system:
geometric data and flow data. Geometric data consists of information on the location and size of
system facilities including pipes, manholes, and lift stations. It also includes the physical
characteristics of the facilities including pipe roughness, invert elevations at manholes, pump
settings in lift stations, and a description of any diversions present. This information is generally
collected from system inventory data or through direct field measurement. The following
sections describe how geometric data was assembled for use in the hydraulic model.
Pipeline and Manhole Locations
The City has spent considerable time assembling a GIS inventory of its existing sewer facilities.
That database includes information on the location and size of manholes and pipelines in the City
collection system. Based on direction from City personnel, pipeline and manhole data was taken
directly from the GIS database for use in the model.
Pipe Flow Coefficients
Pipe flow coefficients used throughout the hydraulic model were assigned to have a Manning’s
coefficient of 0.013. This is approximately equal to the flow coefficient of concrete and clay
pipe. While there are other materials in the system with lower published flow coefficients (e.g.
PVC), 0.013 was used throughout the system as a conservative approach for estimating pipe
capacity. In addition, most collection pipes can develop thin layers of bacteria and solids (a
slime layer) that result in a relatively uniform flow coefficient despite varying materials.
Sediment and Debris
Because of the transportable nature of grease and debris in a sewer collection system, it is not
possible to identify the exact location and quantity of grease or debris accumulation in the
system for any specific point in time. Similarly, the build-up and erosion rates of sediment in
sanitary sewer systems are not always well understood. As a result, the detailed modeling of
sediment, grease, and debris on a system wide basis is not possible because of continually
changing conditions. Therefore, no sediment was included in the various runs of the hydraulic
model. Instead, the design and evaluation criteria for the City collection system is based on
Page 111 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-2 CITY OF MOAB
“clean” pipes, with an allowance for capacity lost to the accumulation of sediment (see
Chapter 5).
It should be noted that the hydraulic modeling software used to simulate the operation of the City
wastewater collection system does have the ability to set sediment depth in pipes. Therefore, if
the City does collect detailed sediment data for a given section of pipe, the s ediment may be
added to the model and its effects evaluated. However, it should be emphasized that any
sediment levels defined today will change in the future as flow conditions change.
Overflows
There are a number of manholes that have two potential flow directions based on the available
invert information provided by the City. In all cases, there is a primary flow direction where all
flow is conveyed under dry weather conditions with a potential “overflow” direction primarily
used for flushing lines and system maintenance. Table 4-1 lists the location of these potential
overflows along with the primary flow direction which are indicated in Figure 4-1. These
potential overflows were identified so that the hydraulic model would correctly simulate the
proper flow path for wastewater through the collection system.
Table 4-1
Manholes with Potential Overflow Directions
Manhole
ID Location
Main Flow
Direction
220 400 N Steward Ln (Overflow to the west. Typically flows north). GIS
for west line may be inaccurate. North
204 250 E Walnut Ln (Overflow to the north. Typically flows west).
North line currently plugged. West
139 100 W 200 North (Overflow to the southwest. Typically flows south). South
142
100 W 100 North (Overflow to the north. However, normal main
flow direction is plugged to the west. All flow currently goes north
through overflow ).
North
146 40 W Center Street (Overflow to the north. Typically flows south).
North line has been capped. South
85 300 E Center Street (Overflow to the west. Typically flows south). South
83 300 E 100 North (Overflow to the west. Typically flows south). South
78 400 E 100 North (Overflow to the west. Typically flows south). South
319 300 E 300 South (Overflow to the north. Typically flows west). West
36 400 E 300 South (Overflow to the west. Typically flows north). North
200 Birch Avenue and Mountain View Drive (Overflows to the northwest.
Majority of flow goes northeast). Northeast
Page 112 of 240
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
#*
EEE E
E
EEEEE
E
E EEEEEEEEEMH 28
MH 145
MH 290
MH 313
MH 114
MH 417
MH 107MH 748
MH 205
MH 472
0 400 800
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 4-1 - Overflow Locations.mxd amckinnon 11/16/2017
4-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
FLOW MONITORING & OVERFLOW LOCATIONS
CITY OF MOABNORTHLegendEFlow Monitoring Site
Overflow Location
EPrimary Direction of Flow
#*WWTP
Existing Sewer Pipes
Diameter (inch)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Spanish Valley
Page 113 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-3 CITY OF MOAB
FLOW DATA
Once all required geometric data was collected and a physical model of the system was
developed, flow data was obtained to model the system hydraulics. Three types of flow
information were required for hydraulic modeling: total magnitude of flow, timing of flow, and
distribution of flow across the City service area. Each of these flow characteristics is discussed
below.
Flow Monitoring
Several types of data were used to measure the total magnitude, timing, and distribution of
wastewater flow for the service area: wastewater treatment plant flow data, indoor culinary water
use data, and flow monitoring data. Flow monitors for the service area were selected along key
trunk lines in the City with the aid of City personnel as shown in Figure 4-1. Additional
discussion of each flow monitoring site is included in the Appendix.
Total Flow
Flow projections for the Moab service area were presented in detail in Chapter 3. Total flow for
modeling scenarios examined here are summarized in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2
Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Total Daily Flow Volumes
Scenario 2017 2060
Peak Month Dry Weather Flow & Infiltration (mgd) 1.20 2.42
Peak Day Dry Weather Flow & Infiltration (mgd) 1.50 3.63
Peak Day / Peak Month Factor 1.25 1.25
Timing of Flow
Both Peak Month and Peak Day dry weather flow/infiltration is shown in Table 4-2. Peak month
represents the average daily flow during the peak month of the year. Peak Day dry weather flow
represents the peak day of flow during the year. Peak month data is primarily used for sizing of
components at the City’s wastewater treatment plant, while peak day data is used for collection
system capacity evaluations. Flow monitoring data collected as part of this study identified a
peaking daily factor of approximately 1.25 compared to peak month average daily flows. In
addition to the peak day to peak month factor, flow monitoring data was also used to identify
hourly fluctuations in wastewater production. To predict the magnitude and timing of peak
flows in the model, it is important to understand how flow varies throughout the day. This is
different for each component of wastewater flow.
Domestic Wastewater – The pattern of fluctuating domestic water use is often referred to as a
diurnal pattern. These patterns vary depending on the type of user. Weekday and Weekend
patterns for the Moab have very distinct differences and the weekend typically has a higher
magnitude and peaking factor than weekdays based on flow monitoring observations. Typical
Page 114 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-4 CITY OF MOAB
diurnal patterns for weekend wastewater production are shown in Figure 4-2. Figure 4-2
includes flow monitoring patterns observed at several locations in the City. Ordinarily, it is
sometimes useful to flow monitor different types of development to establish a “typical” pattern
for use such as residential, commercial, or institutional. The City of Moab, however, has a
diverse mix of development types that discharge to the several trunk lines selected for flow
monitoring. Only one of the flow monitor locations represent a mostly uniform tributary area
(installed at manhole #114 or MH 114) that is mostly residential. MH 290 captures the discharge
from mixed development, but appears to represent a large portion of institutional type use based
on the peak occurring around noon. This may be a result of the upstream elementary school
(Helen M. Knight Elementary).
As can be seen in the figure, peak residential wastewater production typically occurs around 9
a.m. as residents prepare for the day, with a smaller peak occurring around 8 p.m. as residents
clean up and prepare for bed.
Patterns are also shown for lines coming into the treatment plant from the North (MH 28 and
MH 472). These patterns are unique in that they include several Hotels and RV parks along the
Highway. Other patterns include lines coming into the system from the south (Labeled “MH
107”, “MH 417”, and “MH 748” for the manhole where the flow monitor was installed). These
bring in flows from Grand County and San Juan County.
Infiltration – As discussed in Chapter 3, infiltration may vary on a seasonal basis but does not
generally vary on a daily basis. Thus, it has been assumed that infiltration remains constant
throughout the day in the collection system model.
Inflow – For this study, inflow has not been modeled directly because of the wide variability in
storm events and inflow response possible in the City. For design purposes, the City has
included a capacity allowance in its design criteria to account for inflow into its collection
system.
Table 4-3 shows the peaking factors used for each hour that represent the patterns used in the
hydraulic model. Diurnal patterns represent existing use and were applied to growth in domestic
wastewater for areas upstream of the flow monitors so that the pattern of use for future use is
approximated by existing use patterns.
Page 115 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-5 CITY OF MOAB
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24Peaking Factor (Measured flow / Average Daily Flow)Hour
Figure 4-2
Diurnal Patterns
MH 114 - 50 E 100 S
MH 290 - 500 W 400 N
MH 28 - North of Treatment Plant
MH 107 - 600 S Main
MH 417 - 150 E Grand County Middle
MH 748 - 600 S Kane Creek Blvd
Page 116 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-6 CITY OF MOAB
Table 4-3
Moab Service Area Diurnal Patterns
Hydraulic
Model
Diurnal
PatternsHour
MH 114
(50 E 100
S)
MH 290
(500 W 400
N from
East)
MH 28 -
North of
Treatment
Plant
MH
107 -
600 S
Main
St
MH 417
- 150 E
Grand
County
Middle
MH
748
600 S
Kane
Creek
Blvd
0 0.41 0.31 0.46 0.58 0.73 0.68
1 0.20 0.22 0.25 0.39 0.54 0.57
2 0.18 0.21 0.16 0.38 0.36 0.58
3 0.17 0.38 0.10 0.34 0.31 0.56
4 0.18 0.45 0.17 0.31 0.27 0.56
5 0.20 0.35 0.30 0.41 0.27 0.71
6 0.55 0.53 0.78 0.77 0.28 0.83
7 1.11 1.21 1.49 1.32 0.35 1.10
8 1.58 1.41 2.16 1.54 0.92 1.25
9 1.73 1.65 2.19 1.67 1.85 1.33
10 1.69 1.66 1.63 1.38 2.19 1.35
11 1.45 1.75 1.47 1.22 1.73 1.57
12 1.36 1.69 1.34 1.11 1.42 1.23
13 1.18 1.57 1.19 1.15 1.26 1.15
14 1.20 1.28 1.13 1.15 1.15 1.03
15 1.13 1.32 0.94 1.13 0.97 1.07
16 1.20 1.48 0.85 1.17 0.98 1.16
17 1.31 1.22 1.01 1.24 1.11 1.15
18 1.40 1.13 0.97 1.16 1.09 1.18
19 1.43 1.16 1.07 1.17 1.19 1.10
20 1.45 1.07 1.15 1.29 1.29 1.11
21 1.35 0.98 1.34 1.27 1.45 1.04
22 0.93 0.57 1.15 1.11 1.30 0.94
23 0.63 0.43 0.70 0.76 1.00 0.73
24 0.41 0.31 0.46 0.58 0.73 0.68
Based on the diurnal patterns used above, peak flows simulated in the model are summarized in
Table 4-4.
Page 117 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-7 CITY OF MOAB
Table 4-4
Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Peak Hour Flows (mgd)
Scenario 2017* 2060*
Dry Weather Flow 2.56 4.89
*Peak hour WWTP inflow from extended period simulation which accounts for attenuation in the
system
Distribution of Flow
With flow magnitude and timing estimated, the final step in developing flow data for the model
is distributing it spatially across the City:
Domestic Wastewater – Existing domestic sewer flows included in the hydraulic model were
distributed based on winter water use data for the Moab service area. Water billing data
collected across the City were assigned to the nearest manhole assuming that the sewer
connections from the various culinary water meters would flow to the same manhole. Metered
demands which have some inherent inaccuracies with underreporting were factored up to match
the estimated domestic production for the City as measured with flow monitors. Future growth
of domestic sewer flow was distributed based on estimates of overall growth, landuse, and
percentage development. While there will likely be some redevelopment within the City, future
growth has been assigned to undeveloped areas of the Moab service area. Growth in domestic
wastewater from GWSSA was assumed to growth primarily along SR91.
Infiltration – Existing infiltration was distributed using flow monitoring data collected at the
locations shown in Figure 4-1 Table 4-5 shows the total infiltration added to the model at and
upstream of the following flow monitoring sites.
Page 118 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-8 CITY OF MOAB
Table 4-5
Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Infiltration Flows (gpm)
Manhole
Id
Infiltration
(gpm)
28 35
114 30
290 20
313 50
472 20
Total 155
CALIBRATION
The process of model calibration involves adjusting or modifying certain model parameters in
order to better match the actual conditions of the sewer system. Calibration of the model was
performed using indoor water billing data and available flow meter data from various locations
throughout the City. A comparison of model simulation results against the flow monitoring
recordings appears to indicate that, in general, the model is reproducing system conditions within
a reasonable level of accuracy. However, model adjustments were made where possible in order
to better match the flow monitoring data. Final results for several sample flow monitoring
location are shown in Figures 4-3 through 4-5.
As part of initial calibration, indoor water billing records were used to estimate and distribute
domestic wastewater for the Moab service area. In cases where the majority of flow comes from
GWSSA (Manholes 107, 417, 748), only flow monitoring data was available for estimating
wastewater. No distinction is made between domestic production and infiltration in these cases.
It should be understood that the hydraulic model developed for this study relies on the available
geometric data provided by the City. The City should continue to update this hydraulic model
based on new survey information at least once a year to ensure it reflects current conditions.
Page 119 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-9 CITY OF MOAB
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Figure 4-3
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 313 (500 W 300 N)
Observed
Simulated
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Figure 4-4
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 290 (500 W 400 N)
Observed
Simulated
Page 120 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-10 CITY OF MOAB
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Figure 4-5
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 107 (600 S Main St)
Observed
Simulated
Page 121 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 5-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 5
SYSTEM EVALUATION
With the development and calibration of a hydraulic sewer model, it is possible to simulate sewer
system operating conditions for both present and future conditions. The purpose of this chapter
is to evaluate hydraulic performance of the collection system and identify potential hydraulic
deficiencies.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
In defining what constitutes a hydraulic deficiency, it is important to consider the assumptions
made in estimating sewer flows in the model. As described in Chapters 3 and 4, the sewer flow
included in the model is composed of two parts: domestic sewer flow and infiltration. These
inputs are based on available historic data. Because these estimates are based on average values
and a limited data set, actual flows will fluctuate and may be greater than the model estimates.
For example, infiltration during extremely wet years could be more than estimated in the model
(e.g. 1983 was a statewide historically wet year that led to high infiltration and flooding in many
areas). The criteria established for identifying deficiencies should be sufficiently conservative to
account for occasional flows higher than those estimated in the model. The following criteria
have been established to identify capacity deficiencies in the system:
• Pipeline Capacity – The most important deficiency to eliminate in the sewer system is
inadequate capacity. The City has adopted design criteria for its collection system to
account for higher peaking factors in smaller collection lines that may not affect larger
collection lines as much. The design criteria for pipes 15-inch and smaller requires the
depth of flow in the pipe to be less than 50 percent of the pipe diameter. For pipes larger
than 15-inch, the depth of flow in the pipe is required to be less than 75 percent of the
pipe diameter. The remaining capacity in the pipe is reserved for inflow and/or
unaccounted for fluctuations in domestic flow and infiltration. A manning’s roughness
value of 0.013 was used for all collection pipes to conservatively calculate capacity.
• Lift Station Capacity – A lift station capacity deficiency is defined as anytime dry
weather peak hour flows exceed 85 percent of the lift station’s primary pumping capacity.
Note that all lift stations are required to have at least one backup pump in case of
mechanical failure or significant inflow from wet weather events.
EXISTING SYSTEM ANALYSIS
Figure 5-1 displays the hydraulic capacity of the sewer system under existing peak hour flow
conditions with the maximum depth at any point along the length of the pipe. Pipes in the figure
are color coded to show the ratio of maximum depth in the pipe to the pipe’s full depth. Based on
peak flow and pipe capacities alone, the only area of the City that does not meet the City’s
design criteria is along 100 West from Millcreek to Walnut Lane. Beyond the capacity
deficiencies identified along 100 West, flow monitoring conducted along 100 West also
identified irregular flow conditions (various depths for the same flow rate) that may be the result
of poor pipe conditions.
Page 122 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 5-1 - 2017 Existing Deficiences.mxd bkirk 10/23/2017
5-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2017PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2017)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 123 of 240
SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 5-2 CITY OF MOAB
No lift station deficiencies were observed in the existing sewer system in relation to capacity
concerns.
City personnel have expressed concerns about some of the private lift stations in the City. While
many private lift stations are supposed to be operated and maintained by the private property
owner, City personnel often assist with maintenance or replacement of private lift station
components. Where possible, the City would like to eliminate private lift stations to improve
maintenance and limit potential sanitary sewer overflow conditions (see Appendix – Technical
Memo – Northwest lift station). As the City grows, the City will also explore options to
eliminate septic connections where feasible.
FUTURE SYSTEM ANALYSIS
Figures 5-2 through 5-4 show the hydraulic performance as calculated by the hydraulic model for
sewer flows as projected through full buildout conditions if no improvements are made to the
existing system. These results assume that sewer flows associated with future development will
flow to the nearest manhole in the existing system. While the majority of the system under
buildout conditions has ample capacity, some significant deficiencies have been observed in the
model results. Most are the result of growth in the GWSSA service area and deficiencies follow
the main trunk line to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. Figures 5-2 and 5-3 help identify
how soon some of the deficiencies will occur.
Lift Station Deficiencies
Table 5-1 summarizes the projected buildout flow to the City owned lift stations.
Table 5-1
Summary of Sewer Lift Stations
Location
Design
Capacity
(gpm)
Existing
Dry
Weather
Peak
Flow
(gpm)
2060
Dry
Weather
Peak
Flow
(gpm)
Lions Park 68 13 13
500 W Williams Way 108 10 22
Based on the limited flow to these lift stations, there is no projected hydraulic deficiency even
for growth through 2060. These two lift stations may eventually be de-commissioned once a
lower gravity pipe is installed in the future (the South trunk line).
Page 124 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 5-2 - 2022 Deficiences.mxd bkirk 10/23/2017
5-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2022PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2022)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 125 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 5-3 - 2030 Deficiences.mxd bkirk 10/23/2017
5-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2030PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2030)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 126 of 240
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 5-4 - 2060 Buildout Deficiences.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
5-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
YEAR 2060PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
#*WWTP
GWSSA Pipes
City of Moab Sewer Pipes (2060)Peak discharge depth/ pipe diameter
Less than 0.4
0.4~0.5
0.5~0.65
0.65~0.75
Greater than 0.75
Page 127 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 6-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 6
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
The hydraulic model results have identified potential deficiencies in the sewer system under
existing and build-out conditions. This chapter covers system improvements intended to solve
deficiencies as the City approaches build-out. Once design of sewer mains commences, the
design pipe capacity should be based on projected build-out flows. Improvements are organized
in this chapter by locations, and priority of each project is chosen based on the predicted
necessity.
COLLECTION SYSTEM CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
Four system improvements have been identified to resolve hydraulic deficiencies and improve
system operation as identified in Figure 6-1.
Project 1 – 100 West, Mill Creek to Walnut Lane – The existing sewer collection line on 100
West has condition related problems that will require the pipe to be replaced. Connections that
tie into the sewer line at adverse angles will be corrected to improve flow conditions. The pipe
will also be upsized to accommodate short-term growth until a future southwest trunk line can be
constructed.
Project 2 – Northwest Lift Station & Trunk – The City will construct a new lift station and
gravity trunk line near the Aarchway Inn & Holiday Inn Express to eliminate the two private lift
stations at those properties. The new sewer trunk and lift station will also be used to eliminate
the septic system at the Moab RV park (see Appendix – Technical Memorandum – Northwest
Lift Station).
Project 3 – South Trunk Line – A new trunk line will be constructed from near Uranium
Avenue and Main Street following on the west side of Pack Creek toward the treatment plant.
This trunk line will be the primary receiving line for existing and future wastewater from
GWSSA. In addition, this trunk line will enable development west of Pack Creek which is
currently constrained by limits on septic connections. Existing septic systems west of Pack
Creek will also be converted to gravity connections as funding is available.
Project 4 – 1000 North, 500 West to Rubicon Trail – A new 12-inch sewer line will be
constructed to divert flows from 500 West to the existing 15-inch trunk line near the Portal RV
Resort. This will prevent pipes further downstream on 500 West from exceeding capacity in the
future.
Table 6-1 summarizes costs estimates for the proposed projects.
Page 128 of 240
#*
!.32
4
10 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 6-1a - Project Improvements.mxd amckinnon 11/1/2017
6-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
PROPOSED SYSTEMIMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
!.Future Lift Station
#*WWTP
System Improvement (inch)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Existing Sewer Pipes
Spanish Valley
New Northwest Lift Station
Page 129 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 6-2 CITY OF MOAB
Table 6-1
Proposed System Improvements
ID Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Construction
Cost
Estimate
Engineering
/ Admin
(15 percent)
Total
Project
Cost
Estimate
1.1 100 West1 21 1,700 $755,000 $113,000 $868,000
2.1 Northwest Trunk 15 4,133 $992,000 $149,000 $1,141,000
2.2 Northwest Lift Station2 $320,000 $48,000 $368,000
2 Subtotal Project 2 $1,312,000 $197,000 $1,509,000
3.1 1000 North, 500 W to Rb. 12 1,860 $141,000 $21,000 $162,000
4.1 South Trunk 24 9,770 $4,769,000 $715,000 $5,484,000
Total $6,977,000 $1,046,000 $8,023,000
1 Includes cost of replacing the existing Mill Creek siphon.
2 the required capacity of the Northwest lift station is estimated to be 750 gpm (see Appendix “Northwest Lift
Station Memo”). Cost estimated with “Pump Station Design Manual” (2 nd Edition, Sanks et al) figure 29-9 adjusted
to 2017 dollars.
Page 130 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-1 CITY OF MOAB
CHAPTER 7
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Previous chapters of this report have identified improvements to resolve existing deficiencies and
to accommodate wastewater flow from future growth while providing an acceptable level of
service. The purpose of this chapter is to assemble a 10-year capital improvement program to
implement the recommended improvements. This plan should be updated at least every five
years to re-prioritize system improvements to achieve City goals. This will include
recommendations regarding levels of funding for system rehabilitation, replacement, and capital
improvement projects.
SYSTEM REHABILITATION AND REPLACEMENT
In order to assemble a 10-year capital improvement plan, it is not adequate to consider only
capacity related improvements. It is also necessary to budget for the expected rehabilitation and
replacement of system components.
Concrete Pipe Assessment and Rehabilitation
One major category of concern relative to sewer system rehabilitation and replacement is the
corrosion of existing concrete pipe. Hydrogen sulfide gas in a sewer system can result in the
formation of sulfuric acid (𝐻2 𝑆𝑂4 ) on pipe and manhole walls. Sulfuric acid can result in severe
corrosion of ferrous metals and concrete. The top of a moist concrete pipe is a common area for
the formation of sulfuric acid and corresponding corrosion. This is a significant concern for
Moab because most of the City’s large diameter collection lines are constructed of concrete pipe.
The City regularly videos its collection system and has scored the condition of pipe for various
parameters including: wall condition, pipe appearance (cleanliness), pipe joints, roots, ponding
(grade), and pests. All of these parameters are important, but capital projects will primarily arise
as a function of wall condition. Figure 7-1 and Table 7-1 summarizes wall condition
assessments for City pipelines that have been inspected. The higher the number, the worse the
pipe condition. Pipes with a score of “0” in Figure 1 represent areas that have not yet been
inspected (roughly 40 percent of 6-inch and greater pipes) for maintenance or rehab concerns.
In general, the City has tried to prioritize pipe inspections in those areas where operation
personnel believe there may be condition related problems. To estimate the amount of
uninspected pipe that may have severe or critical wall conditions, the percentage of inspected
pipes with severe or critical pipe conditions was calculated. This percentage was then applied to
the uninspected pipe length at a ratio of 0.5 to estimate how much of the uninspected pipe has
severe or critical wall conditions. Table 7-2 shows the estimated pipe length of uninspected pipe
for each diameter that may have severe or critical wall conditions. The City will be trained to
use the Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP), a program to improve pipe condition
assessment, in the near future and has a goal to inspect all City pipe using PACP techniques
within the next two to three years.
Page 131 of 240
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
#*
0 750 1,500
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 7-1 - Pipe Condition.mxd amckinnon 11/3/2017
7-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
SEWER PIPEWALL CONDITION
CITY OF MOABNORTHL E G E N D
#*WWTP
Existing Sewer Pipes
Wall Condition Score
0 - No Data
1 - Good
2 - Mild
3 - Medium
4 - Severe
5 - Critical
Spanish Valley
Page 132 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-2 CITY OF MOAB
Based on the City’s wall condition scoring, pipelines that exhibit a critical condition assessment
(score 5) should be prioritized for replacement as soon possible with larger diameter pipelines
first. Pipes with a severe condition assessment (score 4) or less can likely be rehabilitated with
cast-in-place pipe (CIPP). Table 7-3 summarizes potential costs to rehab or replace pipes with
severe or critical wall conditions.
Table 7-1
Summary of Wall Condition Scores
Length of Pipe (ft) for Wall Condition Score
Diameter
(in)
0 – No Data
1 – Good
Condition
2 – Mild
Condition
Concerns
3 –
Medium
Condition
Concerns
4 –
Severe
Condition
Concerns
5 –
Critical
Condition
Concerns
4 9,237 0 307 142 0 0
6 9,039 1,819 13,097 6,429 3,737 438
8 27,087 10,493 16,749 14,031 14,140 2,404
10 1,801 361 1,424 4,330 936 0
12 3,363 281 372 2,101 307 730
15 3,278 0 0 798 0 0
18 10,174 0 0 0 0 1,832
21 1,125 0 0 0 0 0
24 0 0 0 407 340 0
27 325 0 0 0 0 0
30 257 0 0 657 0 0
Total 56,447 12,954 31,643 28,753 19,460 5,405
Table 7-2
Estimated Length of Uninspected Pipe with Condition Concerns
Diameter
(in)
4 –
Severe
Condition
Concerns
(ft)
5 –
Critical
Condition
Concerns
6 662 78
8 3,312 563
10 119 0
12 136 324
18 0 5,087
Total 4,230 6,052
Page 133 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-3 CITY OF MOAB
Table 7-3
Summary of Rehab/Replacement Costs for
Severe and Critical Wall Condition Pipes
Diameter
(in)
Severe
Condition1
Critical
Condition1
6 $219,798 $136,054
8 $871,987 $782,560
10 $58,659 $0
12 $27,125 $310,022
18 $0 $2,524,420
24 $50,991 $0
Total $1,228,560 $3,753,056
1 – assumes severe pipes are rehabilitated and
critical pipes are replaced
System Rehabilitation and Replacement Priorities
Because funding is always limited, it is important to prioritize initial system rehabilitation efforts
based on the potential consequence of a pipe not performing as designed. The following criteria
may be helpful to City personnel in identifying pipes that are most critical based on their relative
importance in the collection system:
• Sewer Flow Rate – Flow rate in a sewer pipe is the single most important indicator of the
importance of a pipe. Generally speaking, the higher the flow rate, the larger the area
which a pipe serves. Bypass pumping costs, the risk of property damage, environmental
and regulatory consequences, the cost of pipe replacement, and problems from sewage up
in the system are all more severe for larger flow rates. In a worst case scenario, if a pipe
collapses or becomes blocked and surcharging in the pipeline results in flows backing up
into basements and streets, there is a much greater health hazard to the public with a high
flow pipe.
• Road Type – It is much more difficult and costly to perform sewer line repairs on streets
with dense traffic. Therefore, pipelines located in high traffic areas should be considered
more critical than lower traffic areas. For example, the cost of pipe failure along State
Route 191 (Main Street) would be much greater than an equivalent sized pipe located on
a residential street.
• Pipe Depth – The depth of the pipe can have a significant impact on the cost of repairs
and rehabilitation of sewer pipe. Extensions on backhoes, very wide trenches,
dewatering, etc. make repairs and maintenance much more expensive and time
consuming on deeper pipes. Repairing such pipes under an emergency situation would
only be that more difficult. For this reason, deep pipelines should be prioritized over
shallow pipelines when planning a repair or maintenance schedule.
Page 134 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-4 CITY OF MOAB
Figure 7-2 shows critical condition pipe projects prioritized primarily by flow rate because road
type and depth are approximately equivalent for each of the projects identified.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET
Before establishing a 10-year capital improvement plan, it is necessary to determine how much
funding will be set aside each year for capital improvements. One of the best ways to identify a
recommended level of funding is to consider system service life. As with all utilities, each
component of a sewer system has a finite service life. Therefore, it is necessary to continually
spend money towards the rehabilitation or replacement of these components. If adequate funds
are not set aside for regular system renewal, the collection system will fall into a state of
disrepair and be incapable of providing the level of service that customers expect.
The City’s sewer collection system is composed of about 30 miles of sewer main pipe and about
570 manholes. The total cost to replace and rehabilitate all of the pipes and lift stations in the
Moab collection system would be approximately $45 million based on 2017 construction costs.
Using a 90-year life cycle for collection system pipes, the recommended annual budget for
system replacement and rehabilitation would be $500,000/year. It is recommended that the
budget be used to replace or rehabilitate severe and critical condition pipes as soon as possible.
10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES
Based on the maintenance projects identified above and the system improvements identified in
Chapter 6, Table 7-3 lists improvement projects that are recommended within the next 10-years.
This table includes several projects not included in the City’s impact fee facilities plan (see
Appendix). Projects that are maintenance related or fully developer funded have been omitted
from the City’s impact fee facilities plan because they are not impact fee eligible. Pipes with
critical wall conditions are prioritized first and are mostly funded over the next 10 years. For
the purpose of cost estimating, it has been assumed that all critical condition pipes will require
replacement. If rehabilitation is possible through cast-in-place pipe, additional projects to
rehabilitate severe wall condition pipe may also be possible in the 10-year time frame. As a
result, it is recommended that each condition project be reviewed to determine if rehabilitation is
feasible.
Page 135 of 240
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
#*O&M 1O&M 5
O&M 3O&M 4O&M 9O&M 6O&M 2O&
M
8
O&M 70 500 1,000
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 7-2 - Pipe Condition Projects.mxd amckinnon 12/1/2017
7-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
CONDITION PROJECTPRIORITIES
CITY OF MOABNORTHL E G E N D
#*WWTP
Critical Condition Projects
Existing Sewer Pipes
Existing Sewer Pipes
Spanish Valley
Page 136 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-5 CITY OF MOAB
Table 7-3
10-Year Capital Facility Plan
ID
Estimated
Year of
Construction Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Project
Cost
($2017
Dollars)
0 FYE 2019 City Project -- -- $300,000
1.1 FYE 2018 100 West 21 1,700 $868,000
2.1 FYE 2019 Northwest Trunk1 15 4,133 $1,141,000
2.2 FYE 2019 Northwest Lift Station1 $368,000
3.1 FYE 2020 1000 North, 500 W to Rb2. 12 1,860 $162,000
O&M 1 FYE 2020 Crit. Cond. – Outfall Pipe 21 1,840 $864,800
O&M 2 FYE 2021 Crit. Cond. – 100 W, 200 S 12 430 $163,300
O&M 3 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – Walnut Lane 18 830 $365,700
O&M 4 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 500 West 12 580 $213,900
O&M 5 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 200 South 8 1,100 $351,900
O&M 6 FYE 2022 Crit. Cond. – 100 W, 400 N 8 400 $139,200
O&M 7 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – 200 East 8 280 $102,400
O&M 8 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – Emma Blvd 8 290 $105,800
O&M 9 FYE 2023 Crit. Cond. – Birch Ave 6 440 $151,800
O&M FYE 2024-2026 Critical – To be determined -- -- $1,294,200
O&M FYE 2025-2026 Severe - To be determined -- -- $1,229,000
4.1 FYE 2026 South Trunk 24 9,770 $5,484,000
Total $13,305,000
1 It is anticipated that this project will be developer funded and reimbursed through a developer agreement .
2 The City will pay the upsize cost for this project with the remainder funded by a developer .
Figure 7-3 shows how system improvement project may be funded over the next 10-years. A
discussion of each of the major budget categories in the 10-year budget plan is included below:
• Operation & Maintenance – The operation and maintenance budget item shown in
Figure 7-3 shows anticipated maintenance costs associated with routine collection system
and treatment plant operation and maintenance. Costs are anticipated to increase with
commissioning of the City’s new treatment plant.
• Capital Expenditures from Reserves – These costs fund pipe replacement or new
construction projects needed for the collection system or treatment plant.
• Capital Expenditures from Loan Proceeds – The majority of treatment plant costs will
be funded with a loan from the State of Utah. Some costs will be funded through capital
expenditures from the City’s wastewater reserve fund. In addition to the treatment plant,
the City also has some high priority maintenance projects and capital improvement
projects to meet the needs of short term and long term growth.
Page 137 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-6 CITY OF MOAB
• Cash Contribution from GWSSA for WWTP – Some of the costs for the treatment
plant will be funded with contribution from the Grand Water and Sewer Service Agency.
• Debt Service – Once the City obtains loans for the treatment plant and other urgent
collection system projects, the City will need to make payments on the debt associated
with the loans.
• Projected Income – Recommended Rates – The projected income with recommended
rates. Due to the required condition related projects the City intends to repair over the
next 10-years, a 3% increase in rates is assumed from 2022 to 2026 to keep up with
inflation associated with construction and operation costs. This is a slight change to the
10-year rates presented in Moab City’s Sewer Rate study completed in February 2017.
Figure 7-4 shows the effect of the 10-year capital facility plan on the City’s reserve fund.
Page 138 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-7 CITY OF MOAB
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
FYE
2014
FYE
2015
FYE
2016
FYE
2017
FYE
2018
FYE
2019
FYE
2020
FYE
2021
FYE
2022
FYE
2023
FYE
2024
FYE
2025
FYE
2026
Figure 7-3
10-Year Revenue and Expenditures -Moab City Sewer
Capital Expenditures from Loan Proceeds
Cash Contribution from GWSSA for WWTP
Capital Expenditures from Reserves
Debt Service for WRF
O&M
Projected Income - Recommended Rates
Projected Income - Existing Rates
*Includes 3% inflation for O&M and construction costs
Page 139 of 240
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-8 CITY OF MOAB $0$500,000$1,000,000$1,500,000$2,000,000$2,500,000$3,000,000$0$500,000$1,000,000$1,500,000$2,000,000$2,500,000$3,000,000FYE2015FYE2016FYE2017FYE2018FYE2019FYE2020FYE2021FYE2022FYE2023FYE2024FYE2025FYE2026Figure 7-410-Year Reserve Fund Balance - Moab City SewerSewer Master PlanBuilding ProjectCity Designed ProjectSewer Lift StationReplace 100 West Trunk Line1000 North, 500 W to RubiconNew South Trunk PipelineNon-Loaned Treatment PlantCapital CostsCollection - Rehabilitation &ReplacementCollection - Severe ConditionRehabilitationCollection - Critical ConditionRepairReserve Fund BalanceTarget Fund Balance (6 Monthsof O&M)A $6.7 million loan will be used to fund the majority of South Trunk costs. Costs shown include portion funded by City reserve funds.Page 140 of 240
APPENDIX A
Northwest Lift
Station
Alternatives
Memo
Page 141 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Williams
City Engineer
City of Moab
COPIES: Eric Johanson, Obe Tejada
FROM: Jeff Beckman, Keith Larson, Ben Kirk, Andrew McKinnon
DATE: October 2, 2017
SUBJECT: Northwest Lift Station Alternatives
JOB NO.: 130-17-04
INTRODUCTION
The northwest edge of the City cannot gravity flow to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. As a
result, there are several private developments that have constructed private lift stations or septic
tanks and fields to service their individual properties. During discussions with City personnel,
maintenance problems at existing private lift stations frequently become problems for City personnel
because of property owners’ lack of experience in servicing and maintaining sewer facilities. To
reduce potential problems with private lift stations, the City would like to construct a new public lift
station in the northwest part of the City to serve both developed and undeveloped properties that
will require lift station service. The City would also like to eliminate existing septic fields where
possible. The purpose of this memorandum is to explore alternatives for a lift station, sewer mains,
and force mains in this area.
PROJECT AREA
The study area includes land that is already developed, as well as land that may soon be developed
as shown in Figure 1. The study area consists of several smaller service sub-areas. Area A is the
primary service area and stretches on the south side of Highway 191 from the Moab RV Park east to
Western River Expeditions. This reach is approximately 4,000 feet long, and includes 68 acres of
developable land, some of which is already developed. Within this portion of the service area there
are two existing private lift stations that serve the Holiday Inn Express and Aarchway Inn
individually. The Moab RV Park is one other developed property in this area. It is not currently
connected to the sewer system.
Beyond Area A on the south side of Highway 191, an additional potential service area, Area B, consists
of 50 acres of mountainous terrain on the north side of the highway that may be developed in the
future. Most of this area is too steep to be developed, but some limited development could occur on
this side of the highway. There are also several hotels and other buildings across the Colorado River
in Area C that could eventually connect to the system. These facilities currently have their own small
package treatment plan, but could eventually be pumped across the river and into the City system.
Area D is largely undeveloped. However, it is unknown the amount of useable land in this area, or if
the flows from this area would be connected to the Moab Sewer System.
Page 142 of 240
Existing Lift Station
Existing 15-inchStub-out
68 Acres
50 Acres
12 Acres
120 Acres
RVPark
AarchwayInn Holiday InnExpress
WesternRiverExpeditions
H
w
y
1
9
1
Colorado River
100-year ColoradoRiver Floodplain
Existing Lift Station
Area D
Area A
Area B
Area C
0 500 1,000
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\RV Park Sewer Option Project Area.mxd bkirk 9/28/2017
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:
1
MOAB CITYSEWER MASTER PLANRV PARK SEWER OPTIONS PROJECT STUDY AREA NORTH:
L E G E N D
Moab City Limits
Parcels
Existing Sewer Pipes
Floodplain
Project Areas
Area A
Area B
Area C
Area D
NORTHPage 143 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 2
FLOWS AND PIPE REQUIREMENTS
Projected Future Flows
The City Zoning Map defines Study Areas A and B as “Resort Commercial”. The Sewer Master Plan
has estimated these areas will have sewer flows of 871 gpd/acre in Resort Commercial zones unless
otherwise provided by Moab City personnel (existing indoor water billing data or planned
development estimates). While Areas C and D lie outside the City boundaries, it is assumed that these
areas will have similar sewer patterns. Assuming a typical peaking factor of 3.49 based on the 10
States Standard peaking factor equation, the projected future flows for each area are shown below in
Table 1. Table 1 shows the projected peak flows for each area.
Table 1
Projected Future Flows per Study Area
Study Area Area (Acres) Buildout ERU
Estimate
Peak Flow1
(gpm)
Area A 68 593 211
Area B 50 297 106
Area C 12 190 68
Area D 120 713 253
Total 250 1,793 637
1 Peaking factor developed from “Water Supply and Waste-water Disposal” (pg. 136)
Based on the projected buildout flow, the lift station should be sized to accommodate 750 gpm of capacity
(includes 15 percent buffer for equipment decline). Although it should only be equipped with
approximately 375 gpm of capacity until there is potential for collecting areas C and D.
Required Pipe Size
For 15-inch pipes and smaller, the City’s standard assumes a pipe has reached capacity at 0.5 d/D
(discharge depth/Diameter). The State of Utah also has standards for minimum pipe slopes. Table 2
shows the flow capacity through pipes assuming minimum slopes and a d/D of 0.5.
Table 2
Pipe Capacities (d/D of 0.5) at Minimum Slope
Pipe Size
(inches)
Minimum Slope
(ft/ft)
Flow at 0.5 d/D
(gpm)
12 0.00194 352
15 0.00144 550
18 0.00113 792
As shown in Table 2, an 18-inch pipe would be needed to convey the potential maximum of 637 gpm
at the minimum slope. However, because it is uncertain if areas C & D will ever contribute flow to
the trunk line, a 15-inch pipe at minimum slope is recommended to accommodate all of areas A & B
with less than 50 percent depth and areas C & D with less than 55 percent depth to diameter. Thus,
a 15-inch pipe has been used as part of this analysis. This selection especially makes sense in the
downstream segment near the 15-inch stub out. If it is determined that part of the study area is
Page 144 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 3
undevelopable, a segment of the pipe could be downsized to 12-inches or smaller. However, this
analysis and decision can be reviewed as part of the final design.
ALIGNMENT OPTIONS
Even at the minimum allowable slope for 15-inch pipe (0.0014 ft/ft), it is not possible to exclusively
use gravity pipe from the Moab RV Park all the way to the existing stub-out. To provide service to
existing facilities and minimize interference with other utilities, it is recommended that any future
sewer line be installed with a minimum of 3 feet of cover. This makes the minimum depth from
ground surface to invert elevation be approximately 4.25 ft (neglecting pipe thickness). At the
minimum allowable slope, there is not enough grade along the length of the service area to keep the
pipe at its required depth. With this in mind, it can be concluded that a lift station will be necessary
somewhere in the study area. The following options explore different alignments. Note that all
attached figures show elevations in the NVGD 29 datum (The NVGD datum is 3.28 feet lower than
NVGD 88).
Option 1
Option 1, as shown in Figure 2, includes a lift station and force main to service the Moab RV Park and
a new gravity main to service properties on the south side of Highway 191. Wastewater from the
Moab RV Park would be pumped through a force main for approximately 800 feet before connecting
to a gravity line on the east corner of the RV Park property. The gravity line (approximately 4000
feet long) would then run east along the south side of the highway before it turns south in between
Aarchway Inn and Holiday Inn Express. It would then turn east until it connects with the existing 15-
inch stub-out. Some concerns with this alternative are outlined below:
• Cover & Tie-in Concerns – A critical component of this option is the manhole in between the
Aarchway Inn and Holiday Inn Express. At 0.14% slope (the recommended minimum slope
for the gravity main), the invert of this manhole could be no lower than 3961.61 feet (in NVGD
datum). However, the existing ground surface at this point is only 3961.58 feet. In order to
have the necessary cover, the existing ground surface would need to be raised by more than
4 feet in this area. This may not be possible due to the existing developments and grading
conflicts with existing parking lots, etc. An even bigger issue is the inability for existing sewer
lines from Aarchway Inn and Holiday Inn Express to connect to the new pipe.
• Future Development – Another major concern associated with this option is the ability of
future developments between the RV Park and Aarchway Inn to be able to connect to the
sewer system. These parcels would either need to raise the ground surface enough to be able
to slope to the proposed sewer system or have additional private wastewater pumps.
This option be difficult to connect into for existing sewer lines from Holiday Inn Express and
Aarchway Inn. It also represents would require new developments either raise the ground surface
or use pumps. Therefore, this option is not feasible.
Page 145 of 240
Connect to 15-inch stubRim = 3970.64IE = 3958.65
Future ManholeExisting Rim = 3961.58Minimum IE = 3961.61
Connect Future Force Mainto Future Gravity MainExisting RIM = 3971.05Minimum IE = 3964.13
Future Lift Station
3
9
7
5
3
9
7
0
3
9
8
0
39
6
5
39
8
5
399
0
3
9
9
5
3960
398
0
L E G E N D
Moab City Limits
Parcels
Existing Sewer Pipes
New Lift StationProposed Pipe
Force MainGravity Main
Contour
Major
Minor
Floodplain
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\RV Park Sewer Option #1.mxd bkirk 9/28/2017
2MOAB CITYSEWER MASTER PLAN
RV PARK SEWER OPTIONSOPTION #1 0 200 400
Feet
NORTHFIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
AarchwayInn
Holiday InnExpress
WesternRiverExpeditions
MoabRV Park
100-year ColoradoRiver Floodplain
Page 146 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 4
Option 2
Option 2, as shown in Figure 3, includes a gravity main (2,250 feet long) from the Moab RV Park to a
new lift station at the southeast end of the Holiday Inn Express property. A short force main (320
feet long) then pumps to some more gravity main (1560 feet long) that connects to the City’s existing
sewer main along Rubicon Trail. The following points explain how problems associated with Option
1 would be resolved by using the proposed alignment in Option 2.
• Cover & Tie-in – This option would not require any additional cover. The maximum pipe
invert depth would also be limited to less than 9 feet deep making it very feasible.
• Future Development – By placing the pipe on the southwest end of the properties, it also
allows for future developments to tie-in by gravity flow.
This option represents the best option for both existing and future development.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis described above, the following conclusions and recommendations can be made
regarding a future lift station for the northwest area of the City:
• Option 1– Not Feasible – Constructing a gravity line that connects with the 15-inch stub-out
would make the elevation of the pipe too high to be able to service the Aarchway Inn and
Holiday Inn Express.
• Option 2 – Recommended – Although the exact location of the lift station may be shifted, the
location identified in Figure 3 is optimal to minimize the lift station wet well depth and length
of gravity and force main pipes. It would also be the location where flood water impacts can
be mitigated the most easily.
Since Option 2 would place the lift station and part of the sewer system in the 100-year floodplain,
design considerations for this alternative include the following:
• Lift Station Location – The lift station is located within the 100-year flood plain, but is on
the perimeter of the flood plain such that it should be possible to keep floodwaters from
damaging the lift station or being contaminated by wastewater during a flood. The lift station
would also be accessible during a 25-year flood event (State of Utah R317-3-3.1).
o Force Main / Gravity Main Length – The length of gravity and force mains as shown
in Figure 3 has been optimized based on a minimum slope of 0.14% and a minimum
cover depth of 36-inches to the top of a 15-inch main. The optimized lift station
location includes approximately 320 feet of force main. Other options for lift station
placement increase the depth of the lift station or the length of the force main.
Generally, shorter force mains are preferred to minimize septic conditions and
shallower lift stations are preferred to reduce costs of construction.
o Easements – A construction easement and/or some property may need to be
purchased to construct the lift station as proposed.
Page 147 of 240
Connect to 15-inch stubRim = 3971.05IE = 3958.65
Future ManholeExisting Rim = 3960.41Maximum IE = 3956.16
Future Lift StationExisting RIM = 3962.00Maximum IE = 3953.13
Future ManholeExisting RIM = 3965.09Minimum IE = 3960.84
3
9
7
5
3
9
7
0
39
8
0
39
6
5
39
8
5
399
0
3960
39
9
5
398
0
L E G E N D
Moab City Limits
Parcels
Existing Sewer Pipes
New Lift StationProposed Pipe
Force Main
Gravity MainContour
Major
Minor
Floodplain
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\RV Park Sewer Option #2.mxd bkirk 9/29/2017
3MOAB CITYSEWER MASTER PLAN
RV PARK SEWER OPTIONSOPTION #2 0 200 400
Feet
NORTHFIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
AarchwayInn
Holiday InnExpress
WesternRiverExpeditions
MoabRV Park
100-year ColoradoRiver Floodplain
Page 148 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 5
• Gravity Mains – Per State Administrative Rule R-317-3-2.6(E)(3), all of the manhole lids on
the gravity main will need to be water tight.
o RV Park Connections – When the RV Park septic field is decommissioned, watertight
sewer caps should be installed at each RV connection if watertight connections are
not already available.
o Isolation Valve – An isolation valve (plug valve) would be recommended to keep
flood water from entering the collection system from the RV park. In the event of a
100-year flood, the isolation valve could be shut to prevent any floodwater from
entering through any loose RV park connections.
o Venting – Because all of the manhole lids will need to be watertight, an air vent may
need to be constructed an extended outside of the 100-year flood plain so that a
vacuum doesn’t develop in the gravity main in a 100-year flood.
Page 149 of 240
APPENDIX B
Lift Station Data
Page 150 of 240
0204060801001201401600 20 40 60 80 100Total Head (ft)Flow (gpm)FigureLions Park Lift Station Curves and Estimated System CurveEstimated System Curve (ft)Page 151 of 240
The KHG(X)5 series pump features:
• Interchangeable with Competitor Installations
• Dual Silicon-Carbide Mechanical Shaft Seals w/ Viton® Elastomers
• Pressed-In Motor with Internal Overload Protection
• 3-Bearing Shaft Support (Upper / Lower / Sleeve)
• Internal Moisture Detection
• Strong Motor, 1-Phase (208/230) Volt or 3-Phase (208/230/460) Volt
The KEEN PUMP KHG(X)5 series centrifugal grinder pumps easily handle residential,
commercial or industrial sanitary waste, reducing it to a fine slurry. The KHG(X)5
pump is designed for use in pressure sewer applications or any piping network.
The recessed vortex impeller design of the KHG(X)5 grinder pump provides trouble-
free, non-overloading operation over the entire performance curve. The modular
design provides quick and easy serviceability. The hardened stainless steel grinder
assembly provides many years of dependable operation.
Grinder Pumps
REV 03/2017
60
Capacity (GPM)
0
20
80
20
Performance Curve
Total Head (FT) 120
100
60
40
40 80 100
140
160
110
KHG(X)5
5HP High Head Grinder Pump, 1 or 3 Phase (Class 1, Div. 1, Groups C & D Hazardous Location)
Page 152 of 240
471 US Hwy 250 East Ashland, Ohio 44805
419.207.9400 fax 419.207.8031
www.keenpump.com
Features and Benets 5HP Grinder Pump
High Head
KHG(X)5
10
2
4
5
9
3
6
8 7 10
1. Watertight Cable Entrance
Agency-approved, watertight strain relief cord grip with compres-
sion grommet protects outer cord jacket (FM Explosion-Proof) or
Heavy-duty molded compression grommet protects outer cord
jacket. Epoxy-filled inner cord cap provides anti-wicking moisture
protection to the motor even if power cable is cut or damaged.
2. Modular Pump Design
Commonality of parts across the Keen product line minimizes the
amount of parts required for servicing. Heavy-duty ASTM A48,
Class 30 cast iron components.
3. Strong Motor
Powerful high-torque motor for reliable pump operation. Pressed
stator securely holds motor and efficiently transfers heat. Class F
insulation with overload protection in oil-filled chamber for cool
operation and long motor life.
4. 3-Bearing Support
Motor / Pump shaft securely held with upper and lower ball
bearing plus additional sleeve bearing in lower seal chamber.
Long 100,000 hour L-10 bearing life.
5. Double Mechanical Seal Protection
Dual silicon carbide mechanical shaft seals w/ Viton® Elastomers
provide twice the moisture protection for the motor. Dual seals are
housed in a secondary oil-filled seal chamber. Tougher silicon
carbide seals better handle sand, grit and abrasive materials.
6. Moisture Detection
Dual Seal leak probe signals alarm in control panel for
scheduled maintenance.
7. Non-Overloading Hydraulic Design
The recessed centrifugal impeller allows 100% performance curve
operation from shut-off to maximum flow without damage to the
pump or system. The recessed vortex impeller is out of the
passageway of fluid flow, eliminating concerns of blockage or
wear.
8. Proven Grinder Assembly
Hardened (Rockwell 56-60) stainless steel grinder assembly has
30+ years proven field experience. The reversible grinder ring and
grinder impeller effectively reduce solids into a fine slurry, easily
passable in a piping system without concerns of clogging. Highly
efficient 12,400 cuts/second.
9. Versatile Flange Connection
Combination 2-1/2” and 3” horizontal flange. Industry-standard
ANSI Class 125 dimensions.
10. Accessories
Stainless steel lifting handle included. Anti-vibration nylon
mounting feet OPTIONAL.
1
Page 153 of 240
START KIT SK-5 includes:
Start & Run Capacitors, Relay,
and Mounting Hardware
HP / Power Supply
Full Load Amps 208V
Start Amps 208V
Full Load Amps 230V
Start Amps 230V
Poles / Rated Speed
Insulation Class
5HP / 1 ol , 60 Hz
40 Amps
2 P / 3450 rpm
F Class
Start Capacitor
Run Capacitor
300 ufd, 250 VAC
30 ufd, 370 VAC
144 Amps
34 Amps
122 Amps
Single
Phase
Rev. 03/2017* Performance with clear water and ambient temp 20ºC (68ºF)
GENERAL MOTOR DATA
PUMP DATA
PERFORMANCE CURVE
Pump Model
5HP SUBMERSIBLE GRINDER PUMP
Date
Discharge Flange
Grinder Ring
Impeller Type / Std. Dia.
KHG(X)5
03/06/2017
2-1/2 & 3” ANSI Horizontal
25 Slots
Recessed / 6.00”
20
80
20 400
40
60
100
140
60 80 100
160
120
Head / [Ft]
Capacity [USGPM]
6.00” DIA
5.75” DIA
5.50” DIA
MODEL HP Phase Volts
KHG(X)5-2001 5 1 208
KHG(X)5-2301 5 1 230
110
Page 154 of 240
HP / Power Supply
Full Load Amps 208V
Start Amps 208V
Full Load Amps 230V
Start Amps 230V
Full Load Amps 460V
Start Amps 460V
Poles / Rated Speed
Insulation Class
5HP / 3 ol , 60 Hz
21 Amps
2 P / 3450 rpm
F Class
120 Amps
18 Amps
90 Amps
9 Amps
45 Amps
Rev. 03/2017
Three Phase
* Performance with clear water and ambient temp 20ºC (68ºF)
GENERAL MOTOR DATA
PUMP DATA
PERFORMANCE CURVE
Pump Model
5HP SUBMERSIBLE GRINDER PUMP
Date
Discharge Flange
Grinder Ring
Impeller Type / Std. Dia.
KHG(X)5
03/06/2017
2-1/2 & 3” ANSI Horizontal
25 Slots
Recessed / 6.00”
MODEL HP Phase Volts
KHG(X)5-2003 5 3 208
KHG(X)5-2303 5 3 230
KHG(X)5-4603 5 3 460
20
80
20 400
40
60
100
140
60 80 100
160
120
Head / [Ft]
Capacity [USGPM]
6.00” DIA
5.75” DIA
5.50” DIA
110
Page 155 of 240
Page 156 of 240
www.cranepumps.com
SECTION
PAGE
DATE
USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598A Crane Co. Company
Submersible Grinder Pumps
5
3B
Series: SGV
3, 5, 7.5 HP,
3450RPM, 60Hz
DESCRIPTION:
THE GRINDER PUMP IS DESIGNED TO
REDUCE DOMESTIC, COMMERCIAL,
INSTITUTIONAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
SEWAGE TO A FINELY GROUND SLURRY.
Series SGV
Recessed Vortex
1/12
Sample Specifi cations: Section 3 Page 9.
Specifi cations:
DISCHARGE ...................................2” NPT, Vertical
LIQUID TEMPERATURE ................104°F (40°C) Continuous
VOLUTE ............................................Cast Iron ASTM A-48, Class 30.
MOTOR HOUSING ............................Cast Iron ASTM A-48, Class 30.
SEAL PLATE ....................................Cast Iron ASTM A-48, Class 30.
IMPELLER: Design ......................12 Vane,Vortex, With Pump Out Vanes
On Back Side. Dynamically Balanced,
ISO G6.3.
Material .....................Cast Iron
SHREDDING RING ...........................Hardened 440C Stainless Steel
Rockwell® C-55.
CUTTER ............................................Hardened 440CStainless Steel,
Rockwell® C-55.
SHAFT ..............................................416 Stainless Steel
SQUARE RINGS ...............................Buna-N
HARDWARE ......................................300 Series Stainless Steel
PAINT ................................................Air Dry Enamel.
SEAL: Design .......................Tandem Mechanical, Oil Filled Reservoir.
Material ......................Rotating Faces - Carbon
Stationary Faces - Ceramic
Elastomer - Buna-N
Hardware -300 Series Stainless
CORD ENTRY:
SGV5002L & SGV5022L ....................30 ft. (9m) Std. Cord. Pressure
Grommet for Sealing and Strain Relief.
All Other Models .................................30 ft. (9m) Std. Cord. Custom Molded
Quick Connect for For Sealing and Strain
Relief
CORD .................................................CSA/UL Approved 10/4, 6/4, 8/4 Type SOW.
UPPER BEARING:
Design .......................Single Row, Ball, Oil Lubricated
Load ..........................Radial
INTERMEDIATE BEARING:
Design .......................Single Row, Ball, Oil Lubricated
Load ..........................Radial & Thrust
LOWER BEARING:
Design .......................Sleeve, Oil Lubrication:
Load ...........................Radial
MOTOR: Design .......................NEMA L-Single Phase, NEMA B-Three
Phase Torque Curve. Oil-Filled, Squirrel
Cage Induction.
Insulation ... ................Class F.
SINGLE PHASE .................................Capacitor Start/Capacitor Run. Requires
Overload Protection to be Included In control
panel, Requires Barnes® Starter or Control
Panel which Includes Capacitors, or Capacitor
pack.
THREE PHASE .................................. Dual Voltage 240/480; Requires Overload
Protection to be Included in control panel.
OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT ................... Seal Material, Impeller Trims, Cord Length.
Moisture Sensors, Moveable Fitting
RECOMMENDED:
Accessories ..................Break Away Fitting (BAF)
Check Valve
Control Panel
Seal Kit PN ..................085223
Service Kit PN ..............115771
CSA 108 - File No. LR16567
UL 778
NRTL\C
SGV5002L & SGV5022L ONLY
Page 157 of 240
www.cranepumps.com
SECTION
PAGE
DATE
Submersible Grinder Pumps
USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598A Crane Co. Company
6
3B
Series SGV
Recessed Vortex
IMPORTANT !
1.) PUMP MAY BE OPERATED “DRY” FOR EXTENDED PERIODS WITHOUT DAMAGE TO MOTOR AND/OR SEALS.
2.) THIS PUMP IS APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE APPLICATIONS SPECIFIED AS CLASS I DIVISION II HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS.
3.) THIS PUMP IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE APPLICATIONS SPECIFIED AS CLASS I DIVISION I HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS.
4.) INSTALLATIONS SUCH AS DECORATIVE FOUNTAINS OR WATER FEATURES PROVIDED FOR VISUAL ENJOYMENT MUST BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE ANSI/NFPA 70 AND/OR THE AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION. THIS PUMP IS NOT INTENDED FOR USE IN
SWIMMING POOLS, RECREATIONAL WATER PARKS, OR INSTALLATIONS IN WHICH HUMAN CONTACT WITH PUMPED MEDIA IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE.
inches
(mm)
7/04
MODEL NO PART NO HP VOLT/PH Hz RPM
(Nom)
NEMA
START
CODE
FULL
LOAD
AMPS
LOCKED
ROTOR
AMPS
CORD
SIZE
CORD
TYPE
CORD O.D.
± .02 (.5)
in (mm)
SGV3072L 111608 3 200/240/1 60 3450 G 25.2/21.7 86/75 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV3062L 111612 3 200/3 60 3450 J 17.0 65.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV3032L 111609 3 240/3 60 3450 K 14.5 62.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV3042L 111610 3 480/3 60 3450 K 7.2 31.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV3052L 111611 3 600/3 60 3450 J 5.6 22.6 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV5002L 115657 5 200/1 60 3450 F 42.0 134.0 6/4 SOW 1.03 (26)
SGV5022L 115658 5 240/1 60 3450 H 39.0 136.0 8/4 SOW .93 (24)
SGV5062L 111619 5 200/3 60 3450 K 25.0 122.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV5032L 111616 5 240/3 60 3450 L 21.9 120.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV5042L 111617 5 480/3 60 3450 L 11.0 60.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV5052L 111618 5 600/3 60 3450 L 8.8 46.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV7532L 111613 7.5 240/3 60 3450 J 22.3 136.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV7542L 111614 7.5 480/3 60 3450 J 11.2 68.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
SGV7552L 111615 7.5 600/3 60 3450 G 8.2 45.0 10/4 SOW .75 (19)
Temperature sensor cord for SGV5002L & SGV5022L is 14/2 SOW, 0.55 (14mm) ± .02 (.51mm) O.D.
Temperature sensor cord for all other models is 14/3 SOW, 0.55 (14mm) ± .02 (.51mm) O.D.
Optional - Moisture and Temperature sensor cord for all models is 18/5 SOW, 0.47 (12mm) ± .02 (.51mm) O.D., replaces Temperature sensor cord.
Page 158 of 240
Submersible Grinder Pumps
SECTION
PAGE
DATE
USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598A Crane Co. Company
7
3B
www.cranepumps.com
Series SGV
Performance Curve
3, 5, 7.5 HP, 3450RPM, 60Hz
Testing is performed with water, specifi c gravity 1.0 @ 68º F @ (20ºC), other fluids may vary performance
inches
(mm)
1/14Page 159 of 240
APPENDIX C
2017 Flow
Monitoring
Summary
Page 160 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Williams
City Engineer
City of Moab
COPIES: Eric Johanson, Obe Tejada
FROM: Jeff Beckman, Keith Larson, Ben Kirk, Andrew McKinnon
DATE: October 10, 2017
SUBJECT: 2017 Flow Monitoring Summary
JOB NO.: 130-17-04
INTRODUCTION
As part of the City’s Sanitary Sewer Master Plan, the City of Moab retained BC&A to perform flow
monitoring to aid in calibration of the City’s sanitary sewer hydraulic model. The purpose of this
technical memorandum is to summarize the criteria used to select flow monitoring sites along with
the results of flow monitoring.
FLOW MONITORING TECHNOLOGY
Before selecting the sites for collecting flow monitoring data, BC&A reviewed various available flow
monitoring technologies. The two technologies most commonly used for short-term flow monitoring
(and available within the flow monitoring timing window for the study) included ultrasonic doppler
velocity meters, and radar velocity meters.
• Ultrasonic Doppler Velocity Meters – This type of meter is inserted into the incoming pipe of
a manhole upstream of the manhole trough with an insertion ring that expands to hug the
pipe. The meter itself sits at the invert of flow and uses ultrasonic doppler waves to measure
the movement of particles in the water.
Page 161 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 2
o Advantages –
▪ Velocity Profile - This type of meter measures the velocity of flow through
most of the profile of water and represent a very good “average” velocity for
flow due to the large area of measurement.
▪ Calibration – Because the velocity is measured through the full profile of flow,
this type of meter can be more reliable than other types of meters that do not
measure the velocity through the full profile. In addition, by installing the
meter inside of the incoming pipe, any poor hydraulics in the manhole that
may affect flow measurements can be mitigated.
o Disadvantages –
▪ Sediment and Debris – Because it sits at the invert of the pipe, there is a
tendency for this type of meter to accumulate sediment or other debris. Once
sediment and debris accumulates on the sensor, the velocity or depth
measurements can begin to drift as the sensor is obscured. These limitations
can be mitigated by frequent cleaning and re-calibration of the meter.
▪ Minimum Depth – The sensors in this type of meter need a minimum depth of
approximately one inch to adequately measure depth and the area of flow.
This can limit the locations of where this type of meter will accurately
measure flow.
• Radar Velocity Meters – This type of meter is inserted above the flow in a manhole with a
radar sensor pointed up the incoming pipe. The radar sensor measures the surface velocity
of water from the incoming pipe and the depth of water directly below it in the manhole.
o Advantages –
▪ Non-Contact - Because it is located up and out of the flow, this type of meter
can be installed and left alone for longer durations without cleaning or
maintenance.
▪ Versatility – Because these meters will measure almost any depth, they are
well suited for small collection areas.
Page 162 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 3
o Disadvantages –
▪ Manhole Selection – Manhole selection for monitoring flow is extremely
important for this meter due to the way depth versus velocity is measured. If
the slope in the manhole is significantly different than the incoming pipe that
is being measured, the depth/velocity relationship used for flow
measurement can be disturbed. For proper readings, the trough of the
manhole selected should match the shape of the incoming pipe as much as
possible (slope, size, etc) and side lateral pipes should be avoided if possible
to reduce interference in the manhole depth by other incoming flow. This
may limit the locations where this type of meter can be installed.
Because of concerns about sediment/debris accumulation and the limited depth in some of the trunk
lines of interest, radar velocity meters were selected as the preferred monitoring technology.
SITE SELECTION
BC&A coordinated with City of Moab personnel to identify the number and locations of flow
monitoring sites. A minimum of 10 sites were recommended to represent overall flow distribution
and characteristics in the Moab collection system with a focus around calibrating around the main
trunk line leading to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. While selection of additional sites would
have obviously added more detail, the number of sites selected represented a good balance of
collecting sufficient flow data to adequately represent system flow characteristics while still staying
within the allowable budget of the study. Several iterations of sites were proposed to Moab collection
system personnel to identify the best locations for meter installation. BC&A reviewed photos of each
manhole proposed and revised the selection of specific manholes when apparent flow characteristics
looked inappropriate for meter installation. In addition, during field installation, a few additional
modifications were made to the selected set of metered manholes in order to find more favorable
conditions for flow monitoring. A map of each of the ten sites selected is located at the end of this
memo.
The following sections contain specific information on each of the selected manholes:
MH 748 (600 S Kane Creek Blvd), MH 107 (600 S Main St), and MH 417 (150 E Grand County
Middle)
These three sites were selected to monitor flow coming from Grand Water and Sewer Service Agency
(GWSSA). They are all located downstream of some existing GWSSA’s sewer flumes. In recent years,
there have been some accuracy concerns about data from the GWSSA flumes and these flow monitors
were installed to resolve any concern about existing meter accuracy.
MH 114 (50 E 100 S)
This flow monitor site represents a large portion of flow that represents primarily residential
neighborhoods in the eastern portion of the City.
MH 313 (500 W 300 N), MH 205 (290 W Walnut Ln)
These two flow monitor sites monitor the flow in the main trunk line that leads to the City’s
wastewater treatment plant. One is before and one is after the connection from the Moab Regional
Hospital. Two sites along the trunk line were installed to make sure an accurate reading of flow was
available near this critical location. Having a site before and after the hospital was intended to
Page 163 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 4
identify if there were any significant differences in flow patterns before and after this large
institutional connection.
100 West & Center (MH 145)
For all locations, BC&A was able identify manholes that appeared appropriate for flow monitoring
except along 100 West north of Mill Creek. In all cases, the manholes between Mill Creek and Walnut
Lane along 100 West appear to have poor hydraulics. Most of the manholes between Mill Creek and
along 100 West have relatively large side lateral connections that may disturb flow or depth of flow
in the pipe of interest. Due to the relative importance of this location, a site at Center Street was
recommended because only one smaller collection area from the west was identified as influencing
the depth of flow in the manhole. Even this site was recognized as a mediocre site selection, but was
the best available for this important pipeline.
MH 290 (500 West 400 North)
This site monitors the flow from a 10-inch connection from the east that includes both residential
and institutional uses. This site discharges into the trunk line leading to the City’s treatment plant.
MH 472 (North of Treatment Plant), MH 28 (620 N Riversand Rd)
These two sites monitor a large percentage of the area of the City that contributes flow to the City’s
main trunkline from the North. Both of these flow monitors collect a portion of the City that includes
a large number of overnight accommodations.
MONITORING PERIOD
One goal of flow monitoring was to calibrate the City’s sanitary sewer hydraulic model for peak
wastewater production periods in the City. Spring break and “Jeep Week” in the City of Moab
typically represents some of the busiest times of year for tourism in the City. As a result, BC&A
measured flow during the month of April to monitor any peak flow conditions represented by a peak
tourism period. Five flow meter devices were used to measure flow between March 29, 2017 and
April 12, 2017 at manholes at the south end of the City (MH 748, MH 107, MH 417, MH 114, MH 205).
These same flow meters were relocated on April 12th to the remaining five locations (MH 313, MH
145, MH 290, MH 472, MH 28) to measure through May 3, 2017.
“Jeep Week” fell between April 8th and April 15th in 2017. Two weeks were monitored at each site
with each weekend of “Jeep Week” recorded by either set of data. Other weeks during the month
included spring break tourists from the various different school districts in the area. By recording at
least two weeks at each site, it was possible to measure a reliable pattern of flow at each site
representative of peak day conditions (including two weekends when tourism is at its highest).
FLOW MONITORING RESULTS
Table 1 summarizes key statistics for each flow monitoring site along with an assessment of data
accuracy.
Page 164 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 5
Table 1
Summary of Flow Monitoring Results
Location
Collection
Dates
Pipe
Size
(inch)
Average
Calculated
Flow
(gpm)
Max
Calculated
Flow
(gpm)
Max
Depth to
Diameter
Ratio
Depth
versus
Velocity
Consistency
Manning's
Equation
Correlation
MH 748 (600 S Kane
Creek Blvd)
29Mar -
12Apr 8 81.4 142.0 0.29 Good Good
MH 107 (600 S Main
St)
29Mar -
12Apr 10 101.2 177.7 0.25 Good Good
MH 417 (150 E Grand
County Middle)
29Mar -
12Apr 12 170.9 417.3 0.37 Good
Sediment or
Backwater
Effects
Observed
MH 114 (50 E 100 S)
29Mar -
12Apr 10 95.0 175.4 0.21 Good Good
MH 205 (290 W
Walnut Ln)
29Mar -
12Apr 18 592.4 923.6 0.43 Good
Sediment or
Backwater
Effects
Observed
MH 313 (500 W 300 N)
12Apr -
3May 18 713.2 1,310.3 0.38 Good Good
MH 145 (100 West &
Center)
12Apr -
3May 15 679.6 1,004.9 0.90 Poor Very Little
MH 290 (500 W 400 N)
12Apr -
3May 10 50.9 160.1 0.28 Good Good
MH 472 (North of
Treatment Plant)
12Apr -
3May 18 83.2 202.2 0.16 Good Good
MH 28 (620 N
Riversand Rd)
12Apr -
3May 18 93.9 189.3 0.13 Good Good
As part of the summary, an assessment of depth to velocity consistency is provided along with
commentary about correlation to Manning’s equation calculation of flow.
• Depth to Velocity Consistency – The consistency of depth to velocity measurements should
remain the same over time for a given pipe unless changes to pipe roughness, sediment levels,
debris accumulation, or backwater conditions change during the monitoring period. Scatter
plots of depth versus velocity for the monitoring period can reveal how consistent the data
is. Consistency is one of the most important elements in assessing the relative accuracy of a
flow monitor.
• Manning’s Equation Correlation – Manning’s Equation is an empirical formula that can
predict the relationship of depth, velocity, and flow for a given geometry and slope. By
comparing the predicted depth versus velocity using Manning’s Equation against observed
depth versus velocity, it is possible to assess how the pipe is performing compared to a
theoretical clean pipe condition.
Page 165 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 6
Because flows are calculated based on depth and velocity, both good consistency and good
correlation to Manning’s Equation boost confidence in the reliability of flow monitoring data.
Inconsistencies in depth versus velocity may indicate bad data or bad hydraulics in a manhole. Good
correlation with Manning’s equation may boost confidence in flow monitoring data and indicate good
hydraulics in the selected manhole, but is not mandatory for accurate flow monitoring results.
The following graphs show depth versus velocity for each of the flow monitoring sites along with the
predicted Manning’s Equation depth versus velocity plot. A plot of simulated flow versus observed
flow also shows how the model compares to observed flows. Note that the only site with poor
consistency is MH 145. Data at that site indicate that there are very poor hydraulics in that portion
of the Moab collection system that could be the function of debris, roots, or poor connection
hydraulics.
Page 166 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 748 Depth vs Velocity
Man Hole 748 Lvl (in)
Manning's Equation Estimate
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 748
Observed
Simulated
Page 167 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 107 Depth vs Velocity
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 107
Observed
Simulated
Page 168 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 9
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 417 Depth vs Velocity
Man Hole 417 Lvl (in)
Manning's Equation Prediction
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 417
Observed
Simulated
Page 169 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 10
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 114 Depth vs Velocity
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 114
Observed Simulated
Page 170 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 205 Depth vs Velocity
Man Hole 205 Lvl (in)
Manning's Equation
Prediction
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 205
Observed
Simulated
Page 171 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 12
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 313 Depth vs Velocity
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 313
Observed
Simulated
Page 172 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 13
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 145 Depth vs Velocity
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 145
Observed
Simulated
Page 173 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 290 Depth vs Velocity
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 290
Observed
Simulated
Page 174 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 15
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 472 Depth vs Velocity
Manhole 472 Lvl (in)
Manning's Equation
Prediction
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 472
Observed
Simulated
Page 175 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 16
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Flow Depth (in)Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 28 Depth vs Velocity
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Average Flow (gpm)Hour
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 28
Observed
Simulated
Page 176 of 240
TECHNICAL MEMO – 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 17
CONCLUSION
Based on the summary of flow monitoring results, the following conclusions can be made regarding
the flow monitoring conducted in April 2017:
• MH 145 (100 West) – The 100 West Trunk line has very poor hydraulic conditions that could
be a function of sediment, roots, debris, or poor connection hydraulics. The conditions in the
pipe have led to depths that exceed the City’s design criteria for the pipe. Because of
inconsistency in the relationship between depth and velocity, the reliability of flow data at
this site is questionable. Observed flows from the data appear to somewhat match simulated
flow data in the model. However, there is little confidence in observed flow data accuracy at
this location. As a result, this flow monitor site was not used for calibration.
• MH 205 (290 W Walnut Ln) and MH 313 (500 W 300 N) – Observed flows at MH 205 do not
match simulated flows in the hydraulic model as well as they do for other metered sites. This
is true even though results match very well at MH 313, just a short distance away. While data
consistency and correlation at MH 205 is relatively good, consistency and correlation at MH
313 are even better. As a result, flow metering result for MH 313 were considered more
important to model calibration. From the shift in the data at MH 205 away from the
theoretical Manning’s prediction, it appears likely that sediment or backwater is distorting
the flow calculation. This manhole should be avoided for future flow monitoring or a careful
assessment of sediment should be measured to adjust flow calculations appropriately.
• Data Adequacy – Outside of the two exceptions discussed above, the flow monitoring data
collected appears to be accurate and adequate for calibrating the City’s sanitary sewer
hydraulic model.
Page 177 of 240
EE107
748
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
748
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
8-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 178 of 240
EEE417
107
748
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
107
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
10-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 179 of 240
EE417
107
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
417
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
12-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 180 of 240
E114
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
114
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
10-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 181 of 240
E205
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
205
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
18-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 182 of 240
EE290
313
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
313
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
18-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 183 of 240
E145
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
145
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
15-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 184 of 240
EE290
313
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
290
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
10-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 185 of 240
E 472
0 150 300
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
472
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
18-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 186 of 240
E28
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure 2-1 - FlowSites.mxd amckinnon 11/2/2017
28
MOAB CITYSANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
18-INCHNORTH
MANHOLE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
EProposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"12"
15"
18"
21"24"
30"
36"42"
Spanish Valley
Page 187 of 240
APPENDIX D
Model Result
Mapbook
Page 188 of 240
I1
F1 F3F2
E1 E4E3E2
C3 C4 C5 C6
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
H1 H2
C2
B6B5B4B3
A4A3
G2
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook Index.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
X
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOKINDEX
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
B2
Page 189 of 240
P144741944P
1
4
5
3
3
7
6
1
0
1
5
P0
2
6
3
26
1
6
6
P0
2
6
2
35
0
4
4
PM
H
2
0
0
39
4
4
4 P144941266P
1
4
5
8
3
6
0
1
5
2
0
P0
0
7
2
17
7
2
2P144850366MH530
MH494
MH493
MH492
MH491
MH486
MH487
MH488
MH489
MH490
MH196
MH195
MH200IE 4067.5RIM 4072
MH197IE 4063.1RIM 4068.1
MH201IE 4070.17RIM 4075.6
MH326IE 4074.72RIM 4078.29
MH566IE 4062.06RIM 4067.56
MH181IE 4055.34RIM 4060.89
MH180IE 4055.08RIM 4060.74
MH198IE 4057.74RIM 4063.54
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
A-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 190 of 240
P908
700
0144
P2
0
1
9
82
8
035
9
P
2
0
1
8
6
4
2
6
6
1
7
9 20287260216P01
8
1
689
130
143
P08363211736P201648857143P
1
4
5
3
3
7
6
1
0
1
5
P
1
4
5
2
3
3
4
7
7
P
0
0
7
4
3
6
2
9
1
4
P0
2
5
5
20
0
10
10P007150811 P
0
6
7
4
6
9
1
3
2
2
4
1
P0
2
6
2
35
0
4
4
P0
0
7
2
17
7
2
2
P
0
6
7
2
7
3
2
3
1
2
4
1
P
1
4
5
8
3
6
0
1
5
2
0
P
0
8
2
0
1
0
1
4
3
1
2
4
1
MH503
MH820
MH819
MH818
MH506
MH746
MH745
MH502
MH734
MH494
MH484
MH483
MH482
MH481
MH480
MH505
MH573
MH174MH175
MH177
MH179
MH176
MH178
MH202IE 4075.7RIM 4079.8
MH106IE 4055.5RIM 4063.65
MH328IE 4075.3RIM 4084.23
MH326IE 4074.72RIM 4078.29
MH504IE 4064.47RIM 4072.51
MH501IE 4054.92RIM 4062.85
MH565IE 4061.23RIM 4066.48
MH567IE 4064.97RIM 4071.27
MH568IE 4068.41RIM 4075.26MH570IE 4067.79RIM 4072.94
MH566IE 4062.06RIM 4067.56
MH181IE 4055.34RIM 4060.89
MH180IE 4055.08RIM 4060.74
MH572IE 4072.96RIM 4078.36
MH173IE 4052.88RIM 4060.49
MH327IE 4077.01RIM 4082.12
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
A-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 191 of 240
P20
0
2
705
3
0179
2
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook B2a.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
B-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 192 of 240
P2001681201785
P20
0
2
705
3
0179
2
P01373471828
P01417751019P010189919312P144941266P
1
4
5
8
3
6
0
1
5
2
0
P
0
0
6
9
57
0
27
33
P
0
0
7
3
2
8
8
8
1
3
6
1
7
9
P0264
4896086
P010
0
934193
8
P02654776085P145030699P
0
0
7
0
32
8
18
23 P009794211P07893450189252P152389966
P144741944P
1
4
5
3
3
7
6
1
0
1
5P144850366 MH784
MH530
MH747
MH749
MH497
MH496
MH495
MH732
MH498
MH499
MH733
MH491
MH485
MH486
MH580
MH196
MH188
MH185
MH357
MH186
MH195
MH191
MH564
MH194
MH162IE 4028.7RIM 4037.9
MH183IE 4045.2RIM 4050.55
MH171IE 4037.6RIM 4049.55
MH182IE 4048.79RIM 4054.14
MH172IE 4047.31RIM 4053.57
MH181IE 4055.34RIM 4060.89
MH180IE 4055.08RIM 4060.74
MH160IE 4034.16RIM 4038.31
MH199IE 4048.77RIM 4055.27
MH187IE 4041.84RIM 4046.27
MH198IE 4057.74RIM 4063.54
MH189IE 4053.55RIM 4059.36
MH192IE 4049.65RIM 4056.51
MH193IE 4045.38RIM 4050.07
MH159IE 4021.94RIM 4031.44
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
B-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 193 of 240
P20
1
1
185
3
01152P009616931890
P01
8
1
689
130
143P081468600 P045669759P006517534151152P0669806162376
P
2
0
1
8
64
2
6617
9
P014233122
PSWTRUNK1178801532
P06701211162375P0429565711
P081218875690P083216664151151P081659411P0064154859023P
0
0
7
3
2
8
8
8
1
3
6
1
7
9 P0813164258113P0062594812P0432682812
P20016812
01785
P007150811P0
0
9
8
3
7
4
3
6
P080024433P081568111P010
0
934193
8
P042877411
P
0
8
4
5
66
7
13
4
18
0 PMH31934100P081814374151153P0143160559734P009794211
P
1
4
5
8
3
6
0
1
5
2
0
P081918074161153
P007876044
P
0
8
2
0
1
0
1
4
3
1
2
4
1P0827150859329P
1
4
7
7
66
7
13
5
18
0
P0668766175387
PMH03698800
P
1
4
5
3
3
7
6
1
0
1
5
P0454
741
33
P080166147
P045364433
P0264
4896086
P
0
8
0
5
5
7
8
1
1 P0433627917P083120634151151P0671124131241MH503
MH784
MH755
MH748
MH502
MH580
MH729
MH169
MH417IE 4055.2RIM 4066.9
MH162IE 4028.7RIM 4037.9
MH89IE 4040.3RIM 4050.03
MH416IE 4051.9RIM 4062.57
MH163IE 4022.89RIM 4035.7
MH167IE 4043.15RIM 4049.4
MH106IE 4055.5RIM 4063.65
MH103IE 4042.7RIM 4050.13
MH88IE 4044.69RIM 4053.37
MH171IE 4037.6RIM 4049.55 MH418IE 4059.61RIM 4072.11
MH170IE 4029.22RIM 4041.62
MH165IE 4040.89RIM 4045.29
MH161IE 4035.44RIM 4042.64
MH296IE 4048.53RIM 4056.88
MH107IE 4050.14RIM 4057.34
MH501IE 4054.92RIM 4062.85
MH565IE 4061.23RIM 4066.48
MH361IE 4036.38RIM 4044.63
MH111IE 4040.61RIM 4048.31
MH110IE 4043.57RIM 4053.72
MH104IE 4046.49RIM 4054.09
MH414IE 4049.53RIM 4057.83
MH108IE 4046.82RIM 4054.82
MH109IE 4047.99RIM 4052.79
MH172IE 4047.31RIM 4053.57
MH180IE 4055.08RIM 4060.74
MH298IE 4048.02RIM 4056.92
MH558IE 4060.36RIM 4065.46
MH557IE 4063.69RIM 4067.69
MH560IE 4066.63RIM 4070.33
MH318IE 4055.87RIM 4062.32
MH319IE 4051.41RIM 4059.71
MH160IE 4034.16RIM 4038.31
MH173IE 4052.88RIM 4060.49
MH112IE 4037.81RIM 4045.56
MH101IE 4039.09RIM 4046.12
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
B-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 194 of 240
P202369200
P2
0
1
1
18
5
3
011
5
2 P007739322P046937111
P047038138
P
0
0
5
5
3
3
5
2
1
1
0
9
P0781395722
P0760401414P005239933P
0
4
7
2
6
2
5
3
3
P0749565112P0747452010P0758472 11P075138319107P0750333313P0053376213P01443211331
P075240720107P047340133
P077939624P00924061937
P0121563312
P07555911593
P0123677111PMH03698800
P0783566516P005776512P2010209001152P0780394721
P047946311P077511611 P0122677416P047827011
P042877411
P0782395822
P045364433
P0454
741
33 P0058263822P047121048P005610322P
0
1
4
5
1
2
9
5
1
8
3
6
P007876044
P045946811P077760522
P00501002774
P0748255111MH756
MH12IE 4120.6RIM 4130.7
MH67IE 4085.12RIM 4090.6
MH64IE 4072.93RIM 4078.9
MH333IE 4096.4RIM 4101.9 MH8IE 4113.42RIM 4119.24
MH7IE 4116.47RIM 4125.57
MH6IE 4118.33RIM 4127.63
MH2IE 4118.67RIM 4123.77
MH35IE 4060.2RIM 4069.15
MH1IE 4118.01RIM 4122.01
MH672IE 4071.63RIM 4082.9
MH63IE 4083.59RIM 4088.42
MH23IE 4079.58RIM 4085.22
MH22IE 4071.06RIM 4075.76
MH36IE 4061.71RIM 4071.41
MH68IE 4096.07RIM 4101.17
MH62IE 4094.05RIM 4099.75
MH57IE 4111.92RIM 4119.42
MH58IE 4110.32RIM 4119.65
MH61IE 4108.86RIM 4118.31
MH37IE 4067.43RIM 4071.98
MH38IE 4071.74RIM 4080.08
MH14IE 4122.69RIM 4129.74
MH13IE 4118.28RIM 4127.25
MH56IE 4114.54RIM 4118.64
MH303IE 4090.35RIM 4095.25
MH330IE 4091.32RIM 4097.62
MH339IE 4083.32RIM 4087.14
MH673IE 4071.96RIM 4081.09
MH666IE 4068.88RIM 4072.91
MH727IE 4076.51RIM 4081.96
MH338IE 4084.78RIM 4087.98
MH337IE 4087.45RIM 4089.95
MH332IE 4097.54RIM 4103.54
MH331IE 4093.56RIM 4099.29
MH329IE 4089.08RIM 4094.38
MH560IE 4066.63RIM 4070.33
MH561IE 4068.27RIM 4072.02
MH318IE 4055.87RIM 4062.32
MH334IE 4100.28RIM 4106.38
MH363IE 4070.57RIM 4081.52
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
B-5
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 195 of 240
PL
I
O
N
S
B
A
C
K
64
7
067P012489522
P0747452010P07604014 14P005239933P005147033P075847211P0054610112P0053376213P0766 85111P07555911593
P00501002774
P
0
7
4
1
3
1
1
1
1
P0753878470
P0075177800
P07541387774
MH562IE 4122RIM 4130.48
MH12IE 4120.6RIM 4130.7
MH9IE 4128.41RIM 4134.19
MH7IE 4116.47RIM 4125.57
MH6IE 4118.33RIM 4127.63
MH4IE 4119.75RIM 4130.15
MH5IE 4138.44RIM 4146.59
MH53IE 4145.01RIM 4149.36
MH14IE 4122.69RIM 4129.74
MH13IE 4118.28RIM 4127.25
MH10IE 4130.92RIM 4137.39
MH11IE 4137.79RIM 4146.69 MH596IE 4147.16RIM 4160.26
MH556IE 4158.54RIM 4165.84
MH595IE 4130.89RIM 4135.49
MH563IE 4132.18RIM 4138.88
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
B-6
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 196 of 240
P20031105501813
P2002705301792P06002131032P05973441133MH686IE 3990.84RIM 3993.84 MH684IE 3983.09RIM 3992.83
MH263IE 3982.61RIM 3985.21
MH264IE 3981.31RIM 3983.61
MH265IE 3980.26RIM 3982.01
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
C-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 197 of 240
P05311672976385P010189919312P010325677
P0601489830
P0549610527
P06002131032
P0104
262
00
P0445226981579P06508106P003226016062
P0095231920423P153059033
P052845322
P0041680163305P027218951055470P003420761048461P153244111
P0444127462156
P013358019513P06094433434P053224301040452P153
1
1410
33P152987544MH708MH707
MH718
MH723IE 4005.94RIM 0
MH722IE 4005.23RIM 0
MH752IE 4002.4RIM 4005.6
MH750IE 3996.1RIM 4001.1MH682IE 3990.5RIM 3996.3
MH153IE 4014.3RIM 4022.5
MH150IE 4008.05RIM 4019.2
MH532IE 4010.1RIM 4016.35MH753IE 4003.69RIM 4008.16
MH699IE 3984.74RIM 3996.79
MH683IE 3986.78RIM 3992.08MH684IE 3983.09RIM 3992.83
MH685IE 3987.34RIM 3992.93
MH696IE 4007.33RIM 4012.73
MH695IE 4007.05RIM 4012.25
MH678IE 4012.78RIM 4017.83
MH546IE 4015.44RIM 4027.27
MH300IE 4007.23RIM 4013.83
MH158IE 4020.27RIM 4028.27
MH157IE 4020.07RIM 4028.77
MH147IE 4006.47RIM 4017.81
MH145IE 4005.84RIM 4017.88
MH152IE 4009.64RIM 4022.59
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
C-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 198 of 240
P05692392626P0446229560641
P011337722
P05311672976385P052845322
P051334623
P048237511P0445226981579P05031527163304
P057028366
P003226016062
P050539111
P05011027159301 P0036354610P04941458118245P011242600P011542400
P04343961321P0504375813P04981329149290
P04961339133265P003942766 P04951305132264
P00634481423P0147434914P006044144P043143211P04971296148289
P0433627917P0143160559734P01514766161
P057437966P004056400P015034244
P056827388
P048540533P1773241915P002925788P003826512P003738100P0041680163305
P0441244461146P0432682812P051534822 P051142159P0444127462156
P0499982157298
PMH31934100P04931418118244
P0829175360339P049248600
P0827150859329P0442135961246 P053463811P0
4
8
4
43
3
3
3
MH801
MH690IE 4043.42RIM 0
MH691IE 4016.146RIM 0
MH89IE 4040.3RIM 4050.03
MH51IE 4023.35RIM 4034.9
MH153IE 4014.3RIM 4022.5
MH92IE 4034.97RIM 4041.6
MH52IE 4021.57RIM 4033.7
MH362IE 4033.7RIM 4041.95
MH693IE 4026.3RIM 4031.15
MH150IE 4008.05RIM 4019.2
MH90IE 4036.65RIM 4046.08
MH50IE 4028.49RIM 4037.04
MH99IE 4025.07RIM 4032.82
MH48IE 4038.44RIM 4045.09
MH49IE 4033.25RIM 4041.08
MH47IE 4049.67RIM 4058.05
MH84IE 4047.68RIM 4055.71
MH86IE 4045.08RIM 4051.38
MH85IE 4046.43RIM 4053.98
MH536IE 4034.47RIM 4040.1
MH93IE 4036.67RIM 4041.67
MH91IE 4035.13RIM 4043.13
MH34IE 4043.31RIM 4050.94
MH33IE 4045.13RIM 4052.26
MH32IE 4046.48RIM 4053.28 MH31IE 4046.78RIM 4054.98
MH29IE 4058.27RIM 4061.82
MH75IE 4027.51RIM 4032.51
MH794IE 4049.59RIM 4055.59
MH793IE 4049.13RIM 4053.76
MH781IE 4014.68RIM 4022.28
MH679IE 4017.13RIM 4022.21
MH678IE 4012.78RIM 4017.83
MH675IE 4043.91RIM 4050.01
MH296IE 4048.53RIM 4056.88
MH100IE 4026.04RIM 4034.34
MH380IE 4024.14RIM 4030.56
MH361IE 4036.38RIM 4044.63
MH548IE 4015.83RIM 4027.78
MH549IE 4016.41RIM 4030.74
MH148IE 4019.63RIM 4024.63
MH151IE 4017.12RIM 4028.82
MH542IE 4024.63RIM 4029.33 MH114IE 4020.35RIM 4032.62
MH157IE 4020.07RIM 4028.77
MH147IE 4006.47RIM 4017.81
MH145IE 4005.84RIM 4017.88
MH152IE 4009.64RIM 4022.59
MH156IE 4021.53RIM 4032.75
MH113IE 4032.09RIM 4037.14
MH538IE 4052.86RIM 4060.27
MH537IE 4045.17RIM 4049.02
MH535IE 4030.94RIM 4037.06
MH534IE 4022.53RIM 4027.13
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
C-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 199 of 240
P00303723444P005979226
P042488643132
P042689948
P004590340129
P069947157
P
0
1
3
5
3
6
4
2
3
11
0
P
0
0
4
9
5
8
0
2
2
P079598411
P0711105638128
P00933862849P0043124147
P0046115768
P
0
0
5
5
3
3
5
2
1
1
0
9
P0696119000
P07191058811
P0692107326
P069391537
P071094638128
P04931418118244 P06653951825P042569273185P069839424
P067512381517
P
0
0
4
8
4
5
8
2
2P070790255P048237511
P071
5
486
00
P0691121611
P00924061937P00314071618
P051334623
P00424303952P0706107844P072767422P008976270181P07
2
0
938
1
1P072145911
P048938511
P004450136P05253191624P04941458118245
P070865355P
0
7
0
9
8
3
3
6
6P0714121937127 P0728220522
P072
4
469
00
P0047247822
P072230200
P
0
7
2
5
1
8
1
1
1
P0723
304
00P009084978192P072651222P009167911
P069787511
P06767221618
MH574IE 4155RIM 4158.5
MH60IE 4100.6RIM 4108.7
MH18IE 4080.1RIM 4086.1
MH54IE 4141.3RIM 4146.1
MH539IE 4119.5RIM 4125.6
MH20IE 4058.6RIM 4065.93
MH16IE 4107.17RIM 4115.4
MH76IE 4058.67RIM 4065.2
MH44IE 4056.3RIM 4067.75
MH35IE 4060.2RIM 4069.15
MH551IE 4151.55RIM 4155.2
MH19IE 4069.18RIM 4073.96
MH23IE 4079.58RIM 4085.22
MH22IE 4071.06RIM 4075.76
MH17IE 4091.81RIM 4097.37
MH15IE 4118.54RIM 4127.54
MH545IE 4183.5RIM 4187.33
MH61IE 4108.86RIM 4118.31
MH43IE 4069.64RIM 4075.46
MH77IE 4060.14RIM 4067.57
MH47IE 4049.67RIM 4058.05
MH46IE 4057.64RIM 4066.54
MH45IE 4055.57RIM 4068.56
MH69IE 4056.68RIM 4069.83
MH29IE 4058.27RIM 4061.82
MH39IE 4098.82RIM 4108.57MH40IE 4084.33RIM 4094.45
MH41IE 4082.11RIM 4091.31
MH42IE 4075.58RIM 4080.48
MH70IE 4073.18RIM 4078.88
MH71IE 4081.62RIM 4087.62
MH72IE 4093.26RIM 4099.56
MH73IE 4104.77RIM 4111.67
MH14IE 4122.69RIM 4129.74
MH55IE 4132.58RIM 4142.02
MH303IE 4090.35RIM 4095.25
MH593IE 4155.12RIM 4158.62
MH592IE 4110.36RIM 4114.96
MH589IE 4157.15RIM 4160.45
MH588IE 4156.79RIM 4161.04
MH582IE 4156.48RIM 4159.98
MH554IE 4154.13RIM 4157.96
MH540IE 4171.84RIM 4178.44
MH340IE 4062.14RIM 4066.36
MH341IE 4067.13RIM 4074.63
MH664IE 4064.28RIM 4067.88
MH547IE 4112.34RIM 4119.69
MH541IE 4126.44RIM 4131.44
MH544IE 4177.61RIM 4181.61
MH550IE 4174.84RIM 4178.84
MH538IE 4052.86RIM 4060.27
MH725IE 4080.88RIM 4088.25
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
C-5
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 200 of 240
P
0
0
4
8
4
5
8
2
2
P
0
7
4
1
3
1
1
1
1
P071
5
486
00
P071885524
P071
6
642
11
P0046115768
P
0
0
4
9
5
8
0
2
2
MH553IE 4156.8RIM 4161
MH54IE 4141.3RIM 4146.1
MH53IE 4145.01RIM 4149.36
MH14IE 4122.69RIM 4129.74
MH55IE 4132.58RIM 4142.02
MH589IE 4157.15RIM 4160.45
MH552IE 4163.95RIM 4168.45
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
C-6
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 201 of 240
P2004600301807P02391133715761145
P20031105501813
P0243418215771154
P02401807515731157PWWTP10101818183435
MH475IE 3955.5RIM 3965.1
MH770IE 3952.49RIM 3957.69
MH478IE 3954.73RIM 3965.03
MH476IE 3954.97RIM 3967.87 MH220IE 3962.71RIM 3967.09
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
D-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 202 of 240
P20031105501813 P03094033131P016243921295769P015831601280752P032617461367851P02391133715761145
P035349400P030350222
P002547877
P030447944
P02733291313
P037653500
P05973441133P016139341234684
P10198307585P018051951413914
P030633244
P182044071366851
P032739551368858
P030537511
P06002131032P034545500P002433244P060639331294767P031537531370863P036158100P017941621369861P05963454669P01752986179227P060537821278753P030185900
P180349851411912
P061
2
000P036550500P176842509P035
8
672
00
P061
1
374
3535P03074661414P0
3
5
5
73
2
0
0P034357500 P037331600P016610397685
P034172900P037564200 P176432603P035448900P06028613535P0317539615P03143203847P03084633131
MH787
MH782
MH704
MH644
MH633
MH631
MH629
MH628
MH627MH626
MH623
MH621
MH618MH617
MH612MH611
MH610MH609MH608
MH606
MH641
MH640MH639
MH638MH637
MH636MH635
MH650
MH649
MH268
MH413
MH412
MH410
MH619IE 3978.6RIM 3983.73
MH613IE 3976.42RIM 3979.5
MH605IE 3974.9RIM 3979.15
MH409IE 3965.2RIM 3971.75
MH262IE 3979.4RIM 3982.65
MH778IE 3969.72RIM 3973.78
MH771IE 3975.49RIM 3981.21
MH776IE 3979.86RIM 3983.31
MH698IE 3983.36RIM 3993.79
MH688IE 3991.17RIM 3994.87
MH687IE 3989.51RIM 3993.32
MH686IE 3990.84RIM 3993.84
MH643IE 3983.37RIM 3988.42
MH642IE 3980.08RIM 3985.02
MH632IE 3984.39RIM 3987.76MH625IE 3983.08RIM 3986.76
MH620IE 3981.17RIM 3985.67
MH616IE 3978.05RIM 3982.12
MH615IE 3977.39RIM 3980.89
MH614IE 3976.66RIM 3979.76
MH607IE 3975.41RIM 3980.11
MH604IE 3974.46RIM 3978.71
MH603IE 3973.85RIM 36977.4
MH634IE 3982.13RIM 3984.43
MH259IE 3988.63RIM 3990.78
MH211IE 3984.99RIM 3992.93
MH313IE 3983.41RIM 3990.69
MH411IE 3971.81RIM 3975.41
MH213IE 3981.11RIM 3986.31
MH408IE 3978.47RIM 3986.17
MH317IE 3973.77RIM 3979.28
MH215IE 3971.83RIM 3977.37
MH212IE 3979.07RIM 3986.97
MH290IE 3982.42RIM 3987.62
MH260IE 3985.32RIM 3988.07
MH263IE 3982.61RIM 3985.21
MH264IE 3981.31RIM 3983.61
MH265IE 3980.26RIM 3982.01
MH261IE 3982.37RIM 3985.42
MH209IE 3987.92RIM 3993.45
MH210IE 3986.09RIM 3993.79
MH777IE 3968.726RIM 3973.84
MH266IE 3978.3899RIM 3981.3
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
D-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 203 of 240
P026925556P016046801231683P001742588
P010735800P001439722P007920511P015735241170613P059138177P057847551231685 P12513521824P0601489830
P0549610527 P059035155P057734091231682
P06002131032 PMH13921500P06508106P10198307585
P027218951055470P0104
262
00
P02733291313
P016139341234684
P010642139P05605935070
P061
1
374
3535
P0581
274
11
P00163711111
P02716971087510P1252358410
P01563242323
P10219876373
P02702093744
P153059033 P027622382103P052845322
P001518622
P06103833434 P056723111P015985331169614P027438822
P153244111P126254069 P0021360411P
1
2
6
3
4
6
4
6
6
P061
2
000
P218237333
P057658131168616P112743522P008119322
P057941741231685 P218115511P10229535464 P175062655P177166011P218038311P058222011
P0527198068P153
1
1410
33P152987544 MH804
MH708 MH707MH706
MH785
MH780
MH718
MH702MH703
MH705
MH704
MH336
MH723IE 4005.94RIM 0
MH752IE 4002.4RIM 4005.6
MH750IE 3996.1RIM 4001.1
MH682IE 3990.5RIM 3996.3
MH138IE 4004.663RIM 4008
MH204IE 3999.8RIM 4006.3
MH235IE 3995.7RIM 4002.9
MH371IE 3995.78RIM 4001.5
MH373IE 4002.18RIM 4007.8
MH236IE 3998.05RIM 4005.8
MH532IE 4010.1RIM 4016.35
MH233IE 3998.33RIM 4000.8
MH223IE 3988.8RIM 3993.13
MH809IE 3997.79RIM 4002.29
MH802IE 3998.47RIM 4002.97
MH803IE 3998.81RIM 4002.91
MH786IE 4006.73RIM 4013.27
MH231IE 3995.59RIM 4000.25
MH779IE 4003.54RIM 4006.86
MH757IE 3993.47RIM 4000.65
MH753IE 4003.69RIM 4008.16
MH698IE 3983.36RIM 3993.79
MH701IE 3986.86RIM 3997.16
MH699IE 3984.74RIM 3996.79MH683IE 3986.78RIM 3992.08
MH684IE 3983.09RIM 3992.83
MH372IE 3998.18RIM 4004.18
MH694IE 4006.63RIM 4013.13
MH207IE 3989.31RIM 3995.61
MH208IE 3988.98RIM 3995.98
MH678IE 4012.78RIM 4017.83
MH374IE 4003.13RIM 4007.88
MH206IE 3993.38RIM 4000.11
MH529IE 4004.01RIM 4008.66
MH525IE 3988.15RIM 3994.45
MH136IE 4000.28RIM 4009.58
MH142IE 4009.91RIM 4014.56
MH143IE 4003.39RIM 4014.29
MH140IE 4004.15RIM 4008.85
MH291IE 4001.96RIM 4006.08
MH292IE 4002.81RIM 4006.71
MH203IE 4001.74RIM 4008.67
MH205IE 3997.82RIM 4004.52
MH225IE 3986.15RIM 3991.27
MH226IE 3988.79RIM 3994.59
MH227IE 3989.61RIM 3995.09
MH228IE 3991.62RIM 3998.61
MH234IE 3993.79RIM 4001.19
MH232IE 3997.19RIM 4000.72
MH230IE 3994.95RIM 3999.58
MH229IE 3993.55RIM 3998.62
MH224IE 3984.91RIM 3990.07
MH222IE 3987.52RIM 3991.27
MH314IE 3988.61RIM 3992.81
MH221IE 3986.85RIM 3993.78
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
D-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 204 of 240
P056443366
P015338377
P01563242323
P01553621919P02615222028
P194738499
P052845322
P1252358410
P1773241915P051142159P0422949213
P051040137P056616622P05605935070
P02672942021
P04211201112
P05613072443P02702093744 P02607481927P00203722847P00286661313P01105654161 P011122011P050943326P0019793213
P187141523P050875311
P05212822729 P002628833P186945011
P05633722222
P0036354610P05584381111P016494533P053463811MH785
MH780
MH742
MH691IE 4016.146RIM 0
MH122IE 4025.2RIM 4038.9
MH121IE 4016.1RIM 4021.3
MH81IE 4057.05RIM 4070.3
MH96IE 4024.3RIM 4030.55
MH74IE 4025.55RIM 4032.4
MH792IE 4022.55RIM 4025.1
MH80IE 4072.05RIM 4077.05
MH84IE 4047.68RIM 4055.71
MH82IE 4051.09RIM 4060.32
MH83IE 4049.47RIM 4057.75
MH94IE 4039.36RIM 4045.11
MH95IE 4041.94RIM 4047.79
MH97IE 4026.39RIM 4031.49
MH75IE 4027.51RIM 4032.51
MH788IE 4017.94RIM 4024.14
MH789IE 4018.95RIM 4021.75
MH790IE 4019.18RIM 4022.88 MH791IE 4020.07RIM 4023.67
MH786IE 4006.73RIM 4013.27
MH781IE 4014.68RIM 4022.28
MH743IE 4014.52RIM 4018.87
MH311IE 4004.32RIM 4010.72
MH692IE 4025.78RIM 4028.33
MH678IE 4012.78RIM 4017.83
MH600IE 4016.04RIM 4020.77
MH136IE 4000.28RIM 4009.58 MH369IE 4013.96RIM 4017.96
MH123IE 4038.74RIM 4043.72
MH120IE 4012.34RIM 4015.39
MH590IE 4011.46RIM 4016.96
MH119IE 4013.28RIM 4018.08
MH116IE 4013.86RIM 4018.56
MH142IE 4009.91RIM 4014.56
MH143IE 4003.39RIM 4014.29
MH527IE 4008.05RIM 4014.59
MH302IE 4013.61RIM 4019.11
MH531IE 4011.71RIM 4017.78
MH291IE 4001.96RIM 4006.08
MH292IE 4002.81RIM 4006.71
MH382IE 4041.33RIM 4044.03
MH381IE 4015.59RIM 4020.34
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
D-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 205 of 240
P003540122P01186431219
P166679328
P05253191624P0
1
4
9
538
1
3
P06653951825MH742
MH758IE 4080.6RIM 4086.6
MH676IE 4107.95RIM 4113.4
MH79IE 4062.94RIM 4078.74
MH78IE 4061.08RIM 4071.33
MH77IE 4060.14RIM 4067.57
MH677IE 4117.48RIM 4121.48
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
D-5
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 206 of 240
P02391133715761145P02191496206485P02201261208485
P02255825082
P02211158208536P0222832209536P02381705208537P0243418215771154
P
0
2
2
3
17
5
7
20
9
53
6 P02263625081P0218942155402P2004600301807P02401807515731157PWWTP10101818183435
MH470IE 3956.8RIM 3965
MH475IE 3955.5RIM 3965.1
MH474IE 3955.8RIM 3964.5
MH472IE 3956.3RIM 3965.4
MH471IE 3956.5RIM 3963.8
MH468IE 3962.7RIM 3968.6
MH473IE 3955.9RIM 3964.8
MH469IE 3957.3RIM 3963.8
MH478IE 3954.73RIM 3965.03
MH476IE 3954.97RIM 3967.87
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
E-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 207 of 240
P00873284181207
P00821639143141
P032617461367851P02391133715761145P01752986179227P04612259181226P02263625081 P00034261313
P01304572939
P04604403181225P00069502323P00862075160164
P10198307585P01777076756P104494410099P176632806P176842509P018051951413914P11045742020P001335155P182044071366851
P032739551368858 P110337222P176432603P04143438179206
P00851943159159
P031537531370863
P017941621369861
P00102451414
P00832071149147P0174159102P00842056154154 P18313064938P030185900
P180349851411912 P001114811P176742003
P016243921295769P016610397685P1827432129 P11313851111
P02255825082
P176558603
P03094033131 P034172900MH782
MH671
MH670
MH669
MH668
MH667
MH663
MH662MH661MH660
MH659
MH658MH657
MH656
MH636
MH783IE 3972.2RIM 3979
MH467IE 3964.4RIM 3970.3
MH468IE 3962.7RIM 3968.6
MH466IE 3966.3RIM 3972.2
MH350IE 3981.1RIM 3985.5
MH772IE 3978.58RIM 3982.8
MH27IE 3970.86RIM 3975.63
MH24IE 3975.51RIM 3980.19
MH409IE 3965.2RIM 3971.75
MH250IE 3979.9RIM 3984.22
MH312IE 3978.45RIM 3983.9
MH321IE 3967.58RIM 3972.7
MH28IE 3969.54RIM 3974.47
MH26IE 3972.51RIM 3976.71
MH25IE 3973.52RIM 3978.32
MH320IE 3967.8RIM 3972.76
MH778IE 3969.72RIM 3973.78
MH771IE 3975.49RIM 3981.21
MH773IE 3977.81RIM 3982.16
MH775IE 3980.02RIM 3984.23
MH774IE 3978.92RIM 3983.77
MH776IE 3979.86RIM 3983.31
MH603IE 3973.85RIM 36977.4
MH648IE 3970.93RIM 3974.69
MH634IE 3982.13RIM 3984.43
MH248IE 3980.78RIM 3985.31
MH218IE 3965.21RIM 3971.62
MH213IE 3981.11RIM 3986.31MH317IE 3973.77RIM 3979.28
MH215IE 3971.83RIM 3977.37
MH212IE 3979.07RIM 3986.97
MH290IE 3982.42RIM 3987.62
MH407IE 3982.35RIM 3986.88
MH287IE 3978.28RIM 3983.93
MH257IE 3977.85RIM 3983.05
MH323IE 3965.91RIM 3972.54
MH322IE 3966.31RIM 3971.83
MH576IE 3974.48RIM 3978.71
MH251IE 3976.79RIM 3983.24
MH777IE 3968.726RIM 3973.84
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
E-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 208 of 240
P0
0
0
9
5
0
0
3
3
P028773222
P00126865463 P175131444P00069502323
P00076781418
P01296632636
P11087552030
P028871544
P105258322
P10198307585
P027794811
P017038488P01304572939
P05927684553
P00034261313
P217250633P107311732121
P17368643137
P029220922
P112743522P1
7
7
4
34
0
13
15
P1319115766P112942188P017237877P112631844P10219876373
P029136555 P175653033P05894693238
P01655102834
P11313851111
P125325733P029334777
P0279
8291722
P0
2
8
0
49
1
14
19
P028950199
P12513521824P017132822
P016722111
P0
2
7
8
644
15
21
P2187101936P110981322
P113030011
P059138177P012639233P126254069P2188157400P00102451414 P220387916P112824533
P013620933P2202135805P00055641924
P001742588P111045144P124838300P22046862030
P175365633P175924311
P001114811P175525522
P
1
7
7
5
5
8
5
1
3
1
8
P102010436676 P14076591215P012795611P17345484047
P0
1
2
8
71
2
1
1
P175062655P175421800
P10229535464 P22075481214P1
7
6
0
23
6
1
1P175829722
MH815IE 4004RIM 0
MH764IE 4000.51RIM 0
MH135IE 4020.413RIM 0
MH814IE 4004RIM 4007.51
MH808IE 4046.2RIM 4054.8
MH131IE 4015.2RIM 4024.2
MH309IE 3991.3RIM 3993.9
MH235IE 3995.7RIM 4002.9
MH247IE 3981.5RIM 3986.75
MH244IE 3990.8RIM 3995.48
MH236IE 3998.05RIM 4005.8
MH256IE 3980.3RIM 3984.98
MH812IE 4011.42RIM 4018.62
MH810IE 3996.27RIM 4001.32
MH807IE 4030.74RIM 4039.34
MH805IE 4000.66RIM 4009.16
MH769IE 4004.19RIM 4006.85
MH767IE 4003.36RIM 4006.73
MH763IE 3998.06RIM 4004.06
MH762IE 3996.01RIM 4004.11
MH761IE 3994.71RIM 4001.95
MH757IE 3993.47RIM 4000.65
MH368IE 4007.66RIM 4013.56
MH731IE 3986.45RIM 3990.05
MH730IE 3989.59RIM 3992.69
MH289IE 3984.71RIM 3991.06
MH134IE 4017.71RIM 4022.28
MH345IE 3988.62RIM 3992.87
MH315IE 3984.03RIM 3989.75
MH249IE 3980.34RIM 3984.16
MH316IE 3984.35RIM 3989.08
MH243IE 3989.53RIM 3993.53
MH242IE 3987.47RIM 3990.94
MH241IE 3982.81RIM 3988.01
MH248IE 3980.78RIM 3985.31
MH246IE 3986.58RIM 3989.88
MH308IE 3988.23RIM 3992.53
MH136IE 4000.28RIM 4009.58
MH356IE 4003.98RIM 4011.23
MH133IE 4006.25RIM 4012.19
MH127IE 4017.51RIM 4022.75
MH129IE 4009.92RIM 4014.32
MH132IE 4016.57RIM 4024.21
MH252IE 3984.92RIM 3989.77
MH253IE 3986.82RIM 3993.12
MH342IE 3992.51RIM 4000.67
MH343IE 4000.18RIM 4010.18
MH128IE 4008.06RIM 4012.76
MH307IE 4005.04RIM 4009.14
MH254IE 3999.62RIM 4004.72
MH255IE 3985.48RIM 3989.88
MH288IE 3980.95RIM 3985.36
MH344IE 3987.57RIM 3991.41
MH306IE 3993.88RIM 3997.88
MH349IE 3999.24RIM 4004.75
MH347IE 3994.16RIM 4000.66
MH406IE 3997.87RIM 4004.67
MH346IE 3989.62RIM 3995.58
MH724IE 3980.65RIM 3985.45
MH238IE 3992.47RIM 3996.31
MH239IE 3990.35RIM 3992.65
MH225IE 3986.15RIM 3991.27
MH226IE 3988.79RIM 3994.59
MH227IE 3989.61RIM 3995.09
MH228IE 3991.62RIM 3998.61
MH234IE 3993.79RIM 4001.19
MH224IE 3984.91RIM 3990.07
MH240IE 3987.96RIM 3991.66
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
E-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 209 of 240
P0
2
5
9
5
9
3
6
1
3
P02607481927P1319115766 P016494533P2187101936P2188157400P14076591215P22075481214P
2
1
8
6
9
6
7
8
11
MH135IE 4020.413RIM 0
MH808IE 4046.2RIM 4054.8
MH405IE 4026.94RIM 4031.5
MH807IE 4030.74RIM 4039.34
MH368IE 4007.66RIM 4013.56
MH600IE 4016.04RIM 4020.77
MH134IE 4017.71RIM 4022.28
MH136IE 4000.28RIM 4009.58 MH369IE 4013.96RIM 4017.96
MH356IE 4003.98RIM 4011.23
MH370IE 4022.01RIM 4028.91
MH124IE 4022.64RIM 4028.32
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
E-4
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 210 of 240
P0218942155402P02171491155401P02151418155384
P02255825082P02161123155401 P02263625081P02141791154383
P02191496206485MH459IE 3958RIM 3962.8
MH468IE 3962.7RIM 3968.6
MH460IE 3957.5RIM 3963.2
MH457IE 3958.6RIM 3962.8
MH458IE 3958.2RIM 3962.4
MH469IE 3957.3RIM 3963.8
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
F-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 211 of 240
P20291298090
P017310744444
P02284293364
P02273743364
P02263625081P03334212615P02304811719
P03003231212
P02141791154383
P10435691111
P000258999
P00034261313P0330630251P01763513625P17494231111P18313064938P02295233263P0201101969300P01853761517P0237155268210P0
5
4
2
77
1
23
88P0200132167145
P0329954240P174856544P023138811
P1827432129P02151418155384 P029931077
P02255825082
P01777076756P032811832489
P0331411251MH652
MH324MH423
MH420
MH425
MH654MH426
MH427MH428
MH434 MH433 MH432
MH429
MH403MH404
MH651
MH421
MH424 MH422
MH586 MH653
MH454IE 3960RIM 3965
MH783IE 3972.2RIM 3979
MH759IE 3973.3RIM 3979.6
MH760IE 3974.8RIM 3979.6
MH461IE 3974.9RIM 3981.7
MH462IE 3975.1RIM 3981.4
MH463IE 3974.2RIM 3980.2
MH464IE 3971.4RIM 3977.4
MH465IE 3968.8RIM 3974.8MH467IE 3964.4RIM 3970.3
MH468IE 3962.7RIM 3968.6
MH457IE 3958.6RIM 3962.8
MH456IE 3959.1RIM 3963.1
MH455IE 3959.4RIM 3963.3
MH466IE 3966.3RIM 3972.2
MH305IE 3984.6RIM 3990.3
MH312IE 3978.45RIM 3983.9
MH281IE 3980.6RIM 3985.73
MH579IE 3998.61RIM 4003.81
MH577IE 3983.17RIM 3989.42
MH286IE 3979.23RIM 3985.28
MH287IE 3978.28RIM 3983.93
MH304IE 3982.75RIM 3987.77
MH402IE 3983.06RIM 3988.41
MH278IE 3979.91RIM 3983.97
MH276IE 3975.57RIM 3979.35
MH585IE 3987.89RIM 3995.89
MH584IE 3991.83RIM 3999.73
MH277IE 3981.31RIM 3986.54
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
F-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 212 of 240
P000463866
P105258322
P104287944
P040253877
P00034261313
P10435691111
P0
4
1
7
809
12
77
P000258999
P1
0
4
1
484
2
2
P110981322
P029446133
P0
5
4
2
77
1
23
88
P012639233P2202135805P012795611P0
1
2
8
71
2
1
1
P1
1
2
1
413
2
2
MH674
MH305IE 3984.6RIM 3990.3
MH283IE 3994.54RIM 4003.5
MH812IE 4011.42RIM 4018.62
MH579IE 3998.61RIM 4003.81
MH289IE 3984.71RIM 3991.06
MH578IE 3999.44RIM 4004.94
MH288IE 3980.95RIM 3985.36 MH349IE 3999.24RIM 4004.75
MH347IE 3994.16RIM 4000.66
MH406IE 3997.87RIM 4004.67
MH351IE 3996.07RIM 4002.85
MH285IE 3983.01RIM 3986.98
MH284IE 3987.58RIM 3993.66
MH282IE 3987.69RIM 3997.69
MH581IE 4005.86RIM 4009.36
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
F-3
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 213 of 240
P0200132167145P0198171367144P0199141168144P0197159843120P0196284234111P0237155268210MH817
MH816
MH799
MH798
MH800
MH797MH796MH795
MH802
MH443
MH444
MH449
MH448
MH446
MH434 MH433 MH432
MH429
MH431
MH430
MH454IE 3960RIM 3965
MH451IE 3974RIM 3983.5
MH452IE 3962RIM 3973.7
MH450IE 3982.1RIM 3991.6
MH445IE 3990.9RIM 4000.6
MH453IE 3961.1RIM 3967.5
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
G-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 214 of 240
MH398MH399
MH439
MH435
MH436
MH437
MH438
MH440
MH441
MH442
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
H-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 215 of 240
MH441
MH442
MH443
MH444
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
H-2
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 216 of 240
MH740
MH741
MH736
MH737
0 100 200
Feet
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\Figure MapBook.mxd bkirk 10/26/2017
I-1
SANITARY SEWERMASTER PLAN
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOABNORTH
FIGURE NO.
SCALE:NORTH:
L E G E N D
Manholes
No Invert
InvertBuildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
MH IDInvert ElevationRIM
Pipe IDCapacity (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)Existing (gpm)
Page 217 of 240
City of Moab
Regular Council AMENDED Meeting Schedule
2018
The City of Moab will hold Regular City Council Meetings at 7:00 PM with workshops
beginning at 6:30 PM on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. All Regular
City Council Meetings will be held in the Moab City Council Chambers at 217 East Center
Street, Moab, Utah. Meeting dates will be as follows:
Regular Meeting January 9 Regular Meeting/Joint
Planning Commission
January 22
Joint Meeting with Grand
County Council (Possible)
January 30
Regular Meeting February 13 Regular Meeting February 27
Regular Meeting March 13 Regular Meeting March 27
Regular Meeting April 10 Regular Meeting/Joint
Planning Commission
April 24
Regular Meeting May 8 Regular Meeting May 22
Joint Meeting with Grand
County Council (Possible)
May 29
Regular Meeting June 12 Regular Meeting June 26
Regular Meeting/Joint
Planning Commission
July 10 Regular Meeting
(falls on Pioneer Day)
July 25
Joint Meeting with Grand
County Council (Possible)
July 31
Regular Meeting August 14 Regular Meeting August 28
Regular Meeting September 11 Regular Meeting September 25
Regular Meeting October 9 Regular Meeting/Joint
Planning Commission
October 23
Joint Meeting with Grand
County Council (Possible)
October 30
Regular Meeting November 13 Regular Meeting December 11
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Published in the Times Independent, January 18 and 25, 2018.
Page 218 of 240
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 7‐7
Title: Consideration to Adopt Resolution #05‐2018, Approving an Easement Agreement for
Emergency and Construction Access to Properties Along the 200 South Right‐of‐Way
Currently Developed as the Millcreek Parkway Non‐motorized Path
Date Submitted: January 4, 2018
Applicant: James and Valerie Byrnes, Byrnes Family Trust
Staff Presenter: Sommar Johnson, Development Services Coordinator
Attachment(s): Easement Agreement, aerial
Options: Approve as submitted, deny, or modify.
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt Resolution #05‐2018 approving an easement
agreement for emergency and construction access to properties along the 200 South right‐of‐way
currently developed as the Millcreek Parkway non‐motorized path and authorize the Mayor Pro
Tem to sign the agreement.
Background/Summary:
A parcel of land located at 150 South 200 East has very limited access along 200 East. The current
driveway is approximately 13 feet wide which does not allow adequate ingress and egress for
emergency vehicles. This is a relatively large piece of property with additional frontage along the
200 South right‐of‐way. The City elected to develop the 200 South right‐of‐way as a non‐motorized
path with the Millcreek Parkway project sometime during the 1990’s. Because of this decision,
properties that would normally have access via 200 South have been limited in their ability to
access and develop those parcels. Currently there is a dirt driveway that is used to access parcels
along the southern portion of the 200 South right‐of‐way but it does not provide access to
properties on the north side.
The City was approached by Mr. and Mrs. Byrnes about the possibility of securing an easement
across the 200 South right‐of‐way to allow access for emergency and construction vehicles to their
parcel at 150 South 200 East. This easement will provide an alternative route into the property but
will not be used as the main access point. The current driveway on 200 East will continue to serve
as the ingress and egress for the property but the easement agreement allows an alternative
emergency and larger construction vehicles to access the site during development.
During the review of this request it was noted that the easement agreement should also cover those
properties that have access via the dirt driveway. The location of the easement agreement
encompasses the current dirt driveway on 200 South and formalizes access to the southern
properties as well as granting access to the Byrnes property to the north.
Page 219 of 240
CITY OF MOAB
RESOLUTION #05-2018
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY AND
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS TO PROPERTIES ALONG THE 200 SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS, James and Valerie Byrnes acting on behalf of Byrnes Family Trust, located at 855 Wooden
Deer Rd., Carbondale, CO 81623, as the “Owner” of record of 150 South 200 East, Moab, Utah, a .87
acre (37,897 square feet) parcel of land located in the C-2 (Commercial Residential Zone), requested an
easement across the 200 South right-of-way for emergency and construction vehicle access to said
property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Moab developed the 200 South right-of-way with a non-motorized path as part of
the Mill Creek Flood Control and Parkway project; and
WHEREAS, those properties fronting on 200 South between 100 East and 200 East have restricted
vehicular access along the 200 South right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has drafted the easement agreement to formalize emergency and limited
construction vehicle access to those properties; and
WHEREAS, the City of Moab feels it is in the best interest of these properties to have an alternative
vehicular access for emergency services;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Moab City Council, with the adoption of Resolution #05-
2018, hereby approves the easement agreement for emergency and construction access to properties along
the 200 South right-of-way and the Council authorizes the Mayor to sign the Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED in open Council by a majority vote of the Governing Body of Moab City
Council on January 9, 2018.
SIGNED:
______________________________
Mayor Pro Tem
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Rachel Stenta, Recorder
Page 220 of 240
1
When Recorded Mail to:
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, UT 84532
ACCESS EASEMENT AND AGREEMENT
THIS ACCESS EASEMENT AND AGREEMENT (Easement) is made and entered into
as of the date(s) set forth below by and between the City of Moab (Grantor), and James R.
Byrnes, Trustee, and Valerie R. Byrnes, Trustee, of the Byrnes Family Trust (Grantee). In
consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, Grantor and Grantee agree as follows:
1. Grant of Easement. Grantor hereby grants to Grantee, its successors and assigns, without
warranty a permanent easement in the NE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 35, T 25 S, R 21 E SLB&M,
Grand County, Utah as follows:
A 20 foot wide access easement for emergency use and construction use located within the right-
of-way of 200 South Street of the Moab Townsite, Section 1, T26S, R21E, SLB&M, more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the West right-of-way of 200 East Street, said point being North 00°17’
00” East 35.00 feet from the Northeast corner of Block 3 of the Moab Townsite in section 1,
Township 26 South, Range 21 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian; and running
Thence along the north boundary of the vacated portion of 200 South Street North 89°47'00"
West 114.70 feet;
thence with a curve having a radius of 69.49 feet, to the right with an arc length of 67.97 feet, (a
chord bearing of North 61°59'00" West 65.29 feet);
thence North 34°11'00" West 25.82 feet;
thence with a curve having a radius of 23.00 feet, to the right with an arc length of 10.58 feet, (a
chord bearing of North 21°00'04" West 10.49 feet);
thence North 07°49'08" West 2.49 feet to a point on Grantee’s south parcel line;
thence along said parcel line South 89°47'00" East 20.22 feet;
thence with a curve having a radius of 3.00 feet, to the left with an arc length of 1.04 feet, (a
chord bearing of South 24°13'29" East 1.04 feet);
thence South 34°11'00" East 25.82 feet;
thence with a curve having a radius of 50.0 feet, to the left with an arc length of 48.52 feet, (a
chord bearing of South 61°59'00" East 46.64 feet);
thence South 89°47'00" East 114.71 feet to the West bounds of 200 East Street;
thence South 00°17'00" West 20.0 feet to the point of beginning.
(Bearings are based on the centerline of 300 South Street; Bearings = N 89°47’ W).
Page 221 of 240
2
2. Purpose. The Easement is granted for the purpose of installing and constructing road
access for emergency vehicles and construction-related access to the parcel of Grantee, the
description of which is attached as Exhibit 1 (Benefitted Parcel). The Easement shall not be
used for general ingress/egress to the Benefitted Parcel. Grantee shall be responsible for
upgrading the Easement with a hard surface, and shall properly construct the roadway so as to
avoid damage to the existing non-motorized pathway within the Easement, and any adjacent
improvements. All improvements within the Easement are subject to review and approval by the
Grantor. Grantee shall be solely responsible for the maintenance of any improvements,
structures, or equipment it constructs within the Easement.
3. Non-exclusive Use; Removal of Encroachments. Grantor expressly reserves and shall
have the right to use (together with the public) the Easement in a manner that does not impair or
harm the grant or use by Grantee. Neither party shall construct any buildings, structures, or other
permanent improvements within the Easement that would substantially interfere with the use by
the other party, and any such improvements or encroachments may be subject to removal without
compensation.
4. Restoration. Upon completion of any repair or maintenance work contemplated by this
Easement, Grantee agrees to promptly restore the surface to a condition equal or superior to that
existing prior to any disturbance.
5. Abandonment. This Easement shall only be deemed abandoned upon lawful execution
and recording of a written grant by Grantee conveying and abandoning this Easement.
6. Binding in Perpetuity. This Easement is irrevocable and shall bind the subject property
in perpetuity, and all of the benefits and burdens of this Easement shall inure to and be binding
upon the respective legal representatives, heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns
of the parties.
7. Sole Agreement; Modifications. This Easement constitutes the sole and complete
agreement between the parties and no additional or different oral representation, promise or
agreement shall be binding on any of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this
instrument. No modification to this Easement shall be binding unless it is in writing and duly
executed by both parties.
8. Governing Law and Venue. This Easement is governed by Utah law; the sole venue for
any dispute arising from this Easement shall be the courts of Grand County, Utah.
9. Remedies. In the event of any breach of the provisions of this Easement, the non-
breaching party may enforce same in an action for damages, specific performance, or both. In
any such proceeding arising under this Easement the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover
its reasonable attorney fees and court costs, in addition to any other remedies or relief.
This Easement is binding and effective as of the date(s) of execution by the parties, below.
Page 222 of 240
3
Grantor:
City of Moab
By:________________________________ __________________
Mayor Pro Tempore Date
Attest:
By:________________________________ ___________________
Rachel Stenta, City Recorder Date
STATE OF UTAH )
) ss.
COUNTY OF GRAND )
The foregoing Access Easement and Agreement was acknowledged and executed before me by
_________________, Mayor Pro Tempore of the City of Moab on the ____day of
____________________, 2018. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:
_______________________.
_________________________________
Notary Public, State of Utah
Address:__________________________
_________________________________
-Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank-
Page 223 of 240
4
Moab/Byrnes Family Trust Easement
Signature Page, Contd.
Grantee:
By:______________________________
James R. Byrnes, Trustee, Byrnes Family Trust
By:________________________________
Valerie R. Byrnes, Trustee, Byrnes Family Trust
STATE OF UTAH )
) ss.
COUNTY OF GRAND )
The foregoing Access Easement and Agreement was acknowledged and executed before me by
James R. Byrnes and Valerie R. Byrnes, Trustees of the Byrnes Family Trust on the ____day of
____________________, 2018. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:
_______________________.
_________________________________
Notary Public, State of Utah
Address:__________________________
_________________________________
Attachment:
Exhibit 1- Description of Benefitted Property
-End of Document-
Page 224 of 240
Page 225 of 240
")³±³±0 60 12030Feet
1 inch = 60 feet
200 South EasementAgreement
200 S St.
150 S 200 E
Mill Creek Parkway
200 E St.100 E St.339 E 200 S
Page 226 of 240
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9, 2018
#: 8‐1
Title: Miscellaneous Culinary Water Rate Changes and Clarification Regarding
Charges for Multiple Dwellings on a Shared Meter
Date Submitted: January 3, 2017
Staff Presenter: David Everitt
Attachment(s):
‐ Draft resolution
‐ Schedule A – Water Rates
‐ Resolution 2012‐11 – Water rates (for comparison)
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt the resolution revising
miscellaneous culinary water use fees and clarifying rates for multiple
residential dwellings that share a water meter.
Background/Summary:
The City Council approved significant changes to the commercial and
residential water rate schedule earlier this year. These changes did not
include adjustments to some lesser‐used rates, which are:
‐ Fire Line Rate
‐ Bed and Breakfasts within the City
‐ Firefighter Rate within the City
‐ City Parks and Cemeteries
‐ Moab Golf Course Well #7
This recommendation includes increases to the Fire Line, City Parks and
Cemeteries, and the Golf Course rates. The Bed and Breakfast rate would be
removed from the rate schedule and B&Bs would be assessed at the standard
commercial rate. The Firefighter rate would also be removed.
Furthermore, in order to ensure that residential water users are charged
equitably, this resolution includes proposed language that would grant the
Page 227 of 240
City Manager discretion to assess either a commercial or residential rate –
whichever is lower – for residences that are on a shared meter.
Page 228 of 240
1
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 02-2018, A RESOLUTION REVISING
MISCELLANEOUS CULINARY WATER USE FEES AND CLARIFYING
RATES FOR MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS THAT SHARE A
WATER METER
The following describes the intent and purpose of this resolution:
a. The City of Moab significantly revised its culinary water use rates in June 2017;
b. These revisions did not address the following: Fire Line rate, Bed and Breakfast
rates, the Firefighter rate, and rates assessed to City parks and cemeteries and
water used from the Golf Course Well #7;
c. Revenues from the current culinary water user fees have typically been
insufficient to cover the City’s ongoing operations and maintenance needs for the
water system. Historically this has required that the City subsidize the culinary
water system, principally from wastewater treatment revenues or other City
revenues;
d. The City anticipates higher operations and maintenance costs as demands on the
system increase and infrastructure ages;
e. The City finds that it is necessary and appropriate that culinary water user fees
pay for all of the ongoing operations and maintenance needs of the system;
f. The City wishes to simplify the rate schedule where it is reasonable to do so,
which is manifested here by removing the Firefighter and Bed and Breakfast rates
from the schedule entirely. Firefighters will be assessed standard residential rates
and Bed and Breakfasts will be assessed standard commercial rates;
g. The City finds that it is necessary and appropriate that culinary water user fees be
structured so as to encourage conservation and the efficient use of water;
h. The City wishes to not inadvertently charge higher rates to residential customers
who share a single water meter as of the date of this resolution; therefore, where
multiple residences currently share a single water meter, the City Manager has
discretion to apply either the commercial or the residential rate, based on an
analysis of actual use and other information, if: 1) the standard residential rate
would result in an unfair or inequitable charge; and 2) the modification would be
fair to the other users of the system.
i. The City has water rate setting authority pursuant to U.C.A. § 10-8-14(2); and
Page 229 of 240
2
k. The City finds that the following rate structure is reasonable and consistent with
the objectives and policies described above.
Therefore, the City hereby enacts the culinary water rates in Schedule A, attached.
The foregoing resolution is approved and adopted by action of the Moab City Council, as
set forth below. This resolution shall take effect on January 9, 2018.
______________________________
Mayor Emily S. Niehaus Date
Attest:
______________________________ __________________
Rachel Stenta, Recorder Date
Page 230 of 240
Revised December 1, 2017 1
Schedule A: Culinary Water Rates
Rate
Use fee: Residential, in City:
First 2000 gallons (base charge): $10.00
3,000-10,000 gallons (per 1000): $0.75
11,000-60,000 (per 1000): $1.00
61,001+ (per 1000): $1.25
Use fee: Commercial, in City
First 2000 gallons (base charge): $25.00
3,000-5,000 gallons (per 1000): $1.00
6,000-10,000 gallons (per 1000): $1.50
11,000-50,000 gallons (per 1000): $2.00
60,000 gallons + (per 1000): $2.50
Use fee: Residential, out of City
First 2000 gallons (base charge): $14.50
3,000-10,000 gallons (per 1000): $1.00
11,000-60,000 (per 1000): $1.50
61,000+ (per 1000): $1.75
Use fee: Commercial, out of City
First 2000 gallons (base charge): $29.50
3,000-5,000 gallons (per 1000): $2.00
6,000-10,000 gallons (per 1000): 2.25
11,000-50,000 gallons (per 1000): $2.50
60,000 gallons + (per 1000): $2.75
Connection fee: In City
5/8”x3/4” meter: $1840
1” meter: $2305
1 ½” meter: $2485
2”meter: $2785
4”meter: $4555
Connection fee: Out of City
5/8”x3/4” meter: $1925
1” meter: $2045
1 ½” meter: $2325
2” meter: $2965
4” meter: $4915
Page 231 of 240
Revised December 1, 2017 2
Industrial Water Use Fees (per 1000 g)
Shop Water Retail Fee $7.75
Shop Water Government Fee $5.50
Construction Hydrant Fee $7.75
Miscellaneous Use Fees (per 1000 g)
Fire Line Rate $11.24
City Parks and Cemeteries $0.54
Moab Golf Course Well #7 $0.54
Page 232 of 240
Page 233 of 240
Page 234 of 240
Page 235 of 240
Moab City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: January 9. 2018
#: 8‐2
Title: Storm Water Utility Rate Changes
Date Submitted: December 1, 2017
Staff Presenter: David Everitt
Attachment(s):
‐ Draft resolution
‐ Schedule A: Storm Water Utility Fees
‐ FY 2018 Storm Water Utility Fund budget and cash on hand
Recommended Motion: I move to approve the resolution establishing the
storm water utility rates for the City of Moab.
Background/Summary:
The City of Moab’s Storm Water Utility Fund was created in 2008 to support
citywide storm water collection, conveyance, and retention infrastructure.
The Fund has paid for a number of projects over the years, and is the primary
source of funding for the upcoming 100E/100S improvements that are
scheduled for construction in 2018. The Fund will also provide the bulk of the
cost associated with the City’s portion of the improvements that will be
constructed in association with UDOT’s 191 widening project on the north end
of town in 2018‐2019. While there is currently some cash‐on‐hand in this
Fund, it is not enough to cover the expected costs associated with the 191
widening project as well as nearly $6 million in additional future projects that
are identified in the recently completed Storm Water Master Plan.
The proposed rate change is an increase from $2.00 per Equivalent
Residential Unit (“ERU”) to $4.00 per ERU.
The Storm Water Utility Fund’s FY 2018 budget (as proposed for the first
budget amendment) and fund balances are attached for reference.
Page 236 of 240
1
CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION NO. 01‐2018, A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
STORM WATER UTILITY RATES
The following describes the intent and purpose of this resolution:
a. The City of Moab operates a Storm Water Utility that manages the runoff from public
and private property within the City;
b. The City recently completed a Storm Water Master Plan that identifies the need for
significant capital improvements estimated to cost over $6 million;
c. The City anticipates higher operations and maintenance costs as demands on the
system increase and infrastructure ages;
d. The City anticipates higher debt service obligations due to financing future large storm
water retention and conveyance capital projects;
e. The City finds that it is necessary and appropriate that beneficiaries of the storm water
retention and conveyance system pay their proportionate share of all of the ongoing operations
and maintenance needs and capital costs of the system;
f. The City finds that the current fee is inadequate to cover existing and future operations
and maintenance costs for the storm water system;
g. An increase to the current fee is necessary to cover future capital improvement costs;
h. The City finds that periodic changes to the rate structure are necessary and appropriate
as project and maintenance costs change;
i. The City has storm water rate setting authority pursuant to U.C.A. § 10‐8‐38, and other
authorities.
j. The City finds that the proposed rate changes are reasonable and consistent with the
objectives and policies described above.
Therefore, the City hereby enacts the storm water utility rates in Schedule A, attached.
Page 237 of 240
2
Passed and adopted by a majority vote of the City Council. This Resolution will take effect on
January 9, 2018, and the rate changes will be implemented as soon as is practical.
______________________________
Mayor Emily S. Niehaus Date
Attest:
______________________________ __________________
Rachel Stenta, Recorder Date
Page 238 of 240
Revised December, 2017 1
Schedule A: Storm Water Utility Rates
Rate
Residential 4.00 per month for single-family and
duplex homes on a single lot
Commercial $4.00 per month per storm water ERU*
* Every 3,000 square feet of impervious surface = 1 ERU. Every 6,000 square feet of semi-
impervious surface = 1 ERU.
Page 239 of 240
2016 - 2017 Year
End Actual
2017- 2018
Approved Budget
FY18
B.O.
Admin
Recommendation Notes for council
Operating Income
53.36450 STORM WATER DRAINAGE FEE $142,595 $284,000 -($75,000)
Need to implement the
fee increase
Total Operating Income $142,595 $284,000 ($75,000)
Non-Operating Income
53.36112 TFER FROM BEG F.B.-$158,700
Grant revenue (?)$36,264
From DWQ for Holland
riparian restoration
project
Total Non-Operating Income -$158,700 $36,264
Total Revenue $442,700 $0 ($38,736)
Operating Expense
53.40009 Storm wtr GENERAL FUND O/H $4,000 $45,000 -
53.40010 Storm wtr SALARIES & WAGES -$38,000 -($19,000)Have not hired yet
53.40013 Storm wtr EMPLOYEE BENEFITS -$30,000 -($15,000)Have not hired yet
53.40075 Storm wtr SPECIAL PROJECTS $7,350 --
Total Operating Expense $11,350 $113,000 -($34,000)
Net impact to Storm Water Fund Balance $131,245 $329,700 ($4,736)Pull from fund balance
Storm Water Capital Expenses
100 SOUTH STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS $309,700
MINOR STORM WATER PROJECTS $0
RIPARIAN HABITAT STUDY $10,000
Riparian Habitat Restoration Projects $10,000 $36,264
Holland restoration
project
1661.1 - Equipment - General $0
Total Direct Purchase:$329,700 $0 $36,264
Storm Water Fund Balance end of FY17 $ 1,440,788.33
Projected Balance end of FY18 $ 1,277,352.33
Storm Water Utility Enterprise Fund
Page 240 of 240