HomeMy Public PortalAboutRes-CC-2018-04Resolution # 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 9t" day of
January, 2018.
Attest:
Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder
CITY OF MOAB
By:
Emily Niehaus
Mayor
Resolution # 04-2018
Page 1 of 1
r
Sanitary Sewer
Master Plan
Prepared for:
CITY OF
MOAB
UTAH
Prepared by:
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
SANITARY
SEWER MASTER PLAN
December 2017
Prepared for:
CITY OF
MOAB
Prepared by:
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
�G���.„)
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES I CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES II CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title
On or After
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
Title
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C -
Appendix D
LIST OF APPENDICES
- Northwest Lift Station Alternatives Memo
- Lift Station Data
2017 Flow Monitoring Summary
- Model Result Mapbook
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES III CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
G SSA 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
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES
ES-1 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
3.00
to
2.50
czt
t 2.00
1
eu
H 1.50
o
3
o
7, 1.00
75
o
o
0.50
Figure ES-1
Peak Month Flow to Moab City Wastewater Treatment Plant
Moab '
GWSSA
San Juan
nim GWSSA - USU
Septage
Existing Capacity
New Treatment Plant Capacity*
a.)
a
0.00
2017
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060
*Treatment plant capacity may include many different components, but in general can be
represented as a flow capacity for peak month conditions
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.
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES ES-2 CITY OF MOAB
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2017
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6,„,
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
SFY —,,-,)
Feet
FIGURE NO.
ES-2
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Master Plan4.0 GIS\4.1 Protects \Flg ere 0-1 - 2017 Emsti ng Deflclences.mxd amckln non 11/30/2017
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2022
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6,„,
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
�SFY —�,-,)
Feet
FIGURE NO.
ES-3
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Master Plan4.0 GIS\4.1 Protects \F0 ore 0-2 - 2022 Deflclences.mxd amckln non it /30/2017
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2030
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6,„,
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
� 2F94,�,-,)
Feet
FIGURE NO.
ES-4
PaMoab Gty\Sewer Master Plan\MO GIS\Mt Protects \F0 ore 0-3- 2030 Deflclence
mxd am Mennon M/30/2017
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
Feet
YEAR 2060
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6,„,
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
� 2F94,�,-,)
FIGURE NO.
ES-5
PaMoab Gty\Sewer Master Plan4.0 GIS\44 Protects \F0 ore 0-4 - 2060 Be Mout Deflclences.mxd amckln non it /30/2017
alp
IstnattVi
New Northwest Lift Station
'•.
•••
17•P ;T:f7at A
sl ckro&
�y Ar_a
1
LEGEND
• Future Lift Station
WWTP
System Improvement (inch)
6" or less
8°
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Existing Sewer Pipes
1._ ._ i Spanish Valley
J
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
Feet
PROPOSED SYSTEM
IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
�SFY —�,-,)
FIGURE NO.
ES-6
P3Moab Cily1Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects1Flgure 0-6 - Project I mprovements.mxd amcklnnon 11/30/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table ES-2
Probosed Svstem Imbrovements
ID
Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Construction
Cost
Estimate
Engineering
/ Admin
(15 percent)
Total
Project
Cost
Estimate
1.1
100 Wes-0
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 Station
$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
' 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°a 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 Pi es
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.
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES ES-3
CITY OF MOAB
%;,
A
1
C0 "t C3
lJ
�fl
GFr3(e
cr.in ra
az:DamiesLt.
- aaacm _3-_.
g- 7 7 '-
�f Y;
fr
'-90Dbi � i
t`
U
a
«4GGF
a
"- tJ
r
a
- - $M21g0@l7
R. spberry
•,,,..`.
Ar„„„,,''�•.
aottj:,
Izeoa
LEGEND
WWTP
Critical Condition Projects
Existing Sewer Pipes
Existing Sewer Pipes
tt••�
!Spanish Valley
L..i
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 500 1,000
Feet
CONDITION PROJECT
PRIORITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
&ASSOCIATES
FIGURE NO.
ES-7
P:\Moab Gay Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects\Flg ore 0-7- Plpe Condton Projects.mxd amclon non 11/30/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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 Trunk'
15
4,133
$1,141,000
2.2
FYE 2019
Northwest Lift Station'
$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
' 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.
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES ES-4
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 1-1 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
1-2 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-1 CITY OF MOAB
"
. 7
P : \ M o a b C i t y \ S e w e r M a s t e r P l a n \ 4 . 0 G I S \ 4 . 1 P r o t e c t s \ F l g o r e 2 - 1 - E m s t i n g C o l l e c t i o n S y s t e m . m x d a m c k m n o n i t / 3 / 2 0 1 7
i
i
"
N O R T H :
L e g e n d
W W T P
L i f t S t a t i o n
L i f t S t a t i o n
" C o m m e r c i a l / I n s t i t u t i o n a l
O C i t y O w n e d
o H o u s e h o l d
E x i s t i n g S e w e r P i p e s
P i p e S i z e
6 " o r l e s s
8 "
1 0 "
1 2 "
1 5 "
1 8 "
2 1 "
2 4 "
3 0 "
3 6 "
4 2 "
M o a b S e w e r A r e a B o u n d a r y
G W S S A S e w e r A r e a
M o a b C i t y L i m i t s
L . . _ . I S p a n i s h V a l l e y
S C A L E :
0 1 , 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0
F e e t
E X I S T I N G
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M
C I T Y O F M O A B
S A N I T A R Y S E W E R
M A S T E R P L A N
6 B O W E N C O L L I N S
C & A S S O C I A T E S
��S F Y ��, - , )
F I G U R E N O .
2 - 1
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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)
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
2-2 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table 2-2
Sewer Main Material Percentages
Diameter
(inch)
Unknown
PVC
Clay
Transite
Concrete
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 2-3
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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 biological 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
2-4 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-1 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
1.4
1.2
b 1
a E
'
cdw0.8
H •
Q 0.6
3 0
c
,
d 0.4
0.2
0
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-Dec
Figure 3-1
Seasonal Variation in Total Wastewater Flow
V
V
v
- 2015
- 2016
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-2 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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. To 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-3
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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).
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-4
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table 3-2
Projected Growth in ERUs for Service Area
Year
Moabl
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
'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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-5 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
a,o
3.00
2.50
a
t 2.00
a�
H 1.50
0
0
a
0.50
Figure 3-2
Peak Month Flow to Moab City Wastewater Treatment Plant
ILMoab
GWSSA
San Juan
GWSSA - USU
Septage
Existing Capacity
New Treatment Plant Capacity*
0.00
2017
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060
*Treatment plant capacity may include many different components, but in general can be
represented as a flow capacity for peak month conditions
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-6
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 3-7
CITY OF MOAB
Growth (ERUs)
10
O 100
O
0
500
1,000
Legend
LJ City Limits Moab
�.—..—.! Spanish Valley
11-1
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
llllllllllllll� 11
RC
SAR
FC-1
NORTH:
0
z
SCALE:
0
1,250
2,500
Feet
CITY OF MOAB
LAND USE & ZONING
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
3-3
P3Moab Clty\Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects\Flg ore 3-3 - Landuse.mxd Mork 10/24/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-1 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
"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 sediment 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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-2
CITY OF MOAB
r/ MH 472
—•
--..lik
11011EMH`28
.N.
a
IA
Wittrita
3
A
MH 290
MH 31
3
..M%Rfr7T7liri
m
rl
O@
tr.
:1C3XJ-rt.:1)
•
I-
MH 14� 5_
•
arab 021.6 NiaCa uFj -
a:xDi01
c rk
yG a m
K
MH 107
MH 748 •
00
laXM3XINV a
:gee
EMH 417
Uti
•- -- 43404440-;�—F
e 1't
u
u
e
2:600C917g
ceTkLqr1D7
R
Legend
Flow Monitoring Site
Overflow Location
T
Primary Direction of Flow
WWTP
Existing Sewer Pipes
Diameter (inch)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Spanish Valley
NORTH:
SCALE:
400
800
Feet
FLOW MONITORING &
OVERFLOW LOCATIONS
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
�SFY —�,-,)
FIGURE NO.
4-1
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure 4-1 - Overflow Locations.mxd amckinnon 11/16/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 4-3 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
4-4 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
2.5
0
w
—2.0
Q
a)
a
ct
1.5
3
0
21.0
0
czt
U
t10.5
czt
N
0.0
0
Figure 4-2
Diurnal Patterns
- MH114-50E100hS
- MH 290I - 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
3
6
9
12 15 18 21 24
Hour
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES
4-5 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
4-6 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
4-7 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table 4-5
Hydraulic Modeling Scenario Infiltration Flows (gpm)
Manhole Infiltration
Id m
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
4-8 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
1400
1200
R 1000
o w
800
0
ct 600
0
Average Flow (gpm)
400
200
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 4-3
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 313 (500 W 300 N)
- Observed
- Simulated
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hour
Figure 4-4
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 290 (500 W 400 N)
- Observed
- Simulated
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hour
BOWEN COLLINS $ ASSOCIATES 4-9 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
d
180
160
140
a120
0 100
w
on
80
ct
c.) ▪ 60
40
20
0
0
Figure 4-5
Observed vs Simulated Flow at Manhole 107 (600 S Main St)
3
6
9
12
Hour
15
- Observed
- Simulated
18
21
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
4-10 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 5-1 CITY OF MOAB
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
0
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2017
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
-2?-
Feet
FIGURE NO.
5-1
P3Moab City Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects Figure 5-1 - 2017 Existing Deflclences.mxd bklrk 10/23/2017
SEWER MASTER PLAN
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).
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 5-2 CITY OF MOAB
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
0
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2022
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
�-2?-
Feet
FIGURE NO.
5-2
P3Moab City Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects Figure 5-2 - 2022 Deflciences.roxd bklrk 10/23/2017
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
0
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
Feet
YEAR 2030
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
�-2?-
FIGURE NO.
5-3
P3Moab City Sewer Master Plan51.0 GIS51.1 Projects Figure 5-3 - 2030 Deflciences.mxd bklrk 10/23/2017
LEGEND
A 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
NORTH:
0
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
YEAR 2060
PIPE CAPACITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
��2?-
Feet
FIGURE NO.
5-4
P:\Moab City\ Sewer Master Plan540 GIS541 Projects Figure 5-4- 2060 Bulldout Deflclences.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 6-1 CITY OF MOAB
ti♦
•♦o
New Northwest
Lift Station
1
LEGEND
• Future Lift Station
WWTP
System Improvement (inch)
6" or less
8°
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Existing Sewer Pipes
1._ ._ i Spanish Valley
J
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
Feet
PROPOSED SYSTEM
IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C &ASSOCIATES
FIGURE NO.
6-1
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan\4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Flg ore 6-la - Project Improvements.mxd amclon non it I1I201 7
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table 6-1
Proposed Svstem Improvements
ID
Name
Diameter
(inch)
Length
(ft)
Total
Construction
Cost
Estimate
Engineering
/ Admin
(15 percent)
Total
Project
Cost
Estimate
1.1
100 Wes-0
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 Station
$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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
6-2 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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 (H2SO4) 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-1 CITY OF MOAB
LEGEND
WWTP
Existing Sewer Pipes
Wall Condition Score
0 - No Data
1 - Good
—2 - Mild
3 - Medium
4 - Severe
5 - Critical
r••I
iSpanish Valley
L..i
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 750 1,500
Feet
SEWER PIPE
WALL CONDITION
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C &ASSOCIATES
FIGURE NO.
7-1
P:\Moab City\Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ore 7-1 - Rise Condton.mxd amckln non 11/3/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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
Diameter
(in)
Length of Pipe (ft) for Wall Condition Score
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
7-2 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
Table 7-3
Summary of Rehab/Replacement Costs for
Severe and Critical Wall Condition Pines
Diameter
(in)
Severe
Conditionl
Critical
Conditionl
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-3 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
7-4 CITY OF MOAB
A
1
fa Q
�40
Lgtoomea
O&M 3
i 3D
i i
,Itir4,7/3TS-
I�
�fl
germ
�
acpartc,Ol-117 �w�
: d.Tat
U4Li
a
i
0
0
C:r500:1;61
k
a
"- tJ
R. spberry
•,,,..`.
.„„„..�`..
actri4,
LEGEND
WWTP
Critical Condition Projects
Existing Sewer Pipes
Existing Sewer Pipes
r "!
iSpanish Valley
L..i
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 500 1,000
Feet
CONDITION PROJECT
PRIORITIES
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6BOWEN COLLINS
&ASSOCIATES
FIGURE NO.
7-2
P:\Moab Gay Sewer Master Plan04.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ore 7-2- Rise Condton Projects.mxd amckln non 1211/2017
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
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 Trunk'
15
4,133
$1,141,000
2.2
FYE 2019
Northwest Lift Station'
$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
' 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES 7-5 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
• 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
7-6 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
Figure 7-3
10-Year Revenue and Expenditures - Moab City Sewer
iso
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
a
FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
*Includes 3% inflation for O&M and construction costs
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
7-7 CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
Figure 7-4
10-Year Reserve Fund Balance - Moab City Sewer
$3,000,000
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.
— $2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
— $500,000
1
FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
$0
Sewer Master Plan
Building Project
City Designed Project
Sewer Lift Station
Replace 100 West Trunk Line
1000 North, 500 W to Rubicon
New South Trunk Pipeline
Non -Loaned Treatment Plant
Capital Costs
Collection - Rehabilitation &
Replacement
Collection - Severe Condition
Rehabilitation
Collection - Critical Condition
Repair
Reserve Fund Balance
• • • • Target Fund Balance (6 Months
of O&M)
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
7-8
CITY OF MOAB
APPENDIX A
Northwest Lift
Station
Alternatives
Memo
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C� T E S
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.
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
1004ar Colo1r" *
River Floodplain
MOAB CITY
SEWER MASTER PLAN
RV PARK SEWER OPTIONS
Colorado'River
PROJECT STUDY AREA
Aarphway NA
Inn ♦♦`
HolidayZ `
Express ♦`
Area A
68 Acres
NORTH:
SCALE:
0
500
1,000
Feet
FIGURE NO.
1
P:\Moab C11y1Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects RV Park Sewe Opilon Project Area.mxd Mark 9/28/2017
TECHNICAL MEMO - NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
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 Flow'
(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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 2
TECHNICAL MEMO - NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 3
I
Future Lift Station
c� / 1
Moab
RV Park
Future Manhole
Existing Rim = 3961.58
Minimum IE = 3961.61
Connect Future Force Main
to Future Gravity Main
Existing RIM = 3971.05
Minimum IE = 3964.13
Connect to 15-inch stub
Rim = 3970.64
IE = 3958.65
LEG E N D
t_7.11 Moab City Limits
Parcels
Existing Sewer Pipes
O New Lift Station
Proposed Pipe
Force Main
Gravity Main
Contour
Major
Minor
Floodplain
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
RV PARK SEWER OPTIONS
OPTION #1
MOAB CITY
SEWER MASTER PLAN
NORTH:
SCALE:
0
200
400
Feet
FIGURE NO.
2
P:\Moab City\ Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects RV Park Sewe Option#1.mxd bklrk 9/28/2017
TECHNICAL MEMO - NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 4
Future Manhole
Existing Rim = 3960.41
Maximum IE = 3956.16
�. Moab
N•-• RV Park
Future Lift Station
Existing RIM = 3962.00
Maximum IE = 3953.13
00-year Colorado
River Floodplai
Connect to 15-inch stub
Rim = 3971.05
IE = 3958.65
LEGEND
t_7.11 Moab City Limits
Parcels
Existing Sewer Pipes
O New Lift Station
Proposed Pipe
Force Main
Gravity Main
Contour
Major
Minor
Floodplain
6BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
�.4�2a�-._,)>
RV PARK SEWER OPTIONS
OPTION #2
MOAB CITY
SEWER MASTER PLAN
P:\Moab City\ Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects RV Park Sewe Option N2.mxd bklrk 9/29/2017
NORTH:
400
Feet
SCALE:
0
FIGURE NO.
200
3
TECHNICAL MEMO - NORTHWEST LIFT STATION ALTERNATIVES
• 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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 5
APPENDIX B
Lift Station Data
160
140
120
100
/1
W
x 80
H
60
40
20
0
Figure
Lions Park Lift Station Curves and Estimated Svstem Curve
if
System C
rve (ft)
—Estimated
0
20
40 60
Flow (gpm)
80
100
Grinder Pumps AV1YE'�JV P UMP
5
APPROVED
5HP High Head Grinder Pump, 1 or 3 Phase
(Class 1, Div. 1, Groups C & D Hazardous Location)
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.
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
160
140
120
H
Ei 100
73
cu 80
2
70 60
I° 40
20
0
Performance Curve
20 40 60 80 100 110
Capacity (GPM)
REV 03/2017
Features and Benefits
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.
3
5HP Grinder Pump
High Head
KHG(X)5
10
10
AWEENPU1111
471 US Hwy 250 East • Ashland, Ohio 44805
419.207.9400 fax 419.207.8031
www.keenpump.com
JUNINPUMP SHP SUBMERSIBLE GRINDER PUMP
GENERAL
a G(
V)G `l 11
11 11 J
MOTOR DATA
Pump Model
HP / Power Supply
5HP / 1 4), 60 Hz
PUMP DATA i
Full Load Amps 208V
40 Amps
Date
03/06/2017
Start Amps 208V
144 Amps
Discharge Flange
2-1/2 & 3"ANSI Horizontal
Full Load Amps 230V
34 Amps
Grinder Ring
25 Slots
Start Amps 230V
122 Amps
Impeller Type / Std. Dia.
Recessed / 6.00"
Poles / Rated Speed
2 P / 3450 rpm
Single START KIT SK-5 includes:
Start & Run Capacitors, Relay,
Phase and Mounting Hardware
Insulation Class
F Class
Start Capacitor
300 ufd, 250 VAC
Run Capacitor
30 ufd, 370VAC
PERFORMANCE CURVE
Head / [Ft]
160
140
6.0p„CIA
5.75„DIA
120
5.50„EnA
100
80
60
40
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 110
Capacity [USGPM]
MODEL HP Phase Volts
KHG(X)5-2001
5
1
208
KHG(X)5-2301
5
1
230
1- Performance with clear water and ambient temp 20°C (68°F)
Rev. 03/2017
van! MP SHP SUBMERSIBLE GRINDER PUMP
GENERAL
KHG(X)5
MOTOR DATA
Pump Model
HP / Power Supply
5HP / 3 (1), 60 Hz
PUMP DATA *
Full Load Amps 208V
21 Amps
Date
03/06/2017
Start Amps 208V
120 Amps
Discharge Flange
2-1/2 & 3"ANSI Horizontal
Full Load Amps 230V
18 Amps
Grinder Ring
25 Slots
Start Amps 230V
90 Amps
Impeller Type / Std. Dia.
Recessed / 6.00"
Full Load Amps 460V
9 Amps
Three Phase
Start Amps 460V
45 Amps
Poles / Rated Speed
2 P / 3450 rpm
Insulation Class
F Class
PERFORMANCE CURVE
Head / [Ft]
160
140
6.0p„ pIA
5.75„DiA
120
5.50„ pIA
100
80
60
40
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 110
Capacity [USGPM]
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
* Performance with clear water and ambient temp 20°C (68°F)
Rev. 03/2017
94
64
362
SST LIFTING
HANDLE
7
30
1
68
34
o
NOTE' ALL DIMENSI❑NS FOR
REFERENCE ONLY
B
SE
01/06/2017
A
SE
03/26/2015
REV
INMA S
DATE
u-L,
u
w PUMP STANDARD H❑RIZ❑NTAL FLANGE
(2-1/2" OR 3" ANSI) STANDARD BASIN
PACKAGE DISCHARGE (2" PIPING)
ACCEPTABLE WITH MACERATED
SEWAGE SLURRY
2$
t
# DISCHARGE FLANGE "SLOTS"
FOR ❑PTI❑NAL 2,5" OR 3" ANSI
DISCHARGE, CLASS 125„ 4-BOLT
k+-'(Y
J I
®KEEN KEEN PUMP CO.
PUMP 471 US HWY250 EAST
COMPANY ASHLAND, OHIO 44805
PHONE: 419-207-9400
FAx 419-207-8031
7111E
3-7,5HP HIGH FL❑W/HIGH HEAD GR,
PUMP DIMENSI❑NS
SCALE
NTS
DWG. BY
SE
DA7E
01/27/2014
DWG. #
KN-28
REV.
B
BARNES®
Series SGV
Recessed Vortex
www.cranepumps.com
I&O Manual
Specifications:
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/ULApproved 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
Load
MOTOR: Design
Insulation
SINGLE PHASE
THREE PHASE
OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT
Sleeve, Oil Lubrication:
Radial
NEMA L-Single Phase, NEMA B-Three
Phase Torque Curve. Oil -Filled, Squirrel
Cage Induction.
Class F.
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.
Dual Voltage 240/480; Requires Overload
Protection to be Included in control panel.
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
Submersible Grinder Pumps
SGV5002L & SGV5022L ONLY
Series: SGV
3,5,7.5HP,
3450RPM, 60Hz
�' S GV3
NRTL\C
CENTRIFUGAL GRINDER PUMPS
CSA 108 - File No. LR16567
UL 778
Sample Specification
DESCRIPTION:
THE GRINDER PUMP IS DESIGNED TO
REDUCE DOMESTIC, COMMERCIAL,
INSTITUTIONAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
SEWAGE TO A FINELY GROUND SLURRY.
CRANE.
PUMPS & SYSTEMS
A Crane Co. Company USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598
SECTION 3B
PAGE 5
DATE 1/12
Series SGV
Recessed Vortex
BARNES°
www.cranepumps.com
Submersible Grinder Pumps
MO Manual
n
inches
(mm)
,
■
_=
='
_��a_
13.58
'
‘
(344)
7.50
1.50
U
i
(191)
(38)
28
(718)�
25
0Rorq
4.56
(116)
°
+ 9.12
�g
a (232)
11 �11
` =�ti
N,4,_,
a. . t,
-'
•1
FIGURE SHOWN WITHOUT LIFTING BAIL
10
�I
-1I1.
�-, 4.43
Ti1_
I
(1 13)
1
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 (.51 mm) O.D.
Temperature senso cord for all other models is 14/3 SOW, 0.55 (14mm) ± .02 (.51 mm) O.D.
Optional - Moisture and Temperature sensor cord for all models is 18/5 SOW, 0.47 (12mm) ± .02 (.51 mm) O.D., replaces Temperature sensor cord.
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.
SECTION 3B
PAGE 6
DATE 7/04
CRANE
A Crane Co. Company
PUMPS & SYSTEMS
USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598
BARNES®
www.cranepumps.com
I&O Manual
Series SGV
Performance Curve
3, 5, 7.5 HP, 3450RPM, 60Hz
TOTAL HEAD
METERS FEET
60 — 200
50 —
160
40 —
120
30 T
80
20 —
40
10—
U.S. GALLONS
PER MINUTE
LITERS
PER SECOND
Submersible Grinder Pumps
inches
(mm)
— 6.46 (164)
r H
6.25 (159)
6.00 (152)
_ 5.75 (146)
— 5.50 (140)
5.25 (133)
— 5.00 (127)
4.75 (
4.50 (114)
— 4.25 (108)
—4.12 (105
20
40
60
STANDARD IMPELLER SIZES
Pump HP
3.0
5.0
7.5
80
Impeller Dia.
5.00 (127)
6.25 (159)
6.46 (164)
100
V84798b
120
1 2
3 4
5 6 7
Testing is performed with water, specific gravity 1.0 @ 68° F @ (20°C), other fluids may vary performance
� CRAN Eel PUMPS &SYSTEMS
SECTION 3B
PAGE 7
DATE 1/14
A Crane Co. Company USA: (937) 778-8947 • Canada: (905) 457-6223 • International: (937) 615-3598
APPENDIX C
2017 Flow
Monitoring
Summary
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C� T E S
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.
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 2
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 3
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 4
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
5
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 6
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
8
7
6
c
_- 5
s
aa, 4
o
0
3
LL 2
1
Man Hole 748 Depth vs Velocity
• Man Hole 748 Lvl (in)
n anning's Equation Estir^=*�
•
•
•
•
•
r
2 3
Flow Velocity (fps)
5 6
160
140
120
w 80
y 60
40
20
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 748
1
n
I
- Observed
- Simulated
0
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 7
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
Flow Depth (in)
12
10
8
6
4
2
Man Hole 107 Depth vs Velocity
•
••
1
••-
1
2 3
Flow Velocity (fps)
4
5 6
180
160
140
E120
a
100
O
w
a) 80
an
czt
60
40
20
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 107
- Observed
- Simulated
0
4
8
12 16 20 24
Hour
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 8
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
14
12
10
c
t 8
-6_--
a)
a)
0 6
3
o
L
4
2
Man Hole 417 Depth vs Velocity
• Man Hole 417 Lvl (in)
• Manning's Equation Predic
•
•
•
tion
•
•
•
• •
• •.
••
_ a •
1
Flow Velocity (fps)
4
5 6
450
400
350
300
a
250
O
w
tu
a0 200
as
a,
150
100
50
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 417
I
i
- Observed
- Simulated
0
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB 9
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
Flow Depth (in)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Man Hole 114 Depth vs Velocity
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
s
•
••
•-
•
•
•
••
f
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Flow Velocity (fps)
200
180
160
l 140
120
O
w 100
a)
cc 80
;.
a)
Q60
40
20
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 114
Observed Simulated —
0
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
10
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
20
18
16
14
c
t 12
v 10
0
3
0
LT_
8
6
4
2
0
Man Hole 205 Depth vs Velocity
• Man Ho
le 205 Lvl (in)
• Manning's Equation
Prediction
•
•441111°11111111:•
•
•
•
•
••
••
1
2 3
Flow Velocity (fps)
4
5 6
1400
1200
1000
a
800
0
w
to 600
cd
s�
a�
400
200
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 205
- Observed
- Simulated
0
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
11
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
20
18
16
14
c
—= 12
t
+-,
ca 10
o
3
0
L
0
1400
1200
.1000
a
800
O
w
bA 600
ct
s1)
(1)
400
200
0
•
Man Hole 313 Depth vs Velocity
•
1 2 3 4
Flow Velocity (fps)
5
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 313
4
8
12
Hour
16
6 7
- Observed
- Simulated
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
12
TECHNICAL MEMO — 201 7 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
16
14
12
c 10
t
+_
v 8
0
3
0 6
LL
4
2
1200
1000
� 800
3
0
w 600
a)
wo
400
200
Man Hole 145 Depth vs Velocity
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Flow Velocity (fps)
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 145
- Observed
- Simulated
0
4
8
12 16 20 24
Hour
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
13
TECHNICAL MEMO — 201 7 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
12
10
2
8
o
v6
0
3
0
4
2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 290 Depth vs Velocity
80
70
60
a 50
O
4-4
40
a)
bA
� 30
a)
Q
20
10
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 290
0
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
14
TECHNICAL MEMO — 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
20
18
16
14
c
12
0
• 10
0
3 8
0
6
4
2
0
Man Hole 472 Depth vs Velocity
• Manhole 472 Lvl (in)
• Manning's Equation
Prediction
ft
•
••
••
0
0.5 1 1.5
Flow Velocity (fps)
2
2.5
3
250
200
150
O
w
cc 100
;-,
50
0
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 472
- Observed
- Simulated
0
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
15
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
20
18
16
14
c
_- 12
t
0 10
3 8
0
6
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Flow Velocity (fps)
Man Hole 28 Depth vs Velocity
•
•
•
• eill
91
6
7
8
200
180
160
140
a
`-' 120
w100
a�
ccV 80
60
40
20
Observed vs Simulated Flow for Manhole 28
4
8
12
Hour
16
20
24
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
16
TECHNICAL MEMO - 2017 FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY
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.
BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES
CITY OF MOAB
17
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
17.3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
8-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
MANHOLE NO.
748
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
rs-
d
107
Q
•
cal
417
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
17.3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
10-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
" 4?-
MANHOLE NO.
107
rr'1
tri
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan04.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
acROCzo
-0*417
107
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
t_ 3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
12-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
,20
MANHOLE NO.
417
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
ao
m
m
Q E3
s
� g�y3t
C3
� m �
c�
m
ra
co
MCMcralD1
tavka
ea
4
a
m
D 49
o �
TO
r -4114
age
p
c�
ea
TS
C.k7
023 Qp a caa gal +
i
s
�o
ao
m 113 ea
�a
~9
e
...............
r '�S'daaaaa. nao-ew.aa�
a
a
a
0
s
e
a
e
6
Y
s
WEI
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
1
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
r_ D Spanish Valley
NORTH:
\ K
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
10-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S SR O C I A T E S
'� c 'PA?-
MANHOLE NO.
114
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckle non 11/2/2017
CZ EEO
EEO
Regions
Z". TM a 20=2
(73 ECC) EC° n
0
PiR3D.?
EC ED m >D m
m
205
--------��`
ma a
EEO ID
EA
�xa
ECD
c"ii J
m •
> uagazoi
c�
ont
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
17.3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
18-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
2O
MANHOLE NO.
205
ealrr
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Protects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
ca
E150 Ig)
f 311:19 `550
Holiday
. - - G.s:,ufu
-44-290.
GA
COD
A 313
4�
€m
9.
pm
CIO
�a
4c
Ca
€a7
~ tx6Pcv
m
ITO
utcost€4
r <sg
Crl
CO
t�T3
41� CI7 CS
49 CB <SO ,CEI3 M CA 813
c�
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
t_ 3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
/F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
18-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
,20
MANHOLE NO.
313
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
i
m
1!9
175
am
a
09
03
no A
en
m
0) 02a
02
8) Cift
m
f3
6
a
Q
e:a
� £I
g fl
En
m
C�
p
�1
E7
q
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
r_„] Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
15-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C& A S S O C I A T E S
�p...4?
MANHOLE NO.
145
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
EEO
ca CE) m m
EZO 51
idle Ave
8'Li 'k
1111117%
iiaiivay Rd
al) m
a
m
m
a
CO
A 313
�7
ca
CO Q
ECxi
C�1
Co
CD
CID
an
Q
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
t_ 3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
10-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
,20
MANHOLE NO.
290
rtERAile
'.
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amcklnnon 11/2/2017
d 472
I
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
17.3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
150
300
Feet
18-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A TES
,20
MANHOLE NO.
472
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects\Flg ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amclannon 11/2/2017
Cil
8
cm to
e
a
LEGEND
Manholes
No Invert
Invert
Proposed Flow Site
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
t_ 3 Spanish Valley
NORTH:
�F
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
18-INCH
MOAB CITY
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C & A S S O C I A T E S
,20
MANHOLE NO.
28
P:\Moab CO Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\F0 ere 2-1 - FlowSltes.mxd amckln non 11/2/2017
APPENDIX D
Model Result
Mapbook
LEGEND
Manholes
• No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter
6" or less
8°
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..j Spanish Valley
NORTH:
0
SCALE:
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
MAPBOOK
INDEX
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
X
P:\Moab City Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects Figure Ma pBook Index.roxd bklrk 10/26/2017
MH4486
M H0530
MH4
MH195
'O
MH491
MH196
MH4
� p
,,� 6) N c�9
▪ O <2\o``b
/J 'IMH198
• IQ 4057.74
�\ / RIM 4063.54
MH 19� 92j
IE 4063.1., 09y�0
RIM 4068.1 `�Q � o
R
MH49.
\
Qts. �a
�� A
MH200 0
IE4067.3. ss�s�
RIM 4072 `,� G
,•,
,
. M089
•
,`
o Q^ MH180
��oIE4055.08
O RIM 4060
MH, 8i,
IE 4055.3 �,
RJKI 4060.84, �0 6, T,)
f s
A
MH26.1 OS`D
IE 4070.1'7 Q o
RIM 4075.6 Q
4 A
O
�~ 7�
0 O��
• ,
MH493
MH566
IE 4062116
RIM 4067.56
M\H4490
MH326
IE 4074.72
RIM 4078.29 .4
O
MF 494
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
.,..n,
1 L-U ....•
\
NORTH:
2
z
SCALE:
0
100 200
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
A-3
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
o�o� 1.3 MH501
-o P b IE 4052.:8 IE 4054.92
' " RIM 4060.A. RIM 4062.85
\,`,`"0�6,60 mod' N MH106
V IE 4055.5
Mfri180 RIM 4063.65
IE 4055.08
"HIV RIM 4060.74
IE 4055\34
XIM 4060'.,83 'o MH56^
��', p� IE 4061.2'
\ 0 6' \ems a RIM 4066.4
MH175
A •
G? MH57,0
QSOs� IE 4067`.79 0
`. Q RIM 4072`.$4
.
\ A \
MH3.26 Z�j��
IE 4074.72V
RIM 4)78.29 s,� `,4
MH572
''•_ IE 4072.96
MH2'02 RIM 4078.36
IE 4075.7
RIM 4079.8
n
M I- 494
O
MH481
MH482
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
0
MH483
MH484
MH567
IE 4064.9
RIM 4071.27
!179
MH504
IE 4064.47
RIM 4072.51
MH819
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
z
SCALE:
0
100 200
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
Feet
FIGURE NO.
A-4
LEGEND
7,>9
rDi
A2
06 2
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
— 10"
12"
F 15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
SCALE:
0 100 200
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
6-2
P:\Moab City Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects Figure Ma pBook B2a.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
o28 CD CO `-
a
AO'
•
M H 159 931,
IE RIM 4031993
A 44 8
)200
OS, 2
O
7,>92
P2001
6812
0
1785
MH160
IE 4034.16
IM 4038.31 -
(0 0)
a-- --
MH162
IE 4028.7
RIM 4037.9
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
Q
MH732
�
\
N.
\NN
N
MH498
;
MH4 Q\
MYi495
'
MH733
o--
MH564
Lo cm co co
i
1VIH�94
/
MH19.
IE 4049.65
� RIM 4056.51
\
.
0
MH496 v\\
N '0 v .
MH497
P0137
347
18
28
MH193 • 5 • '� •' g9
IE 4045.38 MH!186 MH1:. QO�� 1 M 6�9
"IM 4050.07 �p g6 �59
41D a5�
O M :7
MH357 IE 4041.:4 MH171
RIM 4046.2 • IE 4037.6
�, .7
, o RIM 40F19.55
s�o��
> O
�2
•
NNN 188 MH 183
QDA IE 4045.2
,\
0°RIM 4050.551 �i
MH191 QO�N3�,/ 1 ,7p O
x,v' o>A
,..,0
MH189 �% ��
b IE 4053.55
,RIM 4059.36 . IE 404V.77 M H1`52
RIM 405,5.27 IE 40409
0. \ �. RIM 4054,4 'o
p up 57-
(H485 Q V �S�O ��
vv, M 195 �);0-'(5'' ,o
o ,v ),
MH4 6 \ �, \MH181
neu-oa lE• 4055.34
784
MH0
•
MH580
o
� O
�w >
a cp -
o
RIM 4053.IE 4047. 1MH
MH180
IE4055.08
RIM 4060�4'
•�
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
�'{-
I•• I I s
1 L—U •'..
•
1 L I ��
�1'•1.
1 CL—I 7
•••,,
�
�. •t
����0
�
;
1 L-1�I ••.
�.._"... L—LJ
`'
T..''-
NORTH:
SCALE:
zooFe
o�
�go�o
et
oz
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASSOCIATES
� ��,,
FIGURE NO.
R
V
� ��oP Iii4 ��o� RIMo6o.8si
MH530vv o Q�p3 iRIM4063.54 Q �, �.��o•
v\ M H 196 `° co / I p , �
vv\ �,�MH491 \ I �` ,,
��,
rn�w
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
co
co r-
co coo a CO cr,M
a IE 4{40.3 a) "' m
a9 MH�96-- -
IE 4048.53
RIM 4(�56.88
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
p
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
A
�93
93
6'
MH163
IE 4022.89
RIM
p
68
8
026
48 4
609
�86
\�
MI-1171
IE 4037.E
RIM 4049.55
IE
RIM
-0Q�coz
7
`62.85
ro7� 60 `sd'
.`
Knvl 4u5u.uS
♦ MH361 co N
CO
IE 4036.38 o Co
N- a
N co
o - N RIM 4044.63 P0142
MH160 d Lc) Lc) N 331
IE 4034 16 2
--1
rn
= Moo
a i P0428
__ P0062 P0429
594 565 1 714
12 ; 1
•
PMH036
988
o
0
00
co cg
orn��
a
•--__-__
MH162
IE 4028.7
4035.7RIM 4037.9
RIM 4038 31 !
MH112 MH
IE 4037.81 IE 4019.09
RIM 4045.56 RIM 4046.12
P0801 co
661 MH161
o�om corn��
4 IE 4035.44 0 �' `� 0 `"
_ �_,_ RIM-4042.64 a
,
`,
LPs -10
\ rn 0)n M 11 MH
•P0608
IE 4040.61 IE 4142.7
RIM 4048.31 RIM 41150.13
'45
01 MH88 MH29�1 MH
IE 4044.69 IE 4048.02 IE 40
RIM 4053.37 RIM 4056.92 RIM 40E9.71
co
oa)LO0.'
o_
03
9IE 4055
41
RIM 4062.32
07
4
87
p0
4, 4 P0453
3 ' 644
3 3
3
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
�21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
_ Spanish Valley
co o � - -
M •65 o C° d
o IE 40�0.89 a
0 0, F. o RIM 4�45.29
cow aoo v co co t MH
0- N ; M •10 IE 40.6.49
RIM 41154.09
M 084 l IE 4043.57
RIM 4053.72
i s>oCo
MH167 `,�-'o'cs
�1 IE 4043.15 • - coco rn o
RIM4049.4 • o��o 000
MH170 `F SWTRUNK a p066 a
IE 4029.22 �\A 11788 768
RIM 4041.62 \\ 0 1 6 p06,
1.32 • 3 7S /6.,0 P0818
MH580
\ M 753 415
\ IE 4047.99 MH108 �rs3 415
\ \\ RIM 4052.79 IE 4046.82 1153
RIM 4054.82 •
o a MH414
`Jcfl o> o IE 4049.53
�� d'd, cP � rn rn rn MH416
> o 6 N CO RIM 4057.83
o IE 4051.9
\ RIM 4062.57
-
0
.o M H 169
7�j
MH172 7 d> --1MH755 •
4047.31 7c9`PP` MH 107
4053.57 o IE 4050.14
RIM 4057.34
• A \-0
MMH'8 \0cs' 0 �,��0
7�70 r MH729 0-, "' ' �
o
\
o'i
1'3 7 o
NAIL
A1 IE4052.:8 IE4054.92 N
RIM 4060. ��� 78 RIM MH106 ' 502
co
7j 0 IE 4055.5 U, o, �O
M �58
IE 4060.36
RIM 4065.46RIM
04
P0832 P0065
1666 1753
•� o 0 415 415
cn cn w 1151 1152
•' • •
•
MH417 MH418
IE 4055.2 IE 4059.61
RIM 4066.9 RIM 4072.11
,00
MH557
IE 4063.
4067.69
RIM
A�0
�8S �7
3
7752
MH560
IE 4066.63
4070.33
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
.
�.-•{�',
I
1 L-U .•
1 I �.�
1 CL17 1..
L-L-L-�� ♦�
•�**�
t
'� �
1 I �.
L L-� LJ
•��
`
ti..
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 goo zoo
z
0
Feet
z
MAPBOOK
CITY OFMOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASS 0 C I A TES
.��
FIGURE NO.
B_4
V
\ 7
p MH180 r MH5 e Qr7
9
,> IE 4055.08 MH565 7�`�O
o rn `saRIM 4060.74 IE 4061.23 A3
IM 4066.48�
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
M 1-114
MH 1 IE 4122`69
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
M
IE 4C60.2
RIM a
� 5 M2 M • g • IE 4108. 6 RIM 4129.74
IE H26 MH303 RIM 4118. 1
IE 4079.58 IE 4090.35 \
69 15 RIM 4075.76 Rjna L1086 99 'o
P0428
774
1
1
N
a�
PMH036
988
0
il 0
--
� o P0144
RIM 4095.25 o
� s rs
k.1
P0470
381 P0469
3 371
1
8 1
0
MF 12
IE 4' 20.6
•
MH318
IE 4055.87
RIM 4062.32
P0078
760
4
4
IE 4061671 03
RIM 4071.41
MF
IE 406
RIM 407
� co
pp4 o rn N NO-
7454 P0453 a °'
3 644
3 3
3
J
CP GCS Qs 131 v o � w
O N
31 o_
' 7 ��w -
43 u, r, N
98 o d cG\ °j N t
o
uper ,�
P0473
�� 401
3
3
_ -_- ------------------�-----
v1H756 MH39
IE 4071:74
RIM 4080.0$,
�,
IE MH6493
RIM 4078.9
P0782
395
8
22
a:,
0
a
---•
MH63 462 MF 58
IE 4083.59 IE 40g4.05 IE 4110.32
RIM 4088.42 RIM 4'
RIM 4099.75
P0781 P0780
MH727 395 P0779 _-_ � r O r
IE 4076.51 7 394 396 o d N o
RIM 4081.96 22 21 4 a
-,.-----___-_-_-_w_�-_-_-____-__
_______� MH67 MH329 -� +- -M 8
IE 4085.12 IE 4089.08 IE 4096.07
P0777 RIM 4090.6c.,-, -IM 4094.38 RIM 4101.17 •
605 MH339 0 CO � o MF
2 IE 4083.32 a IE 4111.92
2 RIM 4087.14 RIM 4119.42
- P0775
, 116
o N N = h r`
_ MH330 oo o o CO o
-i IE 4091.32 p � � P0121
--------- rn ,, N
MH 4097.62 N 563
19.65 co
LO
o .1-
o_
57
N
o
a_
P0755
RIM 4130.7
N
•
MF
IE
�4118.28
a) co co
13
5
P0050
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
- 21"
24"
30"
� 36"
42
Not Modeled
._..
i.._..i Spanish Valley
MH560
IE 4066.63
RIM 4370.33a-
� � MH561
0 4 � � IE 4068.27
,37RIM
MH338 IE 4087.45
�\ IE 4084.78 3
RIM 4087.98 RIM 4089.95 12
591
15
1002
7
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
IM 4072.02
MH331
93
74
•
MH666
IE 4068.88
RIM 4072.91
a m
o�
a
MHt33
MH363 IE 4093.56 IE 4196.4
IE 4070.57 N. 'IM 4099.29 RIM A
RIM 4081.52 o c`n0 c- N 0,RIM
0 N r`
O CCOO
P0478 a
270
1 MH332
1 IE 4097.54 __
•
MH8
101.9 IE 4113.42
4119.24
O
LO CO CO CO
dM
O
�oc�
a
MH7
IE 4116.47
RIM 4
25.57
•'�.� ��
�
I i_ �,
MH672 MHRIM 4103.54 MH334
IE 4071.63 IE 4071.96 IE 410028I
RIM 4082.9 RIM 4081.09 RIM 4106.38 M156
IE 4114.54
RIM 4
o)
0-
MH1
- IE 4118.01
RIM 4122.010
V Lo
� LC) L
O N
d
18.64
co
0-
P0747
- 452co
0
10
-
IE 41H8.33
RIM 4'27.63•
co cn
CO..�.
•
I '\
�1'•
t CL-I�
L_ L_ L_ I ,••�o�
t
�'� � ;•
1/4 .
L-I
%,
t4..._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 100 200
x
-
0
Feet
o
z
�HH2
42 IE 41 8.67
7d'5' 77 RIM 4 23.77
-7
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&AS cS /O C I A T E S
...0„,
FIGURE NO.
B_5
0 o N P2023
rio�o
d 692
0
0
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
MH14
IE 4 ,22.69
RIM 4129.74
-
MH53
IE 4145.01
RIM 4149.36
P0075
MF 12 '- 1778
IE 4' 20.6 MF 11 0
RIM 4130.7 IE 4137.79 0
RIM 4 46.69 MHi96 MH556
IE 4158.54
co Lo N co
IE 41{17.16 RIM 4165.84
o7r �LOT-� RIM 4'60.26
d od CO
•
MF13
IE 4118.28
RIM 4' 27.25
•
MH1(
IE 413092 N
RIM 413-.39a
P0755 P0050 P0754 P0753
591 1002 1387 878
15 7 7 4
93 • 74 • 74 ♦ 70 •
MH7 MH562 MH9 MH563
IE 4116.47 IE 4122 IE 4128.41 IE 4 32.18
RIM 4 25.57 RIM 4130.48RIM 4134.19RIM 4138.88
P0054
P0747 610
452 1
0 12 - ---�
10_ 1E4_119.75
• 413,
RIM 4130.15 MI1595 IE 8.44RIM 4146.59
IE 4130.89
RIM 4135.49
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
SCALE:
0
100 200
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
Feet
FIGURE NO.
B-6
MH686..
IE 3990.84'
RIM 3993.84
MH684
IE 3983.09
RIM 3992.8
P:\Moab City Sewer Master Plan14.0 GIS\4.1 Projects Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
z
SCALE:
0
100 200
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
Feet
FIGURE NO.
C-2
pp o �'
Ie MH708 h o
a Q�
I --•-O
V1H707 .....,- .IE 4007 05
P1530 1
ASS P1532 0� o RIM 4012.25 N
590 ysr7 37 o P0528
0 `• 696 - -
453
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
P0549 441 �111 26�Og N rn
MH699 P0601 MH718 610 N, 3 3 2 0 co o v
IF
,� 1 IF ar1RZT1 0 a
MH685
IE 3987.:
3992
IEM983 09
RIM 3992.83
1
0 3
POG00 IE 3984. 4i 489 5 � 3 i
213 8 Q. ou o 1 4012.�3 MH532
RIM 3996.79 27
2
MI4750 -
IE 3996.1
32 MH682 IE4002.4
4 RIM 4005.E •'' 1 Y MH753 �, IE 4010.1 "678MH�83 RIM 4001.1 t MH722I� 4003.69'-. R1M 4016.35 10 30RIM
IE 39G83 IE 3990.5 M �23 IE 4005.23RIM 40D8.16 .•". 78
RIM 3996.3 RIM 0 RIM 4017.83
RIM 3992.08 �� �
IE 4005.94
RIM 0 P0103 a N o
256
7 MH145
• 1 7 IE 4005.84
P0D32
8o
63
•
MH152
IE 4009.64
4022.59
P0444
621•
56
•
MH5.
IE 4015.44
RIM 4027.27
8"
10"
12"
15"
-N1H300 RIMV4017.00� 2601
IE 4007.23 CO m � � 60
RIM 4013.83 d N o 62
•
MH147
IE 4006.47
RIM 4017.81`
cam co 8 0
cri o N Lo
•
MH150 3.5
IE 4008.05
RIM 4019.2
N
0° )RIM
o 0
- -M 153
IE 4014.3
RIM_4022.5
rn rn � 0,
b OU
M ON
013'
Q ���
1g5 4.--
�3 MH157
IE 4020.07
• RIM 4028.77
MH158
IE 4020.27
RIM 4028.27
o
a
� 18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
�,-.�"� .`
♦ I
�I�`{.
1 L-U .'
.�
���
1 C L- 17 1'•1,.
1/4
.` 0
�.
1 I 17 �.
u
�••-•. `�,
;
�
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 700 200
ti
0
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
CBOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
��'
FIGURE NO.
^
1
�./
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
����r n , 0 ; -
a N
P 4 5 3 8
- - - 1 -
_ _ -
r 1 ) N c o 6 )
v - a
r
- -
L E G E N D
M a n h o l e s
O N o I n v e r t
" I n v e r t
B u i l d o u t I m p r o v e d
P i p e D i a m e t e r ( i n c h e s )
6 " o r l e s s
2 M , - M H 6 9 1
2 �� �� ��I
I E 4 0 1 6 . 1 4 6
_ _ -
- - - - - - -
M H
4 � 3 8 - ,
M 4 0 6 0 . 2 7
P 0 4 9 3
1 4 1 8
1 1
I
I 2 4 1
��M H 2 9 ��
I E 4 0 5 8 . 2 7
R I M 4 0 6 1 . 8 2
7 8
E 4 0 1 2 . 7 8
R I M 4 0 1 7 . 8 3
1 1 P 0 0 3 2
M H 1 4 5 2 6 0 1
I E 4 0 0 5 . 8 4
R I M 4 0 1 7 . 8 8
0
M H 1 4 7
I E 4 0 0 6 . 4 7
R I M 4 0 9 7 . 8 1
- o
w c o 8 o
c o c c n n 0 N c o
M H 1 5 0
I E 4 0 0 8 . 0 5
R �� 4 0 1 9 . 2
3 i 5
N
p 0 N
������
- - ��
M H 1 5 3
I E 4 0 1 4 . 3
R 1 M 3 0 2 2 5
M H 5 7
I E 4 0 2 0 . 0 7
R I M 4 0 2 8 . 7 7
R I M 0
I
M H T 8 1 I
I E 4 0 4 . 6 8 -
R I M 4 0 2 2 . 2 8 r - _
N r ,
o c o o 0 o N .
t l N c f ) P 0 1 5 1 P 0 5 7 0 a C D c o
P 0 5 6 8
4 7 6 2 7 3 2 8 3
6 1 g 6
_ "
M H 8 4
I E 4 0 4 - 7 8
R I M 5 5 . 7 7 1
M H 7 5
I E 4 0 2 7 . 5 1 c o
I M 4 0 3 2 . 5 1 o c o o
M H 9 0 d
P 0 1 5 0 P 0 5 1 5 P 0 1 1 3 I E 4 0 4 3 . 4 2
3 4 2 3 4 8 3 7 7 R I f y 1 0
4 2 2
P 0 5 1 3 ,
2 I
3
8 0 "
1 2 "
1 5 "
6 0 - - - - g 6
4 _ _ + _ _ _ _ - - - I - - - -
M
7 9 6 1 ` ` - - - - r - " " -
i 7 . 1 3
_
_ 2 M H 5 3 6
- - , M E
9 3 - M 8 0 1 M H 5 3 7 M E
8 5
8 5
6 2 4
I E 3
M H ��1 4 8 4
R I M 4 0 2 2 . 2 1 I E 4 0 1 9 . 6 3 I E 4 0 2 2 . 5 3 M H 9 3
R I M 4 0 2 4 . 6 3 R I M 4 0 2 7 . 1 3 1 1 I E 4 2 & . - 3
1 R I M 4 3 1 . 1 5
S
S
c o c n c o c o
N N , - -
a c ' ' S M 9 9
" I E 4 0
t - M H " 8 0 R I M 4
= I E 4 0 4 . 1 4
R I M 1 3 0 . 5 6 M r
I M L O 1 0 . 4 .
' 0 0 4 1 o N N P 0 4 9 9
' 8 0 P 0 5 0 3 = P 0 0 6 0 1 t l
9 8 2
6 3 1 5 2 7 M H 5 4 2 I S 1 5 7
1 8 3 I E 4 0 2 4 . 6 3 i 3 0 ��1 1 2 9 8
3 0 4
" R I M 4 0 2 9 . ' M H 1 ` M H 5 2 M
M 1 5 2 M H 1 5 1
I E 4 0 0 9 . 6 4 I E 4 0 1 7 . 1 2 I E 4 0 2 0 . 3 5 I E 4 0 2 1 . 5 7 I E 4 0
R I M 4 0 2 2 . 5 9 R I M 4 0 2 8 . 8 2 R I M 4 0 3 2 . 6 2 R I M 4 0 3 3 . 7 R I M
v ' , 1 -
0 ��o o
a .
P 0 4 4 4
1 2 , 4
6 2 1 P 0 4 4 2
5 6 1 3 5 9 M H 5 4 9
M H 1 0 0
6 1 2 I E 4 0 1 6 . 4 1 I E 4 0
A l / 4 6 " R I M 4 0 3 0 . 7 4 R I M 4
"
M H 5 4 8
I E 4 0 1 5 . 8 3 "
R I M 4 0 2 7 . 7 8 - p
N
��������
� ' - - �� P 0 4 4 6
2 2 9 5
6 0 6
4 1
M H 3 5 M
I E 4 0 3 0 . 9 4 I E 4 0 4 . 4 7 I E 4 0 3 6 . 6 7 Q 5 2 . 8 6
R I M 4 0 3 7 . 0 6 R I M 4 ' 0 4 0 . 1 R I M 4 0 4 1 . 6 7
u 7
w o o N o o
����0 �� a
A
"
- - - - M F 9 2
I E 4 0 3 4 . 9 7
5 . 0 7
3 2 . 8 2 R I M 4 0 4 1 . E
a ��o o
P 0 4 9 8 P 0 4 9 7
1 3 2 9 1 2 9 E
1 4 9 1 4 8
2 9 0 I I 2 8 9
5 1 ' M 9 0 M F 4 9 _
3 . 3 5 I E 4 0 2 8 . 4 9 I E 4 0 3 3 . 2 5
3 4 . 9 R I M 4 0 3 7 . 0 4 R I M 4 0 4 1 . 0 8
��o
o o ����N
a
6 . 0 4 M F F
3 4 . 3 4 I E 4 0 3 5 . 1 3
R I M 4 0 4
v r n o ' ) , -
N
o C O
a
I E 4 0 4 5 . 1 7 I E
R I M 4 0 4 9 . 0 2 R I M 4 0 5 3 . 9 8
O �� M
C D o )
d
"
M
I E 4 0 4 5 . 0 8
R I M 4 0 5 1 . 3 8
v
a c o � ' 7 1 -
P 0 4 9 6 P 0 4 9 5
1 3 0 5
1 3 3 9 1 3 2
2 6 4
2 6 5 . I I M
�� M H 4 8
I E 4 0 3 8 . 4 4 I E 4 0 3 3 . S , 1
R I M 4 0 4 5 . 0 9 R I M 4 0 5 0 . 9
O
C � ��
��������
- a
9 1 - M t g - - - - -
I E 4 0 1 5 . 1 3
R I M 4 0 5 2 . 2 6 R I M
1 3
v o "
a
P 0 5 0 5
3 9 1
1
1 M H 3 2
3 I
R
8 6 - -
P 0 4 9 4
1 4 5 8
1 1 8
2 4 5 I
M . 1 7
3 4
I E 4 0 4 9 . 6 7
R I M 4 m 5 8 . 0 5
_
M H 9 3
I E 4 0 4 9 . 1 3
R I M 4 0 5 3 . 7 6
P 0 4 9 2
4 8 6
��
M �� 9 4
I E 4 0 4 9 . 5 9
4 0 5 5 . 5 9
4
O �� P 0 4 8 2
R i 7 , v 3 7 5
d 1
1
- 1 8 "
2 1
��2 4 "
3 0 "
3 6 "
4 2 "
- N o t M o d e l e d
- ����
��. . _ �� S p a n i s h V a l l e y
M H I D P i p e I D
I n v e r t E l e v a t i o n C a C a p a c i t y m
p Y 9 p
R I M E x i s t i n g ( g p m )
B u i l d o u t I m p r o v e d ( g p m )
��, ��`
��' ��'
C " ����' "
1 ��' ��
1 L - I
I ��1 " .
"
`
I ��f& L - L - L - U , ' ��O " t
���� L - L -
f&��
1 ���� U " "
L i
��" " _ . " ��.
` ' y ��u
N O R T H :
S C A L E :
o + o o z o o
M H 1 1 3
1 5 E M
J ��4 0 1 . 5 3 N h r n I E 4 0 3 2 . 0 9 I E 4 0 3 6 . 6 5
8 r o c h R I M 4 0 3 7 . 1 4
��t I M 4 0 3 2 . 7 5 a �� o R I M 4 0 4 6 . 0 8
c o
" M 3 6 2 o m o ' ��
I E 4 0 3 3 . 7 o _
R I M 4 0 4 1 . 9 5
�� ��
o M
a
M H 6 7 5 I E 4 0 4 6 A 8 '
9 0 R I M 4 0 5 3 . 2 8 I E
I E 4 0 4 3 . 9 1
R I M 4 0 5 0 . 0 1 R I M
a ��
-
- - -
M H 8 9
- I E 4 0 4 0 . 3
M H ��3 1
4 0 4 6 . 7 8
4 0 5 4 . 9 8
- -
I I E 4 0 4 8 . 5 3
' R I M 4 0 5 6 . 8 8 k i w i
o
F e e t
M A P B O O K
C I T Y O F M O A B I
T A R Y S E W E R
M A S T E R P L A N
B O W E N C O L L I N S
^ & A S S O C I A T E S
C f ��` �� ����
F I G U R E N O .
C - 4
7 , _ c o c o N N _
�� c o
r ` w ! M H 3 6 1 a o
o o o r n N I E 4 0 3 6 . 3 8
0 - " " ' R I M 4 0 4 4 . 6 3
4 u 5 u . u . 3 -
= m o o -
a
I
}
P : \ M o a b C l t y \ S e w e r M a s t r P l a n \ 4 . 0 G I S \ 4 . l P r o j e c t s \ F i g u r e M a p B o o k . m x d I s M r k 1 0 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 7
N0)co�--
0 CO
a
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
P0513
346
4
31
___J_____�
IE
RIM
P0494
1458
z45iii
M
IE 4049.67
RIM 4Q58.05
P0482
375
1
1
________I•---
M•
IE 4030_14-
RIM 4
_
67.57
p)
•
MH556.,
IE 4174.84~
RIM 4178.84
0
L $-
r - CO CT)
,a
- -
r _ -
�- -
P0676 P0031 P0675
722 407 1238
16 16 15
18 18 17
y
8
10"
12"
15"
MH
M 38 - RIM 4(65.2
4052.86
4060.27
OD N,r�
0 CO _
a
--
6 MH341 M �25
IE 4062.14 IE 4067.13 IE 4080.88
RIM 4066.36RIM 4074.63 RIM 4088.25
P0693 P0692 P0691 P0047 P0728
P0043 1073 1216 2478 2205 MH540
1241 915
3
4 2 1 2 2 IE 4171.84
1 • 2 2 RIM 4178.44
7 • MH541 •
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42
Not Modeled
._..
. Spanish Valley
I.._..I
N
P0493 0 m
O
141$ a
24
47'' rn N
o v 00 rn
0 0 N.
o_
• •
IE MH73
MH71
• MH69 IE 4073.18 IE 4081.62 IE MH72 IE 4126.44
MH70 4093.26 4104.77 RIM 4131.44
IE 4056.68 RIM 4099.56 RIM 4111.67 0 o
RIM 4078.88 RIM 4087.62 o
AIM 4069.83 r` b � '"
o_ o
• P0699 P0044 P0698 0696 •
MH45 471 501 394 P068� P1190 • CI MH539
IE 4055.57 3 z 8�g 0 IE 4'
5 1 RIM 4125.6
RIM 4068.56 7 6 4 1 0 MH39 r
Al'
MH551 0
IE 4151.55
r` -, � to r;
N � 'IM 4155.2
8 ` N N
o_ 0 MH554 A
RIM 4157IE 196 93S2p
o
o, 0 7
N N N N
19.5 rn
-o
� o� MH544
MH574
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
�.
,. r,
M---------------r-'----------•--r- o N
MH44-- MH43 MH42 MH41 IE 4098.82 o o n n
IE 4056.3 IE 4069.64 IE 4075.58 IE 4082.11 MH40 RIM 4108.57 o_ °
RIM 4067.75 RIM 4075.46 RIM 4080.48 RIM 4091.31 IE RIM 409.33
N N M L
o o MH547
P0091
- IE 4112.34
679 MH664
1 IE 4064.28 RIM 4119.6£
RIM 4067.88 MH592
1---_B
•--MH46
cP � A
IE 4155 IE 4'177.61
RIM 4158.5 RIM 4181.61 O. S36
M1-1545., 0
_ MH 4��24 I 4183.5 \ O
IE 4155. ' 0 9 p-23 RIM 4187.33
• RIM 4158.62 O 304 P3022 MH589
0
rn 0 0 IE 4157.15
0 RIM 4160.45
o U ��", MH582 0
oo IE 4156.48
MH588
4159.98
� ••„
�••�,
.
�,�.•
! EI
I� ‘•
•♦,•
t&
�'
1 .,
" L-L-L-
-o IE
IE 4110.36 IE 4156.79 046
IE 4057.64 RIM 4114.96 00u0 0o P0058 RIM 4161.04 P 157
o co o RIM 4�166.54 P0424 P0045 P0�19 6 8 6
P0489 d N- co
`� I 886 903
P946 12- 11 8
„..
♦'� L_L_J
ti ._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
o 100 200
385
1
'
1056
1056
43 40 946 3� MH 5 MH55
132 129 128 38 1Z� 16 IE 4118. 4 IE 4132.58
128 IE41►7.17
s "
cp
s,
`�
�
MH54
IE 4141.3
RIM 4146.1
1 M
20 . RIM 4127. 4 RIM 4142.C2
BRIM
MH29 IE58.61H1918�
IE 4058.27 RIM 4065.�3
RIM 4061.82
co
co co O coco d-
a
MH17MH60 41 .4 0 0
IE 4069.18 0 5 0
RIM 4073.9E IE 4080.1 IE 4091.81 IE 4100.E o���os `�o "o
RIM 4086.1 RIM 4097.37 c' r'
RIM 4108.7 �� o
o
P0426 P0059 P0795
899 792 984 Alir
4 2 1 M H 14
8 • 6 1 MH:1 IE4122.69
ti
Feet
°
MAPBOOK
CITY OF M OAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
•
MH35 MH22 MH23 • IE 4108.:6 o RIM 4129.74
IE 4060.2 IE 4071.0E IE 4079.58 MH303 RIM 4118.' 1 u oo
?Inn 4069 15 RIM 4075.7E ajnn a G �� IE 4090.35 e's `rs
DA
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
_5
N
o CO ,- co
a
-... ����
tO
vv
-
\
\
\
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
LEGEND
A0j
•- '496 7S
O
MH589
IE 4157.15
RIM 4160.45
P0046 p0718 MI52
1157 855 IE 41 3.95
6 2 RIM 4168.45
8 µ 4 ______ ~�
MH5v MH553
IE 4132.58 o IE 4156.8
RIM 4142.62 Q", oRIM 4161
d' cP
0
O0
\ �scP� �t9
i
MH14
IE 4122.69
RIM 4129.74
'*
6g2 76
7
MH114 - o
IE4141`3 �,o�
RIM 4146.\ >> S;•
ioti-trit
IE 4145.01
RIM 4149.36
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
▪ 15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
z
SCALE:
0 100
200
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
C-6
P�\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
PWWTP
101018 IE
1818 RI
3435
475 P0243
955.5 4182
3965.1 1577 P0239
1 11337
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
BUildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
-
M
478
� -- 00 o 1576—
MH476 �, 9.1 rp � 1145
3954.97 —' w r" o
- IE
z
i RIM
-
M 0
„ I. 3952.49
RIM 3957.69
54.23_— ----IE
RIM 3967.87 MH220
965.03 IE 3962.71
RIM 3967.09
0 0 o N.)RIM
ti `'' 4,
P2003
11055
0
1813
;Al
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
......r-T`
•
� '°
.‘.._.. L-���u
*..._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 100 200
i
2
o
Feet
z
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
C &ASSOCIATES
6�� a-�%r920�/i .-,
L� ))
FIGURE NO.
D-1
_
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
'n co rn
P0239 o rn � N
11337 a
71-
P0327 P0179 A P1820 N o M
P0315 M
P1803 4162 m o N v 4407 a
P01950 MH777 4985 3753 MH215 3955 1369 °o° 1366
IE 3968.726 1411 1370 IE 3971.83 1368
1413 861 851 MH776
30 P0326 P0166 P10'9
PO 1 1039 MH290 83C
1746 MH408
85g 1367 IE 3978.47 76 IE 3982.42 75
0 85 RIM 3987 62 85
851 RIM 3986.17 •
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
576
914 RIM 3973. _ M
MH317 MH771
1
1145
iv! RIM 3983.31 IE 3981.11
MH212
MH409 IE 3969.72 N�
nJ
IE 3965.2 RIM 3973.78 Q� 3°�
RIM 3971.75 6
MH411
IE 3971.81
RIM 3975.41
M 650
6
6
r
Co
v
W o
A W N W
� w o
A
-
MH410
O
MH412
O°'--
cm o n M
• IE 3973.77 IE 3975.49 MH 34
IE 3962.13 RIM 3986.31
MH603 RIM 3979.28 RIM 3981.21Buildout
v rn IE 3973.85 RIM 3984.43
M N o o
a � RIM 36977.4 -0
o-- - - - - - -
• MH635 MH636
MH604
IE 3974.46
M N. o o RIM 3978.71 N
a� •--------�f1H606 MHC 7 -MH638-o cc
MH605
IE 3974.9 in
RIM 3979.15
00in00
a MH639 440
0-- --- ---�- - - -- M-0,
MH607 MHI 608 MH609
IE 3975.41 \
RIM 3980.11 ,
o MV
O - -- - --- �\ m���
o- a
MH611--------MH612
rco
�irnoo O q
O V MH617
M
rn
•
RIM
r`
1
O
3979.07
3986.97
MH313
IE 3983.41
3990.69
P0273
329
13
13
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
�30"
36"
42
Not Modeled
•_..�
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
MH649 a
MH
P2003
MH618
a MH641
OMH413
68
o�^o •'"_ MH633 O N co co
Q op', o H632 -- - - - -0 a M N
o J�13984.39 MH631
I MH�787 1 �M 3987.76 M 0 pp
• A MH625 MH623
MH613 0 T -, ^- IE 3983.08
9 o o I
w o - -
IE 3976.42 4' Q h o RIM3986.76
RIM 3979.5 �03Sj 0- R
• 0e'� S MH626 MH627
MH614
IE 3976.66 0 p03, H620 M 628
RIM 3979.76 0�2 ry^^ c o I� N
0 3981.17
-0 M o in
MH615 0 Qo �� o IM 3985.67 _ o
IE 3977.39 o MH621 a
RIM 3980.89 • P037,5.`
P0376
P0308 IE 3978 05 042 MH642 505
463 RIM 3982.12
3 MH619 IE 3980.08 0 -----------------0
MH211
IE 3984.99
IM 3992.93
--
MH210
3986.09
3993.79
P01E
3934
1234
I
1
-.
1 ��
1 L-U •.
U �••
�•
1
1
CL-17 1,•
,.♦
moo`
I� t
L-U
0
1 1-1 •`.
I I
‘••_., LJ
�• I
L-LJ
110055
3/0
O.
IE 3978.6 MH643 MH644
684
1813
RIM 3983.73 IE 3983.37
MH266 p0025 P0304 RIM 3988.42P0303
MH2O9
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 goo zoo
I--E
o up
o
a
3978.3899 502
479
RIM 3981.3 478 4
4 2 MH259• o `ti vco coo
IE 3987.92
IM 3993.45
+ IE 3988.63 a
P06
02
0
Feet
•
v
CV N
o m 7r
a
M �61 M 260 RIM 3990.78
fV1H262 IE 3982.37 IE 3985.32 MH687
IE 3979.4 RIM 3985.42 RIM 3988.07 IE 3989.51
RIM 3982.65
RIM 3993.32
P0305
P0306 I
332 375 R
4 1
4' i 1 • rn � M
86
35� A0
3s 0
o
MH688 �'�, O
3991.17 ��
M 3994.87
MH8
IE 398
'0.
672 My-1704
/'A
/ 3)477
3
36
8�
36
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
• MH264 MH263 o M ,_ M
IE 3980.26 IE 3981.31 IE 3982.61 a
RIM 3982.01 RIM 3983.61 RIM 3985.21
RIM 39
.79
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASSOCIATES
rp �� �,��
� �� 202E
(�
FIGURE NO.
D-2
MH686
N
b00
13
10
32
IE 3990.84'
RIM 3993.84IF
_
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd IsMrk 10/26/2017
P1019
P1021
9
63
P1022
54 `n
54 a�� �
•
_
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
75
85;
MH224
a�NN
•
MI-122�i
7,
1 MH226
• 64 •; MH757
MH227 MH228
IE 3991.69 IE 3993.47
•
•
MH234
IE $993.79
MH236 MH
MH235 I IE40)0.28
IE 3998.05
IE 3� RIM 4
136
09.58
P
IE 3984.91
RIM 3990.07RIM
o � OD 00
a
�~MH222
00
IE 3986.15 IE 3988.79 IE 3989.61 (0 o IM 3998.61
3991.27 RIM 3994.59RIM 3995.09 � _ co rn
a
-
-
,o
MH22 P�
IE 3993.5 6
RIM 3998.62 6,
P0015
MH2
186 IE 399
2 RIM 39
_�_�___•
11 H223
M
IE 3987.52 RIM
RIM 3991.27 3993.13
---
RIM 4000.65RIM
o 00 r r-
a� a
P0081
2
0 ��MH31
.95 IE 3905.59 •
.58RIM 100.25 MH371
IE 3995.78
RIM 4Q01.51
rn 1
O i
4001.19
I
I
N LO O N
- I a "'
e
}
•
r
�
o co � �
a °'
-
\ MH291
IE 4001.96
AIM 4006.08
P1252
358
4
10
80n
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
N N N
a'
•
MH314
)273 IE 3988.61
329 RIM 3992.81
13
O N N
- a'
P0016 -
371
11
11 MH232
O
a N i 0) u n n
CO
a
�
=
i
i
MH233
•ID •
MH292
IE 4002.81
RIM 4006.71
1a0
P2182 PZ MH803
373 3a�' IE 3998.81
RIM 4002.91
3 1z- -0
--3--- I MH804
MH8O2
;'
/�-
/
O /
/
�/
,/ ,
P0156
324
23
23
"'
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
I�~
Spanish Valley
.._..I
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existingm )
(gpm)
BUIICiOUt Improved (gpm)
-
P
3334
1234
684•
A
0
O6
0
MH6
IE
RIN
•
IV1H221rr MF��25 IE 3997.19 IE 3998.33 0 Ln
IE 3986.85 IE 39$8.15 RIM 4000.72RIM 4000.8 N
RIM 3993.78 RIM 3994.45 a
MH372
IE 3908.18
RIM-40-0-4.18
MH809 IE 3998.47 MH138 •
IE 3997.79 RIM 4002.97 IE 4004.663
RIM 4002.29 RIM 4008
t - •
MH779
IE 4003.54
RIM 4006.8E
rn li
- o �
----�- - >vI1�78o
-�wo
� P0560
/ 593
50
-s.�s�
,
U�.
1 L- `.
MH1
�'15
•---- 9>9'
•
MH036 �` IE 400315
Q 21) RIph4003.85QQr
,
15 CO
N co N o
9 P0576 7 O N W
0_
P0578 P0160 P0577 P015 I i ,-
161 P0579 4755 4680 3409 8533 5813 MH2O3•• 3524/,
4174 1231 1231 1231 1169 1168 IE 4001.74 1170
1231 685 • 683 6g2 614 i 616 gNV14008.67 613 N
{
MH785
-�__
1`„_,.�.
•��
MH786
IE4006.73
RIM 4013.27
P02 70
209
37
44
.�,
I I
��I-1 \-
".....,'•
��`
� �� �.
I
U
I_U
`'
MH2O6 M t 05 MH 04 529 ' a Nt...'
MH2O8 MH2O7 IE 3993.38 IE 3 9.8
1E 3997.82 4004.01
IE 3988.98 IE 3989.31 RIM 4000.11 TRIM 4004.52 RIM 4 06.3 �1 IM 4008.66
RIM 3995.98RIM 3995.61 0^
I�' Q ') O '
O
00 I
672 MH704.
P IE14003.39
MH0705 MH701 o ` o RIM
IE 3986.86 •
� O -O
c0 N
--4ri
H143
4014.29
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 700 200
F
-
Feet
0
z
MAPBOOK
An
0
3)677 MH 3M
4
0
S
3983.36 P0610
3s
3993.79 O 383 MF�706
708 34
34
MH374
IM 3997.16 IE 4003.13 p MH142
702 I 11 MH373 IM 4007.88 OS87 IE 4009.91
I RIM 4014.56
I IE 4002.1 2j4
-H07 RIM 4007 8 ` ~ o _ 7 p0532
'I
o _. `1 220 N �n
P1530 A i rn o'� 1 � � III N I,-
I 7 0 `� 1 A o�,_v
O 590 7gS37 P1532 } .,« __----9�4 a P0528
453
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
P0601
P0549
MH718 MH68� 610 N, 3 3 70 441 I MH6921-,, 26', 0�
1 0 C7
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASS 0 C I A T E S
C ���
FIGURE NO.
D-�
IEn3983 09
r
POG00 489 ^O, V
IE 398474 ^`
IE 4006.63 Q g
2
2
IE 3990.5 Q w rr 1 ` RIM 4013.13 �o' 0
t
27 �`
232 RIM 3996.79 13
30 3996.3 MH750
-,' .,,`` MH532 `�
MH683 'RIM
MH752 1V}H'i53
IE 3996.1
IE 470 9 � -. JE 4010.1 MH678
IE 4002.4 �,, 4003.69
�iE�3�$Zi / IE 40Q
8
RIM 4001.1 I
I RIM 3992.08 RIM 4005`' RIM 0 RIM 4C1 IE 4012.78
08.16 '•RIM 4016.35
RIM 4017.83
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Mast r Plan14.0 GIS14.1 Projects\Flgure MapBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
coLo
Ea"
LEGEND
Manholes
O
No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
MH136
IE 4000.28
RIM 4009.58
MH369
IE 4013.96
0--
o °
N� o ,1e8
�\ MH291
E 4001.96
PIM 4006.08
RIM 4017.96
P3582
4
10
MH.00
IE 40 6.04
RIM 4120.77
�
-, --
-o
oNON
P0939 P9492 P04021
2 2 1- ----
13 13 712
- -O
MH742
--�
�\
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
♦ MH292
E 4002.81
RIM 4006.71
- ---- -MH780
%
F'05
593
C23
5C
MH411
IE 4004.32
RIM 4910.72
O
%
P0156
50 324
23
MH
IE 40
RIM 4u
o m N
a
H-
MH•90
IE 40
RIM 4n16.96
o
o m N �
P0110 tl
565
41
20 M 121 M 122 M 123
2.34 IE 4016.1 IE 4025.2 IE 4038.74
15.39 RIM 4021.3 RIM 4038.9 RIM 4043.72
•
1.46 I MH692
� I IE 4025.78
`' N I21M 4028.33
++
P0563: P0155 o_ N = P4364
372362
22 19 6 P0508
22 19 6 ---� __l� 753
30"
36"
42
Not Modeled
•- ..�
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved m
p (gpm)
�•��• ,�
--�-�r'
-,
.�`�.
1 L-U �'...?
•-
� MI
9 H381-
--
My785
r=-
•
RIw14003.39
IE
RIM
?
Ir
-
�V1H143
4014.29
�- ~~-- -
MH142
4009.911
4014.5E
•
MH786 MH527 IE 4013.28
RIE IM 406. 27R 1 008.05 RIM 40
4014.59
IL ����
Cl.
■
co
co co
un co -
a
IE �4015.59 IE 40294.3
8.08RIM 4020.34 RIM 4a30.55
1v��
MH116
IE 4018.E
RIM 4018.5E
P 1869
H792
450 MH74
MH790 1 IE 22.55 IE 4025.55
IE 4041594 MH81 OP---------__1
RIM 4047.79 IE 4057.05
RIM 4070.3
o a,
�oNco
0 71-
a
•
MF82
-- IE4051.09
RIM 4060.32
Map------- -
IE 4072.Q5
RIM4077.d5
I I ��
E 1-1 1,�
��
'm00%
�� L-L- 1�
17 �.
I
U
•- I
L_ LJ
% .
*.,.._
�
_
MH743
- IE 4014.52
RIM 4018.87
P0270 P0521 P0267
209 MH531 282 294
37 IE 4011.71 27 20
21
- IE 4019.18 1 RI 4025.1 RIM 4032.4 O
RIM 4022.8 MH791 Ln o ch N.
MH789 IE 4020.07 MH382 o_
IE 4018.95 RIM 4023.67 + IE 4041.33
P0153 co
N m IM 4021.75 P1947 No 03 m #21M 4044.03
N
a 394 o_
`� i
9 � i
�7
f
NORTH:
SCALE:
o zoo
o 100
F
0
Feet
MAPBOOK
44 RIM 4017 78 29 - ~3p3
- -- -----0- �fV1 97�� --
MH9
347
M
I � N 6) � ,
E.
P0528
453
--
IE40
MH302 MIH788 �, IE4039.36,
IE 4017 94 �� IE 4026.39 RIM 4057.75
IE 4013.61 RIM 4031.49 RIM 4045.11�'
RIM 4019.11 RIMI14024.14
o (7,Lo rn
a
1
0, co • -
9MF ,
-
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASS 0 C I A TES
FIGURE NO.
D ��
2
2
`) M c- ,- MH691
IE 4016.146
• -- -
H678
E 4012.78
RIM 4017.83
MH781
IE 4014.68
RIM 4022.28
MI C75
RIM 0 s
IE 4027.51 0 , 0
• fIIVI 4032.51 a Oro
F -_ * { _ 1 1 •1 a
! _ -
MH84
1E-4047.68
AIM 4055.71
Aloe City Sewer Mast rPlar04.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \ Figure MapBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
-- -
I
611.171111P-
_ . •
7
M H 742
M•
IE40i2.J4
RIM 4078-.74
M
00 o N N
a
IE 403
RIM 4071.33
Lc)
,N�co�
cM N
d
'
9
_ __-
P0118 P1666
643 793
8
12 :c9°
-1----------- MH-�b8----------- _-__----M7.6 Q9
.08 IE 4080.E IE 410�:�95, e,
RIM 4086.E RIM 4113.4
„s
``.
•
MH677
IE4117.48
RIM 4121.48
- -
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
/,...r-1 .`
1 L—U .'..�
�.
'
E=
I ,,�
.„,�
�, L— L— L— �,,
'� L—L—L— a
I �.
L—L—L— ,11
U
�"-••��`
��
*..._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
o 100 200
0-�
Feet
MAPB00%�
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
. 6.„,„„
6
FIGURE NO.
5
-
CO)
o M .- cv
•
- MH77
IE_4960.14
-
.RIM 4067.57
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
,
r
y
+
o � - �
a
Qp0
P0225
582
32
5o
'6\
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
50
82
k
MH471
IE 3956.5
RIM 3963.8
• Nc000CO
a
•
MH472
IE 3
RIM
_... co
,..., co ,.....
aN_N�
MH
IE 39
RIM 3
P0220
1261
208
485
56.3
65.4
73
5.9
4.8
-p
„, ,
6, c0 N N
MH4 Ap
IE 3955. cD,
RIM 3964. so',9
pWWTP
101018 IE
1818 RI
3435
MH169
IE 3157.3
RIM S63.8
rn
o�N�
a�
MH470
IE 3956.8
RIM
_-
•
T-It'
475 P0243
955.5 4182
3965.1 1577
1154
MH468
IE 3962.7
RIM 3968.6
3965
-
y
- -
P0239
11337
8"
10"
12r
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
,�....r T\
n.
; I \
I1 ;..,,.
•`..
`tt
i .�` L—L-0
j L—L—L—L—IUI *.
�.._., u
.., I
J I
f`..`-
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 100 200
1,
Feet
z
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S 0 C I A T E S
C rpm � ,_-_))
FIGURE NO.
o M N-
MH478
00 O 1576
MH476 U, (494 A 1145
3954.97 —' Q'
N 8 o 09
a
IE 3954_Z3 _I_E
IM 3965.03 RIM 3967.87
:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 1012612017
Pp222
P0225
582
H467 MH466 r
IE 3964.4 R M3972.2 CO CD
`V
35p RIM 3970.3M°'
q\ a pq}g3
M co C54.
a OIE
P0003
MH287 426
3978.28 13
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
p
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
50 •
82 �/
/ IE 3972.2
RIM 3983.93 13
RIM 3979
_____ MH312
IE 3978.45
RIM 3983.9
N- N- N. co
o�°�
a
-•57
P0130
457
29
39
y-W~
MH468
IE 3962.7
RIM 3968.E
8"
10"
12"
15,E
v
Lo o N
IE 3977.85
RIM-3-983.05
o�o�
• E cr--
MH320
POOC6
P0082
IE 3967.8 P0083 950
'IM 3972.76 P0085 P0084 1639
P0087 P0414 P0086 1943 2056 2071 143 23
I
" d1il
18"
21"
_
24"
30,E
� 36"
42"
Not Modeled
Spanish Valley
i„_„i
a -
3284 3438 2075 159 154 I 149 ��
181 179 160 154 147 141 •
207 206 164 • 159 • M0 4 I � MH251
MH176 -_ � IE 3976.79
23
MH321
IE 3967.58
RIM
MH26
M• 8 M 27 IE 3'973552 IE
IE 3972.51
IE 3969.54 IE 3970.8E RIM 3978.32 RIM
RIM 3976.71
72.7 RIM 3974.47 RIM 3675.63
Is.) CO o � I, '� 1
w o
3974.48 IE 3975.51
3 78.71 RIM 3980.19
I
� I M p70
i I
_ -RIM 3983.24
_ o v
_._ �_
a
P0010
144
14
P1131
38511
11
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing m
g (gp
Buildout Improved (gpm)
p
. -
V MH671
MH322 MH656 �.
IE 3966.31 1if,
RIM 3971.83 1 _ -
-..
MH669
--
O. - M 667 IE 3
RIM 3984.22
M•
o �n Ln Ln
a °'
9MHT509 III
0 �
a -
IE
RIM
_
�'
M •48
3980.78
3985.31
�•
1 L-u
.
1 I I .\
1•
I7 •S•
...,
�' L_0 •eta'
v oo NI
a N Nf
M
IE 3965.91
_iiiiimpimemmairit _ W
a t
• 01
1, il
MH657 M
•23
t �
L.--__
- M 660
or r
---MH66111.Wil
P1767 P1766
20 328
4p 0
3 6
E
:,1
�� a
Ai. ei ■
gra.
--
P1765
586
0 I
3
• •
•MH407
MH350
IE 3581.1
RIM 3985.5
CO
_ C)
N N
I E M
(0'
♦
♦
•-
�
` ����U ,••
I
I I
�..� L-L-L-L-L_I
,�
. \ L-LJ
L._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
o goo zoo
_
o
Feet
z
RIM 3972.54
COLO
N.
00N.N
0_ N
P0239
11337 MH218
M 659
P0180 P1803 P0315
5195 MH777 4985 3753 MH215
IE 3968.726 1411 1370 IE 3971.83
413 RIM 3g77.37
•
MH772 MH 73 MH774
IE 3978.58 IE 39 7.81 IE 3978.92
RIM 3982.8 RIM 3 82.1E RIM 3983
�� N-NOM
COON�I M
Ul O d
Co
P0179 P1820
P0327 4162 4407
3955
1368 1369 136E
aS 861 851 MH776
MH775 IE 3982.35
IE 3980.02 RIM 3986.88
77RIM 3984.23
M 663
P0326 P0166
P8 g1 174E 1039
1367 76
• 0 85
851
P10'9
MH290 830
IE 3982.42 75
RIM 3987.162 85
•
L
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASS 0 C I A TES
�+ ���
FIGURE NO.
���%
^T576 IE 3965.21
914 --- - f3 IE 3981.11
1145
MH317 MH771 RIM 3983.31
Rinn �n�•
0309 IE 3975.49 MH634 RIM 3986.31
MH212
• IE 3973.77 N
MH409 IE 3969.72 403 IE 39 2.13 � N "
MH648 MH603 RIM 3979.28 RIM 3981.21 rn rn m
IE 3965.2 RIM 3973.78 31 0 eN o o IE 3973.85 RIM 3 84.43 a en " �
RIM 3971.75 IE 3970.93 3j a RIM 36977.4
RIM 3974.6 _ 0MH636
IE 3979.07
IM 3986.97
P:\Moab Gary\ Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Protects \Flg ere Ma pBook.mxd Mork 10/26/2017
P0003
426
997.
997.87
P1052 A RIM 4004.67 ,o
583 P1109 Q� <oco �0�
3 S 13 °� ��
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
3 2 * 2 N
�\
MH803vy
4046.2
4054:8
,
o
O
'
NZ�
1
MH
4020.413
RIM
3
S
\
\ _-
o
/
135
0
A<P
MH2 Q�3g� 2 `9' R)
89847
-
P40�1�0
IE 398$8 IE 1
RIM 3985 6 RIM 3991.0E
o
P0129
663 a '
' 26
29
33 H846 MH347 MH349 Q i o MH812
IE 3989.62 IE 3994.16 IE 3999.24 h IE 4011.42
RIM 3995.58 RIM 4000.66R1M 4004.75 RIM 4018.62
or')
MH345 Q`Lc6\ ,
IE 3988.62 P1108 P2204 ^b P0005
RIM 3992.87 686
20 20 194 An
30 30
24 u
8"
10"
12
15"
36
39
•
MH810
MH255 MH344 n A
y
P0010
245
14
14
MH256 IE 3985.48 IE 3987.57 IE3993 88 IE 3996.27 MH2
22
IE 3980.3 RIM 3997.88 RIM 4001.32 IE 3999.62
RIM 3984.98 RIM 3989.88RIM 3991.41 RIM 4004.72 p
MH3r- `-'9A 6
IE 4005.0A 7,5' P0277
RIM 4009.14 2' 948
P0006 P1073 P0289 P0288 P0287 1
732 MH128 1 • IE
18"
21"
24
30"
950 1173
23 21
23 • 21
MH724 MH•52
IE 39:4.92
IE 398 .4
� RIM 3985.45 RIM 3�%89.77
715
501 4 2 IE 4008.0E MH1'27 RIM
9 2 _ IE 4017.51 co
- 4 ' 4012.76 -0 co
9 MH342 ' MH343 �o�' RIM 4022.75 cv ,r^)
MH.53 IE 4000.18 ... n � w0 4
IE 398:.82 IE 3992.51 RIM 4010.18
RIM 399'.12 RIM 4000.67 P67787
14
18
36"
42"
- Not Modeled
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
N CO CO
E v
P1131 P1130
385 300
P1755 P1759 cA> IE 4030.74
0 �5� 255 243 p MH129 MH131 , tee, s RIM 4033.34
P1128 oo 1 7 IE 4009.92 IE 4015.2 E rn
U, 00 o Q 2 1 RIM 4024.2 0o
235 "' 9 2 1 �e'6 6ORIM 4014.32 a
0'A •
11 1
11 1
MH767 ; MH1 ' '�
- --� MH764 IE 4003.36� IE 4016. 0 ,' 2p1
�� Q2c�8
•
1�•' `
00 � -
a21M
IE
RIM
•
i IEn3980 34 IE 3H249 MH.81?5
-' RIM-3986.75
3984.1E
N
• r N- N- �
MH248 0_ °'
3980.78 -
3985.31
IE 3984.35
RIM 3989.08
0
N o
co v
a
P0171 MH242
328
2 IE 3987.47
2 RIM 3990.9
MH246 MH308 4000.51 RIM 4006.73 RIM 4024.21
IE 3986.58 IE 3988.23 RIM 0 MH69 7s P1��9
IM 3989.88RIM 3992.53 ---,__ � -• IE 4004.19 61Z
-- M M RIM 4006.85 / �5
r
P1754 �v IE
P0292 218 MH134
MH24
209 MH763 0 IE 4017.71
IE 3990.8
2 �� RIM 3995.48' IE 3998.0E - 0--♦ RIM 4022.28
2 RIM 4004.0E MH814 -
I
j I-D*'•
••
�,
i I I �,�.
1 '1,•
F�•.`t
�' LA_ a,
♦�
__
co
a N m M
--4_
MH315
IE 3984.03
RIM 3989.75
•" -.M 31 - M-H•243 rLo co o� IE4004 ' L� � �
MH$41 RE 3989.53 a o RIM 4007.51 - i�ay •'
IE 3982.81 IE 3986.45 MH133%
RIM 3990.05 M 3993.53
AIM 3988.01 � ti IE 4006.2
MH762 • RIM 4012.19 ��
- H815 W -a.-a (31
IE 3996.01 Me � �I ` - ss
i P0293 P0291RIM 4004.11 - M 0 - •
P0167 MH239 347 365
221 IE 3990.35 7 5 -0
RIM 3992.65 7 5 �i� `
II
I� 1
1 L-L-L-L-U ••
‘,���� U
I
�'� I
-L_I
.
-"
P1019
NORTH:
SCALE:
o goo zoo
MH
1
1
40 �____ --------•
MH730
IE 3989.5
MH368
MH309 MH2,3, 8 n MH 05 w IE 4007.6E
IE 3991.3 IE 399.47 IE 400 .66 v r>
RIM 399631 RIM 400 .16 N oh o o RIM 4013.5E
RIM 3993.9 -o a 11
0
Feet
- IE 39
RIM3
N-
N in
- _ cm N N
E
P1020
330 MH224 1043 -
7.96
91.6E RIM 3992.E
o o
o m
- d
P1021
987
63
MH76
IE 3994. 1
RIM 4001.•.
P1022 P0012 P0592 0
686 768 rn m
953 54 45 r ' '
54 d,
o`J�
W W N 0-
MH356
P1736 P0165 IE 40
P1734 P0589 RIM 4
548 469 864 510
31 28
40 32 34,
47 38 37 •
)3.98
P1319
11.23
1157
MAPBOOK
CITY OFMOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
75 IE3984.91
g5, RIM 3990.0:
66
76
MH99�i
73
MH226
64 63 53
• MH757
MH227 MH228
IE 3993.47
•
MH234 MH235 MH236
IE 3993.79 IE 3�95.7 IE 3998.05
MH136
IE 4000.28
AIM 4009.58
_
BOWEN COLLINS
^ &ASSOCIATES
C �-2o,,,�
FIGURE NO.
E 3
N.-
LO o o
0_
IE 3986.15 IE 3988.79 IE 3989.61 co o IM 3998.61 RIM 4000.65N-
RIM 3991.27 RIM 3994.59RIM 3995.09 e-� CO rn d co r` N.
O .0
RIM 4001.19 in N o
N `n N
a h
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects \Flg are Ma pBook.mxd Mork 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
co
<v
Q.
o Cn
a
�1
65
1
1
IE
MH1
IE 4017.71
RIM 4022.28
/-- - --
MH368
IE 4007.66•o
RIM 4013.56
lkRIM
---
MH356
IE 4003.98 p139
RIM 4011.23 •1
d.
� o
o
MH135
4020.413
RIM
1
1
6
6
MH808
IE 4046.2
Q IM 4054.8
_;'MH807
IE 4030.74
RIM 4039.34
-
�,
0
IE
RIM
MH370
IE 4022.01
4028.91
CO in
� rn m m
_
MH, 05
402:.94
40 1.5
-o
_. � �j
w01
� W �
MH 24
IE 40 .64
RIM 40:8.32
_
�o
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42
- Not Modeled
_..i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
o- I ,
II I
I i_n,
.�
1 I I �.
�
1 C, ..
L_
�♦ •,.'�.. `t
'% L—L—L—
1a
I
'‘..L—L—LJ
L—�
-•.
LJ
*...._
NORTH:
SCALE:
0 100 200
z
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
MH136
IE4000.28
RIM 4009.58
MH369
IE 4013.96
f � C0 CP o
BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
C ..20,,,
FIGURE NO.
E-4
RIM 4017.96
MH600
- IE 4016.04
RIM 4020.77
P \Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
t
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
P0215
1418
155
384
P0214
11541
383
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
i
M
IE 3' .8.2
RIM 262.4
j
0
Lo
o '" .- v
M
IE
RIM
_
N O (n 0
Cl- s— v
M
IE 3
RIM
co
(V V LS O
O O — V
o_
58 MH457
IE 3953.6
RIM 3962.8
59
258
262.8
'60
57.5
263.2
0226
P0225 Q
MH469 582
)`?-
Q61
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
_
II Spanish Valley
_
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
1 L-U �',
t �.,
I I-1 1'•S.
•�,�
�%
L_L_L_L_0I
,�`�
j L-L-L-L-U %.
.‘,.._., L_L_L-L-LJ
\ L_U
*...._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 100 200
11
o
Feet
2
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
&ASSOCIATES
rp
C �41a. ;,9,2p .,,_,)
( L�
FIGURE
NO.
F-1
IE 3957.3 50
RIM 3963.8 82
0) C° (9
(� °' o
a Cs]_
MH468
IE 3962.1
RIM 3968,6
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
/ \
r+ 0- / \\
oco� \
a o
MH429
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
j: P0215
1418
155
384
-0
--.0 0-- MH432
r •---------- - - - - - - - -------0-- M 4 4 MH433
MH454
y IE 3960
RIM 3965
(NI
aLc) co o P2029 p0328
- 1298 1183
r • 90 MH584
tr. M 455 IE 3991.83
IE 3959.4 RIM 3999.73
N
+ RIM 3963.3 N
M Lf) O
N
o`-a)o 0_
N o O O
a ` P0173
PO 914 1074 M �85
154 44 IE 3937.89
383 44 O• RIM 3995.89
g9 ASS,
� �7
0
MHC
98.61
RIM 4003.81 3
79
8"
10"
12
M 15"
18"
21"
24"
MH457
IE 3958.6
RIM 3962.8
M �56 MH428 MH427 P0300 P0299
IE 3959.1 323 310
7
RIM 3963.1
12 7 rc' o
j-� -V--b co
30"12
36"
�-__-__----�
MH0426 M 0 MH0586 M 653 MH652 MH•2%6 MH-MH577 a
IE 3975.57 IE 3981.31 IE 3983.17
� RIM 3979.35 RIM 3986.54RIM 3989.42
` M •
C) O v N
a •--
MH425 MHQo4 MH403
J- - -- - - - - - •
p -- - - - - - MH278 MH
_1 MH651 IE 3979.91 IE 3932.75
Q MRIM 3983.97 RIM 3987.77
h1420
NC m _
MH }21 d __
I. H I
_H423
M 24 �
MHt 24- - - - MHkl22
•
MH402
IE 3983.06
RIM 3988.41
304
P0002
5g9
9
42"
Not Modeled
_..�
i.._i Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improvedm
(gpm)
I���.I'j''`�
I ��
k
P0225
582
I 1- In,.
...
'co
•�
1
1 �L.
��•
IT '♦•• •
�� I
- t
'% L- L- L- L- U
1 L-L-L-L-1� .♦•
MH760
IE 3974.8--
_ RIM 3979.6
MHP59
IE 3573.3
RIM-W79.6
Cs)IE
N-N,--,-_
a
A
•
_
co-Lo�
MH
IE 3
RIM 3
Lco
A) n CO
11 h
MH462
3975.1
RIM3981.4
81 `
80.6
85.73
Pill
P1045
569
11
11
MH305
IE 3984.E
RIM 3990.3
i
�
1
I
�.._. U
'♦t` �I I
LJ
*.._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
o goo zoo
o
0
Feet
P0227 P0228 P5239
374 433 32
33 63
P023086
481 a M
17
19
P388 IE 39
1 RIM 3985.28
•
9.23
MAPBOOK
64 �•
•
�
64 •
�65
MH463 M 61
CITY OFMOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
M
MH466 N
62 H467 IE 3968.8 N N 6
350 IE 3964.4 IE 3966.3 RIM 3974.8 0° � - N
RIM 3972.2 a
61 RIM 3970.3
MH783
MH464
IE 3974.2 IE 3974.9 o
IE 3971.4 RIM 3980.2 RIM 3981.7 E `�'
RIM 3977.4
P0003
MH287 426
IE 3978.28 13
BOWEN COLLINS
&A S S O C I A T E S
C ...20,,,
FIGURE
NO.
F-2
50
82
IE 3972.2 RIM 3983.93 13
RIM 3979 IVr MH312
0 or IE 3978.45
a RIM 3983.9
IE 3962.7
RIM 3968.6
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects \Flg are Ma pBook.mxd Mork 10/26/2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
A
O
MHE
IE 39£8.61
RIM 4003.81
P00O2
5E9
c
c
MH578�s IE 3999.44
4004.94AO
�
d0y7j
9
79 ..>
MH5'81
IE 4005.86
RIM 4009.36
P0402 P0294
538 431
7
7 , 3
- ---
8"
10"
12"
15"/RIM
18
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
j.._j Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
/01-1.`
1 L-U .'...
.1.
i C 41.
•L-L- •,••..,, •
��% L-L-L-L-U t&
j L-L-L-L-1� , %.
P1
569
11
M • 05 M �82 M 283,,
IE 3984.6 IE 3987.69 IE 3994.54
RIM 3990.3 RIM 3997.69 RIM 4003.5
O
MH674
43 P0004 P1042
668 849
1 6 4 • A
I
�.._., L-�L-L-LJ
LJJ
%,
*...._
NORTH:
SCALE:
o goo zoo
0-�
Feet
P0003
426
M 285� MH 284 MH3 v8gV7
IE 3983.01 IE 3987.58 IE 3996.0 2
RIM 3986.98 RIM 3993.66 RIM 4002.85 A7
i7
2 v7027
MH406 ,D
IE 3997.87
P1052 RIM4004.67
1 A
583 P1109 0N�
0 -> 7,,
3 2 R1� Q °��n 77�' MH812
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
B�WEN COLLINS
^ &ASS 0 C I A TES
C �,�
FIGURE
NO.
���
3 z ^- N'tc) 2 N 7 61' IE 4011.42
M �88 MH289 Q�3g2 i 2 Q`Ll'h`5 RIM 4018.62
IE 3980.95 IE 3984.71 3 MH34T' MH349
RIM 3985.36 RIM 3991.06 3 IE 3994.16 IE 3999.24
- RIM 4000.66 RIM 4004.75
P:\Moab Clty\Sewer Mast r Plan14.0 GIS14,1 Projects\Flgure Ma pBook.mxd IsMrk 10/26/2017
0,
MH443
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
F
{rT
r,
..,..I.. .—.
i
I
•
lip,
Ism_i
b ,�
Tt
_ I'
�
43".
" '
r
. '.
�a,
MH444
_ "*'�
r
.tEllr' - - - MHB�
*+ E \
. , t.‘0.' 3 ,\,\ MH445 I mo-
s Q w° •
Y ..pei
IE 3990.9
a • RIM 4000:0
.: MH450
+,:^cb
cb IE 3982.1 Q -- --- --- M Q
4rZOenD RIM 3991.6 MH449 O
P p MF1800
y .ti �.vir:"
O-
$. =. •. , MH79$ ��
V MH795797
a� • MH796
., " __ MH451
IE 3974 M 44.8
y•• N.
o.
� � RIM 3983.5
O �M11802
- Q
_ • ; " 0�• ��
MH0446
-
-
•
MH452
IE 3962 •�.�"�
..;�� RIM 3973.7
p l
a 2�
•f
fl.it
•
MH453
f ifleillrallt IE 3961.1
RIM 3967.5
T�
- O * MH431
-■ - � ems" _- Q `� O
MH 7M1H430
i- / �
t. �r w .
r - -
711kMASTER
it i 0
NAHd90
8r�
12"
15"
� 18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
._..�
�.._I Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
.`
I�� I I
..
1 -...
L—L—L-1� . *
%
�'% L-L-L-L-0I�
1 L-L-L-L-U
L-L-L-L-LJ
�.._..�.`,
L_U
ti.._
NORTH:
\
\
SCALE:
0 700 200
ri
Feet
o
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
PLAN
BOWEN COLLINS
^ '
& A� C�,�
L�
FIGURE NO.
—�
"airReif _
r • M 034 ----- MHo-3---- ------ M 432
MH454
-... 411- a , N RIM 3965
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10I26I2017
LEGEND
Manholes
o No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
SCALE:
0
100 200
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
P:\Moab City \Sewer Master Plan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
Feet
FIGURE NO.
H-1
0
M H441
M H0442
O
MH443
0
MH444
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._..� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
SCALE:
0
100 200
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
H -2
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.l Projects\ Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 10/26/2017
IP
a r 11 37
MH736\\
\\
\\
\\
Mf=i740
I
�v1H741
LEGEND
Manholes
O No Invert
• Invert
Buildout Improved
Pipe Diameter (inches)
6" or less
8"
10"
12"
15"
18"
21"
24"
30"
36"
42"
Not Modeled
�.._� Spanish Valley
MH ID Pipe ID
Invert Elevation Capacity (gpm)
RIM Existing (gpm)
Buildout Improved (gpm)
NORTH:
2
z
SCALE:
0
100
200
Feet
MAPBOOK
CITY OF MOAB
SANITARY SEWER
MASTER PLAN
6 BOWEN COLLINS
& A S S O C I A T E S
FIGURE NO.
1-1
P:\Moab City \Sewer Mast rPlan \4.0 GIS\4.1 Projects \Figure Ma pBook.mxd bklrk 1012612017