Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPKT-CC-2018-10-23CITY OF MOAB UTAH Moab City Council October 23, 2018 Pre -Council Workshop 6: oo P.M. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 7: oo P.M. Moab City Council Chambers City Center (217 East Center Street) Page 1 of 106 Page 2 of 106 CITY OF MoAfA., 6:oo p.m. City Council Regular Council Meeting City Council Chambers Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 6:oo p.m. 217 East Center Street Moab, Utah 84532 Main Number (435) 259-5121 Fax Number (435) 259-4135 www.moabcity.org JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP Discussion Regarding Planning Commission Recommendation on Planned Affordable Developments (PAD) 7:oo p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE SECTION 1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1-1 September 25, 2018 1-2 October 2, 2018 1-3 October 9, 2018 SECTION 2: MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS SECTION 3: ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS SECTION 4: CITIZENS TO BE HEARD SECTION 5: PRESENTATIONS 5-1 Mayor's Student of the Month Awards for the Moab Charter School and Helen M. Knight Elementry School for October 2o18 SECTION 6: OLD BUSINESS 6-1 Proposed Resolution #49-2o18 - Authorizing the Walnut Lane Property Acquisition Closing • Authorizing Expenditure up to $1,815,000 and Approving Financing 6-2 Bag Ban Communications Plan and Council Roles • Discussion Page 3 of 106 6-3 Proposed Resolution #46-2o18 — Amending the Fiscal Year 2o18- 2o19 Annual Budget • Follow-up Briefing and Possible Action 6-4 Revision of City Parks Policies • Follow-up Discussion SECTION 7: NEW BUSINESS 7-1 Proposed Resolution #4o-2o18 — Adopting City of Moab Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan • Briefing and Possible Action 7-2 Construction Management Services for the Mill Creek Road West/USU Project • Approval of a Contract with Civil Science Infrastructure for an amount not to exceed $122,200 SECTION 8: APPROVAL OF BILLS AGAINST THE CITY OF MOAB SECTION 9: ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations during this meeting should notify the Recorder's Office at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259-5121 at least three (3) working days prior to the meeting. Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org Page 4 of 106 MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES --DRAFT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 25, 2(318 Call to Order and Attendance: The Moab City Council held its Regular Meeting on the above date in the Council Chambers at the Moab City Center, located at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah. A recording of the meeting is archived at http://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html. In attendance were Mayor Emily Niehaus, Councilmembers Kalen Jones, Rani Derasary, Mike Duncan, Tawny Knuteson-Boyd and Karen Guzman -Newton. Also in attendance were City Manager David Everitt, Recorder/Assistant City Manager Rachel Stenta, City Attorney Chris McAnany, Communications Director Lisa Church, Deputy Treasurer Chantel Lindsay, Public Works Director Pat Dean, Assistant City Manager Joel Linares, City Engineer Chuck Williams and Sustainability Director Rosemarie Russo. Workshop: Mayor Niehaus called the workshop to order at 6:0o PM. The workshop began with a review of the Administrative Work Plan. City Manager Everitt presented a six-month update on the Plan which he explained was adopted early in the year. Housing issues were the first area Everitt outlined in his presentation, including progress on the Affordable Housing Plan, assured housing analysis and updates to the Land Use Code as well as other areas of the Code. He also mentioned the City's recently -proposed affordable housing development and concluded with a mention of incentives for affordable development that are being considered. Everitt described specific progress in other areas of the work plan, including water resource protection, quality of life and cross jurisdictional initiatives taken on by Rosemarie Russo, and support for the development of the new Utah State University (USU) campus. Land Use and Infrastructure Planning and Development topics were mentioned, and Mayor Niehaus asked about a sidewalk inventory and policy review. It was suggested to include the topic January revision of the work plan in the context of transportation planning. Fleet management was touched on, as well as administrative and personnel goals, including succession planning and upgrading the performance evaluation process and the ongoing work to revise personnel policies. Everitt announced the wellness plan is in place and noted the Arts and Recreation goals were on hold during a staffing gap and concluded with a brief mention of progress in the public safety department, highlighted by increased staffing. The workshop continued with a briefing from Maddy Fisk from Seekhaven and Diana Core from the Police Department on the Lethality Assessment Program. Core outlined the protocols and Fisk explained the benefits and effectiveness of the program. The presenters answered questions about comparative statistics and seasonal escalations in incidents and tourist impacts. Regular Meeting: Mayor Niehaus called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:oo PM and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Thirty-two members of the public and media were present. Approval of Minutes: Councilmember Derasary moved to approve the minutes of the September io and 17, 2o18 meetings with one correction. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Mayor and Council Reports: Mayor Niehaus reported on a meeting of the Utah League of Cities and Towns (ULCT) where she was nominated to be on the Board. At the meeting, she learned of a vision process for the Council. Council discussed timing of such a vision workshop. Page 1 ` 4 September 25, 2018 Page 5 of 106 1-1 Minutes The Mayor also mentioned her participation on a panel of Utah mayors where she discussed Moab's net -zero energy goals, and then traveled to Washington DC to meet with female mayors from across the United States, including six mayors from Utah. Councilmember Derasary also reported on the ULCT meeting. She noted her attendance at the League of Women Voters' candidate forum and she mentioned a meeting of the Emergency Medical Services district to approve their budget and discuss future funding. Councilmember Duncan reported on the Moab Area Watershed Partnership (MAWP) and he mentioned vandalism to a sewer line. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd mentioned the ULCT meeting and reported on the progress of the Museum with efforts to pack and store the exhibits in preparation of a remodeling project. She reported on a benefit dinner for the fire victims, which she attended. Councilmember Guzman -Newton reported on a transit authority meeting and a reminder about a letter of support regarding rail service. She also mentioned a workshop meeting she attended for the school board and outlined upcoming projects and concerns of the school district. She described the MAWP meeting she attended as well as sessions at the ULCT conference. Councilmember Jones reported on his attendance at the United States Forest Service (USFS) meeting in Price. He also noted progress regarding the Dark Skies ordinance. He concluded with a report on the Solid Waste district budget and recycling. Administrative Report: City Engineer Williams and Communications Director Church reported on the progress of the ioo West project, including outreach efforts to the residents in that part of the community. Williams brought up back -in angled parking which is designed into the project and mentioned the Council had about two months to reach a directive regarding this change to parking. City Manager Everitt added this form of parking is statistically safer than other parking layouts. Councilmember Guzman -Newton asked about the bike lanes. Councilmember Jones asked for notifications via text regarding City projects. Citizens to be Heard: Sara Melnicoff talked about the Request for Proposals (RFP) for trash and recycling. She stated she was not in favor of the single -stream method for recycling and gave references in favor of dual -stream recycling. She mentioned there is potential for nearby communities to join in the recycling program. She cited data to support a move away from single -stream methodologies. Presentation: Students of the Month: Mayor Niehaus awarded the Mayor's Student of the Month Awards for September 2°18 to Addison Oldroyd for Helen M. Knight Elementary and Efrain Santana for Moab Charter School. Mayor Niehaus acknowledged the September sponsors, Business Resolutions and Mad Moose Events. Special Events/Vendors/Beer Licenses: Moab Folk Festival Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve an alcohol permit and local consent for the Moab Folk Festival at the Center Street Ballfields from November 3 to 4, 21318. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-o aye, with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman -Newton voting aye. Page 2 ` 4 September 25, 2018 Page 6 of 106 1-1 Minutes Home and Hope Taste of Moab Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd moved to approve a retail beer license, local consent and fee waiver not to exceed $too for Home and Hope Taste of Moab at the Grand Center on October 27, 2018. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. Councilmember Derasary asked about proceeds staying in the local community and the applicant explained the several uses for the proceeds. The motion carried 5-o aye, with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman -Newton voting aye. All Good Superfresh Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve a Private Property Vendor License for Lauren Flores doing business as All Good Superfresh located at 301 South Main Street from September 26 to December 31, 2o18. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-o aye, with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman -Newton voting aye. Maverick Inc. #238 and #341Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Derasary moved to grant Local Consent for Off -Premise Beer Retailer Licenses to Maverik Inc. #238 located at 435 North Main Street and Maverik Inc. #341 located at 985 South Highway 191. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. Councilmember Duncan brought up the proximity of the North Maverick to the northbound Highway out of town, and it was explained the enterprise had carried an alcohol sales license for some time. The motion carried 5-o aye, with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman -Newton voting aye. Old Business: (1:48 on recording) Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) Approved Discussion: City Manager Everitt briefly recapped the proposed agreement. Councilmembers raised questions about the proposal. City Attorney McAnany and City Manager Everitt explained the constraints and zoning authority for the area, City control of how funds are used and prioritization of projects. Everitt also clarified that the CRA would dictate how the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) may develop their portion of the CRA area. It was mentioned that the school district had not yet adopted a document to support the CRA. More discussion ensued regarding the local economic factors and the Mayor's and Council's discretion regarding projects. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Resolution #43-2018 — an Interlocal Agreement with Grand County Community Reinvestment Agency to Conduct Project Area Development Projects. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. Edits were made to the document as discussed by Council. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Business Licensing, Street Performers Code Titles 4 and 5-Approved Discussion: City Manager Everitt described the progress on the code revisions. He explained a correction about inspections. Councilmember Derasary brought up some questions and clarifications regarding special events and terminology. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to approve Ordinance #2o18-15 — Modifying Business Licensing, Special Event and Street Performer Permitting, Processes and Requirements, deleting section 5.2o.5oo regarding inspection of premises. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. 3 4 September 25, 2018 Page 7 of 106 1-1 Minutes New Business: (2:33 on recording) Solid Waste Hauling Contract Request for Proposals (RFP)—Discussion Sustainability Director Russo presented the current solid waste and recycling situation in Moab and explained the difficulty of operating recycling programs in isolated communities located far from processing centers. Russo brought up the need for an educational program, especially for tourists. She explained the differences between single -stream and dual -stream recycling programs, and touched on the global recycling markets and environmental impacts. She brought up options including mandatory recycling and banning cardboard from trash, and recycling concrete. Councilmembers discussed residents who deliver their own recycling to the facility and would potentially disagree with mandatory curbside service. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd asked if the service would be viable or if the recycling piece of the RFP would be considered a loss to the vendor. City Manager Everitt explained mandatory recycling fees could offset the cost of processing the materials. Councilmember Derasary asked about the RFP period, evaluation parameters and "bag and tag" practices. It was clarified that 8o percent of County residents participate in the non -mandatory solid waste pickup service. Mandatory County participation was discussed. Councilmember Jones asked about tracking diversions and rejections. Budget Amendment —Scheduling of Public Hearing (3:18 on recording) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Jones moved to set a Public Hearing Date for Resolution #46-2018 — Amending the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2o18-2o19 for October 9, 2o18. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Approval of Bills: Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to approve payment of bills against the City of Moab in the amount of $756,797.86. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Executive Closed Session: Motion and Vote: At 9:32 PM, Councilmember Derasary moved to enter an Executive Session to Discuss Pending or Reasonably Imminent Litigation and to Discuss the Character, Professional Competence, or Physical or Mental Health of an Individual. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. At 11:28 PM, Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to close the Executive Closed Session. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Adjournment: Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Mayor Niehaus adjourned the meeting at 11:28 PM. APPROVED: ATTEST: Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder 4 `4 September 25, 2018 Page 8 of 106 1-1 Minutes MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES --DRAFT SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2018 Call to Order and Attendance: The Moab City Council attended a Special Joint City Council and Grand County Council Workshop Meeting on the above date in the Grand County Council Chambers at 125 East Center Street, Moab, Utah. A meeting recording is archived at http://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html. County Council Chair Mary McGann called the meeting to order at 12:13 PM. In attendance were Mayor Emily Niehaus, City Councilmembers Kalen Jones, Rani Derasary and Mike Duncan. Also in attendance were City Manager David Everitt, Assistant City Manager Joel Linares, Sustainability Director Rosemarie Russo and Records Specialist Eve Tallman. Representing Grand County were Councilmembers McGann, Jaylyn Hawks, Curtis Wells, Evan Clapper and Greg Halliday. Also in attendance were County Council Administrator Ruth Dillon, County Community and Economic Development Director Zacharia Levine, County Budget Director Chris Baird and Councilmember-elect Terry Morse. Two members of the media were present. Workshop on Legislative Lobbying: Grand County Community and Economic Development Director Levine introduced Lincoln Shurtz and Brandy Grace of the Utah Association of Counties. Shurtz made a presentation on the state legislative process, the makeup of the state legislature, committees that may be of interest to local governing bodies and issues for the upcoming session. He emphasized the abbreviated duration of the session and the most effective ways to influence legislation. Affordable housing, density, and the Transient Room Tax were discussed, as well as the process for adoption of the state budget. Adjournment: Councilmember Halliday moved to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Niehaus seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Council Chair McGann adjourned the meeting at 1:38 PM. APPROVED: ATTEST: Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder Page 1 of 1 October 2, 2018 Page 9 of 106 1-2 Minutes MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES --DRAFT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 9, 2018 Call to Order and Attendance: The Moab City Council held its Regular Meeting on the above date in the Council Chambers at the Moab City Center, located at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah. A recording of the meeting is archived at http://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html. In attendance were Mayor Emily Niehaus, Councilmembers Kalen Jones, Rani Derasary, Mike Duncan, Tawny Knuteson-Boyd and Karen Guzman -Newton. Also in attendance were City Manager David Everitt, Recorder/Assistant City Manager Rachel Stenta, City Attorney Chris McAnany, Deputy Treasurer Chantel Lindsay, Public Works Director Pat Dean, Assistant City Manager Joel Linares, City Engineer Chuck Williams and Sustainability Director Rosemarie Russo. Workshop: Mayor Niehaus called the workshop to order at 6:02 PM. The workshop consisted of a review of the Agreements and Understandings between the City and Utah State University — Moab (USU) and the State and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). Lianna Etchberger from USU and Troy Herold from SITLA were in attendance. Topics discussed included the USU campus construction timeline and scope, Millcreek West road construction, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City, USU and Grand County, approval of the project area plan for the Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) and the SITLA pre - annexation agreement. Herold mentioned that the development Request for Qualifications (RFQ) did not have the anticipated response from developers. The workshop continued with a Water Conservation and Drought Management Advisory Board Update. Water Board members in attendance included chair Arne Hultquist, Kara Dohrenwend, Denver Perkins, Kyle Bailey and Jeremy Lynch. Councilmember Duncan also serves on the board. The Board presented a written report and a handout detailing facts about Moab's water supply, water rights and demand. Hultquist presented his impressions of Moab's water supply situation. Discussion included mention of green infrastructure for stormwater management. Councilmembers asked questions regarding development in view of water supply challenges. Councilmember Duncan suggested a meeting with Dana Van Horn of the Grand Water and Sewer Services Agency (GWSSA). Mayor Niehaus suggested that water may be a top priority in the 2019 administrative work plan. Regular Meeting: (:59 on recording) Mayor Niehaus called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:oi PM and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Twenty-six members of the public and media were present. Mayor and Council Reports: Councilmember Derasary reported on a TrailMix meeting she attended and noted the Travel Council seeks input from the public regarding recent bike events. Derasary said the recent snow in the mountains will likely diminish further bike activities for the season and she mentioned the new Courthouse horse camp and the new bathrooms at the BMX park. Derasary noted the recent joint City and County council meeting she attended and brought up Transient Room Tax (TRT) funds and the budgets for the City and County. She mentioned the recent League of Women Voters event which comprised a City update. She said the main concerns voiced by residents there were RZR (off -road vehicle) noise and the Downtown Plan. Derasary also noted the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) presence meeting and she concluded with a mention that the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) call volume was the highest for the year. Page 1 of 5 October 9, 2018 Page 10 of 106 L 1-3 Minutes Councilmember Duncan reported on the joint City and County Council meeting and commented on the growing local interest in requesting greater latitude for local governments regarding the disbursement and uses of TRT funds from the state legislature. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd mentioned the Faith -Based Coalition meeting she attended and stated the sewer rates are still a concern. She said she observed local vendors and shoppers being appreciative of the plastic bag ban. Councilmember Guzman -Newton reported that the airport would be receiving a $5 million grant for a taxi way. She noted the Chamber of Commerce would relocate in November. She mentioned a possible presentation which could be scheduled at a December meeting with representatives of the Salt Lake Chamber regarding growth expectations for Utah. She said she attended a workshop to make reusable shopping bags and she expressed interest in presenting the workshop to schools. She reported her attendance at the state's water conservation open house and mentioned the local survey. She concluded with a question about a water storage tank proposed by the consulting engineer. Councilmember Jones mentioned his work with the Dark Skies committee and noted the outdoor lighting code was near completion. Mayor Niehaus mentioned she attended the Pride Festival along with Councilmembers Duncan and Derasary. She reported on the Indigenous Celebration Day event with the High School's Native American Club which featured a hoop dancer, and she mentioned her participation with Councilmember Guzman -Newton in Finance Director interviews. She also brought up the Joint City and County meeting about the upcoming legislative session and added she spoke to a class at the middle school. She finished with a mention of a meeting she attended regarding 9-1-1 communications. Administrative Report: Project Specialist Tallman made a brief report about the ongoing Manti-La Sal National Forest Planning Process and noted a public input period which began October 8. She also mentioned the open application period for the Community Contributions program. City Manager Everitt mentioned progress on nuisance abatement efforts in the City. Citizens to Be Heard: There were no citizens to be heard. Christy Calvin submitted written remarks: "I'm concerned about the beginning and ending hours for amplified music and PA systems which show up in the current draft of the park use policy. I recommend these guidelines: because of their proximity to residential neighborhoods, any amplification (music or PA systems) will only be permitted between the hours of 9AM and 7PM at both Swanny and Rotary Parks; all other parks may have sound permitted between the hours of 7AM and 9PM, at the discretion of City staff. "Also, I would like to reiterate that no new or expanded events should be permitted at Swanny Park until Council and Staff take the time to study and evaluate cumulative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. The Swanny Park neighborhood is inundated with too much noise and too much congestion. Please do something now to preserve our quality of life —don't keep putting it off! Thank you!" Presentation: Students of the Month: Mayor Niehaus awarded the Mayor's Student of the Month Awards for October 2018 to Eighth Grade Grand County Middle School Student Willow Nichols and Seventh Grade Grand County Middle School Student Rachael Harrison. Page 2 5 October 9, 2018 Page 11 of 106 L 1-3 Minutes Public Hearings: 0:23 on recording) Budget Amendment: City Manager Everitt presented an outline of the scope of the proposed budget amendment. At 7:41 PM, Mayor Niehaus opened a hearing to solicit Public Input on Proposed Resolution #46-2o18 — Amending the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2o18-2o19. There were no citizens to be heard. Councilmember Jones moved to close the hearing. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. The hearing was closed at 7:43 PM. Conditional Uses Amendments: City Planner Reinhart, Development Services Manager Johnson, and City Attorney McAnany presented an overview of the changes made to eliminate conditional uses in all zones due to new state requirements. At 7:5o PM, Mayor Niehaus opened a hearing to solicit Public Input on Proposed Ordinance #2o18-o1— An Ordinance Amending Various Sections of Moab Municipal Code Chapter 17 Pertaining to Conditional Uses in All Zones. Bob Greenberg stated the City's efforts were fabulous, and he supports removing Bed and Breakfast establishments from R-1 and R-2. He said he takes issue with some shifts in definitions because he lives adjacent to high rise buildings and he is concerned with the shift from families to households primarily because household is not defined. He requested that a redlined version be made available to the public during the next two weeks. Jim Englebright stated he lives on Hillside Drive, in a neighborhood with eleven homes including four bunkhouses which are, in his opinion, employer -owned homes provided for employee housing. He did not see in the document the proposed definition of households. He said he had been living with the bunkhouse situation for some time and has observed that the bunkhouses have six to eight cars at a time. He noted the conditions of the properties have gone downhill and there are weeds in the yard, tenants are parking on the lawn and the yards have problems with spilled garbage. He stated there is a need for long-term housing and in his opinion these residences are different and there is no limit to the number of tenants. He mentioned that the complaint -driven process for enforcement puts neighbor against neighbor. He concluded that it would be well for all involved to better define this. Councilmember Derasary suggested that the definition be read. She clarified that the definition of households is for all zones. City Attorney McAnany clarified that several definitions were added to be applied throughout the code. He recited the definition of household as one or more persons related or unrelated who live in the same dwelling and share meals or living accommodations and may consist of a single family or some other grouping of people. Vicki Webster stated she also lives on Hillside Drive. She referred to several letters she had sent to Council. She expressed her dismay that the properties in her neighborhood that caused negative impacts were company bunkhouses. She emphasized they are not the same as other long-term rentals and they constitute a commercial intrusion into the neighborhood; they are an extension of a business's commercial campus, including storage of company vehicles and equipment. She said the business bottom line was more important than abiding by the ordinances that required them to maintain the properties. She noted she had documented that the landscaping was allowed to die, the garbage piled up and there were excessive vehicles due to so many occupants. She stated her interest in restricting the number of bunkhouses in the neighborhood zone. She stated her concern that garbage and landscaping enforcement requires neighbors to sign formal complaints. She stated we are in a small town which is quite interdependent with our neighbors and requiring residents to sign a formal complaint in order 3 5 October 9, 2018 Page 12 of 106 1-3 Minutes for the City to enforce its code is poor public policy. She said it is unacceptable to her that the City refuses to enforce code violations of which it is well aware. She said a violation is a violation no matter how it is reported. She suggested a middle ground that would regulate bunkhouses would be a win -win situation and would prevent them from negatively impacting the otherwise lovely neighborhood. She concluded by stating the owners have already proven that they won't do that on their own. Judy Powers mentioned the work on the code looked good, yet she expressed her concern that the City is losing its neighborhoods. She expressed support for moving bed and breakfast establishments out of neighborhoods. She agreed with other comments about man camps and bunk houses. She stated she understood the change to households because people don't need to be related to each other. She stated that in these instances there was nobody in charge and occupants come and go and tenants are not there long-term, making it just as bad as a bed and breakfast and may be worse since owners of nightly rentals want them to look good and they are less crowded. She supported protecting the R-2 zone but not R-3 or R-4. She stated the R-2 zone is already dealing with the impact of bed and breakfasts and out -of -control Airbnb rentals. She mentioned RZR noise on the streets as well. She mentioned the importance of knowing your neighbors and she said the bunkhouses were not conducive to knowing the neighbors and would be worse than nightly rentals. She concluded that there was no one taking responsibility. Verl Packard stated the proposed definition of household means nothing. Ann Northrup commented it was her fifth year of concern. She stated R-2 neighborhoods need to protect the people who live in them. She stated her R-2 home should be a single-family home unless she wanted to rent her basement. She brought up her concern about individuals who were parking in one area and mentioned a neighborhood home with so many cars that the occupants park down the street. She said the current code enforcement was not doing an adequate -enough job and stressed the impact on her of putting her name on a complaint. She said she did not believe code enforcement was happening quickly enough or responsibly enough. She referred to an upcoming GGBY event which would not be fair to anyone in the neighborhood and stated there was support from her neighbors and asked if she needed to sign a petition to move forward. She noted there were people walking by her home at all hours of the night, with lights going on and cars coming in and out and she said it was horrible. She concluded that the condition of the subject house was unjust to the people of the community who have been paying taxes for years. With no further citizens wishing to be heard, Councilmember Jones moved to close the public hearing. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Mayor Niehaus closed the hearing at 8:a7 PM. Special Events/Vendors/Beer Licenses: Electric Light Parade —Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Fee Waivers not to exceed $io,o59.8o for the Electric Light Parade to be held on Saturday, December 1, 2o18. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-o aye, with Councilmembers Derasary, Jones, Knuteson-Boyd, Duncan and Guzman -Newton voting aye. Old Business: (2: og on recording) Revision of City Parks Policies —Discussion The Mayor, Council and City Manager continued deliberation of revisions to the Parks Policies. 4 5 October 9, 2018 Page 13 of 106 1-3 Minutes Dogs, sound amplification, special events implications and hours were discussed. New Business: City Treasurer Appointment —Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Duncan moved to approve Proposed Resolution #48- 2018 - Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment of Statutory Appointee and Authorization to Execute an Employment Agreement for City Treasurer — Chantel Lindsay. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Power House Boundary Line Adjustment Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Proposed Resolution #47- 2018 — A Boundary Line Adjustment for Power House Subdivision Amendment #3 for Property Located at noo Sand Flats Road in the RA-1 Zone. Councilmember Guzman -Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Mill Creek Drive West Extension Contract Approved Motion and Vote: Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to approve and award a construction contract for the Mill Creek Drive West Extension Project to Harrison Field Services in the amount of $1,935,o78.44, subject to bonding. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Geologic Hazards Report and Map Adopted Motion and Vote: Councilmember Duncan moved to approve Proposed Resolution #44- 2018 — Adopting Utah Geological Survey Special Study 162 and the Geologic Hazards of the Moab Quadrangle Set of 13 Hazard Specific Maps. Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Community Reinvestment Agency Area Plan —Tabled (2:57 on recording) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to table Proposed Ordinance #2018-21— Adopting the Community Reinvestment Project Area Plan for the South Moab Community Reinvestment Project Area. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. The motion to table passed 4-1 aye with Councilmembers Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman - Newton and Duncan voting aye and Councilmember Jones voting nay. Approval of Bills: Councilmember Guzman -Newton moved to approve payment of bills against the City of Moab in the amount of $772,441.45• Councilmember Knuteson-Boyd seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Adjournment: Councilmember Derasary moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-o aye with Councilmembers Jones, Derasary, Knuteson-Boyd, Guzman -Newton and Duncan voting aye. Mayor Niehaus adjourned the meeting at 9:06 PM. APPROVED: ATTEST: Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder 5 5 October 9, 2018 Page 14 of 106 L 1-3 Minutes Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: October 23, 2m8 Title: Resolution Authorizing the Walnut Lane Property Acquisition Closing Date Submitted: October 17, 2018 Presenters: Tracy Dutson Attachments: • Draft resolution • Memo regarding due diligence Possible Motion: I move to approve Resolution 49-2m8, a Resolution Authorizing the Expenditure of not to Exceed $1,815,000 and the Execution of Financing and Closing Documents by the City Manager for the Acquisition of Real Property Located at 193 West Walnut Lane. Background/Summary: After authorizing an offer to purchase property at 193 Walnut Lane for the purpose of developing workforce housing, and once the offer was accepted, the City Council directed staff to move forward to perform due diligence and identify funding sources for the purchase. The due diligence memo attached is the City's formal acknowledgement that there are no significant issues have been identified that would impact the purchase of the property. This resolution formally authorizes the City Manager to sign closing documents on behalf of the City for the acquisition of the Walnut Lane property. Staff are concurrently developing a proposal for a phased development for Council consideration, and will brief the Council at the meeting accordingly. 1 6-1 Old Business Page 15 of 106 CITY OF MOAB RESOLUTION 49-2018 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF NOT TO EXCEED $1,815,000 AND THE EXECUTION OF FINANCING AND CLOSING DOCUMENTS BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 193 WEST WALNUT LANE. The following describe the intent and purpose of this resolution: a. On July 31, 2018 the City entered into a contract for the purchase of approximately 2.95 acres of real property, commonly known as 193 West Walnut Lane (the Property), which is currently occupied by a mobile home park. The City intends to redevelop the Property for affordable housing. b. The City has undertaken due diligence in connection with the transaction, including an appraisal, survey, Phase One Environmental Assessment, geotechnical evaluation, and title report. c. The appraisal confirms that the fair market value of the Property is equal to or greater than the contract price of $1.8 million. d. Zions Public Finance, Inc. has committed to provide loan financing for the purchase of the Property, in a total amount of $1,815,000. e. No adverse conditions with respect to the Property have been identified to date, and the City is prepared to close on the Property. THEREFORE, the City hereby authorizes the expenditure of a sum of not to exceed $1,815,000 to be paid to the closing agent at the time of closing and to be applied to the City's contract obligation as purchaser and incidental closing costs. Additionally, the City hereby authorizes the City Manager, David Everitt, to execute on behalf of the City all necessary closing and financing documents to complete the purchase of the Property. Approved and authorized by a majority of the City Council this day of October, 2018. SIGNED: ATTEST: Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Rachel Stenta, City Recorder Page 16 of 106 6-1 Old Business 217 East Center Street Moab, Utah 845 2-2534 Main Dumber (435) 259-5121 Fax urnber (435) 259-4135 CITY OF MOAB UTAH TO: Moab City Council FROM: Tracy Dutson-Senior Project Manager RE: 250-28o West Walnut Lane Acquisition Dear Council Members, Mayor: Emily S. Niehaus Council: Tawny Knutcson-Boyd Rani Derasary Mike Duncan Karen Guzman -Newton Kalen Jones October 17, 2o18 This memo is to inform you of the Due Diligence status for the 250-28o West Walnut Lane acquisition and purchase. The following reports were completed as part of staff examination of the site for acquisition: 1. Phase 1 Environmental Report 2. Geotechnical Report 3. Survey 4. Appraisal- Property appraised for the contract price of $1,800,000. The value was based on the highest and best use being redevelopment of the site. 5. Title Report Based on investigation thus far, there are no significant issues. Potential issues might surface upon further investigation. Page 17 of 106 6-1 Old Business Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: October 23, 2m8 Title: Resolution #46-2m8—A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Budget Presenter: David Everitt Attachment(s): • Memo to Council • Draft resolution Suggested Motion: - I move to approve Resolution #46-2m8—A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Budget. OR I move to approve Resolution #46-2m8—A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2018/2m9 Budget with the following changes [] Background/Summary: October 4 Update. Since publication of the proposed resolution for the public hearing, a few items have been suggested for inclusion in Budget Amendment #1: Capital Projects: - Increase revenue in "41-36228 Utah Power Grant" by $12,000. The City will receive rebates back from Rocky Mountain Power because of its participation in the WattSmart Program. These will offset the City's investment in the lighting retrofitting of City facilities initially; the future use of these rebates is to be determined. - Increase expense in "41-46o72 MARC Building Improvements" by $3o,000. MARC staff are moving expeditiously to finish off a series of improvements, and these funds will, along with the current additional funds requested, allow them to complete the lower bathroom remodel, additional painting, and window replacements within this fiscal year. If the Council supports these additions, the net impact to the General Fund balance will be a reduction of $18,000. [From September 25,2018] From time to time, it is necessary to amend the adopted annual budget to adjust revenues and expenses, account for unplanned budget items, and re -prioritize spending. This amendment comes to you a little earlier than usual in order to accommodate the 1 Page 18 of 106 6-3 Old Business expected revenues and expenses associated with the Walnut Lane property purchase, but also includes some other proposed changes in the General Fund, the Capital Projects Fund, the Culinary Water Fund, and the Sewer Fund. Overall, the recommended changes would result in an additional $468,568 in General Fund expenditures, which would be balanced by General Fund balance and a small increase in ongoing revenues. The Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds see small adjustments to account for additional revenue related to impact fees, and the Sewer Enterprise Fund will receive additional contingency funds related to the water reclamation facility bond that may be used for other sewer -related projects. Details are in the included memo. 2 Page 19 of 106 6-3 Old Business September 19, 2018 To: Moab City Council From: David Everitt Re: Budget Opening #1, FY 2o18-19 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, From time to time, it is necessary to amend the adopted annual budget to adjust revenues and expenses, account for unplanned budget items, and re -prioritize spending. This amendment comes to you a little earlier than usual in order to accommodate the expected revenues and expenses associated with the Walnut Lane property purchase, but also includes some other proposed changes in the General Fund, the Capital Projects Fund, the Culinary Water Fund, and the Sewer Fund. Overall, the recommended changes would result in an additional $468,568 in General Fund expenditures, which would be balanced by General Fund balance and a small increase in ongoing revenues. The Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds see small adjustments to account for additional revenue related to impact fees, and the Sewer Enterprise Fund will receive additional contingency funds related to the water reclamation facility bond that may be used for other sewer -related projects. Of the recommended expenses in the General and Capital Funds, $389,727 is one-time and $78,841 is ongoing. This amendment also recommends creating a separate Affordable Housing Fund, transferring the $24o,000 from the General Fund that is already budgeted. Here are the departmental specifics: Revenue - Overall, revenue trends appear to be steady, but it's too early in the fiscal year to make any adjustments to tax revenue. - Small adjustments are proposed to the plan check fees, donations, and sale of property line items. $45,966 ongoing. - Final F1718 numbers are still forthcoming, but we anticipate being over the statutory fund balance maximum by approximately $200,000. That amount will be transferred to the Capital Projects Fund when finalized. Expenses - Administration: o Fireworks. Per the information from Grand County, the cost of the 4tn of July fireworks production is increasing. The City and the County split the expense. $4,000 ongoing. Page 20 of 106 6-3 Old Business o Electeds travel and training. Council and Mayor travel, training, and food has eaten (!) into the Executive line items. These small additions should keep us in the black for the year. $5,000 ongoing. - Planning and Development: o Dam appraisals. The Department needs to commission a set of appraisals of the storm water control dam at the east end of Center Street. Appraisals are necessary to secure a formal access to the top of the dam for repairs and cleaning., and generate valuations of the White and Cozzens parcels to possibly begin settlement negotiations. $25,000 one time. Police: o Recruitment and retention pilot program. The Police Department asks that the Council formally review the request to fund officer recruitment and retention, but proposes that the funds be part of the Departmental budget, as opposed to coming from the affordable housing setaside. This is a follow up item from last spring's budget deliberations when the Council discussed the proposal, but no formal decision was made. $29,5oo ($59,000 ongoing). o Cat support. Cat -specific funds were gifted to the City, most of which were spent on the animal shelter improvements (also known as the Cattery). The unspent funds are being rebudgeted here to go toward feline operational needs. $37,92o one-time. - Public Works: o Restroom maintenance and upkeep. As requested, an additional Parks Service Worker is proposed to focus on parks and facilities restroom maintenance and upkeep. With the addition of the BMX park bathroom and the overall increase in use by residents and visitors, there's a need to service public restrooms more frequently. $40,341($8o,681 ongoing). - Capital Projects: o Grant receipts. The City received some small grant funds for riparian related projects along with the Rocky Mountain Power grant for the EV charging stations. $56,693 one time. o Transfer from General Fund. This is a balancing number to cover Capital Project expenses. $326,807 one time. o 1ooW. Project management. Engineering requests that the additional costs for project management for the looW. improvements be added to the budget, instead of draining Engineering's Professional and Technical services line item or taking from the project budget itself. The Council has already approved the task order for the project. $ioo,000 one time. o Public Works building space assessment. Public Works requests funds to pay for the space assessment work that will provide data regarding the expenses associated with building a new Public Works office and yard. Funds were budgeted in FY18 $45,000 one time. o MARC improvements. The MARC is planning to complete the bulk of their renovations within the year, but needs additional funds to do so. These funds would primarily pay for new windows. $8o,000 one time. o BMX bathroom solar power. The new BMX Park bathroom could be set up as a standalone photovoltaic -supplied facility, which would be around $5,000 more 2 Page 21 of 106 6-3 Old Business than simply hard -wiring into the grid. Regardless, this project needs some additional funds to complete the electrical installation. Project costs came in higher than originally budgeted for, in part due to increases in concrete costs. $12,000 one time. o Retro-commissioning of City facilities. The City is ready to invest in the retro-commissioning process for City Center ($32,000), the MRAC ($32,000), and the Center Street Gym ($23,5oo). This process is expected to achieve demand and energy savings through the implementation of low-cost and no -cost measures, improve system operations, and, in many cases, improve occupant comfort. $87,5oo one time. o Council chambers communication improvements. Upgrades to the council chambers include the ability to hold videoconferences, better audio conferences, and tying in the video transmission to the audio system. $13,000 one time. o Other City Center improvements. We recommend additional funds for office space for new positions and some shade structures for bike parking. $15,000 one time. o EV charger installation. These expenses are what the Rocky Mountain Power grant will reimburse. Other expenses associated with this project were expended in FY18. $26,3oo one time. - Millcreek Fund: o Trail support. These funds are to be used to a) maintain current non -paved and possibly paved trails, b) develop additional trail connections, and c) fund in part an update to the regional trail master plan. Funds will come from the Millcreek Fund balance this year. $15,000 one time and $3o,000 ongoing. - Water Enterprise Fund: o Impact fee revenue. Based on actuals to date and anticipated projects, this amount is increased. $2o,000 one time. - Sewer Enterprise Fund: o Existing facility fee. Based on actuals to date, this amount is increased. $25,000 ongoing. o Impact fees. Based on actuals to date and anticipated projects, this amount is increased. $12o,000 one time. o WRF overtime. The transition from the current facility to the new facility has required additional overtime for city employees. $7,000 one time. o WRF electricity. The new facility will use significantly more electricity, and actuals indicate the need to increase the annual budget accordingly. Once the photovoltaic panels are operational and the expenses related to water use are factored in, it's possible this amount will decrease in future years. $75,000 ongoing. 3 Page 22 of 106 6-3 Old Business RESOLUTION # 46-2018 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2018/2019 BUDGET WHEREAS, the City of Moab has proposed to amend the 2018/2019 fiscal year budget for the various funds; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE 2018/2019 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET SHALL BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: Amended Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Budget Amended Amended Revenue Expenditures 1. General Fund ($13,291,574) $ 13,291,574 2. Housing Fund ($3,320,000) $ 3,320,000 3. Millcreek Fund ($ 845,000) $ 845,000 4. Capital Projects Fund ($5,131,053) $ 5,131,053 5. Enterprise Water Non -Operating ($ 72,000) 6. Enterprise Sewer Operating ($1,752,782) $ 1,504,864 7. Enterprise Sewer Non -Operating ($ 406,749) 2018/2019 Fiscal Year Budget Amendments FUNDS Account # Account Name Adjustment Amount General Fund Revenue 10-32-213 Plan Check Fees $ (20,000.00) 10-35-006 Public Safety Donations $ (12,000.00) 10-36-400 Sale of Real/Personal Property $ (13,966.00) 10-39-940 General Fund Beg. Fund Balance $ (422,602.00) Total Revenue $ (468,568.00) General Fund Expenses Transfers 10-480-61 To Capital Projects Fund $ 326,807.00 New Account To Affordable Housing Fund $ 240,000.00 Police 10-421-14 Other Benefits $ 29,500.00 Animal Control 10-426-50 Grant Expenses - Donor $ 37,920.00 Parks 10-451-10 Salaries & Wages $ 20,386.00 Resolution #46-2018 Page 1 of 3 Page 23 of 106 6-3 Old Business 10-451-13 Employee Benefits $ 19,955.00 Planning 10-418-31 Professional & Technical $ 25,000.00 Executive 10-413-23 Travel 10-413-33 Education $ $ 2,000.00 3,000.00 Community Contributions Transfer to Affordable Housing 10-460-27 Fund $ (240,000.00) 10-460-84 Grand County/4th of July $ 4,000.00 Total Expenses $ 468,568.00 Housing Fund (new fund) Revenue New Account Proceeds from Long Term Debt $ (1,800,000.00) New Account Grants $ (1,250,000.00) New Account Rent/Lease Income $ (30,000.00) New Account Transfer from General Fund $ (240,000.00) Total Revenue $ (3,320,000.00) Expenses New Account Acquisitions $ 1,800,000.00 New Account Debt Retirement $ 1,000,000.00 New Account Development Costs $ 504,000.00 New Accounts Operation & Maintenance costs $ 16,000.00 Total Expenses $ 3,320,000.00 Millcreek Project Fund Revenue 28-39-209 Expenses 28-400-31 Beginning FB $ (45,000.00) Total Revenue $ (45,000.00) Professional & Technical $ 45,000.00 Total Expenses $ 45,000.00 Capital Projects Fund Revenue 41-36-124 41-36-228 41-39-222 Expenses 41-790-44 41-440-70 41-440-81 Resolution #46-2018 Grants $ (6,693.00) Utah Power Grant $ (50,000.00) Transfer from General Fund $ (326,807.00) Total Revenue $ (383,500.00) Perf Guarantee Default $ 4,700.00 Road Improvements $ 100,000.00 City Shop/Yard Improvements $ 45,000.00 Page 2 of 3 Page 24 of 106 6-3 Old Business 41-760-72 MARC Building Improvements $ 80,000.00 41-780-44 Park Improvements $ 12,000.00 41-770-50 City Center Bldg Improvements $ 115,500.00 41-770-55 City Sustainability $ 26,300.00 Total Expenses $ 383,500.00 Water Fund Non -Operating Income 51-36-111 Water Impact Fees $ (20,000.00) Sewer Fund Operating Income 52-57-200 Non -operating Revenue 52-56-111 Dperating Expenses Sewer Existing Facility Fee $ (25,000.00) Total Operating Revenue $ (25,000.00) Sewer Impact Fees $ Total Non -Operating Revenue $ (120,000.00) (120,000.00) 52-600-15 WRF - Overtime $ 7,000.00 52-600-27 WRF - Utilities $ 75,000.00 Total Operating Expenses $ 82,000.00 PASSED AND ADOPTED in open Council by a majority vote of the Governing Body of the City of Moab this 23rd day of October, 2018. Emily S. Niehaus Mayor ATTEST: Rachel E. Stenta City of Moab Resolution #46-2018 Page 3 of 3 Page 25 of 106 6-3 Old Business Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: October 23, 2018 #: 7-1 Title: Adoption of the City of Moab Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan. Date Submitted: September 18, 2018. Staff Presenter: Chuck Williams, City Engineer. Attachment(s): Resolution #40-2018, City of Moab Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan (July 2018). Options: Approve, deny, or modify. Recommended Motion: I move to approve Resolution #40-2018 adopting the City of Moab Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan dated July 2018. Background/Summary: The purpose of this master plan is to provide guidance to the City of Moab for decisions that will be made over the next 5 to 40 years in order to help the City provide adequate water to customers at a reasonable cost. Recommendations are based on City drinking water demand data and standards established by the Utah Division of Drinking Water (DDW). The scope of this master plan includes a study of the City's drinking water system and customer water use including: source production, storage volume, distribution system, energy use, water quality, and 2060 growth projections. From this study of the water system, an implementation plan with recommended improvements was prepared. The implementation plan includes conceptual level cost estimates and recommended schedule. The conclusions and recommendations of this study are limited by the accuracy of the development projections and other assumptions used in preparing the study. It is expected that the City will review and update this master plan about every 5 years as new information about development, system performance, or water use becomes available. Moab's popularity as a tourist destination has grown rapidly. As of 2017, it is estimated that over a million people visit Moab every year and tourism is now the dominant economic force. The U.S. Census Bureau estimated Moab's 2016 Page 26 of 106 7-1 New Business population to be 5,242. The Moab water system contains about 52 miles of distribution pipes ranging in size from 4 to 21 inches in diameter. The City's water delivery network is comprised of three pressure zones. The Moab water distribution network is made up of a variety of components including pumps, storage facilities, valves, and pipes. The City water system must be capable of responding to daily and seasonal variations in demand, while concurrently providing adequate capacity for firefighting and other emergency needs. In order to meet these goals, each of the distribution system components must be designed and operated with these uses in mind. Furthermore, planning is required in order to ensure that the distribution system will be capable of meeting the City's needs over the next several decades. Present and future needs were evaluated in preparation of this master plan. Present water needs were calculated according to Utah Division of Drinking Water (DDW) requirements and compared with actual water use records obtained from billing records and production data. Future water use projections were calculated by reviewing existing water use patterns for various land uses in Moab. Based on these existing water use patterns, future use was projected based on growth projections and planned future land use. In order to facilitate the analysis of the Moab water system, a computer model of the system was prepared and analyzed in two parts. First, the performance of existing facilities with current water demands was analyzed. Next, projected future demands were input to the model and the analysis was repeated. Recommendations for system improvements were prepared based on the results of these analyses. In general, this report was organized to follow the DDW requirements found in section {R309-510 U.A.C.} entitled "Minimum Sizing Requirements." Adoption of the Master Plan will allow staff to prepare budget recommendations for needed improvements as well provide guidelines for future development requirements. Page 27 of 106 7-1 New Business Resolution #40-2018 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, Title R309 of the Utah Administrative Code defines standards for municipal drinking water; and, WHEREAS, adherence to said drinking water standards requires a thorough investigation into the existing water infrastructure; and, WHEREAS, long-term planning is necessary to meet future demand; and, WHEREAS, the City hired Hansen, Allen, and Luce, Inc. to prepare a Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan to identify and prioritize current deficiencies and future improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF MOAB, UTAH THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ADOPTS THE ATTACHED WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MASTER PLAN. PASSED AND ADOPTED in open Council by a majority vote of the Governing Body of the City of Moab this 23rd day of October, 2018. By: Attest: Emily S. Niehaus, Mayor Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder Resolution #40-2018 Page 1 of 1 7-1 New Business Page 28 of 106 " The role of Transient Room Tax revenues to compensate for impacts of tourism on water infrastructure. 2o17Activities: During the past year, the above topics as well as the following have been discussed in Water Board meetings: Manti-La Sal National Forest Management Plan revisions; City's riparian plan; water supply and production compared to Moab's paper water rights; accuracy of water meters in the City and County; sunset of the debt for Ken's Lake; United States Geological Survey (USGS) Groundwater Study; 5,000 Acre -Foot (AF) water rights request made by San Juan Spanish Valley Special Service District, and injection wells as a possibility for Mountain View overflow. The development of new culinary wells and the review of water source protection zones have been a concern of the Board, as well as the E. Coli outbreak in Mill Creek and the use of culinary water to irrigate the baseball fields near the Spanish Valley Arena. The new Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) and recharging the wetlands has been a topic of interest, along with in -line micro -hydro power turbines as a mechanism to defray electrical costs at the WRF. Due to the preponderance of complex and varying facts and figures in the discussion of water supply and demand, Water Board members and staff compiled a Quick Reference Guide for public use. Drs. Ken Kolm and Paul van der Heijde met with the Water Board to discuss their report to the City on the Hydrogeologic and Environmental System Analysis of Moab City's springs and wells. The Board sent questions and feedback on the report to Kolm and City Engineer Chuck Williams. Members of the Board, along with Council members and staff, attended the Southeastern Utah Water Workshop last October. The closing comments of State Engineer Kent Jones at the conference were influential to the Board. After an audience member brought up the assertion that climate change could deplete water supply by up to 30 percent, and that our local area is already at the limit of safe yield, he stated that he is not optimistic about the future of Moab's water supply. 2018 Goals and Activities: The 2018 Goals for the Water Board are as follows: 1) Advise City Council and staff to ensure the City can secure quality water and a sufficient quantity of water required for buildout. A) Ensure we understand Moab's water system and have accurate data in order to assist City Council and staff with such projects as a groundwater monitoring effort and the upcoming Groundwater Management Plan, as well as other numerical goals, from a science -based position and as a reliable partner in regional water management. B) Provide guidance around management of Moab's water rights and ensure we have sufficient rights and production capacity for current and future residents of Moab. 2) Advise City Council and staff on water protection, including sole source protection and watershed management. 3) Advise City Council and staff on water management priorities and strategies to inform municipal planning for stormwater and other infrastructure developments. Action Items: In the past 12 months, the Water Board has voted upon and taken the following actions: 1) Recommended to the City to draft a Memorandum of Understanding regarding an upgrade and shared costs for stream gauges to more accurately measure water supply and diversions from Mill Creek. 2) Recommended to Council to draft a resolution to limit new water right appropriations. Page 29 of 106 7-1 New Business Workshop HAAuin & LUCE= WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MASTER PLAN (HAL Project No.: 380.09.100) FINAL REPORT JULY 2018 7-1 New Business ENGINEERS Page 30 of 106 CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MASTER PLAN (HAL Project No.: 380.09.100) Benjamin D. Miner, P.E. Project Engineer HansEn aLLE1i Sic LUCEnc ENGINEERS July 2018 7-1 New Business Page 31 of 106 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS i LIST OF TABLES iii LIST OF FIGURES iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS v ABBREVIATIONS vi CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1-1 PURPOSE 1-1 SCOPE 1-1 BACKGROUND 1-1 WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLANNING APPROACH 1-2 KEY SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA AND PERFORMANCE FINDINGS 1-2 CHAPTER 2 - CONNECTIONS 2-1 EXISTING CONNECTIONS 2-1 FUTURE CONNECTIONS 2-1 CHAPTER 3 - SOURCES 3-1 EXISTING SOURCES 3-1 EXISTING SOURCE REQUIREMENTS 3-2 Existing Peak Day Demand 3-2 Existing Average Yearly Demand 3-3 FUTURE PROJECTED SOURCE REQUIREMENTS 3-4 Future Peak Day Demand 3-4 2060 Average Yearly Demand 3-4 SOURCE REDUNDANCY 3-4 SOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS 3-5 CHAPTER 4 - STORAGE 4-1 EXISTING STORAGE 4-1 EXISTING STORAGE REQUIREMENTS 4-1 Equalization Storage 4-2 Fire Suppression Storage 4-2 FUTURE PROJECTED STORAGE REQUIREMENTS 4-3 STORAGE RECOMMENDATIONS 4-4 CHAPTER 5 - DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 5-1 EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 5-1 EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 5-1 Existing Peak Instantaneous Demand 5-2 Existing Peak Day Plus Fire Flow Demand 5-2 FUTURE PROJECTED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 5-2 2060 Peak Instantaneous Demand 5-2 City of Moab i Page 32 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business 2060 Peak Day Plus Fire Flow Demand 5-2 COMPUTER MODEL 5-2 MODEL COMPONENTS 5-3 Pipe Network 5-3 Demands 5-3 Sources and Storage Tanks 5-4 MODEL CALIBRATION 5-4 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 5-5 High Pressure Conditions 5-5 Peak Instantaneous Demand Conditions 5-5 Peak Day Demand Plus Fire Flow Conditions 5-5 Peak Day Extended Period 5-6 ANALYSIS RESULTS OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM 5-6 ANALYSIS RESULTS OF THE FUTURE SYSTEM 5-7 Lions Back Development 5-8 EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS 5-9 Recommended PRV Settings 5-11 FUTURE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS 5-12 CONTINUED USE OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM 5-12 CHAPTER 6 - OPTIMIZATION 6-1 OPTIMIZATION OVERIEW 6-1 ENERGY AND SYSTEM PERFORMANCE 6-2 Pumping Costs 6-2 CHLORINE MODELING 6-3 WATER AGE AND DISINFECTION BYPRODUCTS 6-3 SUMMARY OF OPTIMIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS 6-4 CHAPTER 7 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 7-1 PRECISION OF COST ESTIMATES 7-1 SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 7-1 FUNDING OPTIONS 7-6 General Obligation Bonds 7-6 Revenue Bonds 7-7 State/Federal Grants and Loans 7-7 Impact Fees 7-7 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 7-7 Source 7-8 Storage 7-8 Distribution 7-8 Optimization 7-8 REFERENCES 1 City of Moab ii Page 33 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business APPENDIX A — ERC Calculations APPENDIX B — Calibration Data APPENDIX C — Models APPENDIX D — Water Quality Data APPENDIX E — Cost Estimate Calculation APPENDIX F — Division of Drinking Water Certification LIST OF TABLES NO. TITLE PAGE 1-1 Key System Design Criteria 1-3 1-2 Distribution Modeling Flow Summary 1-3 2-1 Existing ERCs 2-1 2-2 Projected Population Growth 2-2 2-3 Projected 2060 ERCs 2-2 3-1 Summary of Moab Water Sources 3-2 3-2 Existing Source Requirements 3-3 3-3 Projected 2060 Source Requirements 3-4 3-4 Source Recommendations 3-5 4-1 Existing Storage Tanks 4-1 4-2 Existing Storage Requirements 4-2 4-3 2060 Storage Requirements 4-3 5-1 Existing Distribution System Projects 5-10 5-2 Recommended PRV Settings 5-12 7-1 Project Costs for System Improvements (Map ID Order) 7-2 7-2 Project Costs for System Improvements (Priority Order) 7-4 7-3 Five Year Cost Summary 7-6 LIST OF FIGURES NO. TITLE PAGE 1-1 Existing Moab Water Distribution System after 1-1 2-1 Future Land Use after 2-2 3-1 Moab 2016 Drinking Water Production 3-1 5-1 Summary of Pipe Length by Diameter 5-1 5-2 Non -Dimensional Peak Day Diurnal Curve 5-4 5-3 Lion's Back Development after 5-8 5-4 Water System Capital Project Map after 5-11 6-1 Water System Optimization Diagram 6-1 6-2 Chlorine Concentrations in Moab City 6-5 6-3 Water Age in Moab City 6-6 City of Moab Page 34 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Successful completion of this study was made possible by the cooperation and assistance of many individuals, including the Mayor of the City of Moab, City Council Members, City Staff, and the Hansen, Allen & Luce project team as shown below. We sincerely appreciate the cooperation and assistance provided by these individuals. City Mayor Emily Niehaus City Council Rani Derasary Mike Duncan Karen Guzman -Newton Kalen Jones Tawny Knuteson-Boyd City Staff Chuck Williams, City Engineer Patrick Dean, Public Works Director Eric Johanson, Assistant City Engineer Mark Jolissaint, Assistant City Engineer Levi Jones, Water Superintendent Hansen, Allen & Luce Project Team Steven C. Jones, P.E. (Principal in Charge) Benjamin D. Miner, P.E. (Project Manager/Project Engineer) Ryan T. Christensen, P.E. (Staff Engineer) City of Moab iv Page 35 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business .y GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS Average Daily Flow: The average yearly demand volume expressed in a flow rate. Average Yearly Demand: The volume of water used during an entire year. Build -out: When the development density reaches maximum allowed by planned development. Demand: Required water flow rate or volume. Distribution System: The network of pipes, valves and appurtenances contained within a water system. Drinking Water: Water of sufficient quality for human consumption. Also referred to as Culinary or Potable water. Dynamic Pressure: The pressure exerted by water within the pipelines and other water system appurtenances when water is flowing through the system. Equivalent Residential Connection: A measure used in comparing water demand from non- residential connections to residential connections. Fire Flow Requirements: The rate of water delivery required to extinguish a particular fire. Usually it is given in rate of flow (gallons per minute) for a specific period of time (hours). Head: A measure of the pressure in a distribution system that is exerted by the water. Head represents the height of the free water surface (or pressure reduction valve setting) above any point in the hydraulic system. Head Loss: The amount of pressure lost in a distribution system under dynamic conditions due to the wall roughness and other physical characteristics of pipes in the system. Peak Day: The day(s) of the year in which a maximum amount of water is used in a 24-hour period. Peak Day Demand: The average daily flow required to meet the needs imposed on a water system during the peak day(s) of the year. Peak Instantaneous Demand: The flow required to meet the needs imposed on a water system during maximum flow on a peak day. Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV): A valve used to reduce excessive pressure in a water distribution system. Pressure Zone: The area within a distribution system in which water pressure is maintained within specified limits. Service Area: Typically, the area within the boundaries of the entity or entities that participate in the ownership, planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance of a water system. City of Moab V Page 36 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business .y Static Pressure: The pressure exerted by water within the pipelines and other water system appurtenances when water is not flowing through the system, i.e., during periods of little or no water use. Storage Reservoir: A facility used to store, contain and protect drinking water until it is needed by the customers of a water system. Also referred to as a Storage Tank. Transmission Pipeline: A pipeline that transfers water from a source to a reservoir or from a reservoir to a distribution system. Water Conservation: Planned management of water to prevent waste. ABBREVIATIONS ac acre ac-ft acre-feet DDW The State of Utah Division of Drinking Water ERC Equivalent Residential Connection GIS Geographic Information System gpd Gallons per Day gpd/conn Gallons per Day per Connection gpm Gallons per Minute HAL Hansen, Allen & Luce, Inc. MG Million Gallons PRV Pressure Reducing Valve psi Pounds per Square Inch SCADA Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition City of Moab vi Page 37 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business .y CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The purpose of this master plan is to provide guidance to the City of Moab for decisions that will be made over the next 5 to 40 years in order to help the City provide adequate water to customers at a reasonable cost. Recommendations are based on City drinking water demand data and standards established by the Utah Division of Drinking Water (DDW). SCOPE The scope of this master plan includes a study of the City's drinking water system and customer water use including: source production, storage volume, distribution system, energy use, water quality, and 2060 growth projections. From this study of the water system, an implementation plan with recommended improvements was prepared. The implementation plan includes conceptual level cost estimates and recommended schedule. The conclusions and recommendations of this study are limited by the accuracy of the development projections and other assumptions used in preparing the study. It is expected that the City will review and update this master plan about every 5 years as new information about development, system performance, or water use becomes available. BACKGROUND The City of Moab is located near the southern edge of Grand County in eastern Utah and is bounded on the north and west by the Colorado River. Settlement of Moab began around 1880 and Moab was incorporated as a town in 1902. Historically, mining was the dominant industry within the local economy. However, over the years Moab has experienced several economic cycles related to the changing demand for locally produced minerals. During the 1970's, tourism was identified as a potential growth opportunity that could reduce Moab's reliance on mining jobs. Since that time, Moab's popularity as a tourist destination has grown rapidly. As of 2017, it is estimated that over a million people visit Moab every year and tourism is now the dominant economic force. The U.S. Census Bureau estimated Moab's 2016 population to be 5,242. The Moab water system contains about 52 miles of distribution pipes ranging in size from 4 to 21 inches in diameter. The City's water delivery network is comprised of three pressure zones. Throughout this report, the three zones will be referred to as the Lower, Middle, and Upper Zones, with the names corresponding to the relative elevations served by each pressure zone. In general, the topography in Moab slopes toward the Colorado River. Therefore, the Lower Zone is on the northwest side of the City, closest to the Colorado River, with the progressively higher Middle and Upper Zones located to the southeast. Figure 1-1 illustrates the extent of the Moab drinking water system and shows the locations of the pressure zones. City of Moab 1-1 Page 38 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business .y HansEn nun% & LUCE nc INGIPIEE R S KANE CREEK BLVD Spring Mountainview Tank 2.4 Miles CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MAST PLAN Well #6 Spring #1 Legend Sources N.• o Tanks H PRV Pipes Pressure Zones Lower Well #10 Well #7. Spring #2 Spring #3 Middle Upper EXISTING MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FIGURE 1-1 WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLANNING APPROACH The Moab water distribution network is made up of a variety of components including pumps, storage facilities, valves, and pipes. The City water system must be capable of responding to daily and seasonal variations in demand, while concurrently providing adequate capacity for firefighting and other emergency needs. In order to meet these goals, each of the distribution system components must be designed and operated with these uses in mind. Furthermore, planning is required in order to ensure that the distribution system will be capable of meeting the City's needs over the next several decades. Present and future needs were evaluated in preparation of this master plan. Present water needs were calculated according to Utah Division of Drinking Water (DDW) requirements and compared with actual water use records obtained from billing records and production data. Future water use projections were calculated by reviewing existing water use patterns for various land uses in Moab. Based on these existing water use patterns, future use was projected based on growth projections and planned future land use. In order to facilitate the analysis of the Moab water system, a computer model of the system was prepared and analyzed in two parts. First, the performance of existing facilities with current water demands was analyzed. Next, projected future demands were input to the model and the analysis was repeated. Recommendations for system improvements were prepared based on the results of these analyses. In general, this report is organized to follow the DDW requirements found in section {R309-510 U.A.C.} entitled "Minimum Sizing Requirements". KEY SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA AND PERFORMANCE FINDINGS Summaries of the key water system design criteria and performance findings for the Moab drinking water system are included in Table 1-1. These design criteria were used in evaluating system performance and in recommending future water system improvements. Criteria development is described in later chapters. Table 1-2 presents the design flows analyzed for the distribution system modeling. City of Moab 1-2 Page 40 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business TABLE 1-1 KEY SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA ELEMENT BASIS FOR STANDARD 2017 EXISTING CRITERIA ESTIMATED 2060 CRITERIA EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS Calculated 3,569 5,662 SOURCE 1 Peak Day Demand Average Yearly Demand {R309-510-7(2) & (3) U.A.C.} {R309-510-7(2) & (3) U.A.C.} 3,321 gpm 2,396 acre-ft 5,270 gpm 3,801 acre-ft STORAGE 1 Equalization Fire Suppression Total {R309-510-8(2) U.A.C.} Total fire flow volume 2.64 MG 1.00 MG 4.18 MG 1.00 MG 3.64 MG 5.18 MG DISTRIBUTION MODELING 1 Peak Instantaneous Minimum Fire Flow Max Operating Pressure Min. Operating Pressure 1.70 x Peak Day Demand @ 20 psi City Standard City Standard (peak day) 5,646 gpm 1,500 gpm 120 psi 40 psi 8,959 gpm 1,500 gpm 120 psi 40 psi TABLE 1-2 DISTRIBUTION MODELING FLOW SUMMARY DEMAND DEMAND PER ERC (gpm) TOTAL EXISTING DEMAND (gpm) TOTAL 2060 DEMAND (gpm) FLOW RATIO Average Day 0.42 1,485 2,357 ADD/ADD = 1.00 Peak Day 0.93 3,321 5,270 PDD/ADD = 2.24 Peak Instantaneous 1.58 5,646 8,959 PID/ADD = 3.80 City of Moab 1-3 Page 41 of 106 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business CHAPTER 2 - CONNECTIONS EXISTING CONNECTIONS According to connection information provided by the City of Moab, the Moab distribution network included 2,073 connections in 2016. Of that total, 1,575 were residential units, while 498 were commercial or multifamily units. An Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC) is a measure used in comparing the water demand of a typical single-family residential connection to other connection types. The number of ERCs served by the Moab drinking water system was calculated in accordance with guidelines provided by (R309-110-4 U.A.C.}. By definition, an average single-family residential connection represents 1 ERC. For convenience, connections will hereafter be categorized as either "residential" or "nonresidential". The term "residential" will be used to refer to single-family residential connections; all other connection types will be grouped as nonresidential connections. The average demand per ERC was determined by dividing the total annual residential demand by the total number of residential connections. Using water use data submitted by Moab to the Utah Division of Water Rights, the total annual volume of water used by residential customers in 2016 was 800 acre-feet. Converting the annual volume to an average flow and dividing by the number of residential connections gives an average demand of 0.315 gpm/ERC. In order to express non-residential demand in terms of ERCs, the non-residential demand was divided by the average demand per residential connection. The total nonresidential demand was 1,012 acre-feet which corresponds to an average annual flow rate of 627 gpm. Based on these values, the total number of ERCs computed for the Moab system was 3,569. The raw data associated with the ERC calculations are included in Appendix A. ERCs were distributed geographically within the Moab service area based on billed usage. A zonal breakdown of the ERC distribution is shown in Table 2-1. TABLE 2-1 EXISTING ERCS ZONE ERCs Lower 1,436 Middle 1,367 Upper 766 TOTAL 3,569 FUTURE CONNECTIONS Future ERCs were calculated by starting with the existing ERCs and adding the incremental amount of ERCs associated with future demands. The base assumption for projecting future City of Moab 2-1 Page 42 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., ERCs was that ERCs would increase proportionally with population. Population forecasts used for this master plan are based on data from the Moab Planning Commission and the Utah Governor's Office of Management and Budget. The forecasts were selected to match those used within the City's recently completed Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (Bowen Collins & Associates 2017). Through 2035, a growth rate of 1.10% was applied, and between 2035 and 2060 a growth rate of 1.02% was used. Table 2-2 presents a summary of the projected growth through 2060. TABLE 2-2 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH YEAR POPULATION Growth Rate ERCs 2017 5,490 1.10% 3,569 2020 5,736 1.10% 3,728 2025 6,058 1.10% 3,938 2030 6,399 1.10% 4,159 2035 6,758 1.10% 4,393 2060 8,710 1.02% 5,662 In all, 2,093 ERCs were added to represent demands that will be added by 2060. These future ERCs were distributed throughout the Moab drinking water service area based on planned future land use (see Figure 2-1). Similar to population projections, the future land use projections were also selected to match the projections used within the City's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. Additional data regarding the future ERC distribution can be found in Appendix A. A zonal breakdown of the projected 2060 ERC distribution is shown in Table 2-3. TABLE 2-3 PROJECTED 2060 ERCS ZONE ERC Lower 2,496 Middle 2,033 Upper 1,133 TOTAL 5,662 Each of the City's pressure zones is projected to experience significant growth. In absolute terms, the zone that is projected to have the largest growth is the Lower Zone. By 2060, the number of ERCs in the Lower Zone is projected to have increased by 1,060 ERCs, an increase City of Moab 2-2 Page 43 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., Moab City\09.100 - Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan\GIS\Figure 2-2.mxd 0 N s x o � HansEn El ALLEn Sk LUCEinc Q Q MH/RV-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 RA-1 RC SAR GWSSA Drinking Water Service Area Numeric values show the distribution of ERCs associated with future growth l6 O ENGINEERS CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAI 7-1 New Business a 4 0 1 Ub FUTURE LAND USE & DISTRIBUTION OF FUTURE ERCS FIGURE 2-1 of 74%. For comparison, the Middle and Upper zones are projected to increase by just under 50%. Within the following chapters, the effects of this projected growth on source requirements, storage requirements, and distribution planning will be discussed. City of Moab 2-3 Page 45 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, CHAPTER 3 - SOURCES EXISTING SOURCES Moab currently uses several wells and springs to provide water to the City's drinking water system. A summary of the City's sources is provided in Table 3-1. TABLE 3-1 SUMMARY OF MOAB WATER SOURCES NAME ZONE CAPACITY (gpm) Well 6 Upper 1,500 Well 10 Upper 700 Skakel Springs Lower 440 Spring 1 Upper 350 Spring 2 Upper Spring 3* Upper 350 TOTAL 3,340 *Spring 3 is also known as Birch Springs. In addition to the sources listed in Table 3-1, the City also owns Well 7. Well 7 is operational but was not included in Table 3-1 because it is not currently used within the drinking water system. Well 7 has a capacity of about 350 gpm and the water is sold to the Moab Golf Club. Figure 3-1 presents a snapshot of Moab's drinking water production in 2016. City of Moab 3-1 Page 46 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu 400 r 350 6 300 c� c 250 0 200 a 150 L >, 100 s 50 0 2 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Springs 1 & 2 Spring 3 Skakel Springs Well 10 Well 6 FIGURE 3-1: MOAB 2016 DRINKING WATER PRODUCTION With regard to peak capacity, Well 6 is currently the City's largest source of drinking water. However, from Figure 3-1, it can be inferred that the City's current usage pattern is to rely on Springs 1, 2, and 3 to meet the City's base water demands and then to supplement with water from Skakel Springs and the City's two wells during times of higher demand. In 2016, the annual breakdown in production volume for each source was: 518 acre-feet for Springs 1 & 2, 516 acre-feet for Spring 3, 232 acre-feet for Skakel Springs, 534 acre-feet for Well 10, and 451 acre-feet for Well 6. EXISTING SOURCE REQUIREMENTS DDW standards require that distribution network water sources must be able to meet the expected water demand for two conditions: peak day demand and average yearly demand. These criteria will be addressed in the following paragraphs. Existing Peak Day Demand Peak day demand is the water demand on the day of the year with the highest water use and is used to determine the required source capacity. In accordance with rule {R309-510-7 U.A.C.}, the total source requirement is the sum of the peak day indoor and peak day outdoor demands. The peak day indoor requirement is defined as 800 gpd/ERC (see {R309-510-7(2) U.A.C.}). Based on 3,569 existing ERCs, the indoor source requirement for Moab City is 1,983 gpm. The peak day outdoor requirement was calculated according to {R309-510-7(3) U.A.C.}. Accordingly, the peak day outdoor requirement was calculated by multiplying the state standard peak day requirement in gpm/acre by the City's irrigated acreage. Moab is located in Zone 5 of the map "Irrigated Crop Consumptive Use Zones and Normal Annual Effective Precipitation". As a result, the State Standard peak day irrigation demand for Moab is 4.52 gpm/irrigated acre. The irrigated acreage associated with an ERC, was determined by randomly selecting 20 residential lots and measuring the irrigable area. Using this process, the average irrigable area City of Moab 3-2 Page 47 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu was 0.115 acres. However, landscaping was found to differ greatly from one lot to the next. Some residents choose to landscape in a traditional manner with much of the irrigable area covered by conventional grasses and/or trees. Other residents have chosen to employ low water use strategies in their landscaping. In order to account for this variation, each lot was also rated based on the effective irrigated area. After correcting for variation in landscaping practices, the average effective irrigable area was found to be 0.083 acres. Multiplying the effective acreage by the unit demand and total ERCs gives a total outdoor demand of 1,339 gpm. Summing the indoor and outdoor demand components gives a total peak day source requirement of 3,321 gpm or about 0.93 gpm/ERC. Actual metered source production data was available for the summer of 2017. The highest observed daily production flow reached 3,185 gpm (July 6, 2017), while the highest 3 day average was 2,754 gpm (June 23 to Jun 25, 2017). Based on these values, the State Standard peak day flow was judged to be reasonable. A per zone breakdown of the existing source requirements is shown in Table 3-2. TABLE 3-2 EXISTING SOURCE REQUIREMENTS Zone ERCs Zone Demand (gpm) Existing Source Capacity (gpm) PRV Flows Remaining Source Capacity (gpm) In (gpm) From Out (gpm) To Lower 1,436 1,336 440 896 Middle 0 NA 0 Middle 1,367 1,272 0 2,168 Upper 896 Lower 0 Upper 766 713 2,900 0 NA 2,168 Middle 19 Total 3,569 3,321 3,340 3,064 3,064 19 "Existing Source Capacity" is the capacity of the drinking water sources which supply water to the pressure zone. "PRV Flows" summarizes the flow in and out of each zone through PRVs. "In" and "Out" are the flows through the PRVs and "From" and "To" are the origination and destination zones of the flow. "Remaining Capacity" is the summation of all of the flows into the zone minus all of the flows out of the zone. Overall, the City has a total excess capacity of 19 gpm. Existing Average Yearly Demand Water utilities must also be able to supply the average yearly demand. Average yearly demand is the average volume of water used during the course of one year. State Standards specify an annual requirement of 146,000 gallons per ERC for indoor use and 2.69 acre-feet per irrigated acre for outdoor use. Based on 3,569 ERCs and 0.083 irrigated acres per ERC, the State Standard average yearly demand for the Moab distribution system is 2,396 ac-ft. The actual metered production volume from 2016 was 2,251 ac-ft. City of Moab 3-3 Page 48 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,...,..,—,- ,.,...,— , .— FUTURE PROJECTED SOURCE REQUIREMENTS Water demand is expected to increase as development within the City continues. As with existing water use, future water source needs were evaluated on the basis of peak day demand and average yearly demand. Each requirement is addressed separately in the following paragraphs. Future Peak Day Demand The projected total peak day demand is predicted to reach 5,270 gpm by 2060. Table 3-3 provides a summary of the 2060 source requirements for Moab City, with each column heading as previously defined. Based on the sources the City is currently utilizing, the projected deficit in source capacity is 1,930 gpm. TABLE 3-3 PROJECTED 2060 SOURCE REQUIREMENTS Zone ERCs Zone Demand (gpm) Existing Source Capacity gpm) PRV Flows Remaining Capacity (gpm) In (gpm) From Out (gpm) To Lower 2,496 2,323 440 0 Middle 0 NA -1,883 Middle 2,033 1,892 0 1,845 Upper 0 Lower -47 Upper 1,133 1,055 2,900 0 NA 1,845 Middle 0 Total 5,662 5,270 3,340 2,798 2,798 -1,930 2060 Average Yearly Demand Similar to the existing average yearly demand, state standards were also applied to calculate the 2060 average yearly demand. Based on values of 146,000 gallons per ERC for indoor use and 2.69 acre-feet per irrigated acre for outdoor use, the projected average yearly demand in 2060 is 3,801 ac-ft, and the increase between the existing and 2060 conditions is projected to be 1,405 ac-ft. SOURCE REDUNDANCY In addition to meeting the peak day and annual source requirements, it is recommended that redundancy be incorporated into drinking water production. It is recommended that the water system have adequate capacity to meet all of the demand objectives with a major source unavailable. Based on the reviewed flow data, the largest source in the Moab system is Well #6, with a capacity of 1,500 gpm. This recommendation is not considered a deficiency since since the City sources are expected to be adequate for the existing needs. City of Moab 3-4 Page 49 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu SOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS Under existing conditions, the City has an estimated surplus capacity of 19 gpm during peak day conditions with all sources in operation. However, in order for the City to have source redundancy such that no single drinking water source is indispensable, about 1,500 gpm of additional source capacity is needed. One potential option for the City to make up a portion of that deficit would be to use Well #7, or another City owned well that is not currently in service, within the drinking water system. In order for one of these wells to be a viable drinking water source, Moab will need to ensure that the well meets all state requirements. In addition, as water from Well #7 is currently sold to the Moab Golf Club, the City should verify that any agreements with the Golf Club would allow the City to divert the water into the drinking water system under an emergency scenario. With a capacity 350 gpm, Well #7 is not sufficient to provide full redundancy in the event of a loss of operation at Well #6. As an additional option, the City could consider working with Grand Water and Sewer Service Agency (GWSSA) to explore the feasibility of adding an interagency connection between the Moab and GWSSA drinking water systems. Depending on the capacity of the connection, it could potentially serve all or part of the needed redundancy. An interagency connection has the potential to aid both parties in supplying quality water to their respective customers. As another option, the City could also develop an additional water source. For planning purposes, it has been assumed that the City will construct a new well for source redundancy. Under 2060 conditions, a source deficiency of 1,930 gpm is projected if no new sources are developed. In order to address this projected deficiency, it is recommended that the City develop an additional 1,930 gpm of source capacity. This is in addition to the capacity needed for existing system redundancy. It is not expected that the City will need to add all of this capacity in the immediate future. Instead, the City should periodically evaluate their source capacity and system demand and add capacity as needed. For the purpose of this master plan, it has been assumed that this future deficiency will be met through the construction of a new well. TABLE 3-4 SOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS Priority Improvement 1 Develop an additional drinking water source to provide redundant capacity. Consider working with GWSSA to explore the feasibility of an interagency connection. 2 Meet future needs by developing new sources of at least 1,930 gpm A well has been assumed for the purpose of projecting costs. City of Moab 3-5 Page 50 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu CHAPTER 4 - STORAGE EXISTING STORAGE The City's current drinking water system includes 3 storage facilities with a total capacity of 3.0 MG. The locations of storage facilities are shown on Figure 1-1. Table 4-1 presents a listing of the names and select attributes of the existing water storage tanks. TABLE 4-1 EXISTING STORAGE TANKS Name Type Dimensions (ft) Volume (MG) Outlet Level Emergency Storage Level Fire Suppression Level Overflow/ Equalization Level Skakel Steel 72 1.0 5,156.8 (0 feet) NA NA 5,190.2 (33.4 feet) Mountain View Steel 72 1.0 5,304.0 (0 feet) NA 5321.2 (17.2 feet) 5,337.4 (33.4 feet) Powerhouse Steel 72 1.0 5,305.E (0 feet) NA 5321.2 (15.6 feet) 5339.0 (33.4 feet) Emergency storage levels and fire suppression levels were considered during the master planning process. The fire suppression levels set in Table 4-1 define the elevation at which the City's fire suppression storage begins. Defining fire suppression tank levels helps the City ensure that the storage volume dedicated to fire suppression is available to meet fire flow requirements at all times. Additional discussion regarding the fire suppression level is included with the "Fire Suppression Storage" subheading below. DDW standards suggest that emergency storage can be considered in the sizing of storage facilities {R309-510-8(1)(c) U.A.C.}. Emergency storage is intended to provide a safety factor that can be used in the case of unexpectedly high demands, pipeline failures, equipment failures, electrical power outages, water supply contamination, or natural disasters. However, based on the City's history and discussions with City staff, no additional storage for emergencies is recommended. Accordingly, no tank levels were specified for emergency storage in Table 4-1. EXISTING STORAGE REQUIREMENTS According to DDW standards, storage tanks must be able to provide: 1) equalization storage volume to make up the difference between the peak day flow rate and the peak instantaneous; and 2) fire suppression storage volume to supply water for firefighting. A summary of the existing storage requirements for the drinking water system is shown in Table 4-2. City of Moab 4-1 Page 51 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, TABLE 4-2 EXISTING STORAGE REQUIREMENTS PRESSURE ZONE ERCs REQUIRED STORAGE (MG) EXISTING STORAGE (MG) REMAINING MG ( ) Equalization (MG) Fire Suppression (MG) Total (MG) Lower 1,436 1.06 0 1.06 1.00 -0.06 Middle 1,367 1.01 0 1.01 0 -1.01 Upper 766 0.57 1.00 1.57 2.00 0.43 TOTAL 3,569 2.64 1.00 3.64 3.00 -0.64 Due to PRV interconnections between pressure zones, excess storage located in higher zones can be applied to zones that are lower. Therefore, the City has an existing deficit of 0.64 MG in drinking water storage capacity. Recommendations for addressing the storage deficit have been included at the end of this chapter. Equalization Storage The need for equalization storage is highest during the irrigation season on days of peak water use. Equalization storage is used to meet peak demands when demand exceeds the capacity of the sources. For the City of Moab, the required equalization storage was calculated according to the guidelines outlined by {R309-510-8(2) U.A.C.). The equalization storage requirement includes an indoor and outdoor component. The indoor component is 400 gallons per ERC. The outdoor component is 4,081 gallons/irrigated acre. Based on 0.083 irrigated acres per ERC, the outdoor component is 339 gallons per ERC. Therefore the total equalization storage required for each ERC is 739 gallons. With 3,569 existing ERCs, the existing equalization storage requirement for the City of Moab was found to be 2.64 MG. Fire Suppression Storage Fire suppression storage is required for water systems that provide water for firefighting. The Moab Valley Fire Protection District has jurisdiction over the City with Phillip Mosher serving as fire chief. The contact information for the Moab Valley Fire Protection District is as follows: Phone: (435) 259-5557 Address: 45 South 100 East Moab, UT 84532 The water system should be managed so that the storage volume dedicated to fire suppression is available to meet fire flow requirements when needed. This can be accomplished by designating minimum storage tank water levels that provide reserve storage equal to the City of Moab 4-2 Page 52 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., required fire suppression storage. Although it is important to utilize equalization storage, typical daily water fluctuations in the tanks should never be allowed below the minimum established levels except during fire or emergency situations. Fire suppression tank levels are included in Table 4-1. The assigned tank levels assume that all of the fire suppression storage in the Moab system is provided by the Mountain View and Powerhouse tanks. Between the two tanks, a total volume of 1.0 MG has been allocated for fire storage, which is sufficient to provide a 4,000 gpm fire suppression flow over a duration of 4 hours. FUTURE PROJECTED STORAGE REQUIREMENTS The projected storage volumes required in 2060 are based on the same equalization, fire suppression, and operational storage requirements as were calculated for the existing conditions. The 2060 equalization storage will be higher than existing conditions because the number of ERCs is projected to increase. The City's future storage projections are presented in Table 4-3. TABLE 4-3 2060 STORAGE REQUIREMENTS PRESSURE ZONE ERCs REQUIRED STORAGE (MG) EXISTING STORAGE (MG) REMAINING MG ( ) Equalization (MG) Fire Suppression (MG) Total (MG) Lower 2,496 1.84 0 1.84 1.00 -0.84 Middle 2,0331 1.50 0 1.50 0 -1.50 Upper 1,133 0.84 1.00 1.84 2.00 0.16 TOTAL 5,662 4.18 1.00 5.18 3.00 -2.18 The projected equalization storage requirement in 2060 is 4.18 MG, an increase of 1.54 MG over the existing condition. Although the storage requirements in Table 4-3 have been categorized by zone, the City is not required to address each zone on an individual basis. Storage located in higher zones can be applied to lower zones. As a result, the City has some flexibility in deciding where to locate future storage tanks. Fire suppression requirements are not projected to increase over the existing scenario. Often, fire suppression requirements do not increase over time. Instead, as older buildings are replaced with newer buildings that conform to newer building codes, fire suppression requirements may decrease. City of Moab 4-3 Page 53 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, STORAGE RECOMMENDATIONS In order to address the existing storage needs, it is recommended that the City construct a new storage tank with a capacity of up to 2.2 MG. The new tank will meet the City's existing needs while providing some additional capacity that would be allocated to future growth. It is recommended that the storage tank should be constructed east of the intersection of Spanish Valley Drive and Spanish Trail Road. The City already owns the property, and the location is advantageous for system hydraulics and energy. Further discussion on the benefits of the tank site is included within the optimization chapter of this report. City of Moab 4-4 Page 54 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— CHAPTER 5 - DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The distribution system consists of all pipelines, valves, fittings, and other appurtenances used to convey water from the water sources and storage tanks to the water users. The existing water system contains about 52 miles of distribution pipe ranging in size from 4 to 21 inches in diameter. Figure 5-1 presents a summary of pipe length by diameter. FIGURE 5-1: SUMMARY OF PIPE LENGTH BY DIAMETER EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Rule {R309-105-9(1) U.A.C.} applies to existing systems approved prior to January 1, 2007 and requires that distribution systems be able to maintain 20 psi at all points in the system during normal operating conditions and during conditions of fire flow plus peak day demand. Rule {R309-105-9(2) U.A.C.} adds the following minimum water pressure constraints: (a) 20 psi during conditions of fire flow plus peak day demand; (b) 30 psi during peak instantaneous demand; and (c) 40 psi during peak day demand. Rule {R309-105-9(2) U.A.C.} applies to new systems approved after January 1, 2007 and to new areas or subdivisions of existing systems approved after the same date. Much of Moab is subject to {R309-105-9(1) U.A.C.}; however, new developments will need to meet the criteria outlined by {R309-105-9(2) U.A.C.}. City of Moab 5-1 Page 55 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, Existing Peak Instantaneous Demand Peak instantaneous demand is the highest demand on the peak day. The pipes in the distribution system must be large enough to convey the peak instantaneous demand while maintaining a pressure at connections above 30 psi. The peak day instantaneous demand was determined based on the peak day flow of 3,321 gpm and a peaking factor of 1.70. Based on these values, the peak instantaneous flow rate is 5,646 gpm. Existing Peak Day Plus Fire Flow Demand In accordance with DDW regulations, the distribution system must be capable of maintaining "20 psi during conditions of fire flow and fire demand experienced during peak day demand" (R309- 105-9(2)). Based on discussions with Moab City personnel, a minimum fire flow criterion of 1,500 gpm was selected for all locations in the distribution system. Larger fire flows may be required at larger structures throughout the system based on the International Fire Code and recommendations from the Moab Valley Fire Protection District. All fire flows were simulated under the state defined peak day demand conditions of 3,321 gpm as outlined by {R309-510-9(4) U.A.C.}. FUTURE PROJECTED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS The same performance standards used for the existing system also apply to the projected 2060 system. The performance of the 2060 system was evaluated for the following scenarios: peak day demands, peak instantaneous demands, and peak day plus fire flow demands. 2060 Peak Instantaneous Demand The projected peak day demand for the 2060 distribution system was 5,270 gpm. Assuming the same peaking factor of 1.70 applies to the build -out peak day demand gives a 2060 peak instantaneous demand of 8,959 gpm. 2060 Peak Day Plus Fire Flow Demand The build -out peak day plus fire flow scenario was evaluated in a similar manner as compared to the existing peak day plus fire flow scenario. It was assumed that the fire flow requirements would not change between the existing and build -out conditions. Generally, this is a conservative assumption as, over time, older buildings are replaced with newer buildings constructed in accordance with updated building codes. The build -out fire flow scenario was evaluated with a model demand of 5,270 gpm. COMPUTER MODEL A computer model of the City's water distribution system was developed to analyze the performance of the existing and future distribution system and to prepare solutions for existing facilities that cannot meet the DDW or City criteria for water system pressures. The software City of Moab 5-2 Page 56 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., used for the model was EPANET 2.0, which is a computer program that models the hydraulic behavior of piping networks. Computer models were developed for three phases of water system development. The first phase was the development of a model of the existing system (existing model). This model was used for calibration and to identify deficiencies in the existing system. The geometry of the existing model was assembled using GIS data of distribution pipelines and facilities provided by Moab City. The model was calibrated based on SCADA data for Moab tanks and sources and based on additional communication with City personnel. A second model was developed which was used to identify those corrections necessary to improve existing system deficiencies (corrected existing model). This model includes the improvements recommended for the existing system. The third phase was the development of a future model to indicate those improvements that will be necessary for the projected 2060 condition (future model). MODEL COMPONENTS The two basic elements of the computer model are pipes and nodes. A pipe is described by its inside diameter, overall length, minor friction loss factors, and a roughness value associated with friction head losses. A pipe can include elbows, bends, valves, pumps, and other operational elements. Nodes are the end points of a pipe and they can be categorized as junction nodes or boundary nodes. A junction node is a point where two or more pipes meet, where a change in pipe diameter occurs, or where flow is put in or taken out of the system. A boundary node is a point where the hydraulic grade is known (a reservoir or PRV). The computer model of the water distribution system is not an exact replica of the actual water system. Efforts were made to make the model as complete and accurate as possible. Nonetheless, pipeline locations used in the model are approximate and some pipelines, particularly those smaller than 4 inches, may not be included in the model. Moreover, it is not necessary to include all of the distribution system pipes in the model to accurately simulate its performance. Pipe Network As indicated previously, the pipe network layout was based on GIS data proved to HAL. During model preparation, accuracy of the new model was verified by reviewing data through discussion with City personnel. Updates to the model were made by HAL throughout the master plan study. Demands Water demands were input to the model based on billing data from the summer of 2017. The peak demand month was determined from the billing data, and the billing addresses were geocoded in GIS in order to link the demands to a physical location. The geocoded demands City of Moab 5-3 Page 57 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, were then assigned to the closest model demand node and the peak monthly flows were scaled to convert them into peak day flows. Daily variation in demand was modeled by applying a typical diurnal demand curve to the model demands. The diurnal curve is used to scale the average peak day demand to the peak instantaneous demand. The non -dimensional demand curve used for Moab is shown in Figure 5-2 1.8 1.6 1.4 Y 0.8 ca a 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 0:00 Time FIGURE 5-2: NON -DIMENSIONAL PEAK DAY DIURNAL CURVE Based on the diurnal curve, the peak instantaneous demand occurs at 6:00 AM and the associated peaking factor is 1.70. Demand is elevated throughout the night as a result of automatic sprinkler irrigation. The high morning peak results from night time irrigation combined with high indoor use from people waking up and preparing for the day. The smaller evening peak is a result of evening irrigation and water use associated with people preparing for bed. Sources and Storage Tanks Moab's wells and springs serve as the drinking water sources in the model. The levels in the tanks are modeled in the extended period model scenario. The extended period model predicts the levels in the tanks as they fill from sources and empty to meet demand in the system. MODEL CALIBRATION A water system computer model should be calibrated before it may be relied on to accurately simulate the performance of the distribution system. Calibration was performed by comparing computer results with actual system performance. When the computer model does not match the field tests within an acceptable level of accuracy, the computer model is adjusted to match City of Moab 5-4 Page 58 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, field conditions. Calibration is especially useful for identifying pipe sizes that are not correct and PRVs or isolation valves that are not operating as expected. Pipe roughness is an additional characteristic which may be adjusted during calibration. The model was calibrated primarily through the use of SCADA data. Source flows and tank levels were provided to HAL and the model was calibrated by adjusting production volumes and PRV settings so that the overall behavior of the network was reproduced within the model. A Darcy-Weisbach roughness coefficient of 0.85 millifeet was used for most model pipes. Calibration results are included in Appendix B. The overall flow patterns in the model matched the observed values very well. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The EPANET model was used to analyze the performance of the water system for current and projected future demands under three main operating conditions: low flow (highest pressure) conditions, peak instantaneous conditions, and peak day plus fire flow conditions. Each of these conditions stresses the water system so that the performance of the distribution system may be analyzed for compliance with DDW and Moab City's requirements. The results of the model for each of the conditions are discussed below. High Pressure Conditions Low flow or static conditions are usually the worst case for high pressures in a water distribution system. In the winter time, water demand during night time hours is very low, tanks are nearly full, and movement of water through the system is minimal. Under these conditions, the water system approaches a static condition and water pressure in the distribution system is dependent only upon the elevation differences and pressure regulating devices. Another condition similar to static condition that can also cause high pressures in the City's water system occurs in the summer when demand is low and pumps are on to fill storage tanks. The highest pressures are reached when pumps are on, tanks are almost full, and demand is low. Both of these high pressure conditions were simulated with the model. Peak Instantaneous Demand Conditions Peak Instantaneous demand conditions can sometimes be the worst -case scenario for low pressures throughout a water distribution system. A water system often reaches peak instantaneous demand conditions during the hottest days of the summer when both indoor and outdoor water use is the highest. The high demand creates elevated velocities in the distributions pipes which reduces pressure. DDW requires the pipes in the distribution system be capable of delivering peak instantaneous demand to the entire service area and maintain a minimum pressure of 30 psi at any service connection within the distribution system. Peak Day Demand Plus Fire Flow Conditions Even though peak instantaneous conditions are the worst -case for the lowest pressure and highest demand for the entire system, the peak day plus fire flow is often the worst -case City of Moab 5-5 Page 59 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, scenario for the lowest pressures for specific locations in the system. This condition occurs when fire hydrants are being used on a day of high water demand. The distribution system must be capable of delivering the required fire flow to the specified location within the system, while supplying the peak day demand to the entire distribution system. In accordance with the requirements outlined by {R309-105-9(4) U.A.C.}, the required fire flows must be delivered while maintaining 20 psi minimum residual pressure at the delivery point and to all service connections within the distribution system. Peak Day Extended Period The peak day extended period model was used to model the water system performance over time. An extended period model is actually a static model run several times for each time period. The peak day extended period model was used to set system conditions for the static models, calibrate zone -to -zone water transfers, analyze system controls and the performance of the system over time, analyze system recommendations for performance over time, and analyze the water system for optimization recommendations. The peak day extended period model was run for several days with the peak day demand curve repeating every 24 hours such that the model operated in a stable pattern. The model has reached stabilization when the filling and emptying cycles of the tanks repeat in a consistent pattern without running empty. System recommendations for existing conditions and future conditions at build -out were checked with the extended period model to confirm adequacy. ANALYSIS RESULTS OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM The model output primarily consists of the computed pressures at nodes and flow rates through pipes. The model also provides additional data related to pipeline flow velocity and head loss to help evaluate the performance of the various components of the distribution system. Results from the model are available on a CD in Appendix C. Due to the large number of pipes and nodes in the model, it is impractical to prepare a figure which illustrates pipe numbers and node numbers. The reader should refer to the CD to review the full model output. Summary results for the various modeling scenarios are included below. For nearly all areas of the City, the observed pressures were below the City's preferred maximum pressure of 120 psi. The lone exception is a small area along the east side of Main Street near the intersection with Kane Creek Boulevard. The maximum observed pressures at that location reach 123 psi, slightly higher than the City's standard. One option that would reduce pressures in the area would be to transfer supply for the area from the Upper Pressure Zone to the Middle Pressure Zone by changing isolation valves. The pressure zone change would reduce the maximum pressure to about 76 psi. However, since the peak pressures are only slightly higher than the City's standard it may be preferable to accept the elevated pressures. Water users become accustomed to their existing level of service and changes in pressure (increases or decreases) may lead to complaints. In addition, automatic sprinkler systems and irrigation systems are often designed based on available pressures. Changes to available pressures may cause poor irrigation system performance. City of Moab 5-6 Page 60 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— Minimum pressures were evaluated against a 40 psi standard under peak day demand conditions and 30 psi under peak instantaneous demand conditions. One small area of the system was not able meet the peak day demand minimum pressure criterion. The modeled pressure at the far south end of David Court was about 39 psi during peak day demand. The most direct solution for increasing the pressures at that location is to make piping changes at the corner of David Court and Doc Allen Drive. Currently, the pipeline in David Court is part of the Middle Pressure Zone. However, there is an Upper Zone transmission pipeline in Doc Allen Drive that connects to Mountain View Tank. Connecting the David Court pipe to the Upper Zone transmission pipeline in Doc Allen Drive would increase the peak day pressure at the south end of Doc Allen Drive to about 85 psi. Before making any changes, it is recommended that the City verify the pressures along David Court. All other areas of the City's drinking water system are able to meet the 40 psi peak day minimum pressure standard. The area of the system with the second lowest pressure under peak day demands is along 100 South at about 550 East. Peak day pressures in this area are about 44 psi. The remainder of the system is generally able to maintain at least 50 psi under peak day demands conditions. All areas of the system were able to meet the 30 psi minimum pressure under peak instantaneous demands. The two areas with lowest observed pressures were along David Court and 550 East 100 South. The minimum pressures at each location were 37 psi and 42 psi, respectively. Using modeling, several locations were identified that are not able to provide the minimum fire suppression flow of 1,500 gpm under peak day demand conditions. The majority of the identified shortcomings result from 4-inch and 6-inch diameter pipelines in residential areas. Projects that address the fire flow capacity at these locations are included within the recommendations toward the end of this chapter. Another distribution consideration relates to the Sunset Grill. Currently, it is connected to the City water system by way of a private individual booster pump. Typically, the Utah Division of Drinking Water does not approve private booster stations, unless through an "exception to rule". It is recommended that Moab City consult with the Division to determine if an exception is necessary. ANALYSIS RESULTS OF THE FUTURE SYSTEM The build -out system was analyzed based on the same parameters that were considered for the existing system. In general, the build -out model behaves similarly to the existing model. However, each of the pressure zones is expected to experience moderate growth. As a result of the growth, pressures within the future model are generally slightly lower and the pipeline velocities are slightly higher as compared to the existing model. A copy of the future model is included on the CD in Appendix C. City of Moab 5-7 Page 61 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— The area with the highest pressures remained unchanged within the future model as compared to the existing model. The peak observed pressure occurs in the small area along the east side of Main Street near the intersection with Kane Creek Boulevard. Within the build -out model the peak observed pressure was 121 psi. As with the existing recommendation, it is suggested that the City accept these slightly elevated pressures. Regarding low pressures under peak day demand conditions, the area along David Court that had the lowest pressures in the existing model is assumed to be connected to the upper pressure zone within the future 2060 model. As a result, the observed pressure at that location will be about 75 psi under future peak day conditions. The lowest observed pressure within the future model occurred at about 550 East 100 North and is predicted to be 43 psi. Therefore, under 2060 peak day demand conditions, all locations within the future model are projected to meet the 40 psi minimum pressure standard. Similar to the existing model, all areas within the future model were able to meet the 30 psi minimum standard under peak instantaneous demand conditions. The lowest observed pressure in the future model was 40 psi at 550 East 100 North. Fire suppression modeling was also conducted for the future model. In general, fire suppression capacity is slightly lower in the future model due to the higher future demands. However, assuming that projects recommended for the existing system will be completed, no future fire flow deficiencies were identified. Lions Back Development The Lion's Back Development is a proposed development located northeast of the City (see Figure 5-3). Water supply for the Development was analyzed while reviewing the future system. It is projected that the development will contribute about 188 ERCs to the future Moab system, with an associated peak day demand of 175 gpm. In order to supply water to the development, a pump station, transmission pipeline, and a storage tank will be needed. The location of the proposed Development is somewhat higher in elevation than the existing Moab pressure zones. The highest elevation of any existing Moab service connection is about 4,195 feet. It is expected that the elevation of the Lion's Back Development will be at least 4,470 feet. In order to provide water to the development, it will be necessary to pump water from the existing Upper Pressure Zone into a future Lion's Back Zone. A logical water source to pump from is the existing 12-inch transmission pipeline that terminates at about 950 Sand Flats Road. The pump station will need to have two pumps, each with enough capacity to supply the peak day demand of the development. The peak day demand requirement should be verified once plans for the development have been finalized. Water is assumed to be conveyed from the pump station to the development via a pipeline installed in Sand Flats Road. The pipeline configuration shown in Figure 5-3 includes about 6,200 feet of pipe. At a conceptually level, the lower portion of the pipeline starting from the pump station up to the point where the storage tank pipeline splits off will need to be an 8-inch City of Moab 5-8 Page 62 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, 7-1 New Business LionsBackPump Lion's Back Tank Lion's Back Pipeline CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MASTER PLAN pipe. Larger pipe may be needed for the upper pipeline portion between the storage tank and the development; the sizing of that section will be governed by fire flow requirements. If an 8- inch pipe is installed between the tank and the development, modeling performed for this analysis indicates the fire suppression capacity will be about 1,500 gpm with a 20 psi residual pressure. Critical variables that affect fire flow capacity include the tank elevation, development elevation, and the distance between the tank and the development. The final determination for pipes sizes should be made during design. The storage tank will need to have capacity for equalization storage and fire suppression storage. For each ERC, the required equalization storage is 738 gallons. As a result, the total equalization storage requirement for the development is projected to be about 140,000 gallons. The total volume of a 2 hour fire suppression flow of 1,500 gpm is 180,000 gallons. In addition, due to the isolated nature of the development, it is recommended that consideration be given to allocating a portion of the storage volume as emergency storage. If 20% of the sum of equalization storage and fire suppression storage is set aside as emergency storage, the emergency storage volume would be 64,000 gallons. Summing the equalization, fire suppression, and emergency gives a total storage volume of 384,000 gallons. Prior to construction of this tank, the fire official should be consulted to verify that the fire flow volume is still adequate. Based on a review of the area's topography, the highest elevation that can be conveniently reached in constructing a storage tank is about 4,580 feet. Higher elevations are available, but only by significantly increasing the length of installed pipeline. If the tank is constructed with a floor elevation of 4,580 feet, a static pressure of 50 psi could be maintained to a connection at an elevation of 4,465 feet. The purpose of this analysis is to provide a basic framework for the proposed Lion's Back Development. All values should be verified once development plans have been completed. It has been assumed that the City will require the developer to construct all of the improvements that are needed for the development. For this reason, no project costs have been included for Lion's Back Development. EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations for improvement projects were based on the modeling, as outlined above, and guidance provided by Moab City personnel. Recommendations have been categorized as existing system projects or as build -out system projects. Table 5-1 lists the existing distribution system projects. City of Moab 5-9 Page 64 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, TABLE 5-1 EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PROJECTS PROJ # LOCATION PROBLEM SUGGESTED SOLUTION 1 970 David Court Peak day pressure is less than 40 psi Disconnect David Court pipeline from the Middle Zone at the intersection of David Court and Doc Allen Drive. Reconnect to Upper Zone transmission pipeline 2 Mill Creek Drive Frequent leaks and ruptures Replace 2,600 feet of 10-inch pipe and 2,700 feet of 12-inch pipe on Mill Creek Drive between Powerhouse Road and 400 East. 3 Southeast portion of Doc Allen Drive Available fire flow is less than 1,500 m gp Install 260 feet of 8-inch pipe in Dogwood Avenue between Mountain View Drive and Doc Allen Drive to connect existing Middle Zone pipelines 4 1000 West Kane Creek Boulevard Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 3,000 feet of 10-inch pipeline in Kane Creek Boulevard between 500 West and 1000 West 5 Riversand Drive Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 1,200 feet of 8-inch pipe to connect the pipeline in Riversand Road to the pipeline in Palisade Drive 6 1000 West 400 North Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 1,200 feet of 10-inch pipe in 400 North between 750 West and 1000 West 7 200 North Stewart Lane Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 850 feet of 8-inch pipe in Stewart Lane between 400 North and 200 North 8 470 West Carlos Court Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 470 feet of 8-inch pipe in Carlos Court 9 1261 North Highway 191 Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 770 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rubicon Trail between Highway 191 and Portal RV Resort 10 1700 North Highway 191 Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 1,600 feet of 8-inch pipe on the south side of Highway 191 between 1500 North and 1700 North 11 300 North 100 West Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm The fire hydrant is connected to 4- inch pipeline. Swap connection to 12-inch pipeline 12 250 Williams Way Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 820 feet of 8-inch pipe in Williams Way between 100 West and 250 Williams Way 13 264 West Center Street Available fire flow is less than 1,500 m gp Install 900 feet of 8-inch pipe in West Center Street between 100 West and 264 West Center Street City of Moab 5-10 Page 65 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, PROJ # LOCATION PROBLEM SUGGESTED SOLUTION 14 194 North 300 East Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 490 feet of 8-inch pipe in 300 East between 100 North and 194 North 15 521 East Center Street, 540 East 100 North Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 800 feet of 8-inch pipe in Center Street between 400 East and 500 East 16 559 East to 672 East Nichols Lane Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Connect to upstream side of 300 South 400 East PRV and install 1,280 feet of 8-inch pipe in 400 East between 300 South and Rosetree Lane and 1,050 feet of 8-inch pipe in Nichols Lane between 400 East and 674 East 17 498 East to 632 East Rosetree Lane Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 500 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rosetree Lane between 400 East and 504 East 18 530 Bowen Circle Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 680 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bowen Circle between 403 Bowen Circle and 530 Bowen Circle 19 350 East Pueblo Court Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 910 feet of 8-inch pipe beginning at approximately 306 East 300 South to Pueblo Court 20 910 Powerhouse Lane Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Disconnect fire hydrant from 8-inch pipe and reconnect to 12-inch pipe 21 730 Bartlett Avenue and 740 Bartlett Circle Available fire flow is less than 1,500 gpm Install 740 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bartlett Avenue between 500 West and 632 West The projects listed in Table 5-1 represent existing deficiencies and should be addressed in the near future. A project map is included as Figure 5-4. One additional item for the City to consider is upsizing the pipeline in Red Devil Drive. There is currently a 6-inch pipeline in Red Devil Drive which provides drinking water service and fire suppression flow to Grand County High School. The 6-inch pipeline receives water from a 10-inch pipeline in 400 East. Under current conditions, a fire suppression flow of 1,500 gpm can be supplied to the fire hydrant near the southeast corner of the school. Increasing the size of the pipe in Red Devil Drive to 10 inches boosts the available fire flow to more than 4,000 gpm. The school's fire flow requirement was not available for this study. The City should consider a more extensive review of the fire suppression requirements for the school and increase the pipe size, if needed. Recommended PRV Settings During the course of analyzing the system, PRV settings were adjusted with the goal of maximizing the usage of equalization storage while minimizing pressure fluctuations and energy costs. Table 5-2 presents the recommended PRV settings. City of Moab 5-11 Page 66 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, x E ET_ m 0 m m `o a c as c 0 m O 0 0 0 U 0 0 c0 a) 0 d m= o'cis N d �� �� �o U HansEn num & LUCE nc INGIMEERS KANE CREEK BLVD Spring and Tank Mountainview Tank CITY OF MOAB WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE MAS E Lion's Back Tank Pump Station Powerhouse Proposed Tank Well #6 Spring #1 Legend � Source 8 PRV b Future PRV b Existing Tank Future Tank b Lion's Back Tank Lion's Back Pump Station ® Connection Project Pipeline Project Dia 8 10 12 Existing Pipes Lion's Back Pipeline Pressure Zones Lower Middle Upper Well #10 Spring #2 Spring#3 PLAN i WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL PROJECT MAP age . o . FIGURE 5-4 TABLE 5-2 RECOMMENDED PRV SETTINGS PRV Address From Zone To Zone Elevation (ft) Setting (psi) 300 South 400 East Upper Middle 4,070 76 890 Mountain View Drive Upper Middle 4,079 72 776 South Main Street Upper Middle 4,063 79 150 South 100 West Middle Middle 4,012 Open 983 North Main Street Middle Lower 4,021 63 170 South 500 West Middle Lower 3,992 76 The elevations and pressures given in Table 5-2 represent modeled values. Precise elevations were not available for the PRVs; as a result it is expected that some adjustment will be needed to these values. The guiding principle in selecting PRV settings is that settings should be high enough to protect pressures in the lower zone, but not so high that tank levels are prevented from diurnal fluctuation. FUTURE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS Assuming that each of the existing recommendations is implemented, no pressure or fire flow deficiencies are projected to exist in the future system. Still, it is recommended that the City fund a pipeline replacement program. Pipelines should be scheduled for replacement based on priority, and in order to take advantage of road resurfacing projects and other situations of convenience. Pipelines smaller than 8-inches in diameter, older pipelines, and pipelines where frequent repairs have been needed should all be considered as high priority for replacement. The State recommends that at least 5% of the annual drinking water budget be set aside for facility replacement. CONTINUED USE OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM It is recommended that the City continue updating the model as the water system changes. Below is a list of ways in which the model could help the City with water system management. The computer model can assist City staff in determining: • Effect on the system if individual facilities are added or taken out of service • Selection of pipe diameters and location of proposed water mains • Capacity of the water system to provide fire flows in specific areas • Water age for water quality monitoring • Residual chlorine and fluoride levels in the system The computer model should be maintained for future use. Necessary data required for continued use of the program are: City of Moab 5-12 Page 68 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., " The location, length, diameter, pipe material, and ground elevation at each end of each new pipeline constructed " Changes in water supply location and characteristics " Location and demand for new large customers " Changes in chlorine and fluoride dosing rates and procedures City of Moab 5-13 Page 69 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,.... .. CHAPTER 6 - OPTIMIZATION OPTIMIZATION OVERIEW Three parameters drive the operation of a water system: system performance, water quality, and energy efficiency (Figure 6-1). Water systems can be characterized by any degree or combination of these three parameters. One system may perform well but incur high energy costs. Another may be energy efficient but is not sufficiently pressurized during peak demand. Still another may perform well hydraulically but fail to meet requirements for chlorine residual. System optimization is the process whereby a distribution network is evaluated in order to identify potential improvements that will allow the network to operate in the region where energy efficiency, system performance, and water quality are balanced. ENERGY EFFICIENCY OPTIMIZED SYSTEM SYSTEM WATER PERFORMANCE QUALITY FIGURE 6-1: WATER SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION DIAGRAM System optimization was considered throughout the development of this master plan. One of the basic principles used was to limit unnecessary energy losses. Energy losses have a direct impact on energy efficiency and system performance. Many of the changes that reduce energy losses also promote water circulation, which improves water quality. The following paragraphs describe how optimization was applied in the development of the recommendations included in this master plan to further optimize the system. City of Moab 6-1 Page 70 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, ENERGY AND SYSTEM PERFORMANCE PRV settings are an ideal example for the application of optimization principles. PRVs can provide a useful means of reducing pressure fluctuations in lower zones by allowing water to flow to the lower zone during peak flow events. However, setting a PRV too high can have the opposite effect within the upper zone. High PRV flows elevate the flow velocity in the upper zone, which in turn increases pressure fluctuations. Furthermore, high PRV settings prevent the equalization storage in tanks from being fully utilized, leading to wasted energy. The solution is to set PRVs at a level where pressures in the lower zones are protected, but flow through the PRV is limited. The settings included within the previous chapter were chosen to keep daily pressure fluctuations under 20 psi while meeting minimum pressure standards for peak day, peak instantaneous, and emergency demand scenarios. Another example of applying optimization principals during the development of this master plan is in selecting a location for the future drinking water storage tank. The location of the storage tank was selected in order to make use of existing facilities, while providing hydraulic and energy advantages. The proposed location is at an elevation that allows sources to gravity flow to the tank, but also preserves as much energy as possible. Because the tank is at a higher elevation than other existing tanks, the City will have additional flexibility to push water to lower pressure zones. It may even be possible to install an in -line generator or micro -hydro station that could convert excess head into electricity. Pumping Costs Producing, treating, and delivering high -quality water requires energy, which is usually a water utility's largest operational expense and can account for 30%-40% of municipal energy consumption (EPA 2015). Efforts to increase energy efficiency bring financial savings and can facilitate improvements in water quality and hydraulic performance. The City should prioritize water usage from sources with the lowest cost water. Springs 1, 2, and 3 are the cheapest sources because no pumping is needed. Moab's pumped sources should only be used during times when Springs 1, 2, and 3 cannot supply enough water to meet the City's demand. As part of the optimization analysis HAL performed a qualitative review of the City's pumping facilities. Energy intensity describes the amount of energy needed to produce a unit volume of water and is often measured in kilowatt-hours per million gallons. Since energy use and pumping costs are directly related, energy intensity serves as a useful proxy for comparing the relative pumping costs of different sources. The energy intensity of a pumped source is proportional to the pump's lift, assuming efficiency is constant. Therefore, if two wells with identical pump efficiencies are considered, one that lifts water from a depth of the 500 feet, and one that lifts from a depth 1,000 feet. The well that lifts water 500 feet will have half the energy intensity of the other well, and produce water at half the cost in energy. Due to the relationship between pump lift and energy use, it is expected that the next City's next cheapest water source after Springs 1, 2, and 3 will be Skakel Springs. Although Skakel Springs requires pumping to lift water into Skakel Tank, the lift associated with pumping a spring is generally much less than the lift needed to pump a well. Wells 6 and 10 are expected to be the City's highest cost water City of Moab 6-2 Page 71 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— sources and should be used when the flow of the Springs is not sufficient to meet the City's demand. Based on Figure 3-1, the City is already utilizing sources quite efficiently. In 2016, Springs 1, 2, and 3 met the base demand for the City through the year. As demand increased, Skakel Springs and Well 6 were added in March, and Well 10 was added in May. One potential area of improvement is to focus on not utilizing Well 6 to the detriment of Skakel Springs. In Figure 3-1 Skakel Springs does not reach peak volume until June. Based on the data provided it is not clear whether this is due to water availability as a result of seasonal fluctuations in spring flow, or due to discretionary choices in source utilization. When possible, water from Skakel Springs should be utilized before water from the wells, and the wells should not be utilized until production from Skakel Springs has been maximized. CHLORINE MODELING Moab City provided chlorine field test results for locations within the distribution system that were collected during 2017. A comparison of the chlorine modeling data and field sampling results is included in Appendix D. The modeled concentrations were generally in good agreement with field concentrations. Figure 6-2 shows the model output from the chlorine modeling. Within the figure, pipes shown in blue represent locations with relatively low chlorine residual while areas shown in green represent comparatively high chlorine concentration. Areas with low chlorine residual include locations that are relatively far from chlorinated sources or else dead end pipelines with low flow velocities. Operational practices can help maintain good chlorine residuals. For example, water levels in storage tanks should be allowed to fluctuate throughout the day. Peak flows should be met by water from storage tanks rather than by increasing source production. Meeting peak flows with storage volume helps turnover the water in the tank, improving residual chlorine concentrations. As long as the water levels do not drop below the fire suppression levels outlined in Table 4-1, diurnal variation in tank level is beneficial. WATER AGE AND DISINFECTION BYPRODUCTS While chlorine is an effective disinfectant in controlling many microorganisms in drinking water, it reacts with natural material found in drinking water to form potentially harmful disinfection byproducts (DBPs). Accordingly, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has developed rules to balance the risks between microbial pathogens and DBPs. A drinking water system needs enough chlorine to destroy pathogens but also not produce excessive DBP. The extended period model was used to predict the areas in the water system that have the highest potential for DBP production. The potential for DBP production is higher in warmer and older water. Consequently, a water age model provides valuable insight into areas with the highest potential for DBP production. Water age was calculated for every location in the system by running the model to simulate several days in the summer scenario. Figure 6-3 illustrates the results of the water age model scenario at 240 hours using the Existing Model. City of Moab 6-3 Page 72 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— Nearly all of the system receives fresh water every three days. Dead end lines with little to no demand have the worst circulation in the model. Areas located along the extremities of the system also tend to have higher water age. It is recommended that the City use the water age model to ensure DBP sampling is occurring at the locations with the highest DBP production potential. SUMMARY OF OPTIMIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the finding and observations presented above, the following recommendations are provided: 1. Set PRVs so that equalization storage is utilized while pressure fluctuations are controlled. 2. Prioritize usage of lower cost source water. 3. Monitor water quality test results. In particular, chlorine should be tested in areas the model identifies as having lower chlorine residual levels. 4. Monitor water quality in areas identified as having higher age. City of Moab 6-4 Page 73 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, Legend Chlorine Residual (mg/L) > 0.40 0.31 - 0.40 0.21 - 0.30 0.11 - 0.20 0.00 - 0.10 FIGURE 6-2: CHLORINE CONCENTRATIONS IN MOAB CITY City of Moab 6-5 Page 74 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,...,..,,..y.. ,.--..., , .— Legend Water Age (hours) - > 96 72 - 96 48 - 72 24 - 48 - 0-24 FIGURE 6-3: WATER AGE IN MOAB CITY City of Moab 6-6 Page 75 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,...,..,,..y.. ,..--..., , .— CHAPTER 7 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Throughout the master planning process, the three main components of the City's water system (source, storage, and distribution) were analyzed to determine the system's ability to meet existing demands and the anticipated future demands at build -out. After identifying system deficiencies, possible solutions were studied by HAL for feasibility. Conceptual costs were developed for the most cost effective solutions. PRECISION OF COST ESTIMATES When considering cost estimates, there are several levels or degrees of precision, depending on the purpose of the estimate and the percentage of detailed design that has been completed. Master planning level (sometimes referred to as conceptual or feasibility design level) costs are relatively crude as compared to costs developed based on preliminary design or final design. The purpose of master planning is to develop general sizing, location, cost, and scheduling information on a number of individual projects that may be designed and constructed over a period of many years. Master planning also typically includes the selection of common design criteria to help ensure uniformity and compatibility among future individual projects. Details such as the exact capacity of individual projects, the level of redundancy, the location of facilities, the alignment and depth of pipelines, the extent of utility conflicts, the cost of land and easements, the construction methodology, the types of equipment and material to be used, the time of construction, interest and inflation rates, permitting requirements, etc., are typically developed during the more detailed levels of design. At the preliminary or 10% design level, some of the aforementioned information will have been developed. Major design decisions such as the size of facilities, selection of facility sites, pipeline alignments and depths, and the selection of the types of equipment and material to be used during construction will typically have been made. After the project has been completely designed, and is ready to bid, all design plans and technical specifications will have been completed and nearly all of the significant details about the project should be known. Cost estimates at this level of design will be more precise as compared to master planning and preliminary design levels. However, there are still many factors that can heavily influence the cost of a project. A few of those include construction timing, contractor work backlog, the time of year in which bids are held, etc. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS As discussed in previous chapters, several source, storage and distribution system deficiencies were identified during the system analysis. Project costs for water system improvements are presented in Table 7-1 with map IDs corresponding to the project locations shown in Figure 5-4. Each recommendation includes a conceptual cost estimate for construction. City of Moab 7-1 Page 76 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, Unit costs for the construction cost estimates are based on conceptual level engineering. Sources used to estimate construction costs include: 1. "Means Heavy Construction Cost Data, 2017" 2. Price quotes from equipment suppliers 3. Recent construction bids for similar work All costs are presented in 2018 dollars. Recent price and economic trends indicate that future costs are difficult to predict with certainty. Engineering cost estimates provided in this study should be regarded as conceptual level for use as a planning guide. Only during final design can a definitive and more accurate estimate be provided for each project. A cost estimate calculation for each project is provided in Appendix E and Table 7-1 provides a cost summary for the recommended system improvements. TABLE 7-1 PROJECT COSTS FOR SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (Listed by Map ID order) TYPE MAP ID RECOMMENDED PROJECT COST Source NA Develop source redundancy $2,025,000 Source NA Construct a new drinking water well for future growth $2,025,000 Storage NA o struct a new storage tank with a capacity of 2.2 Construct MG $2 970,000 Distribution 1 Disconnect David Court pipeline from the Middle Zone at the intersection of David Court and Doc Allen Drive. Reconnect to Upper Zone transmission pipeline $27,000 Distribution 2 Install 2,600 feet of 10-inch pipe and 2,700 feet of 12" pipe along Mill Creek Drive between Powerhouse Road and 400 East. $956,000 Fire 3 Install 260 feet of 8-inch pipe in Dogwood Avenue between Mountain View Drive and Doc Allen Drive to connect existing Middle Zone pipelines $39,000 Fire 4 Install 3,000 feet of 10-inch pipeline in Kane Creek Boulevard between 500 West and 1000 West $522,000 Fire 5 Install 1,200 feet of 8-inch pipe to connect the pipeline in Riversand Road to the pipeline in Palisade Drive $180,000 Fire 6 Install 1,200 feet of 10-inch pipe in 400 North between 750 West and 1000 West $209,000 City of Moab 7-2 Page 77 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., TYPE MAP ID RECOMMENDED PROJECT COST Fire 7 Install 850 feet of 8-inch pipe in Stewart Lane between 400 North and 200 North $127,000 Fire 8 Install 470 feet of 8-inch pipe in Carlos Court $70,000 Fire 9 Install 770 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rubicon Trail between Highway 191 and Portal RV Resort $115,000 Fire 10 Install 1,600 feet of 8-inch pipe on the south side of Highway 191 between 1500 North and 1700 North $240,000 Fire 11 The fire hydrant is connected to 4-inch pipeline. Swap connection to 12-inch pipeline at 300 North 100 West $115,000 Fire 12 Install 820 feet of 8-inch pipe in Williams Way between 100 West and 250 Williams Way $240,000 Fire 13 Install 900 feet of 8-inch pipe in West Center Street between 100 West and 264 West Center Street $14,000 Fire 14 Install 490 feet of 8-inch pipe in 300 East between 100 North and 194 North $73,000 Fire 15 Install 800 feet of 8-inch pipe in Center Street between 400 East and 500 East $120,000 Fire 16 Connect to upstream side of 300 South 400 East PRV and install 1,280 feet of 8-inch pipe in 400 East between 300 South and Rosetree Lane and 1,050 feet of 8-inch pipe in Nichols Lane between 400 East and 674 East $349,000 Fire 17 Install 500 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rosetree Lane between 400 East and 504 East $75,000 Fire 18 Install 680 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bowen Circle between 403 Bowen Circle and 530 Bowen Circle $102,000 Fire 19 Install 910 feet of 8-inch pipe beginning at approximately 306 East 300 South to Pueblo Court $136,000 Fire 20 Disconnect fire hydrant from 8-inch pipe and reconnect to 12-inch pipe at Mill Creek Drive and Powerhouse Lane $14,000 Fire 21 Install 740 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bartlett Avenue between 500 West and 632 West $111,000 TOTAL $10,854,000 City of Moab 7-3 Page 78 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., The above noted projects have been prioritized to provide the City guidance for which order the projects should be pursued. The fire flow projects were prioritized based on available fire flow volume. The future project was given lower priority since it provide for future growth and isn't immediately needed. It should be noted that the selection of criteria and priorities is subjective. As the City personnel evaluate project priorities, the City may wish to alter the order of the priorities. TABLE 7-2 PROJECT COSTS FOR SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (Listed in Priority order) PRIORITY MAP ID RECOMMENDED PROJECT' COST 1 NA Develop source redundancy $2,025,000 1 NA Construct a new storage tank with a capacity of 2.2 MG $2,970,000 2 2 Install 2,600 feet of 10-inch pipe and 2,700 feet of 12" pipe along Mill Creek Drive between Powerhouse Road and 400 East. $956,000 3 16 Connect to upstream side of 300 South 400 East PRV and install 1,280 feet of 8-inch pipe in 400 East between 300 South and Rosetree Lane and 1,050 feet of 8-inch pipe in Nichols Lane between 400 East and 674 East $349,000 4 17 Install 500 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rosetree Lane between 400 East and 504 East $75,000 5 9 Install 770 feet of 8-inch pipe in Rubicon Trail between Highway 191 and Portal RV Resort $115,000 6 13 Install 900 feet of 8-inch pipe in West Center Street between 100 West and 264 West Center Street $14,000 7 8 Install 470 feet of 8-inch pipe in Carlos Court $70,000 8 5 Install 1,200 feet of 8-inch pipe to connect the pipeline in Riversand Road to the pipeline in Palisade Drive $180,000 9 6 Install 1,200 feet of 10-inch pipe in 400 North between 750 West and 1000 West $209,000 10 7 Install 850 feet of 8-inch pipe in Stewart Lane between 400 North and 200 North $127,000 11 19 Install 910 feet of 8-inch pipe beginning at approximately 306 East 300 South to Pueblo Court $136,000 City of Moab 7-4 Page 79 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, PRIORITY MAP ID RECOMMENDED PROJECT' COST 12 4 Install 3,000 feet of 10-inch pipeline in Kane Creek Boulevard between 500 West and 1000 West $522,000 13 1 Disconnect David Court pipeline from the Middle Zone at the intersection of David Court and Doc Allen Drive. Reconnect to Upper Zone transmission pipeline $27,000 14 3 Install 260 feet of 8-inch pipe in Dogwood Avenue between Mountain View Drive and Doc Allen Drive to connect existing Middle Zone pipelines $39,000 15 18 Install 680 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bowen Circle between 403 Bowen Circle and 530 Bowen Circle $102,000 16 11 The fire hydrant is connected to 4-inch pipeline. Swap connection to 12-inch pipeline at 300 North 100 West $115,000 17 14 Install 490 feet of 8-inch pipe in 300 East between 100 North and 194 North $73,000 18 20 Disconnect fire hydrant from 8-inch pipe and reconnect to 12-inch pipe at Mill Creek Drive and Power House Lane $14,000 19 10 Install 1,600 feet of 8-inch pipe on the south side of Highway 191 between 1500 North and 1700 North $240,000 20 15 Install 800 feet of 8-inch pipe in Center Street between 400 East and 500 East $120,000 21 12 Install 820 feet of 8-inch pipe in Williams Way between 100 West and 250 Williams Way $240,000 22 21 Install 740 feet of 8-inch pipe in Bartlett Avenue between 500 West and 632 West $111,000 23 NA Construct a new drinking water well for future growth $2,025,000 TOTAL $10,854,000 The proposed future well project addresses future needs and the proposed storage tank and redundancy projects address a combination of future and existing needs. All other projects address existing deficiencies and are not impact fee eligible. The existing system improvement projects are recommended to be completed within 5 years. A summary of the expected project costs, over the next 5 years, is shown in Table 7-, separated by non -impact fee eligible costs and impact fee eligible costs. City of Moab 7-5 Page 80 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ..,,...,.-.-, ,., TABLE 7-3 FIVE YEAR COST SUMMARY Project Non -Impact Fee Eligible Cost Impact Fee Eligible Cost Fire Flow Projects: $2,851,000 $0 Distribution Projects: $983,000 $0 Source Projects: $1,276,400 $749,000 Storage Projects: $864,000 $2,106,000 Subtotal $5,974,400 $2,855,000 Total $8,830,000 Aside from pipeline replacement, the only project forecasted during the 6 to 40 year time frame is the proposed drinking water well. The estimated cost for the well is $2,025,000 and the full cost is eligible to be funded by impact fees. FUNDING OPTIONS Funding options for the recommended projects, in addition to water use fees, could include the following options: general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, State/Federal grants and loans, and impact fees. In reality, the City may need to consider a combination of these funding options. The following discussion describes each of these options. With respect to water use fees, it is recommended that the City evaluate water rates periodically. Rates should be sufficient to cover the full cost of producing and delivering water and maintaining the system so that it is not necessary to subsidize the water system with other funding sources. Failure to perform proper maintenance and pipeline replacement may create an eventual significant financial burden on ratepayers. Old, unstable and leaky pipes cause significant inefficiency, interfere with conservation efforts, and increases the potential for a water quality health risk. Also, failure to collect the proper impact fees can also place a burden on user rates because once the new connections are on the system, the system upgrades cannot be paid for by impact fees. Charging customers for the true current cost of water reinforces the idea that water is a valuable commodity, and helps fund the system. General Obligation Bonds This form of debt enables the City to issue general obligation bonds for capital improvements and replacement. General Obligation (G.O.) bonds are debt instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the City, which would be secured by an unconditional pledge of the City to levy assessments, charges or ad valorem taxes necessary to retire the bonds. G.O. bonds are the lowest -cost form of debt financing available to local governments and can be combined with other revenue sources such as specific fees, or special assessment charges to form a dual City of Moab 7-6 Page 81 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, security through the City's revenue generating authority. These bonds are supported by the City as a whole, so the amount of debt issued for the water system is limited to a fixed percentage of the real market value for taxable property within the City. Revenue Bonds This form of debt financing is also available to the City for utility related capital improvements. Revenue bonds are not backed by the City as a whole, but constitute a lien against the water service charge revenues of a Water Utility. Revenue bonds present a greater risk to the investor than do G.O. bonds, since repayment of debt depends on an adequate revenue stream, legally defensible rate structure and sound fiscal management by the issuing jurisdiction. Due to this increased risk, revenue bonds generally require a higher interest rate than G.O. bonds. This type of debt also has very specific coverage requirements in the form of a reserve fund specifying an amount, usually expressed in terms of average or maximum debt service due in any future year. This debt service is required to be held as a cash reserve for annual debt service payment to the benefit of bondholders. Typically, voter approval is not required when issuing revenue bonds. State/Federal Grants and Loans Historically, both local and county governments have experienced significant infrastructure funding support from state and federal government agencies in the form of block grants, direct grants in aid, interagency loans, and general revenue sharing. Federal expenditure pressures and virtual elimination of federal revenue sharing dollars are clear indicators that local government may be left to its own devices to fund infrastructure. However, state/federal grants and loans should be investigated as a possible funding source for needed water system improvements. Impact Fees Impact fees can be applied to water related facilities under the Utah Impact Fees Act. The Utah Impacts Fees Act is designed to provide a logical and clear framework for establishing new development assessments. It is also designed to establish the basis for the fee calculation which the City must follow in order to comply with the statute. However, the fundamental objective for the fee structure is the imposition on new development of only those costs associated with providing or expanding water infrastructure to meet the capacity needs created by that specific new development. Also, impact fees cannot be applied retroactively. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Several recommendations were made throughout the master report. The following is a summary of the recommendations organized by category. City of Moab 7-7 Page 82 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu .-....,,......,,,- ..,....— ..— Source 1. Develop an additional drinking water source to provide redundant capacity. 2. Meet future needs by developing new sources of at least 1,930 gpm. Storage 1. Construct a new storage tank with a capacity of 2.2 MG. Distribution 1. Construct all of the projects addressing existing deficiencies within 5 years if possible. 2. Maintain an updated model of the drinking water system. 3. Fund a pipeline replacement project. Optimization 1. Set PRVs so that equalization storage is utilized while pressure fluctuations are controlled. 2. Prioritize usage of lower cost source water. 3. Monitor water quality test results. Chlorine should be tested in areas the model identifies as having lower chlorine residual levels. 4. Monitor water quality in areas identified as having higher age through disinfection byproduct testing. City of Moab 7-8 Page 83 of 106 7-1 New Business Water Distribu , ,, ,, y .., .. ,, REFERENCES Bowen Co!lens & Associates. 2017. Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. Fluoride: Dose -Response Analysis For Non - cancer Effects. EPA 820-R-10-019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Water. Washington, D.C. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2015. "Water/Wastewater." State and Local Climate and Energy Program. http://www3.epa.gov/statelocalclimate/local/topics/water.html. (accessed Sep. 28, 2017) Governor's Office of Planning & Budget, 2012. 2012 Baseline Projections: Sub -County Population Projections gomb. utah.gov/wp-content/u ploads/sites/7/2013/08/Subcounty-Pop-Projections-2013.xlsx (accessed Sep. 28, 2017). International Fire Code Institute, Uniform Fire Code, 2017. RSMeans, 2017. RSMeans Heavy Construction Cost Data. Norwell, MA: Construction Publishers & Consultants. United States Census Bureau. 2016. QuickFacts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/4950700/accessible (Accessed 09/28/2017). Utah Administrative Code R309-200. Monitoring and Water Quality: Drinking Water Standards. rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r309/r309-200.htm (accessed Sep. 28, 2017) Utah Administrative Code R309-500. Facility Design and Operation: Plan Review, Operation and Maintenance Requirements. rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r309/r309-500.htm (accessed Sep. 28, 2017) Utah Administrative Code R309-510. Facility Design and Operation: Minimum Sizing Requirements. rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r309/r309-510.htm (accessed Sep. 28, 2017) City of Moab R-1 Water Distribu 7-1 New Business Page 84 of 106 APPENDIX A ERC Calculations Page 85 of 106 7-1 New Business H nn11En & LucEinc ENGINEERS CLIENT City of Moab SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT Water Distirbution and Storage Master Plan FEATURE ERC Calculations COMPUTED RTC PROJECT NO 380.09.100 DATE 2/24/18 Abbreviations: AF = acre-feet DWR = Utah Division of Water Rights ERC = equivalent residential connection GOMB = Governor's Office of Management and Budget gpm = gallon per minute Referenced DWR data can be found at: https://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cgi-bin/wuseview.exe?Modinfo=Pwsview&SYSTEM ID=1164 Key: Input Calculated Value Water Use and ERC Calculations Moab service area population Total water use Residential connections Total Connections Residential water use Average Residential flow rate Residential demand per ERC Non residential water use Non residential water use Summation of ERCs from non-residential demands = Total ERCs = Existing State Standard Peak Day Flow Computation 5,490 1,812 1,575 2,073 800 496 0.315 1,012 627 1,994 3,569 Indoor Demand Calculations Peak Day Indoor Demand = Total Peak Day Indoor Demand = 800 1,983 Outdoor Demand Back Calculating Using Production Data July 2016 volume = July 2016 average flow = December 2016 volume = December 2016 avg. flow = December 2016 Per ERC avg. demand = December 2016 daily volume per ERC = Peak Month outdoor demand = Add 20% to estimate peak day Outdoor demand per ERC = State Standards, outdoor demand = Irrigated acres/ERC = Total irrigated acreage = 306.6 2,238 97.3 710 0.199 286.51 1528 1833 0.514 4.52 0.114 406 (from 2016 use data reported to DWR) AF (See DWR 2016 annual use data) (from 2016 DWR data) (from 2016 DWR data) AF (from 2016 DWR data) gpm gpm/ERC AF gpm ERCs ERCs ERCs were calculated based on R309-110-4 of Utah Admin. Code gallons/day (see R309-510-7) gpm AF (from DWR data) gpm AF (from DWR data) gpm gpm/ERC gal/day g pm (2,238 gpm-710 gpm) gpm gpm/ERC This analysis assumes the difference between July and December demands is outdoor demand gpm/irr acre (see R309-510-7) acres acres C:\Users\rchristensen\OneDrive\Synced Folders\380.09.100 Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan\ENG\Calculations\Moab cost estimate.xlsx 7-1 New Business Page 86 of 106 HA ufn & LUCE= ENGINEERS CLIENT City of Moab SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT Water Distirbution and Storage Master Plan FEATURE ERC Calculations COMPUTED RTC PROJECT NO 380.09.100 DATE 2/24/18 Outdoor Demand Calculated Based on Random Sample Lot Measurements There is wide variation between lot sizes, and some clearly do not irrigate Average irrigable acreage = Effective irrigated acreage = Total Outdoor Peak Day Demand = Outdoor demand per ERC = Recommended Indoor Plus Outdoor Peak Day Demand State standard total peak day demand = Total demand/ERC = Indoor Plus Outdoor Average Day Demand Indoor state standard demand = Outdoor state standard demand = State Standard Annual Demand = State Standard Annual Demand = Demands Based on Measured Production Volumes 0.115 0.083 1,339 0.375 3,321 0.93 146,000 0.448 2.69 0.223 2,396 1,485 Estimated peak day flow using production data (peak month+20%) _ Demand per ERC using peak month+20% _ From daily meter readings, the overall highest value was From daily meter readings, the highest 3 day average was Peak Day/Average Day peaking factor = Assumed Peak Instantaneous/Peak Day peaking factor = Calculated peak instantaneous flow = Future Peak day Model Flow Computation 2,946 3,185 2,754 2 1.7 1.40 Existing Moab Population = 5,490 irr acre/ERC irr acre/ERC gpm THIS VALUE USED gpm/ERC gpm (1,983 gpm+1,339 gpm) gpm/ERC gallons/ERC AF/ERC AF/irr. Acre AF/ERC acre-feet gpm (compare to 1,123 gpm) State standard values for annual average demand are defined within R309-510-7 gpm (from Sep. 2016 DWR data) gpm/ERC gpm (July 6, 2017) gpm (June 23 to 25, 2017) (using peak month+20%) (Based on HAL experience) gpm/ERC The recent update to Moab's sewer master plan used a growth rate of 1.1% through 2035 and 1.02% between 2035 and 2060. These values result in the following forecasts. Year Population L 5,490 36 6,058 6,399 6,758 8,710 ERCs 3,569 I 3,728 I 3,938 I 4,159 I 4,393 I 5,662 2060 ERCs = 2060 Peak Day Demand = 2060 Average Day Demand = 5,662 5,269 2,356 ERCs gpm gpm Page 87 of 106 7-1 New Business APPENDIX B Calibration Data Page 88 of 106 7-1 New Business Tank Level Calibration Data 4171 0 4170.0 4169.0 4168.0 ead fo Node S a el Tan • • 6 10 12 Time (h22 24 (hours) 4332.0 4331.0 ead fo Node Po e o se Tan 10 12 Time (hours) 14 16 18 20 22 24 7-1 New Business Page 89 of 106 ead fo Node Mo ntain ie Tan 4334.0- 4333.0- m 4332.0- z x 4331.0- ■ 4330.0- • 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Time (hours) 16 18 20 22 24 7-1 New Business Page 90 of 106 APPENDIX C Model Data Page 91 of 106 7-1 New Business APPENDIX D Water Quality Data Page 92 of 106 7-1 New Business Comparison of Field Sampling and Modeled Chlorine Residuals Field Samping Results Model Results Chlorine Sampling Location Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 High Low Avg. Node Public Works Shop 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.31 0.34 18982 Riverside Plumbing 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.30 0.34 0.32 14352 City Market 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.31 0.37 0.36 16282 Grand County School District 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.33 0.35 0.34 16582 Super 8 Motel 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.40 0.41 0.41 11812 Western Spirit 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.36 0.32 0.35 1186 USU Extension Office 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.35 0.30 0.33 1170 Dr. Hackney Office 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.38 0.31 0.36 16300 BLM Office Dog Wood 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.38 0.29 0.33 11594 Grand Senior Center 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.34 0.30 0.33 1508 Sweet Cravings 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.28 0.25 0.26 12024 Eastern Utah Credit Union 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.38 0.36 0.38 11078 Grand County Credit Union 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.27 0.20 0.25 13386 Moab City Hall 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.32 0.30 0.31 J928 Sleep Inn Motel 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.37 0.31 0.35 16260 Shell Gas Station 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.28 0.27 0.27 14778 Field results represent a snap shot of the day and time water samples were collected. The model results vary continuously and water moves through the system. For this reason a range is provided for the model results. Page 93 of 106 APPENDIX E Cost Estimate Calculation Page 94 of 106 7-1 New Business City of Moab - Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan July 17, 2018 Cont Estimate Project Description UNIT UNIT TYP NIT COS T Contingency (20%) and Engineering (1 TOTAL COST NA Develop Source Redundancy 1 each $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $525,000 $2,025,000 NA Construct new well 1 each $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $525,000 $2,025,000 NA Construct a 2.2 MG Storage Tank 1 each $2,200,000 $2,200,000 $770,000 $2,970,000 1 Disconnect and reconnect pipeline 1 each $20,000 $20,000 $7,000 $27,000 2a Install 2,600 feet of 10-inch pipe 2,600 foot $129 $335,400 $117,390 $453,000 2b Install 2,700 feet of 12-inch pipe 2,700 foot $138 $372,600 $130,410 $503,000 3 Intall 260 feet of 8-inch pipe 260 foot $111 $28,860 $10,101 $39,000 4 Install 3,000 feet of 10-inch pipe 3,000 foot $129 $387,000 $135,450 $522,000 5 Install 1,200 feet of 8-inch pipe 1,200 foot $111 $133,200 $46,620 $180,000 6 Install 1,200 feet of 10-inch pipe 1,200 foot $129 $154,800 $54,180 $209,000 7 Install 850 feet of 8-inch pipe 850 foot $111 $94,350 $33,023 $127,000 8 Install 470 feet of 8-inch pipe 470 foot $111 $52,170 $18,260 $70,000 9 Install 770 feet of 8-inch pipeline 770 foot $111 $85,470 $29,915 $115,000 10 Install 1,600 feet of 8-inch pipe 1,600 foot $111 $177,600 $62,160 $240,000 11 Install 770 feet of 8-inch pipeline 770 foot $111 $85,470 $29,915 $115,000 12 Install 1,600 feet of 8-inch pipe 1,600 foot $111 $177,600 $62,160 $240,000 13 Disconnect and reconnect fire hydrant 1 each $10,000 $10,000 $3,500 $14,000 14 Install 490 feet of 8-inch pipe 490 foot $111 $54,390 $19,037 $73,000 15 Install 800 feet of 8-inch pipeline 800 foot $111 $88,800 $31,080 $120,000 16 Install 1,280 feet of 8-inch pipe 1,280 foot $111 $142,080 $49,728 $192,000 Install 1,050 feet of 8-inch pipe 1,050 foot $111 $116,550 $40,793 $157,000 17 Install 500 feet of 8-inch pipeline 500 foot $111 $55,500 $19,425 $75,000 18 Install 680 feet of 8-inch pipe 680 foot $111 $75,480 $26,418 $102,000 19 Install 910 feet of 8-inch pipeline 910 foot $111 $101,010 $35,354 $136,000 20 Disconnect and reconnect fire hydrant 1 each $10,000 $10,000 $3,500 $14,000 21 Install 740 feet of 8-inch pipeline 740 foot, $111 $82,140 $28,749 $111,000 TOTAL $10,854,000 Page 95 of 106 APPENDIX F Division of Drinking Water Certification Page 96 of 106 7-1 New Business APPENDIX CHECKLIST FOR HYDRAULIC MODEL DESIGN ELEMENTS REPORT This hydraulic model checklist identifies the components included in the Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report for City of Moab - Water Distribution and Storage Master Plan (Project Name or Description) 10003 33 (Water System Number) Moab City Water (Water System Name) 07/16/2018 (Date) The checkmarks and/or P.E. initials after each item indicate the conditions supporting P.E. Certification of this Report. 1. At least 80% of the total pipe lengths in the distribution system affected by the proposed project are included in the model. [R309-511-5(1)] ❑X 2. 100% of the flow in the distribution system affected by the proposed project is included in the model. If customer usage in the system is metered, water demand allocations in the model account for at least 80% of the flow delivered by distribution system affected by the proposed project. [R309-511-5(2)] ❑X 3. All 8-inch diameter and larger pipes are included in the model. Pipes smaller than 8-inch diameter are also included if they connect pressure zones, storage facilities, major demand areas, pumps, and control valves, or if they are known or expected to be significant conveyers of water such as fire suppression demand. [R309-511- 5(311 //� 4. All pipes serving areas at higher elevations, dead ends, remote areas of a distribution system, and areas with known under -sized pipelines are inclu the model. [R309-511-5(4)] ❑%� 5. All storage facilities and accompanying controls or settings applied to govern the open/closed status of the facility for standard operations are included in t I e model. [R309-511-5(5)] Z `L% DDW-Eng-0012 Page f of 106 7-1 New Business 10/8/2015 -7/1(/ Lag 6. Any applicable pump stations, drivers (constant or variable speed), and accompanying controls and settings applied to govern their on/off/speed status for various operating conditions and drivers are included in the model. [R309�-11-5(6)] 7. Any control valves or other system features that could significantly affect the flow of water through the distribution system (i.e. interconnections with other systems, pressure reducing valves between pressure zones) for various operating ct . 'ins are included in the model. [R309-511-5(7)] 8. Imposed peak day and peak instantaneous demands to the water system's facilities are included in the model. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report explains which of the Rule -recognized standards for peak day and peak instantaneous demands are implemented in the model (i.e., (i) peak day and peak instantaneous demand values per R309-510, Minimum Sizing Requirements, (ii) reduced peak day and peak instantaneous demand values approved by the Director per R309-510-5, Reduction of Sizing Requirements, or (iii) peak day and peak instantaneous demand values expected by the water system in excess of the values in R309-510, Minimum Sizing Requirements). The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report explains the multiple model simulations to account for the varying water demand conditions, or it clearly explains why such simulations are not included in the model. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report explains the extended period simulations in the model needed to evaluate changes in operating conditions over time, or it clearly explains (e.g., in the context of the water system, the extent of anticipated fire event, or the nature of the new expansion) why such simulations are not included in the model. [R309-511 - (8) & R309-511-6(1)(b)1 © #7 9. The hydraulic model incorporates the appropriate demand requirements as specified in R309-510, Minimum Sizing Requirements, and R309-511, Hydraulic Modeling Requirements, in the evaluation of various operating conditions of the public drinking water system. The Report includes: • the methodology used for calculating demand and allocating it to the model; • a summary of pipe length by diameter; • a hydraulic schematic of the distribution piping showing pressure zones, general pipe connectivity between facilities and pressure zones, storage, elevation, and sources; and • a list or ranges of values of friction coefficient used in the hydraulic model according to pipe material and condition in the system. In accordance with Rule stipulation, all coefficients of friction used in the hydraulic analysis are consistent with standard practices. [R309-511-7(411 ❑X DDW-Eng-0012 Page g3egf106 7-1 New Business 10/8/2015 10. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report documents the calibration methodology used for the hydraulic model and quantitative summary of the calibration results (i.e., comparison tables or graphs). The hydraulic model is sufficiently accurate to represent conditions likely to be experienced in the water delivery system. The model is calibrated to adequately represent the actual field conditions using field measurements and observations. [R309-511-4(2)(b), R ,09-511- 5(9), R309-511-6(1)(e) &R309-511-7(7)1 ❑%� 11. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report includes a statement regarding whether fire hydrants exist within the system. Where fire hydrants are connected to the distribution system, the model incorporates required fire suppression flow standards. The statement that appears in the Report also identifies the local fire authority's name, address, and contact information, as well as the standards for fire flow and duration explicitly adopted from R309-510-9(4), Fireflow, or alternatively established by the local fire suppression agency, pursuant to R309- 510-9(4), Fireflow. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report explains if a steady-state model was deemed sufficient for residential fire suppression demand, or acknowledges that significant fire suppression demand warrants extended model simulations and explains the run time used in the simulations for t j period of the anticipated fire event. [R309-511-5(10) & R309-511-7(5)1 NAV 12. If the public drinking water system provides water for outdoor use, t 4=4 eport describes the criteria used to estimate this demand. If the irrigation demand map in R309-510-7(3), Irrigation Use, is not used, the report provides justification for the alternative demands used in the model. If the irrigation demands are based on the map in R309-510-7(3), Irrigation Use, the Report identifies the irrigation zone number, a statement and/or map of how the irrigated acreage is spatially distributed, and the total estimated irrigated acreage. The indicated irrigation demands are used in the model simulations in accordance with Rule stipulation. The model accounts for outdoor water use, such as irrigation, if the drinkin system supplies water for outdoor use. [R309-511-5(11) & R309-511-7(1)1 13. The Report states the total number of connections served by the water system including existing connections and anticipated new connections served by the water system after completion of the construction of the project. [R309-5 'I 7 2) o /,/ i/i 14. The Report states the total number of equivalent residential connections (ERC) including both existing connections as well as anticipated new connections associated with the project. In accordance with Rule stipulation, the number of ERC's includes high as well as low volume water users. In accordance with Rule stipulation, the determination of the equivalent residential connections is based on flow requirements using the anticipated demand as outlined in R309-510, Minimum Sizing Requirements, or is based on alternative sources of info Ss ation i that are deemed acceptable by the Director. [R309-511-7(3)] ❑X , 7-1 New Business DDW-Eng-0012 Page g of 106 10/8/2015 15. The Report identifies the locations of the lowest pressures within the distribution system, and areas identified by the hydraulic model as not meeting each scenario of the minimum pressure requirements in R309-105-9, Minimum Water P e sure. [R309-511-7(6)] 0 44 rt 16. The Hydraulic Model Design Elements Report identifies the hydraulic modeling method, and if computer software was used, the Report identifies the soft; are name and version used. [R309-511-6(1)0] 17. For community water system models, the community water system management has been provided with a copy of input and output data for the hydraulic model with the simulation that shows the worst case results in terms of water s _tem pressure and flow. [R309-511-6(2)(c)1 0 18. The hydraulic model predicts that new construction will not result in any service connection within the new expansion area not meeting the minimum distribution system pressures as specified in R3099-105-9, Minimum Water Pressure. , • �9- 511-6(1)(c)] 5-ee r col/WPN,7 ❑X 19. The hydraulic model predicts that new construction will not decrease the pressures within the existing water system to such that the minimum pressures as specified inR3 9105� ini um dater Pressure are not met. [R309-511-6 )(d)J w �e ❑x 20. The velocities in the model are not excessive and are within industry stant•rds. X DDW-Eng-0012 PaRe 4 Page 100 of 106 7-1 New Business 10/8/2015 Moab City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: October 23, 2018 #: 7-2 Title: Award to Civil Science Infrastructure, Inc. (CSI) for Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Mill Creek Road West/USU Project and Approval of a Contract in the amount of $122,200. Date Submitted: September 16, 2018 Staff Presenter: Chuck Williams, City Engineer Attachment(s): CSI Proposal for Construction Administration Services dated October 16, 2018 Options: Approve, deny, or modify. Recommended Motion: I move to award a Contract to Civil Science Infrastructure, Inc. (CSI) for Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Mill Creek Road West/USU Construction Project and Approval of a Contract in the amount of $122,200. Background/Summary: On October 9th the Council awarded a construction contract to Harrison Field Services for: • a new road, • shared -use path, • stormwater facilities, • sanitary sewer, • culinary water, • street lights and • landscaping to the Mill Creek Drive west extension (which is platted and will be signed as Rimrock Road). • The road will serve as a main access to the future Utah State University (USU) campus and appurtenant SITLA housing development. This road and utility project will be partially funded by a Community Impact Board (CIB) grant and loan funds in cost sharing partnership with USU, SITLA and Grand County. 7-2 New Business Page 101 of 106 The approved CIB loan/grant application contained cost estimates for the construction project in the amount of $2,316,245. The contract award to Harrison was in the amount of $1,935,078. This leave a balance of $381,965 from this line item subject to any change orders. The CIB loan/grant application contained cost estimates for the Engineering and Construction Management Services for the project in the amount of $361,996.The design of the project was $172,054. This leave a balance of $189,952 from this line item. It is anticipated that construction work will commence in mid -November and be finalized mid -May. The City Construction Inspector will be very busy on the 100 West Improvement project until mid -January therefore he will only be available on a limited basis for construction management on the Mill Creek West/USU project until then. The City therefore needs to supplement construction management on this project. CSI was the design engineer for this project and is intimately knowledgeable of the construction management requirements for it. Staff recommends that CSI be hired to perform this task on behalf of the city. CSI was competitively procured for their design contract. CSI's original design contract anticipated the need for Construction Management services and listed it as an additional service which the City could authorize once a scope and fee were negotiated. Staff has negotiated that scope to include a stronger presence at the beginning of the construction project and to taper off once the City Inspector is more available in Mid -January. There are sufficient funds in the Project budget for these Professional Services. 7-2 New Business Page 102 of 106 CIVIL SCIENCE October 16, 2018 Moab City Chuck Williams, P.E. City Engineer 217 East Center Street Moab, UT 84532 Re: Mill Creek Drive West Extension Construction Administration Services Dear Mr. Williams, INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. 1453 S. Dixie Drive, Suite 150 St. George, UT 84770 Office: (435) 986-0100 Fax: (435) 986-4046 Civil Science (CSI) is pleased to submit this proposal for construction administration services for the Mill Creek Drive West Extension (Project) located in Moab, Utah. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you and Moab City (City) and look forward to working with you. PROJECT BACKGROUND CSI has recently completed the engineering design and submitted final construction drawings for public bid. Harrison Oilfield Services, Inc. was the apparent low bidder, and was given the Notice of Intent to Award on October 9th in City Council Meeting. The Contractor is currently acquiring bonds and insurance and it is expected that construction will begin as early as mid -November. It is anticipated that the construction period will be from November 2018 through May of 2019. Therefore, the City is seeking assistance with construction administration of the Project during this timeframe. SCOPE OF WORK Based on the Project Background outlined above, CSI will provide the following services where tasks will include; Task 008 - Construction Administration 1 , Provide general administration of construction contract; Consult with the City and act as City's representative as provided in the Construction Contract. 2. Receive, review and determine acceptability of any and all schedules that the Contractor is required to submit. 3. Conduct and attend weekly construction progress meetings to coordinate the work. 4. Provide observation as an experienced and qualified design professional the progress of Contractor's executed work and determine in general if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Construction Contract Documents. 5. Provide clarifications and/or interpretations to the Contract Documents, Drawings, and Specifications and answer questions related to the work. 6. Issue and prepare Field Orders requiring minor changes in the work. 7. Recommend and prepare Change Orders, as appropriate. 8. Review and approve or take other appropriate action with respect to shop drawings, samples, submittals and other required shop drawings, samples, and other required Contractor submittals. 9. Review certificates of inspections, tests, and approvals. 10. Review Contractor's application for payments and accompanying supporting documentation. 11. Prepare and issue Notice of Substantial Completion, 12, Issue punch lists and notices of defective work as required. 7-2 New Business Lehi, UT • St. George, UT • Twin Falls, ID • Dicls�on010� Williston, ND • Wooster, OH www.civilscience.com CIVIL SCIENCE SCIENCE INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. 13, Prepare and issue Notice of Final Acceptance and recommend final payment to the Contractor. 14, Provide electronic copies of construction phase documents to the City at the conclusion of the Project in electronic format. 15. Provide other construction phase services requested by the City and as allowed by available budget. FEE PROPOSAL CSI proposes to complete the Scope of Work outlined above as follows: TASK NO. TASK DESCRIPTION FEE TYPE FEE 008 Construction Administration T & M $122, 200 Professional fees shown are not to exceed unless upon written authorization from the City. Professional services rendered for the Time & Materials Fee Type will be completed by CSI at the rates and fees given in the attached Exhibit A. ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions apply to the terms and conditions of this proposal: 1. The construction period will comprise of approximately 210 days. During this period CSI will provide a Construction Manager for inspection/observation as follows: a. Three (3) days/week or 30 hours/week for the first 10 weeks of construction. CSI will take lead role with assistance from the City. b. One (1) day/every other week or 12 hours/every other week for the last 20 weeks of construction. The City will take the lead role with assistance from CSI. These site visits will be staggered with the Project Manager as necessary. 2. The Construction Manager will attend and conduct the weekly construction progress meetings except for the meetings when the Project Manager is present. 3. It was assumed the Project Manager will make eight (8) trips to the site (1 per month + final inspection), 4. The fee shown above is based upon approximately 900 man hours of work. See attached Exhibit B for breakdown of hours per task. 5. Site visits and observations by the Project Manager are not intended to be exhaustive or to extend to every aspect of the Work or to involve detailed inspections of the Work, but rather are to be limited to spot checking, selective sampling, and similar methods of general observation of the Work based on professional judgment. We appreciate the opportunity to work with the City on this and other projects. If the City wishes to move forward with these services, we would recommend execution of a contract modification between the two parties. Please contact me at (435) 773-3120 or chowickacivilscience,com with any questions or concerns. Respectfully, Cody C. Howick, P.E. Project Manager 7-2 New Business Page 104 of 106 www.civilscience.com EXHIBIT A CS Standard Unit Rates and Fee Schedule CIVIL SCIENCE INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. LABOR RATES: Services provided by Civil Science will be invoiced at the unit rates identified below; Labor Category Hourly Labor Rate' Engineer VI $170.00 Engineer V $150.00 Engineer IV $139.00 Engineer III $127.00 Engineer II $108.00 Engineer I $87.00 Survey V $139.00 Survey IV $125.00 Survey III $102.00 Survey II $87.00 Survey I $70.00 Survey Crew - 1-Man $110.00 Survey Crew - 2-Man $180.00 Senior Project Manager $150.00 Tech. V/Project Manager $130.00 Technician IV $122.00 Technician III $102.00 Technician II $86.00 Technician I $68.00 Admin V $175.00 Admin IV $140.00 Admin III $99.00 Admin II $74.00 Admin I $62.00 Clerical I $56.00 DIRECT REIMBURSABLE RATES: Mileage $0.545 / mile Lodging (as necessary and agreed upon) $ Cost / Night Daily Meal Per -Diem (as necessary and agreed upon) $46 / person / day TIME CHARGES: Time reporting for all office personnel is based upon actual time in office. Time reporting for all field work is based upon actual field work plus travel time to and from assigned office location. Time billed in 15 minutes increments. SUBCONTRACTS: General subcontracts, excluding consultant services, will be invoiced at cost plus a 15% handling charge to cover administrative costs associated with management and processing of the subcontracts. OTHER DIRECT COSTS: Expenses for in-house services such as computer usage, copying, and reprographics, are billed at a fixed rate or unit prices whichever is applicable. Specialized instrumentation, mobile laboratories, and related equipment are billed at fixed daily or weekly rate depending on the period of usage. Rate schedules are available upon request. Costs for project specific supplies or travel related expenses (lodging, meals, airfare, vehicle rental, etc...) are invoiced at the cost plus a 15% handling charge. AUDIT PRIVILEGES: All job audit privileges of CLIENT will extend only to review and approval of monthly invoices submitted by CS to CLIENT. Invoices prepared and submitted by CS will include copies of source documents of all expenditures including: time, fravel, subcontracts, supplies, equipment, materials, or premiums. The CLIENT may review, debate, or qualify items for payment at the time of invoice review and approval and payment of invoice. CLIENT waves post job audit privileges beyond invoice approval. CS will not retain job related support documents or any other billing documents beyond the periodic period, review period, and collection by CS of invoices submitted. ESTIMATES: Estimates are provided to the CLIENT for budgeting purposes only and are not an agreement by CS to perform the services for a lump - sum, fixed price, or not to exceed price unless otherwise provided for in the contract. CS reserves the right to change rates used on rate -based reimbursable contracts. Rates subject to change with written notice and agreement. 7-2 New Business Page 105 of 106 www.civilscience.com a co D<HIBIT E City of Moab Mill Creek Hour Derivation Drive West Extension and Cost Task Description Hours Task Total Budget Tyler Turner Engineer VI $ 170.00 HR $ Cody Howick Engineer V $ 150.00 HR $ Trevor Gardner Engineer II $ 108.00 HR $ Jacob Wilder Technician V $ 130.00 HR $ Greg Perkins Technician IV $ 122.00 HR $ Jodi Bennett Technician I $ 68.00 $ HR $ Mileage per mile 0.545 Miles $ Lodging per night $ 150.00 Nights $ Per Diem per person per day $ 46.00 Meals $ Task No. 008-1 Project Management 30 $ 3,600 4 $ 680 14 $ 2,100 $ - $ - $ - 12 $ 816 $ - $ - $ - 008-2 Construction Progress Meetings 112 $ 21,400 $ - 112 $ 16,800 $ - $ - $ - $ - 5,600 $ 3,052 8 $ 1,200 8 $ 368 008-3 Issue & Administer Contract Documents 29 $ 2,800 1 $ 170 2 $ 300 2 $ 216 $ - 8 $ 976 16 $ 1,088 $ - $ - $ - 008-4 Review & Return Submittals 64 $ 6,000 $ - 4 $ 600 12 $ 1,296 $ - 16 $ 1,952 32 $ 2,176 $ - $ - $ - 008-5 Issue Field Orders for Clarifications 90 $ 9,700 $ - 6 $ 900 12 $ 1,296 8 $ 1,040 40 $ 4,880 24 $ 1,632 $ - $ - $ - 008-6 Answer Questions 67 $ 8,400 1 $ 170 6 $ 900 12 $ 1,296 24 $ 3,120 24 $ 2,928 $ - $ - $ - $ - 008-7 Site Observation / Inspection 420 $ 61,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - 420 $ 51,240 $ - 9,200 $ 5,014 20 $ 3,000 40 $ 1,840 008-8 Review & Submit Partial Pay Requests 42 $ 4,300 $ - 4 $ 600 8 $ 864 $ - 14 $ 1,708 16 $ 1,088 $ - $ - $ - 008-9 Issue Punchlist 25 $ 2,800 $ - 1 $ 150 4 $ 432 $ - 16 $ 1,952 4 $ 272 $ - $ - $ - 008-10 Project Closeout Documents 22 $ 2,100 $ - 1 $ 150 1 $ 108 $ - 8 $ 976 12 $ 816 $ - $ - $ - Total 901 $ 122,200 6 $ 1,020 150 $ 22,500 51 $ 5,508 32 $ 4,160 546 $ 66,612 116 $ 7,888 Assumptions: PM = Project Manager; CM = Construction Manager 1. Project will comprise of approximately 210 for construction (30 weeks) 2. 8 trips during the construction phase (1 per month + final insepction) for PM (Cody) 3. 30 hrs/week for first 10 weeks, 12 hrs/every other week for last 20 weeks (staggered from PM) for CM (Greg) PM CM 7-2 New Business J 14,800 $ 8,066 28 $ 4,200 48 $ 2,208 Page 106 of 106