HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1982-11-17 ACOUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NOS.1,6 AND 7
OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
November 17,1982 —8:00 p.m.
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley,California
Pursuant to the adjournment of the regular meeting of November 10,1982,the
Boards of Directors of County Sanitation District Nos.1,6 and 7 of Orange County,
California met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date in the
Districts’administrative offices.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m.The roll was called and
the Secretary pro tern reported a quorum present.
District 1
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Robert Hanson,Chairman,Don Saltarelli,
Roger Stanton
DIRECTORS ABSENT:Robert Luxembourger
District 6
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Elvin Hutchison,Chairman,Ruthelyn
Plummer,Roger Stanton
DIRECTORS ABSENT:None
District 7
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Richard Edgar,Chairman,Evelyn Hart,Don
Smith,Bill Vardoulis,James Wahner
DIRECTORS ABSENT:Robert Luxembourger,Bruce Nestande
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:Fred A.Harper,General Manager,J.Wayne
Sylvester,Assistant General Manager,Bill
Clarke,Tom Dawes,Rita Brown,
OTHERS PRESENT:Conrad Hohener,Don Martinson,Phil Stone,
Mike Swan,Steve Malone
Appointing Rita Brown Secretary Moved,seconded and duly carried:
pro tern
That Rita Brown be appointed Secretary
pro tern in the absence of the Secretary.
—1—
Districts 1,6 &7
11/17/82
Report of Engineer re Consolidated The Chairman recogn~Lzed Cobrad Hohener of
Master Plan of Trunk Sewers Boyle Engineering Corporat~ion who reviewed
the draft of the Co~so1idated Master Plan
of Trunk Sewers for Districts 1,northern half of 6,and 71
The current land—use planning objectives,which serve as the basi~for~
projecting sewage flows,were reviewed with the various planning agencies having
jurisdiction in the master plan service area.Major variar~ces with the Joint
Districts Ultimate Land—Use Plan prepared in 1975 were not~d.A hydraulic
analysis of the combined trunk and subtrunk sewer system w~s accoi~nplished by
developing a computer model of the combined pipeline netwo~k to project sewage
flows to compare them to the pipeline capacities,and then to flag deficiencies.
The model also was used in developing an efficient mode of operation by
identifying the recommended flow routing at the key diversion poi1~its throughout
the pipeline system.The computer model allows the plan t~be up~atedas
conditions change.Very few deficiencies are projected wit~hin the combined
system.Relief of the majority of the deficiencies will b~provided by the
following three major recommended facilities:
1.Fairview—Gisler Relief Trunk in District No.6 rel
existing Fairview Trunk and Air Base Trunk Outfal]i
to Treatment Plant No.1.I
2.Airport Relief Trunk in District No.7 serving th~
expanding Irvine Industrial Complex—West south of
Freeway.
3.South Irvine Lift Station and Relief Subtrunk in c~istrict No.7
pumping flow from the existing Gisler-Red Hill Trunk to ~he gravity
Sunflower Interceptor at a lower lift than the exi~sting College
Avenue Pumping Station.
Mr.Hohener summarized the history of the respective Distr:
expansion to keep pace with the rapid development in metrol
The Consolidated Master Plan investigates the possible joii
combined systems to maximize use of the existing facilitie~
efficient system of trunk sewer facilities,without regard
boundaries.
.cts’sewer system
olitan~Orange County.
~t usag~of the
in providing ~n
to District
ieving the
Sewer No.2
rapid]
the Sar Diego
Three other relief subtrunks,completion of a short stretch
Trunk Sewer,and some modifications to four pumping station
make up the remainder of the recommended trunk sewer facili
facilities are projected for District No.1.Based upon cu
costs,total estimated construction cost of the facilities
is $5,628,000 and $6,514,000 for those serving District No.
The engineer pointed out that each facility had been priori
projected flow buildup requirements using available plannin
recording data,and engineering judgment.To keep pace wit
planning and development processes within the service area,
that flowmetering be implemented on a continuing basis to p
6
of the Tustin—Orange
3 in District No.7
ties.No new
~rent donstruction
Serving District No.
7.
tized to meet the
~inforkmatioñ,flow
~i the ever changing
he also recommended
rovide the combined
—2—
Districts 1,6,&7
11/17/82
Districts with current data from which to establish an implementation schedule
for the facilities reflecting the actual needs of the District as they occur.
Mr.Hohener also reviewed the addendum to the draft master plan authorized by the
Boards at the request of the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD).The addendum
focuses on the alternative means of conveying IRWD’s wastewater to Reclamation
Plant No.1 as one element of their investigation into the feasibility of forming
a new sanitation district and buying capacity in the Joint Sanitation Districts
(CSDOC)facilities to serve the territory within the IRWD.
Three alternatives ranging from minimal involvement with the CSDOC’s system to
multiple capacity sharing opportunities have been developed.Total ultimate flow
from the IRWD planning is 41.35 million gallons per day (mgd).In each
alternative,1.35 mgd from the Upper Peters Canyon area has been routed through
District No.7’s Sunflower/Tustin—Orange Trunk system.Alternative I conveys all
of the remaining 40.0—mgd IRWD—generated flow to the CSDOC’s Treatment Plant No.
1 by a new trunk system from the Michelson Water Reclamation Plant (MWRP).The
second alternative investigates service of the lower undeveloped Peters Canyon
area by a new trunk with a capacity allotment of 7.0 mgd for the IRWD planning
area connecting to the Sunflower—Red Hill Interceptor at McGaw Avenue with the
remaining 33.0 mgd being transported by a new trunk from the MWRP.The third
alternative routes the IRWD flows as in Alternative II but considers several
capacity sharing opportunities with Districts Nos.6 and 7.In all cases it was
most economical to route flow from the Upper Peters Canyon area to the
Tustin—Orange Trunk and to share capacity in a common trunk with District No.6
from Fairview Avenue to Treatment Plant No.1.
The life cycle costs for all three a1tern~tives were equivalent within the
accuracy of the estimates.All alternatives also were tested for intangible
advantages,such as flexibility of operation during normal operation and
emergency situations,reliability over the long term,and opportunities for
staging the facilities to meet the flow buildup requirements of both IRWD and
CSDOC.As a result,Alternative III is recommended for conveyance of the
IRWD—generated wastewater flows to the CSDOC’s Treatment Plant No.1.
Construction of the Peters Canyon Trunk would also eliminate the need for several
existing pump stations.
The estimated total construction cost in 1982 dollars for the required new
facilities is $21,300,000 for IRWD.The net impact to the combined districts’
master plan is a reduction of $3,010,000 for District No.6 and $230,000 for
District No.7.
Refer updated and consolidated Following a lengthy discussion by the
Master Plan of Trunk Sewers for Boards,it was moved,seconded and duly
Districts 1,northern half of 6 carried:
and 7 to the Special Committee and
Fiscal Policy Committee for study That the draft updated and consolidated
and recommendation Master Plan of Trunk Sewers for Districts
1,northern half of 6 and 7,be,and is
hereby,referred to the Special Committee to Study Reorganization of the
Sanitation Districts and to the Fiscal Policy Committee for study and
recommendation.
—3—
Districts 1,6 &7
11/17/82
District 1 Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District No.1 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:29 p.m.,November 17,1982.
District 6 Mov~d,seconded and duly carried:
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District No.6 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:29 p.m.,November 17 1982.
District 7 Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Ad-iournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District Mo.7 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:29 p.m.,November 17,1982.
Secretary pro tern of th~Board of Directors
County.Sanitation Distr~Lct Nos.1,6 &7
of Orange County,California
S
—4—
•V.~
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NOS.2,3 AND 11
OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
November 17,1982 —7:00 p.m.
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley,California
Pursuant to the adjournment of the regular meeting of November 10,1982,•the
Boards of Directors of County Sanitation District Nos.2;3 and 11 of Orange County,
California met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date in the
Districts’administrative offices.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.The roll was called and
the Secretary pro tern reported a quorum present.
District 2
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Henry Wedaa,Chairman,Barbara Brown,Don
Holt,Carol Kawanami,Carrey Nelson,Bob
Perry,Don Smith,Dorothy Wedel
DIRECTORS ABSENT:Don Roth,Robert Luxembourger,Bruce
Nestande,Duane Winters
District 3
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Frank Laszlo,Chairman pro tern,Marvin
Adler,Norman Culver,Roland Edwards,
Henry Frese,Don Griffin,Robert Mandic,
Gerald Mullen,Carrey Nelson,Charles,
Rell,Charles Sylvia,Dorothy Wedel
DIRECTORS ABSENT:Robert Luxembourger,Don Roth,Harriett
Wieder,Duane Winters
District 11
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Ruth Bailey,Chairman,Ron Pattinson
DIRECTORS ABSENT:Harriett Wieder
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:Fred A.Harper,General Manager,J.Wayne
Sylvester,Assistant General Manager,Bill
Clarke,Tom Dawes,Rita Brown
OTHERS PRESENT:Don Martirison,Sam Peterson,Mike Swan
Appointing Rita Brown Secretary Moved,seconded and duly carried:
pro tern
That Rita Brown be appointed Secretary
pro tern in the absence of the Secretary.
—1—
—....~.~...-...L ...~___~_.L..~._i .~~_~__.~—..~_...—.
duly carried:
~rpt frc~m the City of
mayor and interim
~nate Director,be,and
.ng representative be
District(s)Active Alternate
2 &3 Carrey J.Nelson Norm~A.Hicks
__________________________________
The Chairman recognized Dor~Marl±inson of
Lowry and Associates,who reviewed the
draft of the Consoli~dated Master,Plan of
Trunk Sewers for Districts 2,3 and 11 prepared by his firnL
Mr.Martinson summarized the history of the respective Districts’sewer system
expansion to keep pace with the rapid development in metrop~litan Orange County.
The Consolidated Master Plan evaluates the network of the 9istricts as one system
from an engineering viewpoint,without regard to District boundarJ~es.
Early in the study it was ascertained that the existing trunk sewer system in
Districts 2,3 and 11 lends itself very well to the correct1ion of existing and
ultimate capacity constraints.The existing major trunk sy~tem can be made to
carry the existing and projected ultimate flows to the appr~priate treatment
plant.Existing and proposed diversion structures along wi~th relief sewers can
be used to divert flows to major trunks or interceptors tha~have excess capacity
available.Therefore,by optimizing the use of the existing trunk sewer system,
the Districts can minimize the cost of providing for the ultimate projected flow.
Capacity constraints or deficient sewers were determined •by the us~e of a computer
model which compiled the existing and proposed land uses,ca1cula~ed the flow for
each drainage region,and routed each flow through the appropriate~trunk system.
By modeling different situations and solutions to the identified deficiencies,
the most cost—effective improvements to correct the problems were ~eveloped and
an estimated time period was developed.The computer model allows!the plan to be
updated as conditions change.
Mr.Martinson then reviewed the recommended phased construc
District 2 requires three new diversion structures to diver
Ana River Interceptor.District 3 will also require three I
structures to divert flow from overloaded sub—trunks to the
Districts 2,3 &11
11/17/82
Districts 2 &3
Receive and file excerpt re
election of mayor and interim
-~
appointment of alternate Director
is hereby,received and ordered filed;
seated as a member of the Board.
Moved,seconded and
That the minute exc~
Brea re election of
appointment of a1te~
and that the follow~
Report of Engineer re Consolidated
Master Plan of Trunk Sewers
0
0
C
The land use and corresponding wastewater projections refle
sewage flow of about 23 mgd at build—out over the 1975 Land
changes were mostly in the cities of Anaheim,Fullerton,Hu~
Seal Beach,and reflect changes in zoning to accommodate in
Despite the significant unused capacity in the lower reache:
upstream reaches have computed flows which are nearing or h
design capacities.
;t an increase in
Use P1~n.These
~tingto~i Beach and
~reased~density.
;,many~of the
we exceeded their
:ion pr
flow
~ew div
Knott
—2—
gram.
~o the Santa
?rsion
nterceptor.
i ~k ~LI1 .
I
~Di~tricts 2,3 &11
11/17/82
District 11 requires four new diversion structures to relieve capacity
constraints in the area of McFadden,Heil and Edwards in Huntington Beach.He
also reviewed proposed capacity exchanges between Districts in existing
facilities that would effectively optimize the use of the existing major
interceptor sewer systems.
The trunk sewer collection system improvements and capacity exchanges necessary
to provide for ultimate build—out of the entire District 2,3 and 11 service area
will cost approximately $52 million in 1982 dollars——$28.5 million for District
2,$8.4 million for District 3 and $14.8 million for District 11.
In addition to recommended capacity exchanges and construction of relief sewers
the engineer recommended a monitoring program to verify computed capacity
constraints with actual field measurements,and also to monitor sewage quality
for possible harmful industrial discharges.
Refer the draft updated and Following a lengthy discussion by the
Consolidated Master Plan of Trunk Boards,it was moved,seconded and duly
Sewers for Districts 2,3,&11 carried:
to the Special Committee and
Fiscal Policy Committee for That the draft updated and consolidated
study and recommendation Master Plan of Trunk Sewers for Districts
2,3,&11,be,and is hereby,referred to
the Special Committee to Study Reorganization of the Sanitation Districts and to
the Fiscal Policy Committee for study and recommendation.
District 2 Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 7:40 p.m.,November 17,1982.
District 3 Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 7:40 p.m.,November 17,1982.
District 11 Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
Directors of County Sanitation District No.11 be adjourned.The Chairman then
declared the meeting so adjourned at 7:40 p.m.,November 17,1982.
Secretary pro tern of the Board of Directors
County Sanitation District Nos.2,3,&11
of Orange County,California
—3—
-I