HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationMID VALLEY
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
SERVICE PLAN
APRIL 1982
PREPARED BY:
SCHMEUSER & ASSOCIATES, INC
201 CENTENNIAL ST., SUITE 101
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
r•
•
May 28, 1982
Mid Valley Metropolitan District
Formation Committee
P.O. Box 160
El Jebel, CO 81628
Gentlemen:
SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
201 CENTENNIAL STREET
7 SUITE 306
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
(303) 945.5468
Submitted herewith is the Service Plan for organization of the
Mid Valley Metropolitan District.
The report has been written with the purpose of establishing the
need for the Metropolitan District, proposing the physical
facilities required for the formation of the District, and pro-
viding a financing overview for the District.
We trust that the data contained in this report will satisfy your
requirements and will provide the information necessary to suc-
cessfully bring to reality the proposed Metropolitan District.
Respectfully Submitted,
SCHMUESER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dean W. Gordon, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Louis Meyer, E.I.T.
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project #B1501A
Page No.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1-1
CHAPTER II DISTRICT BOUNDARY 2-1
CHAPTER III THE NEED FOR A METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
A. Existing Water Service Facilities
B. Existing Sewer Service Facilities
C. Existing Parks and Recreation
Facilities
CHAPTER IV LAND UTILIZATION AND POPULATION GROWTH
A. Existing Land Usage
B. Proposed Land Usage
CHAPTER V PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM
III -1
III -1
1II-2
IV -1
IV -1
A. General V-1
B. Water Resources V-1
C. Water Demand V-1
D. Water Rights V-2
E. Proposed Water Facilities V-5
CHAPTER VI PROPOSED WASTEWATER SYSTEM
A. General VI -1
B. Wastewater Loading VI -1
C. Design Criteria VI -i
D. Wastewater Treatment Plant VI -2
E. Interceptor Trunklines, Outfalls VI -2
F. Collection Sewers VI -2
CHAPTER VII PROPOSED PARKS AND RECREATION VII -1
FACILITIES
CHAPTER VIII PHASED CONSTRUCTION AND COST ESTIMATES VIII -1
CHAPTER IX FINANCING AND OPERATION PLANNING IX -1
a
CHAPTER X DISTRICT POLICIES X-1
APPENDIX A OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST A-1
APPENDIX B ITEMIZATION 0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST B-1
APPENDIX C PARTIAL EQUIVALENT SCHEDULE C-1
•
•
•
•
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. PAGE NO.
IV -1 Land Use El Jebel Area IV -1
IV -2 Projected Development Use IV -2
V-1 Water Resources V-4
VIII -2 Water System Cost Estimate VIII --1
VIII -2 Wastewater System Cost Estimate VIII -2
Schedule A Phase 1 Water and Sewer Debt Service IX -2
Schedule
Schedule B Phase II Water and Sewer Debt Service IX -3
Schedule
Schedule C Combined Phase I and II Water and Sewer IX -41
Service Schedule
Schedule D Cash Flow Projections IX -5
Schedule E Combined Mill Levy and Service IX -6
Charge Rates
Schedule F Park and Recreation 0 & M Estimated IX -7
Mill Levies
A-1 0 & 11 For Ultimate Wastewater Facilities A-1
A-2 0 & M For Initial Wastewater Facility A-1
A-3 0 & M For Ultimate Water Facilities A-2
A-4 0 & M For Initial Water Facility A-2
A-5 0& M For Ultimate P & R Facilities A-2
B-1 Aerated Lagoon Cost Breakdown B-1
Phase I
6-2 Aerated Lagoon Cost Breakdown B-2
Phase II
C-1
Partial Equivalent Schedule C-1
r
•
ral
1
1
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. PAGE NO.
IV -1 Land Use Summary IV -3
A-1 Vicinity Map A-1
A-2 El Jebel Valley Floor A-2
A-3 Boundary Map A-3
A-4 Water System Phase I Construction A -u
A--5 Water System Phase II Construction A-5
A-6 Wastewater Facilities Phase I Construction A-6
A-7 Wastewater Facilities Phase II Construction A-7
CHAPTER I
i
I. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the revised statutes known as "The Special
District Act" provision 32-1-202, the following service plan has
been prepared for the purpose of organizing a special district,
known as the Mid --Valley Metropolitan District. The formation of
the District is being proposed by a steering committee composed
of twelve major landowners in the southwest end of Eagle County.
The Special District will provide long range planning and im-
provements in water and sanitation facilities and park's and
recreation facilities.
El Jebel is located approximately four miles west of Basalt
on Highway 82 at the point of access to Missouri Heights. The El
Jebel "Sub Area" as identified by the Eagle County Sub Area plan
includes the Roaring Fork Valley Floor from the Garfield County
Line to the Emma Curve and the Missouri Heights Mesa to the
north. El Jebel is primarily a bedroom community for employees
working up -valley in the Snowmass/Aspen Communities.
Presently, 550 existing dwelling units on the valley floor,
plus an existing commercial and urban core, comprise the nucleus
of a minor urban center. Demand for residential housing, commer-
cial space and light industrial space is strong and will continue
to be strong for the next 20 years. Because of the existing ur-
ban infrastructure and the projected growth of El Jebel to a com-
munity of 8000 the formation of a district providing municipal
water, wastewater and parks and recreation services becomes the
first logical step in the development process. Without these
services, well planned development will not occur.
.41 The Mid -Valley Metropolitan District will encompass portions
of the valley floor from the Garfield County Line to the Emma
Curve but because of obvious physical restraints, it will not be
feasible to include the Missouri Heights area. Because of the
1 1000' difference in elevation and the difference in zoning, the
initial capital costs and operation and maintenance costs re-
quired to serve both areas with common utility systems becomes
i prohibitive. This conclusion is consistent with the recommenda-
1 tion from a reconnaissance report entitled "Municipal Water
Supplies in Southwest Eagle County" prepared for the Basalt Water
Conservancy District by the David Fleming Company. The Fleming
9 report published in 1978 recommends that Missouri Heights and the
Roaring Fork Valley Floor be divided into two service areas.
i
The Mid -Valley Metropolitan District Formation Committee has
given all landowners within this area the opportunity to be in-
cluded within this District. Notices were sent to all landowners
within the area explaining the purpose of the District along with
estimated construction costs of proposed facilities and approxi-
mate charges for user fees, mill levy assessment and tap fees.
All landowners were invited to public meetings to further explain
the purpose of the District and answer questions that the land-
owners may have had. In addition, public notices were published
T-!
i
11.
i
in The Roaring Fork Journal announcing the formation of the
Metropolitan District.
The objectives of this service plan are as follows:
1.) Establish the need for water, sanitation and parks
and recreation services within the proposed
District.
2.) Outline conceptual engineering data for con-
struction of water and wastewater systems.
3.) Demonstrate the economic viability of the
District based upon estimated costs and revenues
related to an anticipated development schedule.
I .7
c1
1
CHAPTER II
•
cm
r
•
1
i
1
•
Description of the Perimeter of the Mid -Valley Metropolitan
District located in Eagle County, Colorado. 1
Beginning at the intersection of the Garfield/Eagle County line
and the center of the Roaring Fork River thence Northerly along
said County line 1,600 feet mcre cr less to the Northerly right-
of-way line cf Colorado State Highway 82; thence from the County
line S. 72°10'33"E., 730 feet more or less along the Northerly
right-of-way line of said Highway 82; thence N. 00°00'01"E.,
3,184.29 feet; thence N. 89°42'43"E., 448.71 feet; thence S.
00°38'47"W., 662.75 feet; thence N. 89°39'06"E., 1,373.74 feet;
thence N. 00°36'45"E., 1,322.61 feet; thence S. 88°30'30"E.,
1,317.87 feet; thence S. 00°26'34"W., 1,321.88 feet; thence S.
00°34'35"W., 428.63 feet; thence S. 89°53'43"E., 240.06 feet;
thence S. 01°18'47"E., 2,606.72 feet; thence N. 89°56'52"W.,
731.79 feet; thence S. 02°57'00"W., 326.29 feet to the Northerly
right-of-way line of Colorado State Highway 82; thence along the
Northerly right-of-way line cf said Highway 82, S. 72°16'12"E.,
2,135.25 feet; thence Southeasterly en a curve to the right
having a radius cf 2,905 feet through a central angle of 5°55'00"
an arc distance of 299.99 feet to a point cf tangency; thence
S.66°21'12"E., 15.30 feet; thence Southeasterly on a curve to the
right having a radius of 2,905 feet and having a chord distance
of 54.08 feet bearing S. 67007'03"E., and an arc distance of
54.08 feet to a point of tangency; thence S. 66°35'00"E., 156.80
feet; thence Southeasterly on a curve to the right having a
radius of 5,770 feet and having a chord distance cf 375.79 feet
bearing S. 64°43'02"E., and an arc distance cf 375.86 feet to a
point of tangency; thence departing the Northerly right-of-way
line of said Highway 82 N. 89°47'00"E., 151.53 feet; thence N.
89°37'13"E., 207.71 feet tc Angle Point 111, Tract 43, and also
being a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of Eagle County
Road S-13; thence Southerly along the Westerly right-of-way line
of said County Road S-13, 235 feet more cr less to a point on the
Northerly right-cf-way line of Colorado State Highway 82; thence
Southeasterly along the Northerly right-cf-way line of said High-
way 82, 130 feet more or- less; thence S. 53°03'00"E., 265.10
feet; thence departing the Northerly right-cf-way line cf said
Highway 82, N. 02°27'00"W., 150.50 feet; thence S. 86°07'00"E.,
337.40 feet; thence N. 07°00'00"W., 307.20 feet; thence S.
86°07'00"E., 595.92 feet; thence North, 331.50 feet tc Angle
Point #2, Tract 38; thence East, 2,577.30 feet as per the Office
of U.S. Supervisor of Surveys Supplemental Plat, Sheet #2, dated
August 25, 1927, cf Independent Resurvey of T.8S., R. 87W., cf
the 6th Principal Meridian, Colorado to Angle Point #1, Tract 38
(Plat calls 40.00 chains [2,640.00 feet with 0.95 chains [62.70
1 Because response has not been received from all property
owners within the Districts perimeter boundary, the properties
that will be excepted have not been listed. It is expected that
before submittal to the District Court that this legal descrip-
tion will be amended to show the final District Boundary and
those properties that will be excepted.
•
s
feet] shortage; 2,640.00 feet •- 62.70 feet = 2,577.30 feet);
thence South 1,595.22 feet as per said Supplemental Plat to Angle
Point #6, Tract 38; thence East, 182.82 feet as per said Sup-
plemental Plat to Angle Point #6, Tract 46; thence South,
1,320.00 feet to Angle Point #5, Tract 46, being also Angle Point
#1, Tract 48; thence S. 00022'50"E., 2,308.77 feet; thence S.
00023'00"E., 280.00 feet tc Angle Point #4, Tract 48, being also
Angle Point #1, Tract 52; thence S. 00043'00"E., 1,276.44 feet as
per said Supplemental Plat; thence S 89050'00"E., 2,513.79 feet
along the Northerly line cf Tract 51 to Angle Point #1, Tract 51;
thence South, 2,950.86 feet along the Easterly line cf said Tract
51 and the Easterly line of Tract 59 to Angle Pcint #6, Tract 59
as per the aforementioned Supplemental Plat; thence West, 579.20
feet along the Southerly line cf Tract 59 to a point in the cen-
ter of the Roaring Fork River; thence Northeasterly along the
center cf the Roaring Fork River to the point and place of
beginning.
7T-^
CHAPTER III
•
1
1
III. THE NEED FOR A METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
A. Existing Water Service Facilities
The proposed Mid -Valley Metropolitan District service
area is presently being served by numerous small private
water systems, each constructed and operated with little
regard to physical and legal impacts on other systems.
There are approximately 192 residential and commercial units
within the District ranging from the 90 unit KOA Campground
and Trailer Park to many individual residential units.
The majority of existing units within the proposed
service area are supplied with water from wells drilled in
the Roaring Fork alluvium. The physical and legal relia-
bility of each well varies in each case, but in most cases
the wells are not up to municipal standards.
From a legal viewpoint, many of the wells serving the
area have adjudication dates that are not senior enough for
a dependable municipal supply. Wells with junior water
rights will become increasingly susceptible to being "called
out" as development takes place and more senior water rights
in the Colorado River Basin are protected. The formation of
the Mid -Valley Metropolitan District would ensure that
sufficiently senior water rights would be obtained to meet
municipal standards.
From a physical viewpoint, the existing wells again
vary in both quality and quantity of water produced. If a
proliferation of small wells would occur, the well yield of
existing wellscould decrease and well drawdown may increase.
In addition, well water quality may become susceptible to
contamination from sewage if existing and projected residen-
tial and commercial areas are not tied into a central waste
water system.
With heavy growth occuring in the past 10 years and
expected to continue in the future, the need for compre-
hensive' long range planning to insure the physical and
legal reliability of a safe domestic water system becomes
critical.
B. Existing Sewer Service Facilities
The proposed Metropolitan District service area is
presently served by sewer systems with private treatment
facilities and by individual septic systems. The KOA Camp-
ground is served by a packaged treatment facility that is
consistantly in violation of its discharge permit standards.
The individual septic systems and leachfields are not moni-
tored properly to prevent contamination of well water. The
State Health Department may in the future restrict the number
of separate treatment facilities within the proposed service
area, and the Eagle County 208 Plan in effect states that the
11T
r
1
a
•
1
county does not want to see a proliferation of packaged
treatment plants. Again, well planned development within the
area is dependent upon consolidation of the separate treat-
ment facilities into one regional facility designed to meet
discharge permits at peak flows.
C. Existing Parks and Recreation Facilities
At the present time, there are no parks and recreation
facilities within the proposed District boundary, nor is
there a vehicle by which future facilities can be planned
to compliment the projected growth when it occurs.
21
CHAPTER IV
i
•
T.
•
:1
IV. LAND UTILIZATION AND POPULATION GROWTH
A. Existing Land Usage
According to recent figures from the Eagle County Plan-
ning Office, the existing development use for the El
Jebel area is as follows:
USE
Dwelling Units
Commercial Limited
Commercial General
Industrial
TABLE IV -I
LAND USE
EL JEBEL AREA
QUANTITY % DEVELOPED
550 each
29.10 acres
10.80 acres
34 acres
35 unbuilt lots
40%
56%
83%
B. Proposed Land Usage
The El Jebel area has grown at an accelerated rate
for the past ten years and is expected to continue this
growth pattern for the next 20 years. Most of the
growth has occurred in the El Jebel Mobile Home Park,
Sopris Village and the KOA Campground and Mobile Home
Park. As growth continues, both up valley in Snowmass/
Aspen and down valley in Carbondale and Glenwood
Springs, demands will continue to be placed on El Jebel
as a low cost housing alternative or working mans
community.
Although definite zoning patterns have yet to be
established and will not until the Sub Area Plan for El
Jebel is approved by the Planning Commission, this re-
port will utilize a development scenario based upon
typical and emerging development use in the area. This
development scenario is shown in figure IV -1, and sum-
marized in Table IV -2.
Using a projected 1628 units and an average
density of 3.5 persons per unit the Mid Valley
Metropolitan District would service a population of
approximately 5700 people.
Although certain portons of the valley floor in-
cluding the Sopris Village Subdivision and the El Jebel
Mobile Home Community have elected not to be included
in the District initially, it is anticipated that they
•
may elect to be included within the District in the
future. For this reason, the water and wastewater
facilities will be designed so that expansion of the
facilities will be possible without placing a financial
burden on initial members of the District.
TABLE IV -2
PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT USE
MID -VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
TOTAL AREA % USABLE DENSITY UNITS
,_ ZONING ACRES % (UNITS/ACRE) #
Rural -Agricultural 891 75 .2 134
,+ Light Commercial 46 85 5 195
Urban 41 85 6 210
Suburban 853 75 1 639
Heavy Commercial 106 85 5 450
1628
TOTAL 1937
;-
L.
• riggill:Vills
stilirsrefort,
caltUlt- got ,,,,tiii i'4, ..±.:44,;1- + 4 .
11"1101101T00
NO SO 4,11' 40: ?J.,. + 'I- + + + -.
110.110140411;60 .+ 1-'4- + 4%4. + +
101)1jimiktililltig + 4..1.......)4- + + 4-'--1-
4- + + .11111,0 as
+ + + + + + "rili ,
164.111 .v. • i•i, + + +
.4—L--
+ + + + + + + + + 41. + + + + + + + + +
+++++++++4
+ + + + + + + + + + + + 4,..t + 4- + 4- + + + + +j
+ + + + + + + + + + — 4- + +'-t + + + + + + +
+++++++4++++ +
+ + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + 4 + +
41.,+ + + + + + :I- 4- _* +,+ + +
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + 4 xt +
+ + + + + t + + + + + + + + + \+
+ + + + + + + + + + ++++++++-
L
+ + + + + + 4-
+++++++++ + + + + +
++++++++ + + + + + + + + •
++++++++ + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + 1. + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + Vr + ‘4•4,,
+ + + + + + 4V+
Sp; '71.g
809
mmag
•
r•rri ki
C"..••••••••62
LAND USE
RURAL
SUBURBAN
URBAN
LIGHT COMMERCIAL
HEAVY COMMERCIAL
FIGURE IV- I
EL JEBEL
VALLEY. FLOOR
LAND USE SUMMARY
CHAPTER V
•
•
1
V. PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM
A. General
The development of a water supply is dependent upon the
type of development that will occur within the proposed
district boundaries. Because of the suburban and urban
densities projected, it is proposed to provide a complete
municipal water system providing domestic in-houseseervice,
domestic irrigation, fire protection and herwiyl lbe a
municipal uses. The recommended water system
skeleton water system for the projected municipal area com-
plete with water supply, treatment, transmission, distribu
tion and storage facilities.
B. Water Resources
It is essential that the source of water for a municipal
water system must be adequate from both a physical and legal
point of view. For the Mid Valley Metro -District, the water
supply that best meets this criteria is that of alluvial
wells within the Roaring Fork River alluvium. The Roaring
Fork River is the longest and most reliable water source
along the valley floor. The alluvium, or sand and gravel
laid down by the river, is several thousand feet wide and
one hundred feet deep in the El Jebel area. The alluvial
wells will be able to provide high capacity municipal type
wells as demonstrated by Carbondale, Basalt and the Sopris
Village Subdivision, the later having two wells yielding
more
than 150 gpm each.
The quality of the Roaring Fork alluvium water varies
with location and depth, but is generally of good quality
requiring only chlorination for treatment.
C. Water Demand
Design water demands are estimated as follows:
Average Daily Flow (ADF)
Domestic Use = 5700 population x 80gpcd = 456,000 gpd
Irrigation = 1621 units x 1500 sfx2.8' x 7.48 gal 320gpm
unit 150 day CF =
340,000 gpd
240gpm
Average Winter Flow =
Average Summer Flow
V-
456,000 gpd
320gpm
796,000 gpd
560gpm
1
_1
Maximum Daily Winter Demand = 1.2 x ADF =
Maximum Daily Summer Demand = 1.2 x ADF =
593,000 gpd
1110gpm
1,035,000 gpd
720gpm
Average Annual Water Requirements
Domestic Use = 456,000 gpd x 365 day x 1 A -F
3,259 x 105Gal =
511 A -F
Irrigation Use = 340,000 gpd x 150 day x 1 A -F
3,259 x 105Gal
157 A -F
Consumptive Use
Domestic = Assume Central WWTF
10% of 511 A -F =
Irrigation = Assume use of Grass, 65% efficient
65% of 157 =
51 A -F
102 A -F
Storage Requirements
Operation Storage = 30%%°f ofM1},imum y
30 ,035,000 gpd = 311,000 Gal
Fire Protection = 1500 gpm for 2 hours = 180,000 Gal
Emergency Storage = Assume 12 hours of = 518,000 Gal
maximum day
TOTAL = 1,009,000 Gal
D. Water Rights
A municipal well with an appropriation date of 1982
would not have sufficient senior water rights for a munici-
pal supply. As conditional water rights, such as those for
energy development and municipalities, are perfected and put
in use, all junior water rights become increasingly suscep-
tible to being called out by senior water right holders.
The water rights for the proposed wells must be pro-
tected year round from being called out by augmenting the
supply with senior water rights. To provide year round
protection for the well diversions, it will be necessary
to implement a plan of augmentation that will provide water
to the Roaring Fork River in sufficient quantity to offset
the Districts 153 AF annual consumptive use. This will be
accomplished by utilizing the District's direct flow irriga-
tion rights from the ditches listed in Table V-1 during the
summer irrigation season. The District will propose to
T'
j
transfer direct flow irrigation rights to domestic rights
by taking historically irrigated land irrigated by the
ditches out of irrigation. The amount of acreage taken out
of irrigation by roads, housing driveways, etc. should be
more than enough to accomplish this.
During the winter months, water will have to be stored
in priority and released in quantities to offset domestic
use. The District will have to provide storage to offset a
consumptive use of approximately 25 AF during the six month
period. The Basalt Water Conservency District is now in the
final stages of negotiating with the Bureau of Reclamation
for 500 AF of Ruedi Reservoir water. Once the negotiations
are finalized, the Conservancy District has committed to the
Mid-Valley Metro District Formation Committee sufficient
water to meet their winter augmentation needs.
The water rights under which property within the pro-
posed District boundaries currently obtain water are as
follows:
Name
Robinson Ditch
Northside
Pioneer Ditch
Harris Reed
Ditch
Robinson Ditch
Robinson Ditch
Patterson &
Cummings Ditch
Patterson &
Cummings Ditch
Robinson Ditch
Robinson Ditch
Robinson Ditch
Northside
Pioneer Ditch
Patterson &
Cummings Ditch
Robinson Ditch
TABLE V-1
WATER RESOURCES
Amount Adjudication
(cfs) Date
Source
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
5.0
2.11
2.5
4.24
2.6
1.9
6.46
20.06
0.837
0.890
3.0
3.0
Roaring Fork
River 9.0
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
Roaring Fork
River
5/11/1889
5/11/1889
5/11/1889
5/11/1889
12/29/1903
12/14/1907
12/14/1907
12/29/1903
8/25/1936
8/25/1936
8/25/1936
8/25/1936
10/214/1952
Appropriation
Date
6/15/1882
7/20/1883
11/02/1883
4/15/1886
4/25/1889
11/20/1893
11/20/1893
4/25/1899
4/25/1900
9/01/1900
9/05/1916
5/15/1918
8/114/1948
E. Proposed Water Facilities
The proposed water system facilities for the District
will include source of supply, treatment, storage and trans-
mission lines. The physical facilities will be based upon
the following design criteria:
1 Design Criteria
a. Provide a minimum of 35 psi service pressure
under peak hour demand to the highest
elevation served in the pressure zone.
b. Potable water will be of good quality meeting
all mandatory requirements of the Colorado
Department of Public Health.
c. Fire protection flows will meet or surpass the
ISO (Insurance Services Office) guidelines.
d. Water facilities must be designed for phased
construction to permit gradual investment
approximately paralleling actual needs that
result in an economically feasible plan.
e. Detailed design and materials will conform to
AWWA and ASTM Standards.
2. Supply and Treatment
As discussed earlier in this report, supply
will be provided from alluvial wells. The loca-
tion and depth of the wells will determine both
water quality and quantity in addition to pump-
ing costs to storage. During the final phase of
design, after test wells have been drilled, proper
consideration will be given to the layout of the
well system. It is expected that the quality of
the well water will be such that chlorination
will be the only treatment required. Wells will
also lend themselves to phased construction,
and provide flexibility if further areas are an-
nexed into the service area.
3. Storage
Properly located reservoirs, which provide
adequate storage, allow uniform operation of the
facilities and eliminate the need for costly over-
sized water supply facilities to meet peak hour and
emergency needs. The topography of the area within
the proposed district allows only one_pressure
zone. The service area elevations range
y -b
from 6390 feet to 6530 feet mean sea level. With
storage facilities located at approximately 6610
feet, service pressure will range from 35 psi to 94
psi. It is recommended that the ultimate storage
requirement of 1.0 million gallons be provided
with two storage tanks, the exact location of which
will be determined during final design.
4. Transmission and Distribution
The recommended transmission facilities needed
to serve the District service area are shown in
figures A-4 and A-5. The required capacity will
be determined from fire flow requirements. Dis-
tribution lines within developments will be sized
and located during final design when new develop-
ment occurs and will be the responsibility of the
individual developer.
CHAPUR 1
•
VI. PROPOSED WASTEWATER SYSTEM
A. General
The nature of the development on the valley floor will
dictate the type of sewage handling facilities. The urban
and suburban areas projected within the district necessitates
a central collection and treatment system.
B. Wastewater Loading
Design wastewater flows are estimated as follows:
Average Daily Flow (ADF)
5700 population x 100 gpcd = 570,000 gpd
Peak Flow
=2.5 x ADF = 2.5 x 570,000 gpd = 1,425,000 gpd
C. Design Criteria
The preliminary wastewater system planning has been
based on the following general criteria.
1. Community - type sewer service would be provided
to all high density developments within the
District. Lower density areas may have individual
wastewater systems until service to the individual
area becomes economically justified.
2. The wastewater treatment facilities will be
located and designed subject to the approval of the
Water Quality Division of the Colorado Department
of Health. The effluent requirements for discharge
to the Roaring Fork River will require secondary
treatment to meet minimum state effluent standards
for all parameters. Detailed design will conform
to the "Design Criteria for Wastewater Works"
published by the Colorado Water Pollution Control
Commission.
3 The ultimate service population of 5700 people and
an average per capita sewage contribution of 100
gpcd will result in the wastewater treatment plant
to be sized with a design flow of 0.57 MGD.
4. Interceptor lines and wastewater treatment
facilities shall be designed for phased construc-
tion to permit gradual investment approximately
paralleling actual needs.
•
r -
I
D. Wastewater Treatment Plant
It is anticipated that secondary treatment will be
met by an aerated lagoon process. This process was
based upon the assumption that land would be available
in the northwest corner of the District for the lagoon
system. If adequate acreage is not available and the
cost of obtaining acreage becomes prohibitive, then the
next viable alternative would be a mechanical treatment
plant utilizing a rotating biological contactor (RBC)
process.
E. Interceptor, Trunklines, Outfalls
The preliminary location of the main interceptor
and trunk lines are shown in figure A-6, A-7. The
topography of the valley floor will permit gravity flow
to the treatment site but prohibitive construction cos
in the area of the existing Sopris Village sewage plant
may dictate the need for a lift station.
F. Collection Sewers
Existing collection systems will be incorporated
into the District's Facilities. Construction of
collection systems within future developments will be
the responsibility of the individual developer and will
be designed when the new development occurs.
5
r
W
VII, PROPOSED PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
In an area with the nucleus of a small urban community
such as El Jebel, it becomes important to plan for the recre-
ation needs in advance rather than let growth dictate the
needs after the fact. The character of El Jebel will be en-
hanced by preserving the rural character of the valley and
focusing the character on common facilities including a park
system. The proposed district will work closely with Eagle
County in establishing policies and specific goals toward
these common facilities. It is proposed that the District
will be used as a vehicle in which to define receivership and
maintenance and to oversee a function to coordinate recre-
ational activities.
Large community wide parks will be provided for active
and passive recreation, in addition to the small recreation
facilities provided by each development for small children.
A few possible community wide parks that could be pursued are
as follows:
A. Park site within the Forest Service Tree Nursery along
the Roaring Fork River.
B. A major active recreaton area for young adults of 10 to
20 acres should be developed in cooperation with the
school facility on the north side of Highway 82.
CHAPTER VIII
•
VIII. PHASED CONSTRUCTION AND COST ESTIMATES
The phasing and construction cost estimates for the pro-
posed water and wastewater facilities are summarized in
Tables VIII -1 and VIII -2.
PHASE I
1983-1992
PHASE II
1993-2003
150
0.5
12"
10"
TABLE VIII -1
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
WATER SYSTEM COST ESTIMATE
UNIT PRICE
ITEM
GPM Well
MG Storage
Transmission
Transmission
ITEM
QUANTITY
3ea.
2ea.
6200LF
17700LF
Sub Total
+ 25% Engr
Total Cost
QUANTITY
40,000/ea.
250,000/ea.
24/LF
20/LF
& Const.
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL PRICE
$
120,000
500,000
149,000
354,000
1,123,000
281,000
1,404,000
TOTAL PRICE
150 GPM Well
10" Transmission
Main
3ea.
7700LF
Sub Total
+ 25% Engr
Total Cost
40,000/ea.
20/LF
& Const.
120,000
154,000
274,000
69,000
343,000
PHASE 1
1983-1992
•
TABLE VIII -2
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
WASTEWATER SYSTEM COST ESTIMATE
ITEM
QUANTITY
PHASE II
1993-2003
Secondary Treat-
ment Facility
18" Interceptor
15" Interceptor
12" Interceptor
10" Interceptor
Interceptor
12" Outfall
8"
ITEM
0.285mgd
2600 LF
9000 LF
1870 LF
2500 LF
8500 LF
3000 LF
UNIT PRICE
635,000/LS
TOTAL PRICE
$
31.50/LF
28,50/LF
214/LF
21.50/LF
18/LF
211/LF
Sub Total
+ 25% Engr. & Cont.
Total Cost
Secondary Treat-
ment Facility
8" Interceptor
QUANTITY
0.285mgd
2000 LF
UNIT PRICE
$
4173,000/LS
Sub Total
+ 25% Engr. &
Total Cost
18/LF
Cont.
635,000
82,000
257,000
45,000
511,000
153,000
72,000
1,298,000
35�4,000
1,622,000
TOTAL PRICE
,473,000
3,600
509,000
127,000
636,000
CHAPTER IX
•
IX. FINANCING AND OPERATION PLANNING
The public facilities of Mid -Valley Metropolitan District
will be financed in three phases. Two phases will provide
water and sewer to accommodate the ultimate population build
out and a third phase will provide operation and maintenance
for recreation and park facilities dedicated by developers
and held in common by property owners.
Water and Sewer facilities will be constructed in Phase I
(1983) in the amount of $3,900,000. Of this $1,404,000 will
be for water, $1,622,000 in wastewater facilities, and
$874,000 for interest payments on debt for the construction/
development period. Phase II, to begin in 1993, will add an
additional $343,000 in water, $636,000 in wastewater and
$276,000 for additional interest requirements. Total financ-
ing for water/sewer facilities will be $5,155,000. See
Schedules A-E on the following pages.
Water and Sewer facility financing for this 20 year develop-
ment will require an initial tap fee of $4,000, a monthly
service charge of $20 per month and an initial mill levy of 5
mills. Over time the tap fee will rise to $6,500, the mill
levy to 10 mills and the service charge will drop to $17.50
per month. The financial assumptions include 74 new units
per year within the 1,845 acre district. An overview of
water/sewer financing is included as Schedule "D" of this
section. Schedule "E" is a summary of mill levies and ser-
vice charges.
While park and recreation facilities are not as detailed as
water/sewer requirements in this plan, operation and mainte-
nance and coordination of the use of the facilities will be
needed. Facilities will be dedicated by developers and held
in common by owners. Recreation facility requirements are
not expected to exceed 3.00 mills per year from year 7
through year 20. This would produce approximately $6,700 in
year 7 and $56,000 at the build out period.
The yearly progression for all of the following financial
schedules will be pushed back one year with construction
beginning in 1983 rather than 1982.
10
/3,9001000
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
PHASE I WATER AHD SEWER
ESTIMATED DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1982
PATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST
TOTAL ANNUAL
12/ 1/1983 546000.00 546000.00 546000,00
6/ 1/1984 273000;00 273000.00
'- 12/ 1/1984 273000.00 273000.00 546000.00
6/ 1/1935 273000.00 273000.00
12/ 1/1985 25000 273000.00 298000.00 571000.00
lR 6/ 1/1986 271250.00 271250.00
J 12/ 1/1936 25000 271250.00 296250.00 567500.00
3 ' 6/ 1/1987 269500.00 269500.00
12 12/ 1/1987 25000 269500.00 294500,00 564000.00
6/ 1/1988 267750.00 267750,00
__ 121 1/1983 25000 267750.00 292750,00 560500,00
7 6/ 1/1989 266000,00 266000,00
12/ 1//989 50000 266000.00 316000,00 582000.00
6/ 1/1990 262500.00 262500.00
''
12/ 1/1990 50000 262`,00.00 312500.00 575000.00
4 1 6/ 1/1991 259004.00 259000.00
"' 12/ 1/1991 145000 259000.00 404000,00 663000.00
_- b/ 1/1992 248850 00 248250.00
fi 12/ 1/1992 165000 248850.04 413850.00 662700,0
0
6/ 1/1993 237300.00 237300.00
12/ 1/1993 175000 237300.00 412300.00 649600.00
en 6/ 1/1994 225050.00 225050,00
12/ 1/1994 175000 225050.00 400050.00 625100.00
i6/ 1/1995 212800.00 212800.00
12/ 1/1995 180000 212800.00 392900.00 605600.00
6/ 1/1996 200200.00 200200.00
1 12/ 1/1996 280000 200200.00 480200.00 680400.00
f-"� 6/ 1/1997 180600,00 190600.00
12/ 1/1997 320000 180600.00 500600.00 681200.00
11 6/ 1/1998 159200.00 158200,00
:r 12/ 1/1998 440000 158200.00 598200.00 756400,00
6/ 1/1999 127400.00 127400.00
11 12/ 1/1999 500000 127400.00 627400.00 754800.00
6/ 1/2000 92400.00 92400.00
12/ 1/2000 600000 92400,00 692400.00 784800.00
f 6/ 1/2001 50400.00 50400.00
1 ; 12/ 1/2001 720000 50400.00 770400,00 820800.00
lk TOTALS
1 ACC INT;
• n
j
RATE;
BOND 'IFS;
AVE LIFE:
3900000 8296400.00 12196400.00 12196400.00
.00
14,0000
59260.00
15.1949
FIRST PAYMENT WAS HOT REDUCED BT ACCRUED INTEREST
SCHEDULE A
/1,255,000
HIP VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
• PHASE II WATER AND SEWER.
ESTIMATED DEPT SERVICE SCHEDULE
AS OF DECEMBER 11 1993
LATE PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL ANNUAL
6/ 1/1994 87850.00 87850.00
12/ 1/1994 87850.00 87850.00 175700.00
6/ 1/1995 87850.00 87850,00
12/ 1/1995 25000 87850.00 112850.00 200700.00
6/ 1/1996 86100.00 86100.00
12/ 1/1996 25000 86100.00 111100.00 197200.00
6/ 1/1997 84350.00 84350.00
12/ 1/1997 25000 84350.00 109350.00 193700.00
6/ 1/1998 82600.00 82600.00
12/ 1/1998 25000 82600.00 107600.00 190200.00
. 6/ 1/1999 80850.00 80850.00
12! 1/1999 25000 80850.00 105850.00 186700,00
6/ 1/2000 79100.00 79100.00
12/ 1/2000 25000 79100.00 104100.00 183200.00
6/ 1/2001 77350.00 77350.00
12/ 1/2001 25000 77350.00 102350.00 179700,00
6/ 1/2002 75600.00 75600,00
12/ 1/2002 230000 75600.00 305600.00 381200.00
6/ 1/2003 59500.00 59500,00
'- 12/ 1/2003 250000 59500.00 309500.00 369000.00
11111 6/ 1/2004 42000.00 42000.00
12/ 1/2004 275000 42000.00 317000,00 359000.00
6/ 1/2005 22750.00 22750.00
12/ 1/2005 325000 22750.00 347750.00 370500,00
TOTALS 1255000 1731800.00 2986800.00 2986800.00
ACC INT; ,00
L_
RATE; 14.0000
BOND YRS: • 12370.00
AVE LIFE; 9,8566
FIRST PAYMENT WAS HOT REDUCED PT ACCRUED INTEREST
5/11/1982 AT 16: 8. 7
SCHEDULE B
i ,,1;,:,, 000
MIP VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
COMBINED PHASE 1 AND II WATER. AND SEWER
ESTIMATED DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1982
• DATE PRINCIPAL IIiTEREST TOTAL ANNUAL
12/ 1/1983 546000.00 546000.00 546000.00
6/ 1/1984 273000.00 273000.00
12/ 1/1984 273000,00 273000.00 546000.00
6/ 1/1985 273000.00 273000,00
12/ 1/1965 25000 273000.00 298000.00 571000,00
6/ 1/1986 271250.00 271250.00
12/ 1/1936 25000 271250.00 , 296250.00 567500.00
j 6/ 1/1987 269500.00 269500.00
12/ 1/1997 25000 269500.00 294500.00 564000.00
6/ 1/1988 267750.00 267750.00
12/ 1/1968 25000 267750,00 292750,00 560500,00
6/ 1/1989 266000.00 266000.00
12/ 1/1989 50000 266000.00 316000.00 582000,00
6/ 1/1990 262500.00 262500.00
12/ 111990 50000 262500.00 312500.00 575000.00
6/ 1/1091 259000.00 259000.00
12/ 1/1991 145000 259000.00 404000.00 663000.00
6/ 1/1992 248850.00 248850.00
12/ 1/1992 165000 248850.00 413850.00 662700.00
6/ 1/1993 237300.00 237300.00
12/ 1/1993 175000 237300.00 412300.00 649600,00
6/ 1/1994 312900.00 312900,00
• 12/ 1/1994 175000 312900.00 487900.00 800800.00
6/ 1/1995 300650.00 300650.00
12/ 1/1995 205000 300650.00 505650.00 806300.00
7
6/ 1/1006 296300.00 286300.00
12/ 1/1996 305000 286300,00 591300.00 877600.00
7
6/ 1/1997 264950.00 264950,00
12/ 1/1997 345000 264950.00 609950.00 874900.00
6/ 1/1998 240800.00 240600.00
12/ 1/1998 465000 240800.00 705800.00 946600.00
6/ 1/1999 208250.00 208250.00
12/ 1/1999 525000 208250.00 733250.00 941500,00
_ 6/ 1/2000 171500.00 171500.00
12/ 1/2000 625000 171500.00 796500.00 966000,00
{ 6/ 1/2001 127750.00 127750.00
12/ 1/2001 745000 127750.00 872750.00 1000500.00
-r-
6/ 1/2002 75600.00 75600.00
12/ 1/2002 230000 75600.00 305600,00 381200.00
6/ 1/2003 59500.00 59500.00
12/ 1/2003 250000 59500.00 309500.00 369000.00
6/ 1/2004 42000.00 42000.00
12/ 1/2004 275000 12000.00 317000.00 359000.00
6/ 1/2005 22750.00 22750.00
121 1/2005 325000 22750.00 347750.00 370500.00
• TOTALS
RCC INT:
FATE;
WW1 'IJ S'
5155000 10028200.00 15183200.00 15183200.00
.00
34.9050
SCHEDULE C
r:.
1
ft
tl:
r
grhprlifle T1
MID -VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Cash Flow Projections
Water/Sewer Systems
0)
0
r v,
c c C c C c c C c a s1 a) •O Vst CC d C. 'a tL sl •C et
Cc a«acCC aCo c.¢cca
vcttttnc eCaaa
cer. --t aav:avrew¢� cc net aar„ cav
c r
a s c t a a.0 Ir r net tr ce •te: a c C c v c v. a
r c a r cc r r r v: a c M v C c C a a r a r
CC Cr r r M e! a! c: P. �! P v u:
N �f
C C C C C C C C Q s! m C te C C Q C C C C v C C
3't: a Cc a CCCCNI Ce.cPc. CC.v'-acs: Crcr c
C'C c C er_r r. tea -q .C� . u^C-.�v r cc
1. c C o vicecreto ec a'rv.v ccc,_ o t -q C ts.0-
•
G R LC CAa�` �: `a r c
ft - c ` ...
v
d c c c c c c c c c c c cc== c c c c O c c c c
G V) C C C C C C C C C C C C C G C C C C C C C C C
w C C0 sr 41: tC -�•Ptc O MP P?CC cN NC
• O telt R ct:V vsr
NNle secc' C Na cr O COC ell" UT UT N cc Q
• X
cc cc r e•: re N et NP to cc Per u: CC C4 r M
tt U: U: CC C CC C C tC P P P CC CO cc a. C C C r tf-. et7 0) V:
r r r
C C C C C C C C C C C O c C C 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0
0) C C O C O C C O O O C C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
�•+ U C O C ie 0 C O O C Co. C CC M C CC CC V`O O C C V:
->`,t tr — CN v:e^N0: CDCCPQCC rCOC.-P-Q O
c 0,s2* e- tc cc oc Pec :c se C O PP sr tC CD CO IC UM0
UT Ut Ie: Ut V: LC OCCIC OO CO CO CO CT -0 0 :C OMMe+:M
41
C C
O C
V C
scu C
et asC
co
Tr.! E
O O
E c
0)
✓ d
t.
0)
T.1)
W
C 0 0 0 O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O C
C Co C O O C O C O O C O C O 0 C 0 0 0 C 0 0 0
C K sr C: Ie) CA u: se CD C CO CM M C- e- N 0: .-+ O N C` 0)
• P 0� N u7 co N U: C, en MNP PJ C U7 N Cm CC U: et ct rt M
Cry Misr 'en U)U)to cc PP CO CO CA O CD <4 N et sr M CO
V!
O O C O C O G O O CO N CD O O G O O O O O O O 0 0
N N N N N t O O sr e) CM M O CO CC .tf' N O CO O V r N O O
0) O co sr tO nr •i PN sr CO N N M sr lt)UD P sr r. O a: CO
et NM CD 010 Ma: PCO U)sr O Or' IV CI OM N O OD CC Cc
H p- P. N sr OM M OD In CD H sr N CO N sr 02 1.4 0) r'N N
P) M M u7 en CC CC tD 1000 -PCO CO CI CD DO O) 00) 07 VD 117
O O O D O D D O O D D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D D O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D D D 0 O D O D 0 0 0 D O Co D O O D D D
CD CD CD P P 0-o- Com -C. C. C -t-0- 0- .4 4.4 .4,4."4
N02 CM CD CD CD CP CD CP CD CD CD CD OD 00 CO CO OD OD 07
N N V' sr C' sr sr sr sr 'a' sr .0 .0 sr nr nr sr nr sr
ar
10000DODCDCOOOODODDODODCADD
N N O Sr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co O O O O CO sr 0 0 0 0
Co 1t7N O M c44 sr ID 0D0 NQ' co. OO C4 sr CO V!C709 MM
P HOC- sr M C7 N OD P 01 r1 M OD CO CD N Ie) M N N NN
.4 POON C. O N Mr CID co MNP O N u7 t- sr V' sr nr
L? N N .-C NNNN NM MMM sr sr 1)c9.t, 1') MM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD N CD O O O O O O O O CD O 0 0
1. )C O nr co N CO O Sr O) M M O CO to sr 09 O co CD Q' N OO
tO C W 1001 M OD N C`.-/ sr Sr V, CD CD M Sr MNC to co P COO
OF MPNtD.-tDOr C4Cnul MC4.1OOP07srnr
t. Lt- rl.-�NNM srco t0en src) e -I C.701.4. U7 (0tD P DOD
a .M .M .-C N N -4 N .•1 .M .i .4 .-1
.r >
0
0
1:a$4) 011
F
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O Q O O O O O O D O G O O O O O C O O O O O D O
0 0 U7 to to en en ato CO a Cb 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0
O O D O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 CD W CD sr N 0 CD CD sM C4 O CO UD sr N 0 O CD sT CV O O
O OOO C. CO 05 sr N .4 CD CO CO CO V) sA M N O a) (D t- CD CO
PP PNSTt7N.0-400)000DU7 srMNHOO) PCO 44) .4.4'
.-iNM V' V)tD COC. CO CO O.i N R)sr sr un CD C - MOO
N .i .M .4 .-I .-e .4 .-C .-C N .M
0.' CO C4 ID O Sr CO N CD O sr CO N CO O nr CO N CO O 000
V) N 0) P Sr N 0) CD Sr .i 0) CD CO .-1 CO CD M O O 0) en M M M
H N NM V' u,(0 CO t -OO a)O N .-i N V)Q.4 117 IOCO co co
N. .-t .4 .-i N N N N
O O O O O CD O O O O C O O O D O 0 0 0 0
O O O O O C O O O O O O G O O C O C O O
O O O U7 tO N um to ee_ u7 to to Cn to v) U7 to Uy. U7 1D
sT st er u)O V) t1 Lt.:. lO I77 O 117 U7 tD (0 ED ID CD ID ID
N
0. N M sr V) ID C- DO 0) O .-C N Mer V) ID P O 0) O NN Msr 117
CD CO CO CO O O O O O CO Cr) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0
7a
01 CD 0)CD0)0)0)0)0) 0)0)0)0) CO CO 010)0)000000
N N .•i .•i N .-t .-4 .4 .4 N .-C H H .i .-i .-e .4 .-t N N 04 N N N
w 4g
CV
c.
O)
mIn 0
Col .0
My d C L
~ C 0 0)
0 0 0) E 0)
Schedule E
MID -VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Combined Mill Levy and Service Charge Rates
Water/Sewer Recreation Water & Sewer Tap Fee
Year Mill Levy Mill Levy Montly Rates Rates
1982 0.00 0.00
1983 0.00 0.00 $20.00 $4000.00
1984 5.00 0.00 20.00 4000.00
1985 5.00 0.00 20.00 4000.00
1986 5.00 0.00 20.00 5500.00
1987 5.00 2.00 20.00 5500.00
1988 5.00 2.00 25.00 5500.00
1989 5.00 2.00 25.00 5500.00
1990 5.00 2.00 25.00 5500.00
1991 6.00 2.00 25.00 5500.00
1992 8.00 2.00 25.00 5500.0
1993 8.00 2.00 25.00 5500.00
1994 10.00 2.50 25.00 5500.00
1995 10.00 2.50 25.00 5500.00
1996. 10.00 2.50 25.00 6500.00
1997 10.00 2.50 25.00 6500.00
1998 10.00 2.50 25.00 6500.00
1999 10.00 2.50 25.00 6500.00
2000 10.00 2.50 20.00 6500.00
2001 10.00 3.00 20.00 6500.00
2002 10.00 3.00 17.50 6500.00
2003 10.00 3.00 17.50 build out
2004 10.00 3.00 17.50 build out
2005 10.00 3.00 17.50 build out
L_
MID -VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Parks and Recreation 0 be M
Estimated Mill Levies
Year Assessed Value Mills Revenue
1987 $3,364,000 2.00 $6,728
1988 4,252,000 2.00 8,504
1989 5,140,000 2.00 10,280
1990 6,028,000 2.00 12,056
1991 6,916,000 2.00 13,832
1992 7,804,000 2.00 15,608
1993 8,692,000 2.00 17,384
1994 9,580,000 2.50 23,950
1995 10,468,000 2.50 26,170
1996 11,356,000 2.50 28,390
1997 12,244,000 2.50 30,610
1998 13,132,000 2.50 32,830
1999 14,020,000 2.50 35,050
2000 14,908,000 2.50 37,270
2001 15,796,000 3.00 47,380
2002 16,684,000 3.00 50,052
2003 17,572,000 3.00 52,716
2004 18,460,000 3.00 55,380
Irgnim
r
MID -VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Special Assessment District within three mile radius at Mid -
Valley Metro District.
Basalt Rural Fire District
Basalt Sanitation District
Basalt Water Conservency District
Colorado River Conservation District
Town of Basalt
R.E. 1 School District
Colorado Mountain College
If
X. DISTRICT POLICIES
Basic policies recommended for the Mid Valley Metropolitan
District are:
A. The District will finance and construct all water and
sewer ("wholesale") facilities required tc supply,
treat, store and distribute water to development
boundaries and will define receivership and mainte-
nance for community wide parks.
B. Developers will be required to construct and dedicate
to the District all water distribution and collection
sewer lines ("retail facilities") within development
boundaries. Builders cr developers will be required tc
finance all service lines. All such facilities shall be
designed and ccnstructed in conformity to District
standards.
C. Customers shall be responsible for maintenance and
replacement cf all sewer service lines, and water ser-
vice lines. Existing individual residential units which
are on individual water and sewer systems shall operate
and maintain those systems until such time that District
facilities are within 400' cf the individual property
boundary and it is economically feasible for the unit to
tie on to the District's water and sewer facilities.
The District shall be responsible for maintenance of all
other facilities.
D. All lands and easements reasonably needed for the Dis-
tricts physical operation to serve in -District customers
shall be contributed by the individual developers.
E. All property owners served by the domestic water system
and using water from that system will be required tc
deed to the District -sufficient legal and physical
water rights to provide for augmentation during the
irrigation season. Where sufficient water rights are
not available, the District may require a cash -in --lieu
payment or purchase of other water rights for dedication
to the District. Winter augmentation water ccsts will
be included in the operating cost of the water system.
F. Inclusion of additional property in the District may be
accomplished from time to time by the Board of Directors
cf the District in accordance with Title 32, Article 1,
Part 4, C.R.S. 1973, as presently existing or herein
after amended. It will be the intention cf the District
that in reviewing requests for inclusion of additional
property that the Board of Directors of the District
will consider whether:
1. There is sufficient existing need or projected need
for water and sewer services in the area based upon
plans which have received land use approval by the
Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County.
2. The water and sewer service presently existing in
the area is adequate for present and projected
needs.
3. Adequate service is not or will not be available
to the area through existing municipal or Quasi-
municipal corporations within a reasonable time and
on a comparable basis.
4. The District is capable of providing economical and
sufficient service to the area to be included.
5. The area to be included in the District has or will
have the financial ability to pay the cost of con-
structing adequate facilities to service such area
either through construction of the facilities on a
pay-as-you-go basis or by discharging any indebted-
ness of the District on a reasonable basis.
6. The facility and service standards within the area
to be included are compatible with the facility of
service standards of the District.
7. The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted
county, regional, or state long-range water quality
management plan for the area.
8. The District has sufficient capacity in its water
and sewer facilities or such capacity will exist,
to provide service to the area to be included with-
out adversely affecting the existing service area
or existing contracts or obligations of the Dis-
trict to provide service.
9. That the rates, fees, charge and general ad valorem
taxes of residents within the existing District
boundaries will not be adversely affected by the
inclusion of the area within the District bound-
aries.
[* 9
APPENDIX A
•
A
APPENDIX A
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST BREAKDOWN
The Operation and maintenance costs were based upon the fol-
lowing assumptions: Power costs @ $.05/KW-Hour;
C/2 costs @ $1400/Ton;
Labor costs @ $12/Hour
TABLE A-1
Operation and Maintenance for Ultimate Wastewater Facilities
(0.57 MGD)
COST
ITEM ($/YEAR)
Labor 19,000
Power 16,000
Chlorination 1,300
111
Major Maintenance 1,000
Materials 1,500
TOTAL 38,800
TABLE A-2
Operation and Maintenance for Initial Wastewater Facility
(0.285 MGD)
COST
ITEM ($/YEAR)
Labor 9,500
Power 8,000
Chlorination 650
Major Maintenance 500
Materials 150
TOTAL 19,400
TABLE A-3
Operation and Maintenance for Ultimate Water Facilities
(720 gpm)
COST
ITEM ($/YEAR)
Labor 19,680
Transporation 2,200
Power 39,500
Chlorination 580
Office Billing & Misc. 3,000
Materials 3,000
TOTAL 67,960
TABLE A-4
Operation and Maintenance for Initial Water Facilities
(360 gpm)
COST
ITEM ($/YEAR)
Labor 7,020
Transportation 390
Power 6,535
Chlorination 400
Office Billing & Misc. 900
Materials 1,000
TOTAL 16,2145
TABLE A-5
Operation and Maintenance for Ultimate Parks and Recreation
Facilities
ITEM
Labor
Transportation
Equipment
Chemicals
TOTAL
COST
($/YEAR)
24,960
3,000
6,000
3,000
36,960
a
POCKr MTN MAMMAL PAtli
•
1
Th -
FIGURE A -I
EL JEBEL
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
DISTRICT
• VICINITY MAP
Roaring Fork Valley frorn west of El Jebel with Colorado Highway 82 in center,
U. S. Forest Service riursery at right and irrigated land in foreground-
•
•
-o,
F
�'=—mss✓. j�'
•
•
�{-3 •
•
•
- ,:rre"-
.'Fy .
.51
Community at El Jebel in the Roaring Fork Valley from north.
FIGURE A-2
EL J E BE L VALLEY FLOOR
1
•
LEGEND
DISTRICT AREA
FIGURE A-3
EL JEBEL
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
DISTRICT
BOUNDARY MAP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
33
385
11 \ 6434
• \
6428
34
4"0
655
El Je
1 '; N "
; 21-\\
.11
6482
•
S C AL E: 1 = 24,000
Leon
%, •
•
4 4
8M - •
6508
5C
Glove • I
LEGEND
TRANSMISSION MAIN
10" TRANSMISSION MAIN
STORAGE RESERVOIR
FIGURE A-4
EL JEBEL
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
DISTRICT
WATER SYSTEM
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
33
? 85
643'
•
'61'0
/ ‘
/
) t•-* ' ( OC:) "b-' / -‘
6557,,,
El Je ; ••••••
c •••./
•-, '%.
4. ---,
,...,
6182"---'1-7-
,--,,
\
. • / /4/
;
f
72:
• ;
<56
di
r )\`
Leon
6454
478
rt>
ni*
A-- 0
Grave 1
SCALE1:24,0100
vmmilismIlml.memr•a•
•
•
LEGEND
=-,==-----,==12" TRANSMISSION MAIN
10" TRANSMISSION MAIN
• STORAGE RESERVOIR
FIGURE A-5
EL JEBEL
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
DISTRICT
WATER SYSTEM
PHASE IL CONSTRUCTION
APPENDIX B
•
R
•
•
APPENDIX B
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
ITEMIZATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPITAL COSTS
TABLE B-1
Aerated Lagoon Cost Breakdown
Phase I
ITEM
1) Dirtwork
2) Aeration Equipment
3) Yard and Piping
4) Headworks
5) Comminutor
6) Chlorination
7) Fencing
8) Building
9) Flow Measurement
10) Landscaping
11) Bentonite
12) Level Control
13) Mechanical &
Electrial
14) Heating &
Ventilation
15) Riprap
44466 CY @ $3/yd
w/blower L.S.
900 LF -12" @ $30/LF
240 LF -6" @ $15/LF
L.S.
2 @ $15,000/ea.
L.S.
1400 LF @ $15/LF
15' x 30' @ $40/SF
L.S.
L.S.
133,333 SF @ $.15/sf.
140 Tons @ $100/ton
3 @ $700/ea.
L.S.
L.S.
200 yds. @ $15/Yd.
SUB -TOTAL
25 acres @ $5000/AC
TOTAL
Include land costs
COST/$
• 133,400
= 100,000
• 27,000
▪ 3,600
= 15,000
▪ 30,000
• 20,000
▪ 21,000
= 18,000
• 15,000
= 15,000
• 20,000
• 14,000
= 21,000
• 50,000
• 4,000
• 3,000
= 508,000
• 125,000
• 635,000
1
TABLE B-2
Aerated Lagoon Cost Breakdown
PHASE II
ITEM
1) Dirtwork
2) Aeration Equipment
3) Yard and Piping
4) Fencing
5) Building
6) Landscaping
7) Bentonite
8) Level Control
9) Mechanical &
Electrical
10) Heating &
Ventilation
11) Riprap
43800 CY @ $3/CY
w/blowers
900 LF -12" @ $30/LF
240 LF- 6" @ $15/LF
1400 LF @ $15/LF
15' x 30' @ $40/SF
L.S.
130,888 SF @ $.15/SF
140 Tons @ $100/Ton
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
100 Yd @ $15/YD
20 Acres @ $5000/AC
SUB -TOTAL
TOTAL
COST/$
• 131,400
100,000
• 27,000
• 3,600
• 21,000
• 18,000
• 7,500
= 20,000
• 14,000
• 7,000
• 25,000
• 2,000
• 1,500
= 378,000
• 94,500
= 473,500
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
---------- 7t.--
.-7•__,
--•%_:,"
_ . •‘-,. \
--
33
181'4)
2"(i)
o
' to"
34
sn/
1.
it\
6552
El
648?
Leon
••••:, • =
32
a a
',BM
6508
Grave il
A
SCA L E:. 1 : 24,000
s
•
LEGEND
AERATED LAGOON
PLANT SITE
INTERCEPTOR
OUTFALL
FIGURE A-6
EL JE BE L
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
DISTRICT
WASTEWATER FACILITIES
PHASE I CONS I RUCTION
33
785
•
•6600 -
t�
�`. ;Ly Cw
\ � � 6474
•6460
6418,
34.
O ,1
655? 0
EI Je
6481
�� QQ
11
ti t 11
y 6454 \�
478
}Vi114,
Grave 'R
SCALE: 1= 24,000
•
LEGEND
❑ AERATED LAGOON
PLANT PHASE 1E
INTERCEPTOR
-- OUTFALL
FIGURE A-7
EL JEBEL
MID VALLEY METROPOLITAN
WASTEWATER FACILITIES
PHASE II CONSTRUCTION
1
APPENDIX C
TABLE C-1
Partial Equivalent Schedule
CLASS OF USE
A. RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS
1. Single Family Residential Units (per
unit). Single family homes, duplexes,
individually billed mobile homes, mobile
homes on single lot, and mobile homes
established as permanent residences.
NOTE: Rental privileges of all kinds are
not included in this value. Only one kitchen
1 is permitted; if a resident has more than one
kitchen, then additional EQR values should be
assigned in accordance with multi -family resi-
1 dential units. A kitchen is defined as any
110 areas having facilities for cooking and dish-
washing.
71
2. Multi -Family Residential Units
J Apartments, condominiums, townhouses, and similar
facilites in the same complex, small cabins in
17icourts not associated with motels; all units in-
`, tended for long-term rental.
a NOTE: Excludes more than one kitchen per unit;
swimming pools are additive. Includes common
laundry facilities or individual laundry hook-ups.
A bath is defined as any area having a toilet.
a. 4 or more bedroom unit (per unit) 1.10
b. 3 bedroom unit (per unit) 1.00
c. 2 bedroom unit, 2 bath (per unit) 0.85
d. 2 bedroom unit, 1 bath (per unit) 0.80
�I e. Single bedroom or studio unit (per unit) 0.65
7] 3. Transient Residential Units
Hotels, motels, mobile home parks, dormitories,
recreational vehicle parks, and similar facilities.
w
EQR VALUE
1.00
C -I
1
r
NOTE: Includes laundry facilities in mobile homes.
Swimming pools and laundry facilities (except those in
mobile homes) are additive; room counts shall include
rooms furnished to employees. Recreational vehicle
parks include central bath house facility but not
laundry or retail space. See
Paragraph
a. Manager's unit, use multi -family or 2
single family residential unit classifica- above
tion as applicable (per unit).
b. Motels, hotels, and rooming houses with-
out kitchen facilities.
i. Rooms having not more than two bed
spaces (per rental unit). 0.25
ii. Rooms having more than two bed
spaces per rental unit (per additonal
two bed spaces). 0.10
c. Motels with kitchen facilities.
i. Units having not more than 2 bed
spaces (per each available space). 0.10
ii. Units having more than 2 bed
spaces (per rental unit). 0.50
d. Mobile home parks (per each available
space). 0.85
e. Dormitories (per each rental bed space). 0.10
f. Recreational vehicle parks.
i. Camping or vehicle spaces without
sewer hookup (per space). 0.35
ii. Camping or vehicle spaces with
sewer hookup (per space). 0.40
NOTE: Spaces which have year-round mobile
home to be evaluated per mobile home park.
1 g. Add for laundry facilities in billing
unit complex (per washing machine or avail-
able hookup). 1.05
r
B. COMMERCIAL CLASSIFICATION
1. Restaurants, Bars and Drive -Ins
Restaurants, bars, lounges, banquet rooms, and
drive-ins.
J
;-
f
1
a. Restaurants and bars (per 10 seats). 0.65
b. Banquet rooms (per 10 seats). 0.35
c. Drive—ins (per car stall). 0.15
2. Commercial Buildings
Office buildings, retail sales buildings, multiple
use buildings, laundromats, service stations, shops,
garages, and similar facilities.
a. Offices and office buildings (per 1,000
sq. ft. of gross occupied area).
b. Retail sales area (per 1,000 sq. ft.
of gross sales and display area).
c. Laundromats (per washing machine or
available hookup).
NOTE: This category does not include
commercial laundries.
d. Service Stations.
0.65
0.35
1.60
i . Per fuel nozzle. 0.40
ii. Add for each bay/rack where
cars can be washed. 1.60
e. Non—retail work areas, such as garages,
machine shops, fire stations, and warehouses
(per 1,000 sq. ft.).
f. Process water from commercial establi—
shments discharged to the collection system
shall be evaluated based on the metered water
inflow (per 1,000 gpd, maximum day).
C. CHURCH AND SCHOOL CLASSIFICATIONS
1. Churches (per 100 seats)
NOTE: Rectories or other living areas are
additive.
2. Schools — Day care centers, public and
private day schools.
NOTE: Includes teachers, librarians, custo—
dians, and administrative personnel associated
with the school function; adminstrative centers,
warehouses, equipment (such as buses) repair and/or
0.20
2.50
1.50
i
•
r
r v
Ctry
•
— 1
storage centers, swimming pools, and similar
facilities are additive.
a. Without gym and without cafeteria
(per 50 students).
b. Without gym and with cafeteria or with
gym and without cafeteria (per 50 students).
c. With gym and with cafeteria (per 50
students).
r a
1.50
1.85
2.10