Wastewater Collection System Master Plan

(1)

#

*

#

*

#

*

#*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#*

#

*

#*

Hwy 280

Floribunda Ave Newhall Rd

Sanchez Ave

Hillsb oroug

h Blvd Town of Hillsborough

(North)

City of Burlingame

Town of Hillsborough (South) Hillside Dr

California Dr

Burlingame Hills

77 66 55 4

4 22

33

B  9 B  9 B  8

B  8 B  1 0B  1 0 B  1 7 B  1 7

N e w h a l l N e w h a l l

F l o r i b u n d a F l o r i b u n d a

±

Last Revision:7/24/2012

0 0.125 0.25

Legend

#

* Flow Meters

HILLB_Pipes_and_FMBasins Burlingame City Limits Parcels Task11_HILLB_FM_Basins Label

2 3 4 5 6 7 B8 B9 B10 B17 Floribunda Newhall

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection

System Master Plan

Figure 2

Project No. 137152

P:\137000\137152  Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\GIS\mxd\Task11_Fig2s.mdx

#

*

#*

#

*

#*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

#

*

Hwy 280

Floribunda Ave Newhall Rd

Sanchez Ave

Hillsb oroug

h Blvd Town of Hillsborough

(North)

Town of Hillsborough (South) Hillside Dr

Califo rnia Dr

Burlingame Hills

77 66 55 44

22

3 3

B  9 B  9 B  8

B  8 B  1 0B  1 0 B  1 7 B  1 7

N e w h a l l N e w h a l l

F l o r i b u n d a F l o r i b u n d a

±

Last Revision:7/24/2012

0 0.125 0.25

Legend

#

* Flow Meters

HILLB_Pipes_and_FMBasins Burlingame City Limits Parcels Task11_HILLB_FM_Basins Label

2 3 4 5 6 7 B8 B9 B10 B17 Floribunda Newhall

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection

System Master Plan

Figure 2

Project No. 137152

P:\137000\137152  Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\GIS\mxd\Task11_Fig2s.mdx

Wastewater Collection System Master Plan –

Capital Improvement Plan Update Burlingame (North) Sewershed

Prepared for

Town of Hillsborough

April 2014 | FINAL

(2)

(3)

Technical Memorandum

Limitations:

This document was prepared solely for the Town of Hillsborough, California in accordance with professional standards at the time the services were performed and in accordance with the contract between the Town of Hillsborough, California and Brown and Caldwell dated October 15, 2013. This document is governed by the specific scope of work authorized by the Town of Hillsborough, California; it is not intended to be relied upon by any other party except for regulatory authorities contemplated by the scope of work.

201 North Civic Drive, Suite 115 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Phone: 925-937-9010 Fax: 925-937-9026

Prepared for: Town of Hillsborough, California

Project Title: Hillsborough Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Project No.: 137152

Technical Memorandum No. 4 Update Subject: Capital Improvement Plan Date: April 16, 2014

To: Daniel Gonzales, PE, Town of Hillsborough, Consultant Senior Engineer From: Christopher M. Peters, PE, Brown and Caldwell, Project Manager

Prepared by:

Erik Zalkin, PE, Brown and Caldwell California, License No. C 72777

Reviewed by:

Christopher M. Peters, PE, Brown and Caldwell California, License No. C 69669

Peter Bellows, PE, Brown and Caldwell California, License No. C 34337

(4)

This Page Intentionally Left Blank.

(5)

Technical Memorandum No. 4 Capital Improvement Plan

ii

Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document.

P:\137000\137152 - Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\Task 12 Master Plan Update\TM\Final\TM-4 Capital Improvement Plan FINAL.docx

List of Figures

Figure 4-1. Candidate Basins for Rehabilitation ... 3

Figure 4-2. Capital Improvement Projects ... 11

List of Tables

Table 4-1. Sanitary Sewer Unit Costs ... 6

Table 4-2. Completed Capital Improvement Project Summary^a ... 13

Table 4-3. Pending Capital Improvement Project Summary ... 14

Table 4-3. Pending Capital Improvement Project Summary (Continued) ... 15

Table 4-4. 30-Year Capital Improvement Plan Schedule ... 16

(6)

(7)

1

Section 1: Capital Improvement Plan

This is an update of the 2011 Master Plan (2011 MP) Technical Memorandum 4 (TM 4), which summarizes the Town of Hillsborough (TOH) Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).

This TM builds upon TM 3 – System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan and subsequent hydraulic model updates, which describe the capacity deficiencies that the TOH collection system experiences during the two 10-year, 24-hour design storms. This TM recommends a CIP to improve the performance of the TOH modeled trunk sewers and to meet the capacity assurance requirements of the TOH settlement agreement.

This TM is organized into the following sections:

• CIP Development

• Construction Costs

• Capital Improvement Plan

• Project Implementation

• Other Recommendations

1.1 Capital Improvement Plan Development

This section describes the approach, development, and prioritization of the CIP.

1.1.1 Approach

The approach for the development of the CIP is based on eliminating capacity-related sanitary sewer

overflows (SSOs) during rain events of less than the specified design storm in the modeled trunk sewers and downstream. Capacity-related SSOs caused by peak flows that exceed the hydraulic capacities of the sewers are addressed by increasing the capacity of the collection system (capacity improvement projects) and/or reducing peak flows (rehabilitation projects). Hydraulic capacity and rainfall-dependent inflow and infiltration (RDI/I) reduction projects are identified. These projects will eliminate hydraulic restrictions and help the TOH reduce RDI/I in the system.

1.1.2 Project Development

Capital improvement projects were developed to mitigate hydraulic deficiencies. Potential projects include capacity improvement projects and collection system rehabilitation to reduce RDI/I.

1.1.2.1 Capacity Improvement Projects

Capacity improvement projects are intended to increase hydraulic capacity in the system. TM 3 identified hydraulic deficiencies by pipe reach and highlighted those that were deemed critical. These deficiencies were evaluated, and the most effective improvement (e.g., relief sewers, sewer replacement, and sewer re- routing) were modeled iteratively from upstream to downstream until system surcharge levels dropped to an acceptable level. Following the completion of the 2011 MP, subsequent hydraulic modeling upstream of the Newhall permanent flow meter site led to identifying additional capacity deficiencies that are now included in this updated CIP (Project 5B).

(8)

2

1.1.2.2 Collection System Rehabilitation

Collection system rehabilitation has several benefits including: 1) reducing peak flows in the TOH collection system; 2) potential elimination of additional capital projects in the City of Burlingame due to capacity improvements in the TOH; and 3) the reduction of RDI/I flow volumes that contribute towards the use of the near shore outfall at the Burlingame Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Experience demonstrates that rehabilitation should occur on an area- or basin-wide approach. With this approach, the entire system within a designated basin is rehabilitated as compared to trying to identify and repair specific defects (e.g., cracks, offset joints, defective laterals, etc.) spread throughout the system. The latter approach has proven

ineffective because storm water can migrate past rehabilitated defects and enter the collection system through other defects that were not rehabilitated.

Collection system rehabilitation projects developed for this plan are based on the recommendations presented in TM 3. Comprehensive rehabilitation of mains, manholes, and privately-owned laterals¹ was assumed to potentially achieve a 50 percent reduction in RDI/I. Actual RDI/I reduction will depend on the type of rehabilitation performed and how much RDI/I is contributed by sewer mains and manholes and how much is contributed by laterals. The need for future capacity improvement projects may need to be

reevaluated based on actual RDI/I reduction results. Following sewer rehabilitation, the TOH should determine if the peak flow reduction was sufficient to prevent capacity-related SSOs. Candidate Basins for RDI/I reduction in the TOH are presented on Figure 4-1.

1 In the TOH, laterals are the responsibility of the homeowner from the home to the sewer main; however, it is now TOH policy to replace the lower lateral within the public ROW in conjunction with main sewer rehabilitation or replacement.

(9)

# *

#

*

# *

#

*

#

*

# *

#

*

#

*

#

*

# *

Burlingame Hills

Town of Hillsborough (North)

Town of Hillsborough (South)

FM 3R=6.6 PF=55 Dry GWI=0.00 Wet GWI=0.00 FM B-8

R=5.7 PF=20 Dry GWI=0.00 Wet GWI=0.02

FM B-17 R=6.3 PF=7Dry GWI=0.1 Wet GWI=0.1

FM B-9 R=7PF=13 Dry GWI=0.02 Wet GWI=0.02

FM Floribunda R=4.5

PF=36 Dry GWI=0.03 Wet GWI=0.03

FM 5R=6.2 PF=53 Dry GWI=0.01 Wet GWI=0.01

Cherry Creek PS Bypass/Overflow

to Burlingame sewershed

7 6 5

4

2

3 B-9

B-8 B-10

Newhall

Floribunda

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection System

Master Plan Update

Source: Town of Hillsborough GIS

Legend

#

*

Flow Monitors Parcels

Burlingame City Limit Flow Meter Basins

3 5 B-8 B-9 B-17 Floribunda Rehab Basin Pipes

Unlined (Phase 1 and 2) Lined (Phase 3)

No Rehab

Other CIP Plastic

Other Hillsborough SS Mains

Path: \\bcwckfp01\projects\137000\137152 - Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\GIS\mxd\2014 MP Update\Fig_4-1_Rehab_Basins.mxdAuthor: Fill out Map Document Properties1/21/2014

0 500 1,000 Feet

±

Figure 4-1

Candidate Rehab Basins and Pipes

Notes:

R-factors in percent of rainfall volume PF = Peak wet weather fow Peaking Factor for SCS Type 1A storm scenario GWI in million gallons per day (mgd)

Flow monitor B-17 was located in Burlingame.

Only the portion of Basin B-17 basin located within Hillsborough is shown.

(10)

(11)

5

1.2 Construction Costs

This section describes the development of construction costs for recommended improvements to the TOH collection system. Unit construction costs based on bid tabulations were developed as part of the City of Burlingame Wastewater Collection System Master Plan and were updated to reflect the construction climate and specific local conditions. Costs have again been updated from the 2011 MP based on the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) for San Francisco. The escalation from October 2011 to December 2013 was approximately seven percent.

1.2.1 Pipelines

Two construction methods were considered for this Master Plan: pipe bursting and open cut construction.

Pipe bursting was the default construction method chosen for pipeline projects, and open cut construction was recommended in cases of shallow cover, required grade change, or where pipe diameters increased more than two nominal sizes.

Pipe Bursting: Pipe bursting is a trenchless method of constructing replacement sewer pipe. The

replacement sewer can be of the same or slightly larger diameter (up to two nominal pipe diameter sizes) as the existing pipe, but the pipe grade must remain the same.

Open Cut Construction: Open cut construction is the traditional method of installing sewer pipe and consists of excavating a trench along the alignment of the existing sewer reach, removing the existing pipeline, and installing a new sewer. The replacement sewer can be of the same or larger diameter, and can be

constructed at a different grade depending on the downstream conditions.

Planning Level Unit Costs: Project costs were developed based on planning level unit costs and preliminary pipeline lengths and diameters. Planning level unit costs were developed from bid tabs from recent pipeline construction projects in Northern California.

Planning level unit costs are presented in Table 4-1 and are for sewers installed less than ten feet deep, unless otherwise specified. Unit costs for open cut sanitary sewer include mobilization; demobilization; traffic control; normal sheeting, shoring and bracing; excavation and typical dewatering; standard manholes at typical intervals; lateral reconnection at typical intervals; typical surface restoration; erosion, sediment and stormwater control; overhead; and profit. Unit costs for sewer replacement by pipe bursting include

mobilization; demobilization; traffic control; normal sheeting, shoring and bracing; excavation and standard dewatering; standard manholes at typical intervals; lateral reconnection at typical intervals; erosion, sediment and stormwater control; overhead; and profit.

(12)

6

Table 4-1. Sanitary Sewer Unit Costs

Item Unit $/Unit^a

Open Cut Sanitary Sewer Replacement

8-inch LF 300

10-inch LF 310

12-inch LF 372

15-inch LF 465

18-inch LF 559

21-inch LF 652

24-inch LF 745

Sewer Rehabilitation: Pipe Bursting

8-inch LF 205

10-inch LF 246

12-inch LF 295

15-inch LF 369

Other

Lower Lateral Replacement^b EA 2,000

Upper Lateral Replacement EA 6,000

CCTV^c LF 2

Construction Contingency % 35%

Engineering, Admin, Change Orders etc. % 35%

aThe update cost escalation factor is 1.07, which is the ratio of ENR CCI for San Francisco of December 2013 (10,898.84) to October, 2011 (10,199.29).

bUnit cost assumes that lower laterals will be reconstructed in conjunction with main sewer rehabilitation or replacement projects.

cAssumed no cost escalation from 2011 MP.

1.2.2 Collection System Rehabilitation

Costs for collection system rehabilitation are based on replacing existing 4-inch, 6-inch and 8-inch sewers with new 8-inch sewers by pipe bursting and include the rehabilitation of privately owned upper and lower laterals. Consideration was given for typical large lot sizes and long service lateral lengths in TOH.

1.2.3 Other Costs

Contingency: A contingency of 35 percent was added to the planning level costs to obtain planning level construction costs. Planning level projects have many inherent uncertainties and it is appropriate to include a contingency allowance to cover the potential additional construction costs. Uncertainties associated with planning-level projects include unexpected geotechnical conditions, extraordinary utility relocation,

significant groundwater, alignment changes, and permits. All of these uncertainties can increase the construction cost.

(13)

7

Engineering, Legal, Administrative, Change Orders, etc.: 35 percent was added to the planning level costs to account for design, construction services, administration, legal and environmental services, and

construction change orders. Engineering services associated with projects are estimated at 15 to 17 percent of the construction cost and include preliminary investigations and design services, site and route surveys, geotechnical explorations, preparation of drawings and specifications, construction services, surveying and staking, and sampling and testing of materials. Administrative charges are estimated at 8 to 10 percent of the construction cost and include administrative costs, legal and environmental services, financing

expenses, and interest during construction. A 10 percent allowance is also included for unforeseen

construction change orders. The total allowance for engineering, administrative, and change orders costs is 35 percent of the construction cost.

1.3 Capital Improvement Plan

This section provides individual project summary descriptions. The 2011 MP (TM3) compared the difference in capital projects required when modeling with the synthetic design storm versus the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Type 1A storm. The TOH indicated that it will design CIP projects based upon modeling with the SCS storm, so this update only includes projects as required to meet TOH hydraulic criteria under the SCS storm model.

The CIP is summarized in Tables 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4 and is shown on Figure 4-2. Table 4-2 lists previously recommended projects that are either in design or have been constructed. Those projects were removed from the updated CIP budget. In Table 4-3, costs have also been provided for the City of Burlingame Lower Sanchez (Burlingame Project 12) and the Oak Grove/El Camino Real Bottleneck (Burlingame Project 19) projects, to which the TOH will contribute half of the total project cost. Reach numbers are from TM 3. The detailed cost summary is included in Attachment A.

Project 1 (Reach 1): Reach 1, in Hillsborough Boulevard, is currently under capacity for both the Design and SCS storm events. This project is currently in design and has been removed from the CIP budget.

Approximately 300 feet of pipe from manhole 8I15 to manhole 7H7 will be upsized from 12- to 18-inch-diameter.

Project 2 (Reach 2 and Reach 3): Reach 2 and Reach 3 are parallel pipes in Hillsborough Boulevard Currently, most of the flow is directed to Reach 2 at manhole 6H12. Manhole 6H12 will be reconfigured to primarily direct the flow towards Reach 3. Also, one pipe segment in Reach 2 from manhole 5H3 to 5H12 is currently under capacity for both the Design and SCS storm events and will be upsized from 10- to

15-inch-diameter.

Project 3 (Reach 4 and Reach 5): This project is currently in design and has been removed from the CIP budget. It was modified slightly from the 2011 MP recommendation based on subsequent hydraulic modeling efforts. Reach 4 and Reach 5 are parallel pipes in Ralston Avenue and Pepper Avenue. Currently, the two pipes are disconnected at the upstream manhole 5H12. The lines will remain disconnected, and approximately 1,035 feet of pipe in Reach 4 will be upsized from 15- to 18-inch-diameter between manhole 4I6 and manhole 3I7.

Approximately 1,773 lineal feet of 12-inch-diameter pipe in Reach 5 (City of Burlingame sewer) will be lined with cured in place pipe (CIPP) between manholes 5H10 and 3I7. The lateral connections will be renewed or reconfigured.

(14)

8

Project 4A (Reach 6): Reach 6 in Pepper Avenue is currently under capacity for both the Design and SCS storm events. This project is currently in design and has been removed from the CIP budget. Approximately 1,430 lineal feet of pipe from manhole 3I7 to manhole 3H12 will be upsized from 15- to 21-inch-diameter.

Project 4B (Reach 7): Updated hydraulic modeling demonstrates that upstream improvements (i.e. Project 4A) will cause hydraulic deficiencies in the segment in Floribunda Avenue between Walnut Street and El Camino Real under both the Design and SCS storm events. Work will include upsizing 424 lineal feet of pipe from 15- to 21-inch diameter in three pipe reaches between manholes 3H12 and 2H9. These 15-inch pipes were recently lined with CIPP. Project 4B will not be required until Project 4A has been constructed and upstream RDI/I reductions have been achieved.

Two recent projects have been designed or constructed at the downstream end of Reach 7:

1. El Camino Real Sanitary Sewer Project: Approximately 270 feet of pipe between manholes 2H9 and 2H13 has been replaced with 15- and 16-inch-diameter PVC and HDPE. Due to conflicts with other buried infrastructure, TOH is unable to do any more work in this area that would help alleviate the hydraulic restriction that remains in the model.

2. TOH Oak Grove Sewer Crossing Project: The pipe from manhole 2H13 to manhole 2H12 is to be

abandoned and 92 feet of new 15-inch-diameter pipe will connect manhole 2H13 to the existing 15-inch sewer in Oak Grove Avenue. Before this project is constructed, BC recommends that TOH consider revising the plans and not abandoning the existing pipe, even though it is partially obstructed by another utility that crosses through it. Updated modeling still shows a hydraulic bottleneck across El Camino Real and down the Oak Grove sewer. Leaving the existing pipe would provide some relief for the upstream TOH pipeline because some flow would divert through the existing El Camino crossing when the new parallel crossing becomes surcharged.

TOH and the City of Burlingame are unable to alleviate any additional existing hydraulic restrictions in the sewers along El Camino Real and downstream in Oak Grove due to conflicts with other buried infrastructure.

See Projects 6 through 11 below for additional recommendations.

Project 5A and Project 12 (Reach 8): The City of Burlingame master plan identified that the existing TOH trunk sewer in Sanchez Avenue in the City of Burlingame is undersized for the Design and SCS Type IA storms. Hydraulic modeling conducted after the 2011 MP resulted in a slight reduction to the original project’s required length in Sanchez Avenue. The modeling is described in a letter report dated October 31, 2012 and referenced in Attachment B. The modified project for Reach 8 includes upsizing approximately 1,362 feet of 12-inch-diameter sewer to 15-inch-diameter from City of Burlingame manhole E5-21059 to D5-21040.

Project 12, which is related to Project 5, includes the installation of a new permanent flow monitor on the TOH sewer in Sanchez Avenue, downstream of its current Newhall location.

Project 5B: The aforementioned hydraulic modeling identified additional hydraulic deficiencies upstream of the original Project 5A. This project includes upsizing approximately 2,287 lineal feet of 6- and

8-inch-diameter pipe to 12-inch-diameter from manhole 3F12 in Forest View Avenue to manhole 1G4 in Newhall Avenue.

An alternative would be to upsize approximately 1,400 lineal feet of the Denham Court bypass sewer from 6- and 8-inch diameter pipe to 12-inch-diameter from manhole 2F9 in Forest View Avenue to manhole 1G3 in Sanchez Avenue. The CIP budget includes the first option since it is more conservative.

(15)

9

Projects 6 through 11: These comprehensive sewer rehabilitation projects are included to reduce RDI/I within Basins 3, 5, Floribunda, B-8, B-9 and B-17, which had the highest RDI/I rates in the TOH Burlingame sewershed. Comprehensive sewer rehabilitation includes sewer main and manhole rehabilitation or

replacement, and private service lateral replacement. Rehabilitation projects have been prioritized such that those denoted as “A” include unlined pipes in each basin, and projects denoted “B” include lined pipes. “A”

reaches are included in Phase 2 while the less-critical “B” reaches can be deferred and addressed under Phase 3. Basin 3 has no lined pipes, so the entire basin is included in Phase 2.

Rehabilitation and RDI/I reduction in Basins 5 and Floribunda are necessary to prevent downstream

overflows because improvements at Floribunda/Oak Grove and El Camino could not be constructed as large as recommended and because a capacity improvement project is not planned in the newly-rehabilitated Oak Grove sewer (City of Burlingame). Updated hydraulic modeling indicates that about 30 percent RDI/I

reduction in Basin 5 would relieve the modeled SSO at manhole 5H19, although the level in nearby manholes would not meet the five-foot-freeboard criteria. Approximately 55 percent RDI/I reduction in Basin 5 would be required to reach the freeboard criteria at the most critical manhole (5H21 at Floribunda and El Camino) during the modeled SCS Type 1A storm.

1.4 Project Implementation

The TOH’s long-term objective of RDI/I and peak flow reduction through system renewal has positive benefits for the TOH system as well as the City of Burlingame system through reduced capacity issues in the

collection system and at the WWTP. It is the TOH’s desire, when possible, to implement RDI/I reduction projects through renewal of its system, prior to constructing relief sewers downstream in the City of Burlingame or the TOH. The following project implementation approach should be used to meet this objective:

Phase 1: Implementation of RDI/I reduction projects for non-rehabilitated (i.e. unlined) pipes in Basin 5 (Project 7A), which is upstream of the Burlingame Oak Grove Trunk Sewer. Implementation of the Sanchez and Newhall/Forest View Avenue Capacity Improvement Projects (Projects 5A, 5B and 12). Note: A future project in Oak Grove as well as a potential project in the lower Floribunda basin may be needed if RDI/I reduction is not adequate.

Phase 2: All projects included in the original Phase 2 of the 2011 MP have either been completed or are in the design phase as of the writing of this update, with the exception of Project 2 and a short portion of the Pepper Avenue Capacity Improvement Project (Project 4B) between Walnut Street and El Camino Real. The three 15-inch-diameter pipe reaches in this segment were recently lined with CIPP and are likely in good condition. Unless RDI/I reduction results in approximately 55 percent RDI/I reduction from Basin 5, upsizing is still required to mitigate the modeled hydraulic capacity deficiency. At the 55 percent reduction level, the existing pipes would have sufficient capacity to convey peak wet weather flow and this project could be eliminated. This portion of the original project is still scheduled for Phase 2 but should be reevaluated following completion of Basin 5 rehabilitation work. Other Phase 2 work includes RDI/I reduction projects for non-rehabilitated (i.e. unlined) pipes in Basin Floribunda (Project 8A) and Basin B-9 (Project 9A) upstream of the Burlingame Oak Grove Trunk Sewer.

Phase 2 also now includes projects that were Phase 3 priority in the 2011 MP. These include

implementation of long-term RDI/I reduction projects for unlined pipes in Basin 3 (Project 6; upstream of Sanchez Avenue), Basin B-17 (Project 10A) and Basin B-8 (Project 11A). RDI/I reduction in these Basins will not impact any capacity improvement project recommendations but will reduce RDI/I volumes to the Burlingame WWTP.

(16)

10

Phase 3: Implementation of long-term RDI/I reduction projects for previously rehabilitated (i.e. lined) pipes in Basins 5, Floribunda, B-9, B-17, and B-8 (Projects 7B, 8B, 9B, 10B, and 11B, respectively). These projects will have less impact on RDI/I reduction than Phase 2 projects.

It is the TOH’s intention to implement all of these projects over a 30-year period. The CIP presented herein will follow this approach.

1.5 Other Recommendations

Although not included in the CIP, the following activities are also recommended to meet the State RWQCB and settlement agreement requirements.

1.5.1 RDI/I Investigations

TOH conducted a smoke and dye testing project in 2012/13 (2012 Sewer Smoke Testing Project). The program focused on the mini-basins of City Hall-A MB1, Chateau CCMB2 and Willow MB1, which roughly correspond to Basins Floribunda, 5 and B-9, respectively. TOH should implement the recommendations from that report during Phase 1 Basin rehabilitation projects.

TOH should conduct additional detailed field investigations, including smoke and dye testing, to locate sources of infiltration and inflow and characterize how RDI/I is distributed within Phase 2 rehabilitation Basins: 3 (Sky Farm MB1 and MB2), B-8 (Hillsborough Highlands MB1) and B-17(Hillsborough Highlands MB2). This should be carried out closer to the time of the project implementation; likely between 2030 and 2039 based on current projected spending levels.

1.5.2 Private Lateral Rehabilitation Programs

The TOH should expand their efforts to control and reduce RDI/I by implementing a rigorous private lateral inspection and rehabilitation program. The 2012 smoke testing project included a lateral CCTV inspection component in the Chateau CCMB2. Future smoke and dye testing projects should also include private lateral assessment where required as a follow-up to initial testing.

Upper lateral (privately funded) rehabilitation costs are not included in the CIP. For reference, rehabilitation of upper laterals in the high RDI/I CIP basins (shown on Figure 4-2) could cost private homeowners upwards of $6.7M.

1.5.3 Master Plan Update

This is an interim Master Plan update. The Master Plan should be updated again in five years (c. 2019) as TOH completes improvements and RDI/I reduction projects, and as updated flow monitoring information becomes available. The existing hydraulic model should be updated periodically to reflect changes in the collection system, including collection system rehabilitation and sewer upsizing projects.

(17)

! (

!

!( (!(

! (

11A,B

6

9A,B

8A,B

7A,B

5A

5B

12

4B 10A,B

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection System

Master Plan Update

Source: Town of Hillsborough GIS

Legend

Parcels Basin-wide Rehab

3 5 B-8 B-9 B-17 Floribunda

Other Hillsborough SS Mains CIP Location

4B-Floribunda 5A-Sanchez 5B-Newhall 12-Flow Meter Removed from Updated CIP

Pipe Project MH Project No Project

Path: \\bcwckfp01\projects\137000\137152 - Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\GIS\mxd\2014 MP Update\Fig_4-2_CIP.mxdAuthor: Fill out Map Document Properties1/22/2014

0 750 1,500

Feet

±

Figure 4-2

Capital Improvement Projects

(18)

(19)

13

Table 4-2. Completed Capital Improvement Project Summary^a Project

(Phase) Reach Location Project Description Existing Size

(in)

Design Future Size

(in) Quantity

(LF) Reach USMH Reach DSMH Capacity Improvement Projects

1 1 Hillsborough Boulevard Pipe upsize 12 18 291 8I15 7H7

3 4 Ralston and Pepper Avenue Pipe upsize 15 18 1,035 4I6 3I7

3 5 Ralston and Pepper Avenue CIPP 12 12 1,773 5H10 3I7

4A 6 Pepper Avenue Pipe upsize 15 21

21

953 477

3I7 3H1

3H1 3H12

aProjects completed or currently in design.

(20)

14

Table 4-3. Pending Capital Improvement Project Summary Project

(in) Future Size

(in) Quantity

(LF) Construction Cost Engineering,

Admin, Etc. Total Project Cost Capacity Improvement Projects

2 2 and 3 Hillsborough Boulevard Manhole flow split. Pipe upsize 10 15 25 $44,670 $15,630 $60,300

4B

(Phase 2) 7 Floribunda Avenue Pipe upsize 15 21 424 $372,990 $130,550 $503,540

5A

(Phase 1) 8 Burlingame/Sanchez Avenue Pipe upsize 8/10 12 1,362 $859,500 $300,830 $1,160,330

5B

(Phase 1) NA Newhall/Forest View Avenue Pipe upsize 6/8 12 2,287 $1,155,820 $404,540 $1,560,360

12

(Phase 1) NA Newhall/Sanchez Avenue Permanent Flow Monitoring Site NA NA NA $72,230 $25,280 $97,510

Burlingame Project 12

(Phase 1) NA Burlingame

Lower Sanchez Avenue Pipe upsize (TOH Contribution) 15 21 1,110 NA NA $502,180

Burlingame Project 19

(Phase 1) NA Burlingame

Oak Grove/El Camino Real Pipe upsize (TOH Contribution) 15 21 85 NA NA $38,450

Subtotal – Capacity Improvement Projects $2,505,210 $876,830 $3,922,670

(21)

15

Table 4-3. Pending Capital Improvement Project Summary (Continued) Project

(in) Future Size

(in) Quantity

(LF) Construction Cost Engineering,

Admin, Etc. Total Project Cost Basin-Wide Collection System Rehabilitation Projects

6

(Phase 2) NA Basin 3 Rehabilitate or replace mains,

manholes, and laterals. 4 and 6 8 24,200 $7,184,230 $2,514,480 $9,698,710

7A

(Phase 1) NA Basin 5 Rehabilitate or replace unlined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 4, 6 and 8 8 13,100 $4,024,700 $1,408,650 $5,433,350 7B

(Phase 3) NA Basin 5 Rehabilitate or replace lined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 4, 6 and 8 8 8,100 $2,246,480 $786,270 $3,032,750 8A

(Phase 2) NA Basin Floribunda Rehabilitate or replace unlined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 4, 6, 10, 12

and 15 8, 10, 12 and

15 28,700 $9,928,640 $3,475,020 $13,403,660

8B

(Phase 3) NA Basin Floribunda Rehabilitate or replace lined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 4, 6, 10, 12

and 15 8, 10, 12 and

15 9,200 $2,890,160 $1,011,560 $3,901,720

9A

(Phase 1) NA Basin B-9 Rehabilitate or replace unlined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 and 8 8 4,400 $1,395,820 $488,510 $1,884,360

9B

(Phase 3) NA Basin B-9 Rehabilitate or replace lined

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 and 8 8 2,300 $637,890 $223,260 $861,150

10A

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 8 2,000 $703,190 $246,120 $949,310

10B

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 8 3,900 $1,081,650 $378,580 $1,460,230

11A

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 and 8 8 24,600 $7,551,660 $2,643,080 $10,194,740 11B

mains, manholes, and laterals. 6 and 8 8 1,100 $305,070 $106,770 $411,840

Subtotal - Basin-Wide Collection System Rehabilitation Projects $37,949,490 $13,282,330 $51,231,820

Total $40,454,700 $14,159,160 $55,154,490

(22)

16

Table 4-4. 30-Year Capital Improvement Plan Schedule Project

(Phase) Cost No. Years Annual Cost Start End

1 $8,792,180 5 $1,758,440 2015 2019^a

2 $36,694,620 20 $1,834,730 2020 2039

3 $9,667,690 5 $1,933,540 2040 2044

Total $55,154,490 30 $1,838,480

a2019 or prior to termination of Baykeeper Settlement Agreement; whichever is sooner.

(23)

A

Attachment A: Detailed Project Cost Summary

(24)

(25)

P:\137000\137152 - Hillsborough Wastewater Master Plan\Task 12 Master Plan Update\CIP\CIP Cost Estimate_updated.xlsx

Capital Improvement Plan Detailed Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project Costs

Date: April 16, 2014 ENR CCI Oct, 2011 10,199.29 2011 MP

Client: Town of Hillsborough Dec, 2013 10,898.84 Update

Project: Collection System Master Plan Cost Escalation Factor: 1.07 Project No.: 137152

Phase Project No.:

Location:

Reach:

Unit $/Unit Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Quantity Total Grand Total

Open Cut Sanitary Sewer Replacement

8-inch LF $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10-inch LF $310 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12-inch LF $372 $0 $0 $0 2,287 $851,587 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $851,587

15-inch LF $465 25 $11,636 $0 1,362 $633,943 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $645,579

18-inch LF $559 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

21-inch LF $652 $0 424 $276,291 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $276,291

Sewer Rehabilitation: Pipe Bursting

8-inch LF $205 $0 $0 $0 $0 24,200 $4,971,648 13,100 $2,691,264 8,100 $1,664,064 20,500 $4,211,520 6,300 $1,294,272 4,400 $903,936 2,300 $472,512 2,000 $410,880 3,900 $801,216 24,600 $5,053,824 1,100 $225,984 $0 $22,701,120

10-inch LF $246 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3,000 $738,300 200 $49,220 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $787,520

12-inch LF $295 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 4,400 $1,299,408 2,700 $797,364 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,096,772

15-inch LF $369 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 800 $295,320 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $295,320

Other

Manhole Modification EA $21,400 1 $21,400 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 $21,400

Lower Lateral Replacement EA $2,000 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 175 $350,000 145 $290,000 $0 405 $810,000 $0 65 $130,000 $0 55 $110,000 $0 270 $540,000 $0 0 $0 $2,230,000

Permanent Flow Monitor EA $53,500 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 1 $53,500 $53,500

CCTV (NO ESCALATION) LF $2 25 $50 0 $0 1,362 $2,724 2,287 $4,574 0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $7,348

Totals

Subtotal $33,086 $276,291 $636,667 $856,161 $5,321,648 $2,981,264 $1,664,064 $7,354,548 $2,140,856 $1,033,936 $472,512 $520,880 $801,216 $5,593,824 $225,984 $53,500 $29,966,438

Contingency % 35% $11,580 $96,700 $222,830 $299,660 $1,862,580 $1,043,440 $582,420 $2,574,090 $749,300 $361,880 $165,380 $182,310 $280,430 $1,957,840 $79,090 $18,730 $10,488,260

Construction Cost $44,670 $372,990 $859,500 $1,155,820 $7,184,230 $4,024,700 $2,246,480 $9,928,640 $2,890,160 $1,395,820 $637,890 $703,190 $1,081,650 $7,551,660 $305,070 $72,230 $40,454,700

Engineering, Admin, Legal % 35% $15,630 $130,550 $300,830 $404,540 $2,514,480 $1,408,650 $786,270 $3,475,020 $1,011,560 $488,540 $223,260 $246,120 $378,580 $2,643,080 $106,770 $25,280 $14,159,160

Total Project Cost $60,300 $503,540 $1,160,330 $1,560,360 $9,698,710 $5,433,350 $3,032,750 $13,403,660 $3,901,720 $1,884,360 $861,150 $949,310 $1,460,230 $10,194,740 $411,840 $97,510 $54,613,860

30-Year CIP

Phase Cost No. years Yearly Start End

1 $8,792,180 5 $1,758,440 2015 2019

2 $36,694,620 20 $1,834,730 2020 2039

3 $9,667,690 5 $1,933,540 2040 2044

Total $55,154,490 30 $1,838,480

Note: the 30-Year CIP also includes costs for two Burlingame projects not shown above.

2 3 1

3 2 3 2 3

1 2 1 3 2

2 2 1

10B Basin 3 Rehabilitation

Lined 7B

Basin 5 Rehabilitation Basin Floribunda Rehabiliation Basin B-9 Rehabiliation Lined 9A

Unlined 7A

Unlined

9B

Item

2 Hillsborough Blvd.

Burlingame Sanchez 5A Avenue Pepper/Floribunda 4B

Avenue Grand Total

10A

Unlined

11A

Unlined

Newhall/Sanchez 12 Permanent Flow Monitor

NA 11B

Basin B-17 Rehabiliation Basin B-8 Rehabiliation

Lined Lined

Unlined 8A

Lined 8B 6

2 and 3 6 and 7 8 Unlined

Newhall/Forest View Avenue

5B

NA

(26)

(27)

B

Attachment B: Letter Report Dated October 31, 2012

(28)

Wastewater Collection System Master Plan

±

±

Wastewater Collection System Master Plan –

Capital Improvement Plan Update Burlingame (North) Sewershed

Technical Memorandum

Table of Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

Section 1: Capital Improvement Plan

1.1 Capital Improvement Plan Development

# *

# *

#

*

# *

#

*

#

*

# *

#

*

#

*

#

*

# *

7

6 5

4

2

3

B-9

B-8 B-10

Newhall

Floribunda

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection System

Master Plan Update

#

*

±

1.2 Construction Costs

1.3 Capital Improvement Plan

1.4 Project Implementation

1.5 Other Recommendations

Town of Hillsborough Wastewater Collection System

Master Plan Update

±

Attachment A: Detailed Project Cost Summary

Attachment B: Letter Report Dated October 31, 2012