HomeMy WebLinkAboutR85-807RESOLUTION NO. R85-807
A RESOLUTIONOF THE CITYODUNCILOF THE CITYOF PLAINVIEW,
TEXAS~ORIZINGCITYADMINSTRATIONTOPREPARE SPECIFICATIONS
AND TO ADVERTISEFOR BIDS FOR THECTRANING OF SRL~CTED~i~TER
MAINS OF THECITYOF PIAINVIEW.
WHEREAS, tb~ City of Plainview has determined that a large number
of two-inch cast-iron water mains have a restricted water flow because
of incrustation; and
WHEREAS, the restricted flow has had a adverse impact on service to
City of Plainview water custc~ers; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the most viable course of
action is cleaning said effected lines; and
WHEREAS, it is noted that the cleaning of the lines will not
resolve all water flow problems; and
WHEREAS, individuals who are interested on voluntary basis may
finance the replacement of the lines:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Plainview City Council that
the City Adminstration is to proceed with the preparation of the
specifications and request bids for the cleaning of the lines and in
addition City Administration is to ascertain th~ level of voluntary
participation for fiuancingthe replacement of the liD~s.
PASSED AND APPR~JED this the 2.6th day of February, 1985.
E.V. RIDLE~N3BER, Mayor
W~LTER S. DODSO~, City Clerk
CITY OF PLAI~
TWO-~CASTIRON~STRICTED~TERMAINS
In the mid to late 70's the City of Plainview began receiving
complaints of inade~_ate water flow in two-inch cast iron water lines
which lie between llth Street and 20th Street, west of Quincy Street.
Since that time the cc~plaints have grown in number and consistency.
Upon closer investigation'~ it was noted that the flow through the
two-inch cast iron water mains was being restricted because of
incrustation.
The two-inch lines when originally installed, during the 50's and 60's,
were designed to carry a flow of 50 to 100 gallon per minutes. Tests
show that many of the lines are restricted to a flow of less than 20
gallons per minute and some lines are restricted to a flow of less than
10' gallons per minute.
During the sumner of 1984 the City contracted with a firm, on an
experimental basis, to clean a section of two-inch cast iron water main
along the west side of Ennis Street between llth and 13th Street. The
test proved to be successful and the end result was tb~t the two-inch
cast iron water main was returned to its original flow capacity. If the
City were to pursue cleaning two-inch cast iron water lines, instead of
replacing the lines, the anticipated first year cost has been estimated
-1-
This allocation should permit the City to successfully clean all
tw~-inch cast iron water mains which have been identified as b~ving a
flow of less than 20 gallons per minute and to also clean some of the
two-inch water mains in areas where the flow has dropped below design
limits but remains above 20 gallons per minute, yet a problem has been
identified with the operation of underground sprinkler systems.
The two-inch cast iron water mains currently causing problems were
installed 20 to 30 years ago. If the cleaning of these lines are as
successful as the recently completed tests indicate, it is anticipated
that the life of the lines may be extended from 10 to 15 years. It
should be noted that there are no guarantees on the extended life and at
best, the 10 to 15 year projection is an educated guess. It is also
important to note that the extent of the problem has not been fully
identified. There are many other miles of two-inch cast iron lines in
other parts of the City which have not been checked as to the extent of
the incrustation, simplY because cc~plaints have not been received. It
is safe to assume that all cast iron mains, no matter what size they
are, will have to be replaced sooner or later. ~ins which are cleaned
today would be the last to be replaced in the future.
REPLACEMENT
If money were not an issue, the most prudent course of action would
be to replace the two-inch cast iron water mains with 4-inch PVC water
mains. In order to replace the 43,680 feet that is proposed to be
cleaned, the cost would be in excess of $535,000.
-2-
If the City were to move forward with replacing all two-inch cast iron
water mains between llth street and 20th street, west of Quincy, which
have been identified as having restricted flow, the total cost would be
in excess of $800,000.
UNDERGRDUND SPRIN/41.~R SYSTEMS
Many complaints that the~ City has received concerning inadequate
flow have been initiated by citizens who have underground sprinkler
systems. When the original water system was constructed in Plainview it
was not designed to handle underground sprinkler systems simply because
25 years ago or longer the use of underground sprinkler systems was
rare. As underground sprinkler systems became more popular they
magnified the water flow problems. At one time the City of Plainview
permitted the installation of two-inch water taps in order to facilitate
the operation of underground sprinkler systems. A two-inch water meter
has a rated flow of 160 gallons per minute. When you consider that a
two-inch cast iron water main has a maximum anticipated flow of 100
gallons per minute, you can quickly recognize the problem. Because of
the tremendous cost that is associated with providing higher flow
capacities the City of Plainview has since adopted a policy that the
maximum meter size for an underground sprinkler system would be one-
inch. The one-inch water tap should provide a flow of approximately 50
gallons per minute. The one-inch tap should provide adequate flow for a
sprinkler system which is properly "z~ned" so that the entire system
will not come on all at once but rather will come on in sechions.
-3-
If the old two-inch water mains were cleaned it should return the flow
capacity to its original design but it would not resolve all the
problems that are being encountered by those individuals who operate
underground sprinkler systems.
Some of the older sprinkler systems have also been installed with
iron pipe; therefore, some of the problems being encountered through low
flow are a proble~ of the individual system and not of the City. Also
those sprinkler systems which were functioning adequately twenty years
ago may not do so after the lines are cleaned because the system zones
may have been altered and because additional sprinkler systems may have
been installed in the immediate area which will result in lower flow
when more than one system is operating simultaneously.
FUTURE WATER POLICY
The City of Plainview has not adDpted a formal policy addressing
the conservation of water. While most projections indicate that the
City is in no immediate danger of suffering from inadequate water
supply, steps need to be taken now to implement effective
conservation measures to assure that future generations will have an
adequate water supply. One item which needs particular attention is
will capacity design be adequate to accommodate the continued use of
high volume underground sprinkler systems? High volume underground
sprinkler systems result in the higher flow of water which creates a
higher instantaneous demand for water thus creating a higher demand upon
the City' s water system booster pumping cpacities. Autcmated
underground sprinkler systems which have low volume zones conserve water
and reduce the instantaneus demand upon the distribution system.
-4-
However, high water useage for lawns will continue to deplete the water
supply. The current policy of requiring minimum water main size of
4-inch and the discontinued use of the cast iron line may not resolve
the water flow problems in the future, unless a concrete policy is
developed which will help to assure that all users of the Plainview
water system receive adequate service and are paying for the type of
service that they deserve, but at the same time results in prudent water
conservation.
FINANCE
The 1985-86 budget for the Water and Sewer fund projected unencumbered
funds of $311,000. With four months history, with the new water rates,
the unencumbered fund projection has been adjusted downward to $276,000.
If the city w~re to allocate $105,000 for the cleaning of mains it is
anticipated, based on past costs, that the City should be able to
contract for the cleaning of all lines which have been identified of
having flows of less tb~n 20 GPM. If the City were to allocate $140,000
for the replacement of mains, all lines which have been identified as
having a flow of less than 15 GPM could be replaced, with additional
replacements to be ~scheduled in succeeding fiscal years.
Since the City does not currently have a long range operating and
capital improvements budget and since it is prudent to maintain adequate
monetary reserves it is recorm~ded that whatever course of action is
pursued that total costs for the 1985-86 fiscal year be held under
$150,000. The expenditure of $150,000 will drop total unencumbered
reserves to 6.5%, of total expenditures.
2/4/85
-5-
~SCRr.LANEOUS INFORMATION
METER
SIZE GPM
5/8" 20
1" 50
1½" 100
2" 160
LINE
SIZE GPM*
2" 50
4"- 200
6" 500
*If line is fed from two directions, under normal conditions the GPM
capacity will be increased by two times.
Garden Hose: A 5/8" garden hose will flow frc~ 6 to 8 GPM.
Shower: A typical shower will flow between 2 to 4 GPM.
2/1/85
-6-
I Lt'
ESTIMATED COST OF CLVANING 2" ~TER LINES B~ llTH STREET AND 20TH
STREET WEST OF QUINCY STREET. (Based on quote of 7/9/84 from Ace Pipe
Cleaning)
Lines with flow of 10 GPM or less
1,840 L.F. @ $2.50/L.F. =
Lines with flow of 10 GPM to 15 GPM
8,160 L.F. @ $2.50/L.F. = $20,400.00
490 L.F. @ $2.25/L.F. = $ 1,102.50
$4,600.00
SUB TOTAL = $21,502.50
Lines with f!owof 15 GPM to 20 GPM
13,600 L.F. @ $2.25/L.F. =
$30,600.00
Sub-Total Estimated Cost of Cleaning
Lines with flow of 20 GPM or less
$56,702.50
Lines with flow above 20 GPM
40,700 L.F. @ $2.25/L.F. =
$91,575.00
PRDPOSED PROJECT FOR 1984-85
10,000 L.F. @ $2.50 = $25,000.00
14,090 L.F. @ $2.25 = 31,702.50
Selected locations involving yead sprinkler systems
19,590 L.F. @ $ 2.25 = 44,077.50
TOTAL PROPOS~DPROJECT = $100,780.00
12/26/84
-8-
ESTIMATED COST OF REPLACING 2" WATER LINES BETWEEN llTH STREET AND 20TH
STREET WEST OF QUINCY STREET.
Lines with flow of 10 GPM or less
Vernon Street - 1500 Block (E. Side) 400 L.F. @ 12.26= $4,904.00
19th Street - Yonkers to Amarillo (S.side) 800 L.F.@ 12.26 = 9,808.00
Ennis Street - 13th to 14th (W. side) 640 L.F. @ 12.26 = 7,846.40
(1,840)
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST = $22,558.40
Lines with flow of 10 GPM to 15 GPM
Travis Street, 1700 block (W. side) 350 @ 12.26
Vernon Street, 1400 Block (E. side) 360 @ 12.26
Vernon Street, 14th to 16th (W. side) 760 @ 12.26
19th Street, 2300 Block (W. side) 470 @ 12.26
Amarillo Street, 14th to 16th (E. side) 780 @ 12.26
17th Street, Amarillo to Canyon (N. side) 750 @ 12.26
Dallas Street, 1600 Block (N.side) 700 @ 12.26
Ennis Street, llth to 16th (E. side) 2170 @ 12.26
Ennis Street, llth to 13th (W. side) 750 @ 12.26
Floydada Street, 14th to 16th (E.side) 770 @ 12.26
Floydada Street, 14th to 16th (W. side) 770 @ 12.26
Garland Street, 14th to 16th (E.side) @ 12.26
L.F. = $4,291.00
L.F. = 4,413.60
L.F. = 9,317.60
L.F. = 5,762.20
L.F. = 9,562.80
L.F. = 9,195.00
L.F. = 8,582.00
L.F. = 26,604.20
L.F. = 9,195.00
L.F. = 9,440.20
L.F. = 9,440.20
770 L.F. = 9,440.20
(9,400)
TOTAL ESTIMATEDCOST = $115,244.00
Lines with flow of 15 GPM to 20 GPM
Travis Street, 16th to 17th (W. side) 310 L.F. @ 12.26
Xenia Street, 13th to 14th (E. side) 610 L.F. @ 12.26
19th Street, 2200 Block (S.side) 340 L.F. @ 12.26
19thStreet, Wayland to Yonkers (N.side)680 L.F. @ 12.26
20th Street,Yonkers to Amarillo (S.side)740 L.F. @ 12.26
19th Street, Amarillo to Canyon (S.side)750 L.F. @ 12.26
18thStreet,Yonkers to Ennis (N. side) 2250 L.F. @ 12.26
18th Street,Canyon to Ennis (S.side) 740 L.F. @ 12.26
17th Street, Amarillo to Canyon (S.side)750 L.F. @ 12.26
Borger Street, 13th to 14th (W. side) 640 L.F. @ 12.26
Borger Street, 14th to 16th (E.side) 780 L.F. @ 12.26
Dallas Street, llthto 13th (W. side) 780 L.F.. @ 12.26
Dallas Street, 1600 Block (S.side) 600 L.F. @ 12.26
Ennis Street, 14th to 16th (W. side 770 L.F. @ 12.26
Floydada Street, llth to 13th (E. side) 790 L.F. @ 12.26
Floydada Street, llth to 14th (W. side) 1430 L.F. @ 12o26
Garland Street, 13thto 14th (E.side) 640 L.F. @ 12.26
(13,600)
TOTAL ESTIMATEDCOST =
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST TO REPLACE 2 " LINES FLOWING
20 GPM OR LESS
--9--
5/2/84
= 3,800.60
= 7,478.60
= 4,168.40
= 8,336.80
= 9,072.40
= 9,195.00
= 27,585.00
= 9,072.40
= 9,195.00
= 7,846.40
= 9,562.80
= 9,562.80
= 7,356.00
= 9,440.20
= 9,685.40
= 17,531.80
= 7,846.40
$166,736.00
$304,538.40
ESTI~ATED COST OF REPLACING 2" WATER LINES BETWRRN llTH STREET A~D 20TH
STREET WEST OF QUINCY STREET
Lines with flow above 20 GPM
Quincy Street, 12thto 15th (W. sid~)
Alley, Quincy-Raleigh, llthto 12th
Raleigh Street, llthto i3th
Travis Street, 12th to 16th 1,
Utica Street, 13th 16th 1,
*Vernon Street, 12th to 14th 1,
*Wayland Street, 12th to 14th 1,
*Yonkers Street,13th to N.of 14th(W, side)
*Zephyr Street,13thto 16th (both sides)2,
*Amarillo Street, llth to 13th
1,100 12.26 =$13,486.00
660 12.26 = 8,091.60
870 12.26 = 10,666.20
660 12.26 = 20,351.60
360 12.26 = 16,673.60
110 12.26 = 13,608.60
110 12.26 = 13,608.60
810 12.26 = 9,930.60
840 12.26 = 34,818.40
780 26 = 9,562.80
26 = 15,692.80
26 = 34,818.40
26 = 9,195.00
26 = 7,723.80
*Amarillo St.,13thto 14th(both sides) 1,280
*Canyon Street, !3thto 16th(both sides)2,840
*Dallas Street, llth to 13th (E.side) 750
*Floydada Street, 13th to 14th (E.side)
*Garland Street, llth to 13th (E. side)
*Holiday Drive,llthto 16th (Both sides)4,
*Floydada Street,18th to Jefferson (East)
Ennis Street, 18th to 20th (W. side)
20thStreet,Quincy to W. of Utica (South)l,
20th Street, Amarillo to Ennis (S.side)
19thStreet, Quincy to Yonkers (S.side)
19th Street, Yonkers to Ennis (N. side)
19th Street,Canyon to Ennis (S. side)
18th Street,Quincy to Utica
*18th Street,Yonkers to Canyon (S.side)
17th Street, Quincy to Travis
17th Street, Yonkers to Amarillo (Both)
14th Street, Wayland to Xenia (N.side)
12th Street, Vernon to Xenia
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
L.F. @
630 L.F. @
820 L.F. @
460 L.F. @
620 L.F. @
780 L.F. @
650 L.F. @
1~480 L.F. @
2,440 L.F. @
2,220 L.F. @
730 L.F. @
1,560 L.F. @
1,540 L.Fo @
1,240 L.F. @
1,600 L.F. @
430 L.F. @
700 L.F. @
(40,070)
TOTAL ESTIMATEDCOST =
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12
12
26 = 10
26 = 54
26= 7
26 = 9
26 = 20
26 = 18
.053.20
.679.60
.601.20
.562.80
.229.00
.144.80
26 = 29,914.40
26 = 27/217.20
.26 = 8,949.80
.26 = 19,125.60
12.26 = 18,880.40
12.26 = 15,202.40
12.26 = 19,616.00
12.26 = 5,271.80
12.26 = 8,582.00
$491,258.20
*Known to involve Yard Sprinkler Systems
5/28/84
-10-
ESTIMATED COST OF REPLACING 2" WATER LINE ON WEST SIDE ON ENNIS STREET
BETWRRN llTH STREET AND 13th STREET
Materials Required:
4" PVC Pipe
8" x 4" Cross
8" Cut-in sleeve
4" Gate valves
Valve Boxes 1 ea. @
4"xl" Tapping saddles 10ea. @
1" Corporation Stop 10 ea. @
1" Curb Stop 10 ea. @
1" Service Line 100 L.F.@
Meter Boxes (%) 5 ea. @
751 L.F. @ 2.50 = $ 1,877.50
1 ea. @ 150.00 = 150.00
1 ea. @ 130.00 = 130.00
2 ea. @ 160.00 = 320.00
16.00 = 16.00
13.00 = 130.00
12.00 = 120.00
22.00 = 220.00
.40 40.00
27.00 = 135.00
Sub-Total Est. Material Costs
Plus Contingencies (20%)
$3,138.50
627.70
TOTAL EstimatedMaterials Cost =
$3,766.20
INSTALLATION:
Boring Driveways- (8x22) 176 L.F. @ 6.00
Boring Sidewalks, C & G 10 L.F. @ 6.00
Trenching (751-176-10) 565 L.F. @ 1.00 =
Removing 8x2 Cross & Setting
8 x 4 Cross & Cut-in sleeve (wet connection)=
Laying 4" PVC pipe 751 L.F. @ 1.00 =
Setting Valves & Boxes 2 ea. @75.00 =
Making 1" Taps &
Changing out meters 10 ea. @100.00 =
Backfilling & Leveling 751 L.F. ~ 1.00 =
Sub-total Est. Installation Cost =
Plus Contingencies (20%) =
TOTAL ESTIMATED INSTALLATION COST
= $ 1,056.00
= 60.00
565.00
200.00
751.00
150.00
1,000,00
751.00
$4,533.00
906.60
$5,439.60
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST =
EstimatedCost Per Foot = $9,205.80
751 = $12.26
$9,205.80
5/28/84
-11-