HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 3090ORDINANCE NO. 3090
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS,
AMENDING CHAPTER 110 AND APPENDIX A OF THE NORTH RICHLAND
HILLS CODE OF ORDINANCES; AMENDING LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR WATER AND
WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS; AMENDING WATER AND WASTEWATER
IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A
SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 395, Texas Local Government Code, provides a procedure
enabling municipalities to enact and update impact fees; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 1997, the City Council first imposed impact fees by
passing Ordinance 2241 which fees have been previously reviewed as
provided by law and last updated after a public hearing on March 28,
2005; and,
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing, after
compliance with all legal prerequisites, to consider amendments to the
land use assumptions and capital improvements plan upon which the
City's impact fees are based, as well as to consider amendments to such
impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt the updated land use assumptions and
capital improvements plan for water and wastewater improvements (the
"Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Report") attached hereto as
Exhibit "B" which was considered at the March 8, 2010 public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt the updated capital improvements plans
and impact fee calculations for water and wastewater improvements to the
City's water and wastewater system, including City of Fort Worth
Wholesale Systems attached hereto as Exhibits "D" and "F" which was
considered at the March 8, 2010 public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the impact fees heretofore imposed by
adopting the water and wastewater fees established herein for the service
area shown on Exhibit "A" hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Report and Capital
Improvements Plans were developed by qualified professionals using
generally accepted engineering and planning practices in accordance with
Section 395.014 of the Texas Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that all legal prerequisites
have been complied with; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND
HILLS, TEXAS:
Section 1: Inclusions. THAT all of the above recitations are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated into the body of this ordinance as if copied in
their entirety.
Section 2: Capital Improvements Plan. The City Council hereby approves and
adopts the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Update Report and Capital
Improvements Plans, copies of which are attached as Exhibit "B ", Exhibit
"D ", and Exhibit "F ". Exhibit "B" addresses the portion of the overall North
Richland Hills Capital Improvements Plan to be accomplished within the
Service Area shown in Exhibit "A ". Exhibits "D" and "F" are the Capital
Improvements Plans for Water and Wastewater Impact Fees covering the
City of Fort Worth's systems which include service to North Richland Hills
as a wholesale customer. A copy of the Water and Wastewater Impact
Fee Update Report and Capital Improvements Plan which includes
Exhibits 'A," "B ", "D ", and "F" shall be maintained at all times in the City
Hall.
Section 3: Chapter 110 of the North Richland Hills Code of Ordinances is hereby
amended by a new Article XIX which shall read as follows:
"ARTICLE XIX IMPACT FEES
Sec. 110 -520. In general; purpose; policy.
This article is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 395, Texas Local
Government Code, as well as under the authority of Article 11, Section 5 of the Texas
Constitution. This article implements a policy of the city to impose fees upon each new
development project to pay the costs of constructing capital improvements and facility
expansions necessary to serve new development.
Sec. 110 -521. Definitions.
For the purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply:
Assessment: The determination of the amount of the maximum impact fee per service
unit which can be imposed on new development pursuant to this article.
Building permit: Written permission issued by the city for the construction, repair,
alteration or addition of a structure associated with an increase of one or more service
units.
Capital improvement: Water supply, treatment and distribution facilities, and
wastewater collection and treatment facilities that have a life expectancy of five (5) or
more years and are owned and operated by or on behalf of the city.
Capital Improvements Advisory Committee: The city's planning and zoning
commission.
Capital improvements plan: A plan contemplated by this article that identifies capital
improvements or facility expansions for which impact fees may be assessed.
City. The City of North Richland Hills, Texas.
Credit: The amount of the reduction of an impact fee for fees, payments or charges for
or construction of the same type of facility.
Facility expansion: The expansion of the capacity of an existing facility that serves the
same function as an otherwise necessary new capital improvement, in order that the
existing facility may serve new development. The term does not include the repair,
maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing facility to better serve existing
development.
Final plat approval or approval of a final plat: The point at which the applicant has
complied with all conditions of approval and the plat has been released for filing with the
county clerk.
Fort Worth access fee. The fee imposed upon the City of North Richland Hills by the
City of Fort Worth for providing water and /or sanitary sewer service to new development
contained within the incorporated city limits and to which service is provided either
directly or indirectly by the City of Fort Worth water and /or sanitary sewer system(s)
Impact fee: A charge or assessment imposed as set forth in this article against new
development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital
improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new
development. The term includes amortized charges, lump -sum charges, capital
recovery fees, contributions in aid of construction, and any other fee that functions as
described by this definition. The term does not include:
(a) dedication of land for public parks or payment in lieu of the dedication to serve park
needs;
(b) dedication of rights -of -way or easements or construction or dedication of on -site or
off -site water distribution, wastewater collection or drainage facilities, or streets,
sidewalks, or curbs if the dedication or construction is required by a valid ordinance and
is necessitated by and attributable to the new development;
(c) lot or acreage fees to be placed in trust funds for the purpose of reimbursing
developers for oversizing or constructing water or sewer mains or lines; or
(d) other pro rata fees for reimbursement of water or sewer mains or lines extended by
the political subdivision.
However, an item included in the capital improvements plan may not be required to be
constructed except in accordance with Section 395.019(2), Texas Local Government
Code, and an owner may not be required to construct or dedicate facilities and to pay
impact fees for those facilities.
Land use assumptions: A description of the service area and projections of changes in
land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a ten -
year period which has been adopted by the city and upon which the capital
improvements plan is based.
Meter equivalent: The flow capacity of a water meter compared to the base three -
fourths -inch meter. The water meter equivalents shown on Conversion Table 2 and in
the Impact Fees Capital Improvements Plan serves as the standardized measure of use
or generation attributable to the new unit of development.
New development: The subdivision of land; the construction, reconstruction,
redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of a
structure; or any use or extension of the use of land; any of which increases the number
of service units.
Offsite: Located entirely on property which is not included within the bounds of the plat
being considered for impact fee assessment.
Onsite: Located at least partially on the plat which is being considered for impact fee
assessment.
Service area: The entire area within the corporate limits of the city to be served by the
capital improvements and facilities expansions specified in the capital improvements
plan.
Service unit: The three - fourths -inch water meter equivalent as shown on Conversion
Table 2 attached hereto and in Appendix A as Table 3.5 in the Impact Fees Capital
Improvements Plan which serves as the standardized measure of use or generation
attributable to the new unit of development based on historical data and trends
applicable to the city during the previous ten (10) years.
Wastewater facility. An improvement for providing wastewater collection and treatment,
including, but not limited to, land or easements, treatment facilities, lift stations, or
interceptor mains. Wastewater facility excludes sanitary sewer lines or mains which are
constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed from pro rata charges
paid by developers or owners of property in other subdivisions as a condition of
connection to or use of such facility.
Water facility.• An improvement for providing water supply, treatment and distribution
service, including, but not limited to, land or easements, water treatment facilities, water
supply facilities or water distribution lines. Water facility excludes water lines or mains
which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed from pro rata
charges paid by developers or owners of property in other subdivisions as a condition of
connection to or use of such facility.
Sec. 110 -522. Capital Improvements Advisory Committee.
(a) The capital improvements advisory committee shall consist of the city planning
and zoning commission. If the commission does not include at least one (1)
representative of the real estate, development or building industry who is not an
employee or official of a political subdivision or governmental entity, the city council
shall appoint at least one (1) such representative as an ad hoc voting member of the
advisory committee.
(b) The capital improvements advisory committee serves in an advisory capacity and
is established to:
(1) Advise and assist the adoption of land use assumptions;
(2) Review the capital improvements plan and file written comments;
(3) Monitor and evaluate implementation of the capital improvements plan;
(4) File semi - annual reports with respect to the progress of the capital
improvements plan and report to the city council any perceived inequities in
implementing the plan or imposing the impact fee; and
(5) Advise the city staff and council of the need to update or revise the land use
assumptions, capital improvements plan and impact fee.
(c) All professional reports concerning the development and implementation of the
capital improvements plan shall be made available to the advisory committee.
(d) The capital improvements advisory committee shall elect a chairperson to
preside at its meetings and a vice - chairperson to serve in his absence. All meetings of
the committee shall be open to the public and posted at least seventy -two (72) hours in
advance. Robert's Rules shall, insofar as applicable, govern the conduct of the
committee's business. A majority of the membership of the committee shall constitute a
quorum.
Sec. 110 -523. Periodic updates required.
The land use assumptions and capital improvements plan upon which impact fees are
based shall be updated at least every five (5) years, beginning with the next such
update to be on or before March 7, 2015. Alternatively, the city council may, pursuant
tothe provisions of Section 395.0575 of the Local Government Code make a
determination that no such update is required.
Sec. 110.524 Adoption of Updated Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements
Plan and Impact fees; Impact fee required.
(a) The 2010 land use assumptions, capital improvements plan and impact fees
proposed by staff and on file in the office of the City Secretary along with the Tables
referred to herein are hereby adopted.
(b) No building permit shall be granted to new construction of any property, nor shall
any original water or sewer service connection be made unless or service commenced
unless and until impact fees required by this article are assessed and collected or a
contract providing for payment as approved by the city entered into.
Sec. 110 -525. Assessment of impact fees.
(a) Assessment of the impact fee per service unit shall occur as set forth in Sec.
110 -526.
(b) Additional impact fees or increases in fees shall not be assessed unless the
number of service units to be developed on the tract increases. Should the service units
be increased, impact fees shall be increased in an amount equal to the current impact
fee per service unit multiplied by the difference in number of service units.
Sec. 110 -526. Collection of impact fees.
(a) At the time building permits are requested (or, if property is to be connected to
mains without such permits, at the time connection to mains is requested), the number
of service units shall be determined from the number of residential meters using, if
necessary, the meter equivalency Table 2 attached hereto.
(b) The amount of the impact fee due shall be determined by multiplying the number
of service units times the amounts of the impact fees together with the applicable Fort
Worth access fee for water and wastewater contained in Table 1 attached hereto.
(c) The impact fee due shall be collected at the time a building permit is issued or, if
connection is to occur without a permit, prior to connection to the city main.
(d) The determination of impact fees shall be reduced by any allowable credits for
the category of capital improvements as provided by section 110 -527.
(e) The owner of property for which there is a recorded plat may enter into a written
agreement with the city providing for the time and method of payment of impact fees,
which agreement shall prevail over any contrary provision of this article.
(f) Impact fees may be assessed, but not collected, for property where service is not
available unless:
(1) The city commits to commence construction of necessary facilities
identified in the capital improvements plan within two (2) years and have service
available in a reasonable time not exceeding five (5) years;
(2) The city agrees in writing to permit the owner of the property to construct
or finance the required capital improvement or facility expansion and agrees that
the costs incurred or funds advanced will either:
a. Be credited against the impact fees otherwise due from the new
development;
b. Reimburse the owner for such costs from impact fees paid from
other new developments that will use such capital improvements or
facility expansions in which case fees shall be reimbursed to the owner at
the time collected; or
C. The owner voluntarily requests that the city reserve capacity to
serve future development and the city, and the owner enter into a valid
written agreement.
Sec. 110 -527. Credits.
(a) Any construction of, contributions to, or dedications of any facility appearing on
the capital improvements plan which is required to be constructed by the owner as a
condition of development shall be credited against the impact fees otherwise due for the
same category of impact fees otherwise due from the development.
(b) The amount of each credit for required construction of a facility on the capital
improvements plan shall be calculated by multiplying fifty percent (50 %) by the number
indicated in the column titled "10 -Year (2009- 2019)" of Table 3 -3 of Exhibit B for water
infrastructure projects and the column titled "10 -Year (2009- 2019)" of Table 3-4 of
Exhibit B for wastewater infrastructure projects.
(c) As an alternative to the foregoing, the city and the owner may enter into an
agreement providing that in addition to the credit, the owner will be reimbursed for all or
a portion of the costs of such facilities from pro rata charges collected from others who
connect to such facilities and from impact fees as received from other new
developments that will use such capital improvements or facility expansions. Pro rata
charges paid shall be credited against impact fees in the same manner as expenditures
for facilities constructed as set forth in subsection (b) hereinabove above.
(d) An owner shall be entitled to a credit against any category of impact fee as
provided in any written agreement between the city and the owner.
(e) No credit for construction of any facility shall exceed the total amount of impact
fees due from the development for the same category of improvements.
Sec. 110 -528. Expenditure and accounting for fees and interest.
(a) All impact fees collected shall be deposited in interest bearing accounts clearly
identifying the category of capital improvements or facility expansions within the service
area for which the fee is adopted.
(b) Interest earned shall be credited to the account and shall be subject to the same
restrictions on expenditures as the funds generating such interest.
(c) Impact fees and the interest earned thereon may be spent only for the purposes
for which such fee was imposed as shown in the capital improvements plan.
(d) The records of the accounts into which impact fees are deposited shall be open
for public inspection and copying during ordinary business hours.
Sec. 110 -529. Refunds.
(a) On the request of an owner of the property on which an impact fee has been
paid, impact fees shall be refunded if existing facilities are available and service is
denied or if the city failed to commence construction of facilities required for service
within two (2) years of payment of the fee or if such construction is not completed within
a reasonable time, but not in any event in more than five (5) years from the date of
payment of the fee.
(b) Any impact fee funds not expended within ten (10) years after payment shall be
refunded.
(c) Refunds shall bear interest calculated from the date of collection to the date of
refund at the statutory rate set forth in Section 302.002, Texas Finance Code.
(d) All refunds shall be made to the record owner of the property at the time the
refund is paid. However, if the impact fees were paid by another political subdivision or
governmental entity, payment shall be made to the political subdivision or governmental
entity.
(e) The owner of the property on which an impact fee has been paid or another
political subdivision or governmental entity that paid the impact fee has standing to sue
for a refund under this section.
Sec. 110 -530. Certification of compliance required
(a) Each year the city imposes an impact fee it shall submit a written certification
verifying compliance with this chapter to the attorney general each year not later than
the last day of the city's fiscal year.
(b) The certification must be signed by the mayor of the city and include a statement
that reads substantially similar to the following: This statement certifies compliance with
V.T.C.A., Local Government Code chapter 395.
(c) In the event the city fails to submit a certification as required by this section, it is
liable to the state for a civil penalty in an amount equal to ten (10) percent of the amount
of the impact fees erroneously charged. The attorney general shall collect the civil
penalty and deposit the amount collected to the credit of the housing trust fund."
Section 4: Appendix A to the North Richland Hills Code of Ordinances is hereby
amended by adding thereto Tables 1 and 2 attached hereto.
Section 5: Severability and Savings; Partial Repeal of Prior Ordinances
If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this
ordinance, or application thereto, or any person or circumstance, is held
invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed
such remaining portions of the ordinance despite such invalidity, such
remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. All ordinances or
any parts thereof in conflict with the terms of this ordinance shall be and
are hereby deemed repealed and are of no force or effect provided that
such repeal shall be only to the extent of such inconsistency and in all
other respects this ordinance shall be cumulative of other ordinances
regulating and governing the subject matter covered in this ordinance.
Specifically, prior ordinances establishing impact fees are hereby saved
from repeal except to the extent this Ordinance establishes impact fees
effective after the date of this ordinance.
Section 6: Effective Date
This ordinance shall be effective immediately from the date of passage
and approval hereof.
AND IT IS SO ORDAINED.
PASSED AND APPROVED on this 8th day of March, 2010.
ummull l _"W C11
CHI %..
13y.
z
A . $T:
Ir
y
Patricia f%iseW4, Mty Secretary
ACT- A
1 fiA ) 'I F 0
111 r
iti4k- WIle
-..-
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Mike Curtis, P.E., Managing Director
Table 1
* Fort Worth Water Access Fee changes annually. The annual rate will be the base rate
shown multiplied by the NRH Ratio which is to be determined annually. The NRH Ratio
will be calculated as the percentage of the overall water that the City of North Richland
Hills purchases from the City of Fort Worth.
Table 2
Meter /Service Unit Equivalency Table
Meter Size
Maximum Flow
Wpm)
Service Unit
Equivalents
Fort Worth Access Fees
30
NRH
NRH
Water
1.67
1 1/2"
Year
Water
Wastewater
Wastewater
Fee
NRH
350
11.67
4"
Base Rate
Ratio
6"
Year 1
46.67
8"
1800
80
(April 1, 2010 —
March 30, 2011
$ 1,087
$ 306
$ 867
66%
$ 185
Year 2
(April 1, 2011 —
March 30, 2012
$ 1,087
$ 306
$ 867
$ 185
Year 3
(April 1, 2012 —
March 30, 2013
$ 1,209
$ 335
$ 867
*
$ 185
Year 4
(April 1, 2013 —
March 30, 2014
$ 1,330
$ 363
$ 867
*
$ 185
Year 5
(April 1, 2014 —
March 30, 2015
$ 1,330
$ 363
$ 867
It
$ 185
* Fort Worth Water Access Fee changes annually. The annual rate will be the base rate
shown multiplied by the NRH Ratio which is to be determined annually. The NRH Ratio
will be calculated as the percentage of the overall water that the City of North Richland
Hills purchases from the City of Fort Worth.
Table 2
Meter /Service Unit Equivalency Table
Meter Size
Maximum Flow
Wpm)
Service Unit
Equivalents
3/4"
30
1
ill
50
1.67
1 1/2"
100
3.33
2"
160
5.33
3"
350
11.67
4"
600
21
6"
1250
46.67
8"
1800
80
---- -----------------
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
WATER AND WASTEWATER
N ✓SERVICE AREA
LEGEND
Streets Streams L Service Area
Rail Road Lakes
0 1,250 2,500 FREESE
- SCALE IN FEET NRH roll,
NRH09410
Exhibit B
Water and
Wastewater
Impact Fee Study
FINAL DRAFT
February 2009
Prepared for:
City of North Richland
Hills
MRH
Prepared by:
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
4055 International Plaza
Suite 200
Fort Worth, TX 76109
817/735 -7300
FREESE
�NICNOLS
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY .............................................................. ...........................ES -1
1.0 BACKGROUND ..................................................................... ............................1 -1
2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ................................................ ............................2 -1
2.1 Residential Land Use ............................................................ ............................2 -1
2.2 Non - residential Land Use ...................................................... ............................2 -2
3.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN .................................. ............................3 -1
3.1 Water and Wastewater Load Projections ........................... ............................... 3 -1
3.2 Water and Wastewater System Improvements ................... ............................... 3 -2
3.3 Impact Fee Analysis .............................................................. ............................3 -7
3.3.1 Service Units .................................................................. ............................3 -7
3.3.2 Maximum Impact Fee Calculation .............................. ............................... 3 -9
i
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2 -1 Population by Traffic Survey Zone ................................ ............................2 -3
Figure 2 -2 Non - residential Acreage ................................................ ............................2 -4
Figure 3 -1 Water System Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ............................. 3 -5
Figure 3 -2 Wastewater System Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan .................... 3 -6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2 -1
Historical Population .....................................................
-1
Table 3 -1
............................2
Projected Water Demands ...........................................
3 -1
Table 3 -2
...............................
Projected Wastewater Flows .......................................
3 -1
Table 3 -3
...............................
Cost Allocation for Water Impact Fee Calculation ..... ...............................
3 -3
Table 3 -4
Cost Allocation for Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation ..........................
3 -4
Table 3 -5
Service Unit Equivalency Table ................................. ...............................
3 -8
Table 3 -6
Projected Water Service Units for 2009 - 2019 ............... ............................3
-8
Table 3 -7
Projected Wastewater Service Units for 2009 - 2019 ... ...............................
3 -9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2 -1 Population by Traffic Survey Zone ................................ ............................2 -3
Figure 2 -2 Non - residential Acreage ................................................ ............................2 -4
Figure 3 -1 Water System Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan ............................. 3 -5
Figure 3 -2 Wastewater System Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan .................... 3 -6
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 BACKGROUND
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires an impact fee analysis before
impact fees can be created and assessed. Chapter 395 defines an impact fee as "a charge
or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to
generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility
expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development." In September
2001, Senate Bill 243 amended Chapter 395 thus creating the current procedure for
implementing impact fees.
2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
To assist the City of North Richland Hills in determining the need and timing of capital
improvements to serve future development, a reasonable estimation of future growth is
required. Growth and development projections were formulated based on assumptions
pertaining to the type, location, quantity, and timing of various future land uses within the
community. The 2009 population is estimated to be 66,100 while the projected 2019
population is approximately 73,118.
3.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
An impact fee capital improvements plan (CIP) was developed for the City of North
Richland Hills to ensure high quality water and wastewater service that promotes
residential and commercial development. The recommended improvements will provide
the required capacity and reliability to meet projected water demands and wastewater
flows through year 2019. The total impact fee eligible cost for the water system
improvements is $9,487,939. The total impact fee eligible cost for the wastewater system
improvements is $2,370,443.
4.0 IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
The impact fee analysis involves determining the utilization of existing and proposed
projects required as defined by the capital improvement plan to serve new development
over the next 10 -year time period. The total projected costs include the projected 10 -year
ES -1
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
capital costs, the projected finance cost for the capital improvements, and the consultant
cost for preparing and updating the Capital Improvements Plan. The maximum allowable
water impact fee is $1,771 per service unit. The maximum allowable wastewater impact
fee is $474 per service unit.
ES -2
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
1.0 BACKGROUND
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires an impact fee analysis before
impact fees can be created and assessed. Chapter 395 defines an impact fee as "a charge
or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to
generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility
expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development." In September
2001, Senate Bill 243 amended Chapter 395 thus creating the current procedure for
implementing impact fees. Chapter 395 identifies the following items as impact fee
eligible costs:
• Construction contract price
• Surveying and engineering fees
• Land acquisition costs
• Fees paid to the consultant preparing or updating the capital improvements
plan (CIP)
• Projected interest charges and other finance costs for projects identified in
the CIP
Chapter 395 also identifies items that impact fees cannot used to pay for, such as:
• Construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other
than those identified on the capital improvements plan
• Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements
• Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements
to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental, or regulatory standards
• Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements
to provide better service to existing development
• Administrative and operating costs of the political subdivision
• Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness, except as allowed above
1 -1
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
In November 2009, the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, authorized Freese and
Nichols, Inc. (FNI) to perform an impact fee analysis on the City's water and wastewater
systems. The purpose of this report is to address the methodology used in the
development and calculation of water and wastewater impact fees for the City of North
Richland Hills. The methodology used herein satisfies the requirements of the Texas
Local Government Code Section 395 for the establishment of water and wastewater
impact fees.
1 -2
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
2.0 LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
To assist the City of North Richland Hills in determining the need and timing of capital
improvements to serve future development, a reasonable estimation of future growth is
required. Growth and development projections were formulated based on assumptions
pertaining to the type, location, quantity, and timing of various future land uses within the
community. These land use assumptions, which include population projections, will
become the basis for the preparation of an impact fee capital improvement plans for water
and wastewater facilities.
2.1 Residential Land Use
The City of North Richland Hills provided yearly service population data from 1998
through 2009. The data indicated an increasing growth rate with an average of 2.01%
annual growth over the last 10 years. Table 2 -1 presents the historical service
populations for the City of North Richland Hills.
Table 2 -1 Historical Population
Year
Service Population
Growth Rate
1998
53,100
-
1999
54,300
2.26%
2000
55,635
2.46%
2001
56,800
2.09%
2002
58,550
3.08%
2003
59,800
2.13%
2004
60,400
1.00%
2005
61,650
2.07%
2006
63,520
3.03%
2007
64,050
0.83%
2008
65,750
2.65%
2009
66,100
0.53%
Average
2.01%
City planning staff developed future population estimates based on the growth rates from
recent years and provided the total projected service population for 2009 and 2019. The
2009 base year population is approximately 66,100, and the 2019 population is
approximately 73,118. The total population was then distributed throughout the City
2 -1
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
using Traffic Survey Zones (TSZs). Figure 2 -1 presents the 2009 and 2019 population
by TSZ.
2.2 Non - residential Land Use
The City provided land use shapefiles, which included the current zoning and future land
use type. This data was used to determine the total non - residential acreage based on 2005
zoning and the future land use for 2020. In order to determine the non - residential acreage
for 2009 and 2019, a straight -line growth trend was assumed. Some areas on the
periphery of the service area were adjusted to more closely correspond with the growth in
population. The 2009 and 2019 non - residential land use is approximately 1,754 acres
and 1,940 acres, respectively. Figure 2 -2 presents the non - residential acreage by TSZ for
the water and wastewater service area.
2 -2
;j
10250
2813
2865
r
10337
- --1079
1167
10334
0
10450
1463
1463
C_- 200117
\ 2017
1
104`'.43
7511
10454 10457
1618
1666
1666 1618
i
10459
o
0 1,250 2.500
SCALE IN FEET
836
10460
386
436 %
10345
3222
3258
10349
500
1670
10185
10268
10351
0
0
10353
0
13 8
33
3 -33 �' 41.01
45.01
0174 I (r
0.00 // t
,0177
4.02 10179
4.47 18.82
20.88
I
I 10185
10184 0.00
26.40 0.00
26.40 !
10176 30.40
0.40
0.44 10180
13.14
13.14
- -- 10257
` 8.67 i
10250 10253 � 12.67
1.21 5.12 10 C
1.35 - --
�
I
L 10261 10265
7.89 0.00
8.75 0.00
10252 la
18.53
18.53 10258 10250 10268
20.11 26.11 0.00
1 10256 20.11 28.99 u.GO
- _ -
---_� 45.13
50.13 C✓ - -- !
10287
8.67
15 094 i / 10263 9.62
7.09 j i 0.00
0.00
5.38 10264
24.77
10336 �� 10339 10342 24.77
16.10 13.18 15.21 !
18.10 20.18 15.21 10346
163.03 7
-- �% 180.97 h 10351
Vim-
67.33
U
10345 74.33 = 84.69
j
?i
I
E
10337,
1--------37.501
54.07
48.00
10462
10334
i
i
-- -- i
10338
0
140.09
0.00
!
f
i
150.59
I
i
'
10450
50.48
10452
- "- -
7.38
10453
1 72
I
10454
1045 57.14
0.00
I 2.55
y
57.1.,
N
I
%
0 1,250 2.500
SCALE IN FEET
0.00
84.69 0.00
10349 ;
10340 = 58.41 /
80.10 L�y� 58.41
89.10
- --
10344 10355
13.50 0.00
N 20.50 0.00
10343
77.05
10456
76.02
84.38
0348
14.87 710 88 -11-11
16.50 86.44
-_
10350
��
31.81
7 �✓ I
, 35.31
68.38 u /l 10 i
75.90 a 80.90 ,
89.80 10466
18.48
FIGURE 2 -2
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
COMMERCIAL ACREAGE BY TSZ
FOR IMPACT FEE
FINAL DRAFT
LEGEND
Streets Transit Oriented Development
(TOD) Districts
Rail Road F R� Traffic Survey Zones
Streams � City Limits
Lakes
N K H MWICHOLS
10465
54.07
65.07
10462
92.81
03.81
-- - -- -- - --------
i
-- -- i
18.48
FIGURE 2 -2
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
COMMERCIAL ACREAGE BY TSZ
FOR IMPACT FEE
FINAL DRAFT
LEGEND
Streets Transit Oriented Development
(TOD) Districts
Rail Road F R� Traffic Survey Zones
Streams � City Limits
Lakes
N K H MWICHOLS
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
3.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
An impact fee capital improvements plan (CIP) was developed for the City of North
Richland Hills to ensure high quality water and wastewater service that promotes
residential and commercial development. The recommended improvements will provide
the required capacity and reliability to meet projected water demands and wastewater
flows through year 2019.
3.1 Water and Wastewater Load Projections
The population data was used to develop future water demands and wastewater flows
based on a projected average day per capita use and peaking factors. Table 3 -1 presents
the projected water demands, and Table 3 -2 presents the projected wastewater flows for
the City of North Richland Hills.
Table 3 -1 Projected Water Demands
Table 3 -2 Projected Wastewater Flows
Average Day
Maximum
Peak Hour
Daily Flow
Demand
Day Demand
Demand
Year
MGD )
(MGD)
MGD
2009
10.89
22.94
40.15
2019
12.06
25.39
1 44.43
Table 3 -2 Projected Wastewater Flows
3 -1
Average Annual
Peak Wet Weather
Daily Flow
Flow
Year
MGD
MGD
2009
8.43
33.73
2019
1 9.29
37.15
3 -1
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
3.2 Water and Wastewater System Improvements
Proposed water and wastewater system projects were developed as part of the CIP. A
summary of the costs for each of the projects required for the 10 -year growth period used
in the impact fee analysis for both the water and wastewater systems are shown in Tables
3 -3 and 3 -4, respectively. The 2009 percent utilization is the portion of a project's
capacity required to serve existing development. It is not included in the impact fee
analysis. The 2019 percent utilization is the portion of the project's capacity that will be
required to serve the City of North Richland Hills in 2019. The 2009 -2019 percent
utilization is the portion of the project's capacity required to serve development from
2009 to 2019. The portion of a project's total cost that is used to serve development
projected to occur from 2009 through 2019 is calculated as the total actual cost multiplied
by the 2009 -2019 percent utilization. Only this portion of the cost is used in the impact
fee analysis. The proposed 10 -year water system projects are shown on Figure 3 -1.
Proposed wastewater projects are shown on Figure 3 -2.
3 -2
M
M
OJ
H
N
C
0
f6
3
U
U
OJ
4J
LL
U
!6
Q
E
O
J
e
0
m
u
0
Q
a+
H
0
U
m
O
r4
p
Ln
W
a
C)
O
l0
0)
tD
O
ON
M
M
Qt
n
M
N
O
O
tD
p
tD
n
1�
tD
O
N
O
V
0)
m
tD
W
O)
t0
G
d
.--I
N
a
to
V?
N
Ch
iA
O
V)
m
N
m
R
Ln
co
O
O
O
tpn
Off)
N
R
m
N
t/f
N
V
N
N
�
O
O
o)
O
R O
O
CIO
O
cn
0)
tD
Ln
to
O
cn
O
W
Ln
00
''.{
O
co
p
01
N
tD
^
G
C
Y N
O
to
tD
W
N
O
11
tD
0
00
V
^
0)
co
ZD
w
tD
M
N
O
01
O O
.�
^j
n
M
n
tD
N
N
� l
vj
�
00
n
00
00
tD
O
^
c-1
to
ry)
N
Ln
I�
H
00
N
tf)
M
tD
t0
O
N
t!1
O
Ln
N
N
to
N
V)
t/1
i/)
N
�
Vi.
Vf
N
N
m
N
N
O
V
y
c d
C £
LA
N
Ln
n
N
M
O
O
lD
00
O
O
O
00
01
O
N
u1
tD
M
O
I�
p
m
M
O)
^
m
0)
M
0)
N
U1
00
W
to
tD
tD
O
Ln
00
O
N
tD
O
Ln
Y)
O
7 O
n
M
O
Ln
to
N
M
D1
tD
n
00
tD
O
M
l0
W
Cf
to
00
N
to
1--I
kD
O
In
U
N
M
�
N
.�
V
N
to
N
00
m
O
M
W
°
ti
O
O
tD
0)
to
N
00
O
O
O
N
O
O
^O
O
M
M
O
O
lOD
O
p
M
C)
Cn
M
tD
tD
o
m
m
m
tD
M
0)
O
N
V)
M
,,)
n
v
CL
v�
N
.-
Ln
T
*
co
v
tD
0)
N
m
m
`^
m
m
co
'"
^
m
^
m
0
ui
o
uai
o
U
N
to
N
m
L}
r-4
to
t/1•
trmi
Vf
N
V?
0^0
to
W
Ln
N
H
O)
N
N
Vf
in
off°
a°
0
0
0
0)
O
V
O
M
tof)
�"�
N
M
O
N
M
M
Ln
co
co
O
q
lf1
to
.--I
t71
Ln
�
V
O
N
O
M
Ln
.1
O
M
O
N
O
M
O
N
IA
F
y
°
Cj
N
O
CC
CC
�
O1 -I
d
a°
p
o
9
�
C
\ ° \°
C
N
Z
to
n
O
O
D>
O
m
O
W
O
Ot
to
m
Ln
00
L
00
O
N
to
O
O
N
t/)
Ln
O
0
O
d
iy
'y
N
co
00
m
00
m
00
N
u�i
a
d
CL
w
O
W
a
0
a°
�°
N
u1
M
O
N
to
n
to
t0
to
O
O
n
O
tD
O
V)
Ln
M
V1
00
O
V
�
co
O
N
Ln
to
O
00
to
to
O
t/)
O
N
tk
tko
OJ
C
. J
Ol
O
O
O
'2
O
00
O r0
O
L
ar
-6
00
m
LLI
_N
�, O
2
C
° 'O
f0
r.+
C
0 J
CL
p
uyi
O
00
aY-
.6 O)
V
00
y
H
d
to
ti
?
R
O
'X
L
m
g Oc0
m
CO
X
C V
-6
N
a°+
v
v -O
7
U
CO
OJ
O
7
p
OJ
(0
o
°
f0
N
°;
O
a m
>
m
000
0
O
CJ O
E S
at6+
Y
3
U
:v+ J
v
C
T
o
a,
3
2
3
0`
0 0
3L
,,
o
o
Z
C
-6 U
a
c
r0 m
(�
c
C
3
v o
'�
0°
C
2r
3
v
m
V
d
N
c M
2 .s
y
ry
0
'B
'O
yNj
y
°
w
O 0
O)
m
N 3
Q
N
d
O
T
> .
m
-
U
In
0
L S
mw
°
c
°
3
u
v v
o>
w
3
O Q
o
N
03 O)
c
E
o
O>
m
r-
p>
CD
7 c
O
J
2
O
Y
F
E
c O
J
'O
j
U•
c N
in
m
0 Y
°
U
C
O
C
d
N
t'
L
U
-CO E
o
w
l7
O
Oq
`�
`~ a
bD
_+
L
Om0
OJ 7>
C
C
'6
a
L O
`O
N
y
C
Q
m
7
m
c O
d J
L W
A
m
'O m
C f0
E
D
N
°
ice+ 'O
CO
to
S O
v t
C
L C
'6
a
m to
tD
m-6
0
}'
C
h N
m
0l
d
0
C
a
3
Y
L
C
> +�
t0
Ur`
=o
L_
v
W
O
Y
o0 0
m m
OD U
>
CC
U
m
m
C O
>
U m
i
° O
%
m
O V
L
w U
aL+
U
'O
am+ O
C c
_
U
m
N O
E
01 C
y
U
W
>
O m
'°
J c
'° 3
i0 O
C .0
J
°
m Y
H
m
.> C
w
o
,.
t
Eo
°o
ti
In
c
m
o
v
0 3
Y
d
E
0
v
Q c
c
c°
o
c
E=
n
3
v
aEi
J •1
J
Cl
E
°
Y
J
3
lO N
fL
m=
L
N Q
J
J J
J
J
J Jy.+ 1
0_
J
J O
00
L CL
E
c
c
t ti0
°
o
E
w
L U
c
L
c
L 3
c m
L
c
L J
c
L fc0
ar
°'
J
c 3
OJ 0)
v
Q
c
cu
c
J
c 00
cl
a
,a
H
00
N-1 (%
N m
N a)
3 C
J
N
N
a +'
N
t6
H
N c�
N C
O v
N cr
V U
N C
lD O
H M
X
W
tD
N m
`
O
N U
N
LO
D_ Z
U
.�
°
Z
Q
m
U
O
W
e-1
N
M
R
to
tD
N
00
01
O
c-1
N
m
yam„
H
0%
N
O
N
0%
O
O
N
C
N
d
O
a
E
E
a ar
of a
a �
m o
u
d
0
U
d
M
ar
0
CL
0
a
C
r
l6
u
m
v
d
N
W
m
CL
E
0
C
O
0
a
0 0
v
m
Nm
W
Ol
`~
T
41
Ln
rl
M
O
O
M
O
o
LD
N
m
An
lD
N
al
cN-1
O
AA
n
`
A
W
m
N
to
N
f/1•
O
a
OO
O
N
A O
N
N
V
Ln
o
m
R
W
0
01
N
ill
O
V1
of
14
O1
t0
C
o
d
oo
�l
`l
op
O
m
W
1
co
.
m
o
N
M
N
N
�D
N~
A
VT
N
Vf
N
H
LO
r
N
O
(J
C
M
m
�
cq
o)
It
N
M
V
oo
O
co
`
l0
iA
N
m
V1
-1
m
m
�p
N
N
N
n
0
oo
n
�
m
M
r;
1R
V
N
-4
V1
M
D
iWA
N
iNA
N
O
m
iD
O
O
O
N O
1A
VN
0
m
O
N
R
O
rn
o)
ti
r`
,..�
in
A
w
Ln
W
Om
rn
G
M
pal
^
^
ti
m
oo
r^-I
Lo
^
allo
of
Of
.y
N
O
O
O
O
a°
o
o
Ln
.r
i
�
Ln
o O
O
8
.--4
-1
�
Ln
14
O
N
A
N
7
N
H
o
O°�
C)
C
N
W
001
o
W
m
O7
W
0
a
a
a
c�
W
p
H
o
0
p
N
H
l0
O
Lo
rl
O
Ol
O
rl
N
oo
V1
oo
o
1�
O
o
of
W
d
J
L
L N
o
N
3 o
J
c
m
O
z
7
0 �
o
M
m
L
m
c
-o
L '-
c
a
o
C y
u
m
C
O
-p
lo O
M �''
Ln
O
U V1 -
'6
2
N L
a
Y
3 a
N
`°
o
a
o N ^
E
"
K
°c
2
>
i
c y C
v o
Q
a v
>
a
3
" J
op
0
3
_O
=
-p
.� cu L
J Z U
o
_
@
U aJ
U in
O
a/
c
no DQ c
C d
G C
3
C
O C '6 N
c
c
- m
U O
N
N
0_
c
O
=> cy
N m '6
_
—
oc
yO
c
°N°
2
aaj
C p d ca
3
o
oa
E
S
L.} L
v v
L
L
m
x
v c
c
c
i a
G
p i1
=
m
L
'
3
oo a) O
u
lA
N
O
e
O
c
L
oo o w
to
c
to
c
p`
O 7
c
E
Z c
c
c a
£ O
O.
•u
L
O
a/
u
J
7
in D H=
.y x
Y
'x
!n
x
y N
U
U
m c
fa
c
N
O U) v
(v y
N co
2 N
c:i
N
c
a/
o
m
o
a 3 u
o v
o >°
Q
Y
G
E
E
aJ
ac
O N O
N L
o
c u
c
—°
L
v
>
3
c
u
fo
J
v c
a
v v m v
c 2
c
aci 3
0 00
O
aJ
ai .-I
cu
p
Ep
ai m`
" m�
O
O
u m
3
N
n�a
u
n�
ca
C
v
x u
M
CC O
a'
�ocL
v o0 �
fo
O
C y
ate+
W C
c op
u
L
�
ti
O oc
O
N�
O 3
pnco.o'c
�
0
O +L.+
L
U
C
g a
c
0.ca
cL >u
°c
E
'ZI U
(o
N
u =
` .x
cl
a) m L
U m d0
aJ O
U
N V1
U
W
Vl c
L
C
aJ N
` C
a) J
al Y c
U
O`
U
C u
C
po
C i C
ac
+ c
C J
C x
O.
E
c o
u
u Q
u
U a J o
u c
u O
U d m
O N
'0
C
`
C=
C c C ul
c
C E
C ate+
v
N c
Q J
r4
N
ul c
N J
I� p
N
0
M O
a o c
N O f0 _
00 m
c-I („)
V 4
U
a
G
ZQ
.--4
N
M
�
�A
ID
rl
oo
H
FIGURE 3 -2
CITY OF
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPACT FEE I
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN !
I I
FINAL DRAFT
LEGEND
j
I
.-. Existing Lift Station Streets I 5. 6 a• 5. fi. 6' a
B Meter Station Rail Road i 6- I e•o
?s'
8" and Smaller Sewer Lines Streams I 6 6
6'
10" and Larger Sewer Lines Lakes ,
24" !
Existing Eligible Sewer Lines !City Limits -- ----- - - - - -- - ° 6"
Proposed Eligible Sewer Lines
1 fi
27" 24" 6"
FREESE i i j
N R H r•�N,�HO�s �q•.
6 e.
MAJOR BASINS i ?�
0
&g Bear Uttle Bear Z�'• m
fi• a,. 30 I
Big Fossil Creek Mackey Creek
6 6 _
Calloway Walker m 6' s' fi• ,�I
5.. � I
fi I
6' g- I
6• I
6' 6 6-
6' 6• 3O`
6"
6" 6" a 3�••
6'
6" 6'
6' 6 101 6" .. 3 "
6 6' 6" u
6" u
6
Z. 6'
6' 6 � 6•
6 6a _ g• O
6" fi•
05 6.
6"
IrJ1 r
fi..
od 12"
I 5.. 10„ 1 .
9' I
C5 t
Ifi e 6` m
6 6
6
6' 6' 1- 5• 1
6'
6' 6'
; n 6• 6• r b fi• I
6 6 8-
e' T 5' 6'
6" 16
o � 6 "e I
2'
I - r
6 cl
m. a.. 6
I
6"
e' a /' e- �� 0 5• e•" 10.. 10•
12••
N 8
I 6"
6. I
" 1
i 6. „p.ns1 n
I
6�• I 6• 6• �.. 6. O N
I e o 15'• s 6- e
6. �„ m
y 12 12” o a.. /
6.
J -v- ins
J \ 10
6 i
i 6' fi• 0
I - 6
j 12"
i +o
- jib 5.. •o 12-
l 10"
j a" e
-T-
6' s. _
6' 6 O 6' 6• I
♦� b
9� 10" 10" 10• r .. c 6• a..
I I l l p N Z
30" 3p --
6" I
1� ro 6 6 0 10 s
O /1
6' it
5• 12•, e' m112'
5• \ e.
B 6 a 9
fi. h
5• 5. a evly
0
10" �', .10 10
I
ai � I � 6• 5• 6-
6"
o.• s
o /i � I fi• e. �
s, y 10 /
� 6• I I e
^O 6 6 _
6,
a s 78•, 6.1 ems.' 2f 5.
0.,
j 6"
I 6"
j ^O fi'
I /•
I
m.
• 12•' _
I N �� c%
I
0 1,250 2,500
SCALE IN FEET
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
3.3 Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis involves determining the utilization of existing and proposed
projects required as defined by the capital improvement plan to serve new development
over the next 10 -year time period. For existing or proposed projects, the impact fee is
calculated as a percentage of the project cost, based upon the percentage of the project's
capacity required to serve development projected to occur between 2009 and 2019.
Capacity serving existing development and development projected for more than 10 years
in the future cannot be charged to impact fees.
3.3.1 Service Units
The maximum impact fee may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the
cost of capital improvements required by the total number of service units
attributed to new development during the impact fee eligibility period. A water
service unit is defined as service equivalent to a water connection for a single -
family residence. The City of North Richland Hills does not directly meter
wastewater flows and bills for wastewater services based on the customer's water
consumption. Therefore, a wastewater service unit is defined as the wastewater
service provided to a customer with a water connection for a single - family
residence.
The service associated with public, commercial, and industrial connections is
converted into service units based upon the capacity of the meter used to provide
service. The number of service units required to represent each meter size is
based on the maximum rated capacity of the meters as shown in AWWA Manual
6, Water Meters -- Selection, Installation, Testing, and Maintenance, 4th edition,
1999. The service unit equivalent for each meter size used by the City is listed in
Table 3 -5.
3 -7
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Table 3 -5 Service Unit Equivalency Table
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Meter Size
Maximum Flow
(gpm)
Service Unit
Equivalents
3/4"
30
1
1"
50
1.67
1 1/2"
100
3.33
2"
160
5.33
3"
350
11.67
4"
600
21
6"
1250
46.67
8"
1800
80
Table 3 -6 and Table 3 -7 show the water and wastewater service units for 2009
and the projected service units for 2019. Typically, in North Richland Hills,
single - family residences are served with 3/4 -inch water meters. Larger meters
represent public, commercial, and industrial water use. The City provided data
that included the meter size of each active water meter as of December 2009.
Table 3 -6 Projected Water Service Units for 2009 -2019
Meter Size
2009
Existing
Connections
2009
Existing
Service Units
2019
Projected
Connections
2019
Projected
Service Units
Projected
Growth in
Service Units
3/4"
18,427
18,427
20,383
20,383
1,956
1"
1,286
2,148
1,423
2,376
228
11/2"
87
290
96
320
30
2"
726
3870
803
4,280
410
3"
8
93
9
105
12
4"
16
336
18
378
42
6"
3
140
3
140
0
8"
2
160
1 2
1 160
0
Total
20,555 1
25,464 1
22,737 1
28,142 1
2,679
3 -8
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Table 3 -7 Projected Wastewater Service Units for 2009 -2019
Meter Size
2009
Existing
Connections
2009
Existing
Service
Units
2019
Projected
Connections
2019
Projected
Service Units
Projected
Growth in
Service
Units
3/4"
18,350
18,350
20,298
20,298
1,948
1"
1,103
1,842
1,220
2,037
195
11/2"
73
243
81
270
27
2"
523
2,788
579
3,086
298
3"
7
82
8
93
11
4"
14
294
15
315
21
6"
2
93
2
93
0
8"
2
160
2
160
0
Total
20,074
23,852
22,205
26,352
2,500
3.3.2 Maximum Impact Fee Calculation
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code states that the maximum
impact fee may not exceed the amount determined by dividing the cost of capital
improvements required by the total number of service units attributed to new
development during the impact fee eligibility period less a credit to account for
water and wastewater revenues and property taxes used to finance capital
improvement plans.
The total projected costs include the projected capital improvement costs to serve
10 -year development, the projected finance cost for the capital improvements, and
the consultant cost for preparing and updating the Capital Improvements Plan.
3 -9
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Maximum Water Impact Fee with Financing Costs
Total Capital Improvement Costs
Financing Costs
Engineering
Administration, Audit, and Accounting
Total Eligible Costs
Total Water Impact Fee Credit (50 %)
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
$6,950,503
$2,360,936
$86,500
$90,000
$9,487,939
$4,743,970
The total eligible cost associated with the existing and proposed water system
improvements to meet projected growth over the next ten years is $9,487,939.
The increase in the number of service units due to growth over the next ten years
is projected as 2,679 service units.
Maximum Water Impact Fee = _Total Eligible Costs - Credit
With Credit 10 -year growth in Service Units
= $9,487,939 - $4,743,970
2,679 SU
= $1,771 / SU
Maximum Water Impact Fee without Financing Costs:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $6,950,503
Engineering $86,500
Administration, Audit, and Accounting $90,000
Total Eligible Costs $7,127,003
Total Water Impact Fee Credit (50 %) $3,563,502
The total eligible cost associated with the existing and proposed water system
improvements to meet projected growth over the next ten years is $7,127,003.
Maximum Water Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs - Credit
With Credit 10 -year growth in Service Units
= $7,127,003 - $3,563,502
2,679 SU
= $1,330 / S
3 -10
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
City of North Richland Hills
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee with Financin Costs
Total Capital Improvement Costs
Financing Costs
Engineering
Administration, Audit, and Accounting
Total Eligible Costs
Total Water Impact Fee Credit (50 %)
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
$1,637,664
$556,279
$86,500
$90,000
$2,370,443
$1,185,221
The total eligible cost associated with the existing and proposed water system
improvements to meet projected growth over the next ten years is $2,370,443.
The increase in the number of service units due to growth over the next ten years
is projected as 2,501 service units.
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs - Credit
With Credit 10 -year growth in Service Units
$2,370,443 - $1,185,221
2,501 SU
= $474 / SU
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee without Financing Costs:
Total Capital Improvement Costs $1,637,664
Engineering $86,500
Administration, Audit, and Accounting $90,000
Total Eligible Costs $1,814,164
Total Water Impact Fee Credit (50 %) $907,082
The total eligible cost associated with the existing and proposed water system
improvements to meet projected growth over the next ten years is $1,814,164.
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee = Total Eligible Costs - Credit
With Credit 10 -year growth in Service Units
$1,814,164 - $907,082
2,501 SU
= $363 / SU
3 -1
FORT%bRTH City of Fort Worth
Exhibit D
Capital Improvements
Plan
Water Facilities
Final Report
May 6, 2009
Report Prepared By:
RED
CONSULTING
Table of Contents
Contents
1.1. Introduction ...............................................................................
............................... D -1
1.2. Capacity Criteria ........................................................................
............................... D -1
1.2.1. General ......................................................................
............................... D -1
1.2.2. Raw Water Sources and Transmission .......................
............................... D -1
1.2.3. Water Treatment Plants ..............................................
............................... D -3
1.2.4. Pump Stations ............................................................
............................... D -3
1.2.5. Storage Tanks ............................................................
............................... D -5
1.3. Eligible Facilities ........................................................................
............................... D -5
1.4. Growth Related CIP ..................................................................
............................... D-6
1.4.1. Water Treatment Plants ..............................................
............................... D-6
1.4.2. Pump Stations ............................................................
............................... D-8
1.4.3. Storage Tanks ............................................................
............................... D -9
1.4.4. Engineering Studies ...................................................
............................... D -9
1.5. Service Units ........................................................................... ...............................
D -12
1.6. Impact Fee Calculations .......................................................... ...............................
D -15
List of Tables
Table D -1. 2009 -2019 Growth Related CIP .................................................
...........................D -12
Table D -2. AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors ........................................ ...............................
D -13
Table D -3. Development of 2009 Population and Employment per Equivalent 5/8" x 3/4" Meter
.............................................................................................................. ...............................
D -14
Table D-4. Proposed Water Impact Fees ................................................ ...............................
D -16
List of Figures
Figure D -1: Existing Water Facilities ...................................................... ...............................
D -17
Figure D -2: Proposed Water Facilities ................................................... ...............................
D -18
Figure D -3: Water Treatment Plant Expansion Schedule ....................... ...............................
D -19
Figure D -4: Pump Station Allocation ...................................................... ...............................
D -20
Figure D -5: Storage Tank Allocation ...................................................... ...............................
D -21
Appendices
A. Water CIP Projects
B. Water Pumping Capabilities
C. CIP for 2009 -2019
D. Water Meters
• •; C)NSU Fort Worth Water Department
•• C01�1SULTING Capital Improvements Plan
r4)
i'V
„�,s „„ ,. Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
1.1. Introduction
In accordance with Texas Local Government Code (TLGC), Chapter 395, the City of
Fort Worth has commissioned Red Oak Consulting, to conduct an Impact Fee Study.
This report establishes the engineering basis for the fee schedule, updating the previous
study completed in 2004.
Impact fees provide the City of Fort Worth a mechanism for recouping the cost
associated with expanding the municipal water system to accommodate growth in the
service area. The City of Fort Worth owns and operates an infrastructure intensive
system comprised of treatment facilities, pumping stations, storage facilities, and
pipelines that are continuously improved and expanded. The schedule for future
investment in the water system is known as the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The
CIP was updated as a part of this study with capital project scope and cost provided by
previously commissioned master planning documents and input from Fort Worth Water
Department staff.
The report describes the basis for establishing which City of Fort Worth water facilities
are eligible to be included in the impact fee analysis. Next, the criteria for measuring
infrastructure capacity are explained for each infrastructure type. Finally, the additional
facilities required to accommodate growth during the study period are summarized.
1.2. Capacity Criteria
1.2.1. General
This section of the study discusses the capacity of those facilities that are eligible for
inclusion in the calculation of the impact fee. The only capacities that are considered are
the increases in capacities due to growth during the study period of 2009 through 2019.
The following sections describe those increases in capacities for the water treatment
plants, plump stations and storage tanks that were considered for inclusion in the
calculation of the wastewater impact fee.
1.2.2. Raw Water Sources and Transmission
The City obtains the majority of its raw water supply from the Tarrant Regional Water
District (TRWD), with the balance supplied by the City's permitted capacity at Lake
Worth and the Corps of Engineers (COE) permitted capacity at Lake Benbrook. The
City's supply from TRWD is per a long term contract, with no contractual limits on the
water withdrawn from the Richland Chambers and Cedar Creek Reservoirs, subject to the
TRWD limits. The current water rights for the City are as follows:
IEBDAK Fort Worth Water Department,
• •• CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D -1
o "IsIoN or ,,�o , „a„t Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
TRWD Allocated to Fort Worth
Source
Diversion
(mgd)
Normal
Flow (mgd)
Mild Drought
Flow (mgd)
West Fork
142.374
89.207
41.035
Lake Worth (Fort Worth Permit)
-
10.832
10.832
Lake Benbrook (COE Contract)
64.675
0.609
0.609
Richland Chambers Reservoir
182.874
No Limit
No Limit
Cedar Creek Reservoir
153.882 1
No Limit
No Limit
Through a series of pump stations, the TRWD has implemented improvements to allow
water from the Richland Chambers and Cedar Creek Reservoirs to flow to Lake
Benbrook. The blended water can then be pumped back to Rolling Hills Water
Treatment Plant ( RHWTP) and North Holly Water Treatment Plant (NHWTP) /South
Holly Water Treatment Plant ( SHWTP). The TRWD is in the process of implementing
improvements to tie Lake Benbrook to Eagle Mountain Lake, which should be complete
in 2008.
The existing raw water supply facilities are shown as follows:
Unit
Capacity
Eagle Mountain Intake
66 mgd
Eagle Mountain Pump Station and Pipeline
105 mgd*
Lake Worth Intake and Pipeline
127 mgd
Clear Fork Pump Station
90 mgd*
Cedar Creek System
138 mgd*
Richland Chambers System
116 mgd*
*Indicates firm capacity with largest pump out of service.
The NHWTP, SHWTP, and RHWTP have been in use for some time and therefore are
not associated with an expansion capacity. An expansion of the Eagle Mountain Water
Treatment Plant (EMWTP) intake is associated with expansion capacity. The capacity
associated with the raw water facilities is calculated based on the water treatment plant
criteria. Therefore the same criteria are used for both raw water facilities and water
treatment plants, with the criteria explained in detail below.
�•; CONSULTING Cap Worth Water Department � ❑
• • •' COI�ISULTING Capital Improvements Plan D_2
DIVISION „...0 „w „•„,E Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
1.2.3. Water Treatment Plants
The design criteria for water treatment plants are based on the maximum day demand.
The 2004 Water System Master Plan defined maximum day demand as 2.26 times the
average day demand, per historical data.
The maximum day demand computation per capita was calculated as follows:
MAX = AVG X Factor
Where MAX = Maximum day consumption per capita
AVG = Average day consumption per capita = 206
Factor = Max day / Average day = 2.26
MAX = 206 X 2.26 = 465.6 gallons per capita per day (gpcd)
For the City of Fort Worth, the 2009 population given in the Land Use Assumptions
report, times the maximum day criteria of 466 gpcd provides the following design
demand for water treatment:
Max Day Demand = 466 gpcd X 722,722 population
Max Day Demand = 337 mgd
The year 2019 Max Day Demand, using the above formula would be as follows:
Max Day Demand = 466 gpcd X 947,956 population
Max Day Demand = 442 mgd
The wholesale customer demand was provided by the wholesale customers as part of the
wholesale customer surveys. The 2009 Maximum Day Demand for wholesale customers
is 138 mgd and the 2019 Maximum Day Demand for the wholesale customers is 178
mgd.
The total 2009 Maximum Day Demand for Fort Worth and its wholesale customers is
475 mgd (337 + 138 mgd). The total 2019 Maximum Day Demand for Fort Worth and
its wholesale customers is 620 mgd (442 +178 mgd).
The incremental demand related to treatment capacity during the study period is therefore
145 mgd (620 mgd — 475 mgd). This is greater than 14 mgd increase in demand per year
over the study period.
1.2.4. Pump Stations
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) requires pump station
capacity to be a minimum of 0.6 gallons per minute (gpm) per connection, provided the
• : UBDS Fort Worth Water Department FORTW RUTH
• �
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D3
„V,,,,„ Of •ALCOLM „a,,, Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
City's system has an elevated storage capacity exceeding 200 gallons per connection
(which it does).
Pump Capacity = 0.6 gpm/connection X Number of Connections X 24 hrs /day
X 60 min/hr
= 0.6 gpm X 355,205 connections X 24 hrs /day X 60 min/hr
= 307 mgd
The pumping capacity requirement is actually higher than this, due to the repumping
characteristics of the City's system. Also, the state requirements are a minimum value,
with the City's own system requirements for pressure dictating the correct pumping
capacity. The City's formula calculates the pumping capacity required based on the
greater of the peak hour flow or the maximum day flow plus fire flow. The 2009
pumping capacity that would be required would be as follows:
Pump Capacity = Max Day X Peak Hour Factor
= 475 mgd X 1.57
= 746 mgd
Where:
Max Day = System Maximum Day Flow (from previous section)
Peak Hour Factor = Peak Hour /Max Day Factor from Master Plan
Or, based on max day plus fire flow:
Pump Capacity
Where:
= Max Day + Fire Flow
Fire flow for the City is based on 4,000 gpm per pressure plane:
Fire Flow = 4,000 gpm X 60 minutes /hour X 24 hour /day X 13 pressure planes
= 75 mgd
Pump Capacity = 475 mgd + 75 mgd
= 550 mgd
The Pump Capacity calculation which provides the maximum required capacity is the one
that uses the peak hour factor, resulting in a required pumping capacity for 2009 of 738
mgd. This calculation is used to determine the required pumping capacity for 2019.
Pump Capacity = 620 mgd X 1.57
= 973 mgd
R Fort Worth Water Department �_� UH
�� •
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D_4
„—,,,, 01 •ALCOLM ,,,N,E Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
The calculated incremental pumping capacity demand is therefore 227 mgd (973 mgd —
746 mgd) for the required level of service for the study period of 2009 to 2019.
1.2.5. Storage Tanks
The TCEQ criteria for water system design states that 200 gallons per connection of total
storage and 100 gallons per connection of elevated storage is required. The City uses
these criteria to determine the required storage capacity to serve its retail customers as
most of its wholesale customers have their own storage capacity. The calculation of the
storage requirement is as follows:
2009 Total = 200 gal/connection x 215,963 connections = 43.2 MG
Elevated = 100 gal/connection x 215,963 connections = 21.6 MG
2019 Total = 200 gal/connection x 283,173 connections = 56.6 MG
Elevated = 100 gaUconnection x 283,173 connections= 28.3 MG
The TCEQ requirements are a minimum, with the City adopting a different formula to
determine their storage requirements. The City has a total storage capacity presently of
120.7 MG (75.7 MG in the distribution system and 45 MG at the water treatment plants)
and 16.5 MG of elevated storage. The City uses more stringent design criteria, from the
2004 Water System Master Plan, with the calculation as follows:
Total Storage = Population X (1 connection/3 persons) X
(City Only) (400 gal/connection)
The calculation of the required total storage was made net of wholesale storage
requirements, because some wholesale customers have their own storage. Therefore, the
consumption for the City customers was used to determine the total storage requirements.
2009 Total Storage = 722,722 X (1/3) X 400 gal = 96.4 MG
2019 Total Storage = 947,956 X (1/3) X 400 gal = 126.4 MG
Thus, the need for total storage during the study period is equal to 96.4 MG in 2009 and
126.4 MG in 2019. An incremental demand of 30.0 MG was calculated (126.4 MG -
96.4 MG).
1.3. Eligible Facilities
This section establishes the types of City of Fort Worth water facilities that are eligible
for inclusion in the calculation of the impact fee. Projects included in the CIP can serve
to rehabilitate and renew the system, enhance the system to improve efficiency and meet
regulatory requirements, increase the system capacity, or achieve a combination of these
objectives. Only those projects warranted by capacity issues derived from growth
occurring during the study period (2009 to 2019) can be included in the impact fee
CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department FO�H ❑
''• Capital Improvements Plan D -5
• •• CONSULTING
„,,,„„„ , „,«,l„ „ „ „„ Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
calculation. Additionally, projects are excluded from the impact fee calculation if the
costs cannot be accurately delineated of if alternate mechanisms for cost recovery are in
place.
Raw Water is obtained from the Tarrant Regional Water District (TRWD) and with costs
to the City of Fort Worth the tied to usage, which is effectively captured in user rates.
Financing costs associated with the water system have been excluded due to the dynamic
nature of the financial markets, and the uncertainty this introduces, consistent with
previous City of Fort Worth impact fee studies.
Drinking water transmission mains and distribution piping have been excluded from this
study due to alternate cost recovery mechanisms in place, consistent with the previous
impact fee study.
Facilities included in the impact fee study are raw water supply and transmission, water
treatment facilities, pump stations, storage facilities, reclaimed water facilities, and
engineering studies.
Figures D -1 and D -2, showing existing and proposed facilities, respectively, are included
at the end of this section.
Appendix A describes each Water CIP project for the 2009 -2019 planning period. The
purpose of each project, the portion that is allocated to growth and the current status is
also included.
1.4. Growth Related CIP
1.4.1. Water Treatment Plants
The existing water treatment capacity is 485 mgd. Section 1.2.3 calculations presented a
maximum day demand in 2009 of 475 mgd, increasing to 620 mgd by 2019. This results
in an incremental demand of 145 mgd. The current capacity of the treatment plants is
greater than the 475 mgd required in 2009. Thus, 10 mgd (485 mgd — 475 mgd) of the
incremental demand has already been satisfied. Figure D -3 presents the water treatment
demand, as well as the treatment capacity and requirements during the study period. The
2004 Water System Master Plan presents maximum day demands for the years 2002 to
2025. The allocation of capital costs during the study period was made as follows:
1. The recent expansion of the Eagle Mountain WTP from 70 mgd to 105 mgd
provides capacity in excess of the 2009 maximum day demand. The excess
capacity will be used to serve future customers. The current capacity of all of the
water treatment plant is 485 mgd, and the 2009 maximum day demand is 475
• R Fort Worth Water Department Fo ❑
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D -6
A „v,,,,• „ —COL„ ,,,,,E Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
mgd. Thus, 10 mgd (485 mgd — 475 mgd) of the 35 mgd expansion of EMWTP
will be used to serve future customers.
Growth- related allocation = 10 mgd/35 mgd = 29 %.
Study period allocation = (35 mgd — 25 mgd) = 10 mgd <145 mgd.
Remaining incremental demand = 145 mgd — 10 mgd = 135 mgd.
% Allocated for Study Period =100% X 29% = 29 %.
2. The South Holly WTP Pump Station Improvements and Expansion Project (180
mgd to 200 mgd) will be required during the study period. Approximately 10%
of this project is considered to be growth- related because the pump station will be
upsized from 180 mgd to 200 mgd as part of the improvements project. The
expansion of SHWTP will begin in 2009. The SHWTP expansion should be
allocated against the remaining system -wide additional capacity requirement of
135 mgd.
Growth- related allocation = (200 mgd — 180 mgd) / 200 mgd = 10%
Study period allocation = (200 mgd — 180 mgd) = 20 mgd < 135 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 135 mgd — 20 mgd = 115 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100% X 10 % = 10%
3. The Westside WTP will be needed during the study period by 2011. This project
will increase the plant capacity by 15 mgd. The WSWTP should be allocated
against the remaining system -wide additional capacity requirement of 115 mgd.
Study period allocation = (15 mgd — 0 mgd) = 15 mgd < 115 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 115 mgd — 15 mgd = 100 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100%
4. The RHWTP Phase IV expansion from 200 mgd to 250 mgd will be needed
during the study period. The RHWTP Phase IV expansion should be allocated
against the remaining system -wide additional capacity requirement of 100 mgd.
Study period allocation = (250 mgd — 200 mgd) = 50 mgd < 100 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 100 mgd — 50 mgd = 50 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100%
5. Additional WSWTP Membrane Filters (15 mgd to 20 mgd) will be needed during
the study period. The membrane filters should be allocated against the system-
wide additional capacity requirement of 50 mgd.
Study period allocation = (20 mgd — 15 mgd) = 5 mgd < 50 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 50 mgd — 5 mgd = 45 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100%
• • REDDAK Fort Worth Water Department ��
.�•
• ••
CONSULT __ Capital Improvements Plan D_7
„.,s,,, „ •ALCOLY „a�„ Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
6. EMWTP Expansion from 105 mgd to 140 mgd will be needed during the study
period to meet the required maximum day demand. The expansion should be
allocated against the system -wide additional capacity requirement of 45 mgd.
Study period allocation = (140 mgd — 105 mgd) = 35 mgd < 45 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 45 mgd — 35 mgd = 10 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100%
Additional WSWTP Membrane Filters (20 mgd to 25 mgd) will be needed during
the study period. The membrane filters should be allocated against the system-
wide additional capacity requirement of 10 mgd.
Study period allocation = (25 mgd — 20 mgd) = 5 mgd < 10 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 10 mgd — 5 mgd = 5 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period =100%
8. Additional WSWTP Membrane Filters (25 mgd to 30 mgd) will be needed during
the study period. The membrane filters should be allocated against the system-
wide additional capacity requirement of 5 mgd.
Study period allocation = (30 mgd — 25 mgd) = 5 mgd = 5 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 5 mgd — 5 mgd = 0 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period = 5 mgd / 5 mgd =100%
1.4.2. Pump Stations
While it is more accurate to calculate pump station requirements and demand on a
pressure zone basis, the Land Use Assumptions were done for the system as a whole,
with not enough data to determine pressure zone requirements. System wide calculation
tends to provide a conservative demand, in that much of the water is repumped between
pressure zones. The system -wide demand was used for this study.
In section 1.2.4, the demand for pump station capacity increased from 746 mgd in 2009
to 973 mgd in 2019. This incremental demand of 227 mgd is required to serve growth.
Therefore, the calculation of the study period capacity percentage is as follows:
Study Period = Total New Pumping Required
Capacity of Proposed Pumping Projects
% Allocation to Study Period = 227 med
45 mgd > 100%
The remainder of the required pump station capacity is met from existing capacity.
Figure D -4 presents a graphical interpretation of the projects included and those
attributed to future growth.
• CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department F0 ❑
' ' • : Capital Improvements Plan p_g
• • CONSULTING
• DIVISION Of MALCOLM YIN ,E Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
1.4.3. Storage Tanks
The City currently has 120.7 MG of total storage. The total incremental capacity
required during the study period is 30 MG (126.4 MG — 96.4 MG), which was calculated
in Section 1.2.5. There is a total of 33 MG in storage capacity identified in the CIP. For
the purpose of allocating the costs of additional storage between study period customers,
and customers beyond the study period, the following calculations were made:
Study Period = Total New Storage Required
Capacity of Proposed Storage Projects
% Allocation to Study Period = 30 MG
33 MG > 90.9%
The remaining 9.1 % of the pump station costs are allocated to the period beyond the
study period. Figure D -5 presents a graphical interpretation of the amount of projects
included and those attributed to future growth.
1.4.4. Engineering Studies
There are four studies which have been included in the calculation of the water impact
fees. The studies are as follows:
1. 1998 Water Facilities Plan — The Water Facilities Plan updated the water
treatment plant aspects of the 1989 Master Plan for the period of 1998 through
2018. The Water Facilities Plan also made recommendations concerning
reliability and regulatory improvements. Eleven years of the twenty year study
was for existing customers, and nine years of the twenty year study was for the
study period. The calculation of the allocation was as follows:
Existing Customers = 11/20 = 55%
Study Period = 9/20 = 45%
Beyond Study Period = 0/20 = 0%
% Allocation for Study Period = 45%
2. 2004 Water System Master Plan — The 1989 Water System Master Plan was
updated, including a comprehensive projection of the facilities required from the
year 2004 through 2023. This plan will be updated again in 2014. Therefore, five
years of the ten -year life of the plan is for existing customers, and the remaining
five years are for the study period.
Existing Customers = 5110 = 50%
Study Period = 5110 = 50%
Beyond Study Period = 0 /10 = 0%
% Allocation for Study Period = 50%
•• �� CEI3DAIC Fort Worth Water Department
• •• CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan p_g
„ „a Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
3. 2014 Water System Master Plan — The 2004 Water System Master Plan will be
updated, including a comprehensive projection of the facilities required from the
year 2014 through 2033. This plan will be updated again in 2024. Therefore, five
years of the ten -year life of the plan is for the study period, and the remaining five
years are for the period beyond the study period.
Existing Customers = 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period = 5110 = 50%
Beyond Study Period = 5110 = 50%
% Allocation for Study Period = 50%
4. 2004 Impact Fee Study — The 2004 Impact Fee Study provides impact fees for
the study period 2004 through 2014. Therefore, five years of the ten -year study
period for the existing customers, and the remaining five years are for the study
period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee update and the other half
is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 5110 = 50%
Study Period = 5110 = 50%
Beyond Study Period = 0 /10 = 0%
% Allocation for Study Period = 50%
5. 2009 Impact Fee Study — The 2009 Impact Fee Study provided impact fees for
the study period 2009 through 2019. Therefore, 100% of the study is allocated to
the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee update and the
other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period = 10/10 = 100%
Beyond Study Period = 0 /10 = 0%
% Allocation for Study Period = 100%
6. 2012 Impact Fee Study — Although the requirement is to conduct an impact fee
study every five years, the City would like to update the study every three years.
The 2012 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees for the study period 2012
through 2022. Therefore, seven years of the ten -year study period are allocated to
the study period, and the remaining three years are for the period beyond the
study period. One half to the study is for the water impact fee updated and the
other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period = 7/10 = 70%
Beyond Study Period = 3/10 = 30%
% Allocation for Study Period = 70%
CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department F_� U ❑
• • •' CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D -10
•,„,,,,„ . Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
7. 2015 Impact Fee Study — The 2015 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees
for the study period 2015 through 2025. Therefore, four years of the ten -year
study period are allocated to the study period, and the remaining six years are for
the period beyond the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact
fee update and the other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period = 4/10 = 40%
Beyond Study Period = 6/10 = 60%
% Allocation for Study Period = 40%
8. 2018 Impact Fee Study — The 2018 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees
for the study period 2018 through 2028. Therefore, one year of the ten -year study
period are allocated to the study period, and the remaining nine years are for the
period beyond the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee
update and the other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0/10 = 0%
Study Period = 1 /10 = 10%
Beyond Study Period = 9/10 = 90%
% Allocation for Study Period =10%
Table D -1 summarizes the growth related costs of the eligible facilities. Appendix C
shows the detail development of the costs and capacities of the eligible facilities.
•••� REIN Fort Worth Water Department 1b ❑
IS • ••
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D -11
♦ DIVISION Or N.1OD11 .INNIE Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
Table D -1.
2009 -2019 Growth Related CIP
Water Facility
Total
Growth
Related Cost
Capacity
Added
from CIP
Capacity Needed
During 2009 -2019
2009 -2019
Growth
Related Cost
Amount
Percent of
Total CIP
Raw Water
22,507,000
240 mgd
145 mgd
60.4%
11,663,000
Treatment Plant
425,569,000
235 mgd
145 mgd
61.7%
248,391,000
Pump Station
13,766,000
45 mgd
227 mgd
100.0%
13,766,000
Storage Tanks
49,416,000
33 MG
30 MG
90.9%
44,919,000
Engineering Studies
3,601,000
65.2%
2,460,000
Total
321,199,000
1.5. Service Units
The differentiated costs between customer types are allocated through the application of
the equivalent meter concept. Since the 5/8" x 3/4" water meter is the most frequently
used meter by the residential customer, a factor has been calculated to relate the
capacities of other meter sizes to the 5/8" x 3/4" meter capacity. Table D -2 presents the
factors developed using capacity information from the American Water Works
Association (AWWA) Standard C700 -02, Cold -Water Meters — Displacement Type,
Bronze Main Case and AWWA Standard C701 -07, Cold -Water Meters — Turbine Type,
for Customer Service.
REEMjt Fort Worth Water Department FORT WORTH ❑
G Capital Improvements Plan D -12
...• co1�t71.1. - -
. - . —ma ■, ■r,,■ ■�■ Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
Table D -2.
AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors
Meter Size
5/8" x 3/4" Equivalency
Factor
5/8" x 5/8" and 5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
ill
2.50
1-1/2"
5.00
2"
8.00
3"
21.75
4"
37.50
6"
80.00
8"
140.00
10"
210.00
Appendix D contains the number of water meters for residential and non - residential
customers by meter size for the City as well as for the wholesale customers who provided
this information to Red Oak. The number of equivalent meters is also calculated for the
City and wholesale customers.
The next calculation step determines population per residential meter and employment
per non - residential meter. Table D -3 summarizes this calculation for the City of Fort
Worth and wholesale customers using 2009 information.
;*- REHDkK Fort Worth Water Department Fl) ❑
;;• COIq1;IJI.TIIVG Capital Improvements Plan D -13
Amr....,,�Nm. Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
Table D -3.
Development of 2009 Population and Employment per Equivalent 5/8" x 3/4"
Meter
Description
Residential
Non - residential
City of Fort Worth:
Number of Equivalent Meters
238,196
144,457
Population / Employment
722,722
625,215
Population / Employment per
Equivalent Meter
3.03
4.33
Wholesale Customers:
Number of Equivalent Meters
105,710
35,539
Population / Employment
294,303
100,788
Population / Employment per
Equivalent Meter
2.78
2.84
Red Oak did not receive meter count information from eight of Fort Worth's wholesale
water customers. The number of equivalent meters used to calculate the wholesale
customers' population / employment per equivalent meter in Table D -3 is the total
number of equivalent meters served by Fort Worth for those wholesale customers who
responded to the Red Oak survey with their meter count information. In order to more
accurately estimate the population / employment per equivalent meter, Red Oak divided
the number of equivalent meters by the sum of population or employment served by Fort
Worth for those wholesale customers who provided their meter count information.
The projected increase in equivalent meters between 2009 and 2019 uses the ratios in
Table D -3 and the population and employment projections for 2009 and 2019 in Exhibit
A, Water Land Use Assumptions report. The calculation is shown below. Because no
meter count information is available to calculate the number of equivalent meters for the
unincorporated service area, the calculation for the unincorporated service area uses the
weighted average of population and employment per equivalent meter for the City and
wholesale customers.
City of Fort Worth
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
_ (947,956 — 722,722) / 3.03
= 74,335
• ; � � U Fort Worth Water Department FOR_ TT W�O�RTH ❑
• "' • G�]ITI1vG Capital Improvements Plan D -14
r - • RI.I�IR. Y .R{RRLR I�RRIR Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
= (820,263 — 625,215) / 4.33
= 45,046
Wholesale Customers
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
= (427,225 — 349,950) / 2.78
= 27,797
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
= (201,145 — 146,667) / 2.84
= 19,182
Unincorporated Area
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
= (73,884 — 24,370) / 2.96
= 16,728
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
= (18,422 — 9,801) / 4.03
= 2,139
Increase in Equivalent Meters = 185,227
1.6. Impact Fee Calculations
Impact fees are the quotient of the total cost of expansion for the study period from Table
D -1 divided by the increase in equivalent meters from Section 1.5. This fee equals the
maximum water impact fee for a 5/8" x 3/4" water meter size.
Maximum Water Impact Fee = Cost of Expansion / Increase in Equivalent Meters
= $321,199,000 / 185,227
= $1,734 per 5/8" x 3/4" equivalent meter
The water impact fees for meters other than 5/8" x 3/4" are the product of fee per 5/8" x
3/4" equivalent meter multiplied by the respective equivalent meter factor from Table D-
2. The maximum allowable water impact fees are provided in Table D -4, as well as the
resulting impact fee at a 50% collection rate.
• ;�� f,, Fort Worth Water Department Fo i ❑
;;• CC)I.TII`1G Capital Improvements Plan D -15
Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
Table D-4.
Proposed Water Impact Fees
Meter Size
5/8 x 3/4"
Equivalency
Factor
Maximum Allowable
Impact Fee
Proposed Impact
Fee (Collected at
50 %)
5/8" x 5/8" and
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
$ 1,734
$ 867
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
$ 2,601
$ 1,300
1"
2.50
$ 4,335
$ 2,167
1 -1/2"
5.00
$ 8,670
$ 4,335
2"
8.00
$ 13,872
$ 6,936
3"
21.75
$ 37,715
$ 18,857
4"
37.50
$ 65,025
$ 32,512
6"
80.00
$138,720
$ 69,360
8"
140.00
$ 242,760
$ 121,380
10"
210.00
$ 364,140
$ 182,070
••� ' fK Fort Worth Water Department Fo, >rr�H ❑
•'
• �: QO JLTI
l�1SCIVG Capital Improvements Plan D -16
■ wnn•■ r ■u■ ■u Ron.. Water Facilities
e.
t
r
Sendera Ranch 5MG NS2 GST and
Ps NS4 Pump Station
Avondale Haslet 2.5MG NS
Elevated Tank
F
� �r
Caylor Road Reservoir
Bradley Elevated Tank
Ps North Beach Reservoir & Pump Station
\Lago Vista NS4 Booster Pump Station
Eagle Mountain
Raw Water e Lake Country Elevated Tank
--1� -� t J ,r
Pump Station WTP agle Mountain Water Treatment Plant -
Ps antrell- Sansom Pump Station
Jenkins Heights Elevated Tank
Lake Worth Raw Ps Lake Worth T
Water Intakes �Northe Reservoir & Fleetwood Reservoir &Pump Station
Northwwes st Elevated Tank
P
Westside Pump Northside Pump Station
p South Holly Water Treatment Plant
Station Ps Randol Mill Reservoir & Pump Station
Calmorevated Tank
Westland Reservoir & La
Chapel Creek Pump Station Meadowbrook Elevated Tank
P
Stagecoach Reservoir & � Q— Eastside Pump Station
mp Station Ps e Mork Raw Water Pump Xor;Eastwood n Como Reservoir & Edwards Ranch Pump S Elevated Tank
Ish Ranch Pump Station Ps �Tmberline Elevated Tank
Ground Storage Tank
Seminary Elevated Tank —1 Southside Reservoir & Pump Station
Alta Mesa Reservoir & W®-- Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant
Pump Station
Armstrong Ranch �� Russom Ranch Pump Station
Elevated Tank
Sun Country Elevated Tank �McCart SS2 5MG Tank & SS3 Pump Station
--rE�
LEGEND
M
Raw Water Supply
®
Treatment Facilities
Ps I
Pumping Station
0
Storage Tank
City of Fort Worth
3 1.5 0 3
Miles
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
Existing Water
Facility Map
March 2009
FIGURE D -1
I
Llano
Wt
N
FM 407 2MG 3 Tank
t;
q
Tradition 1 MG NS3 ReservoirTradition 1 MG N se IT I
Proposed 1 MG NS4 Elevated Tank =•�
pg estside Water Treatment Rta`nt
Froposed 5 MGD WS4 Pump Stati
IH2O WS S Ph 1V
a +'r
ump tatron ase A
AledNVG WS5 Tank<Phas A
® `proposed WS2 Res voir Phpase II
Tiger 1.5MG WS3 Tank
Kelly 1.51VIG VQW Tank Dick Price 1 MG SS2 Tank
Stewart Feltz SS4 Pump Station •
0 Circle R 1.51VIG SS3 Tank
Meadow Oaks SS3 Pump StationWinding Oak 2.51VIG SS2 Tank
FM 2331 SS3 Pump Station a
ky SS4 Pump Station
Ps WM 1019 1.5MG SS4 Tank
Southwest Water Treatment Plant Trail Tree 1 MG SS2 Tank
LEGEND .
® Pumping Station
® Storage Tank
Treatment Facility 3 1.5 0 3
Miles
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
City of Fort Worth Proposed Water Facilites March 2009
Map FIGURE D -2
R
t
'V
V 1
i
.N
M Q.
D W
W �
L
�a
LL a..,
E
`L
r
L
fa
'O
00
E
O
N
LO
S
JaII14
ueJ
wa
dIM
aP!SlsaV
.a
E
W
00
�
E
O
�
7
E
x
(pSu
ot7t
uois
edx
d1M
UlejL
now
aloe
+;
E
U
GJ
0
i
(PS
OZ)
Jall!
a
ueJ (
waV
I dl
ap!
lsa
�+
00
U
C
CL
O
lu
M
a
!0
O
H
( Aw
)SZ)
Joisu
2dx3
I ase
4d d
M SIN
2L
1I10a
a
ee
E
0
N
M
pew
SL) am
c
p!sls
M
(I
2w
OZ)
o!su
dx3 eue
u
^Jwl
dd.L
II
Hy
E
Ln
M
0
N
00
ei
O
N
N
rl
O
N
LD
ei
O
N
M
0
N
-:T w
O Lu
N }
M
ei
O
N
N
rl
0
N
ei
e-I
0
N
0
0
N
01
O
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N
M N ri O D1 00 N Co M q:t M N ri O 01 Co N
LD O W LD M M M M M M M M M M lzr -01 d
49W
Figure D -4
Pump Station Allocation
250 - L
200
150
100
45 MGD
50
100%
Allocated for
Study Period
0
Capacity of Proposed Incremental Demand
Projects
Figure D -5
Storage Tank Allocation
33 MG
35
9.1%
30 MG
Allocated for
Future
30
Growth
25 -
20
90.9%
15
Allocated for
Study Period
10
5
i
0
Capacity of Proposed Projects
Incremental Demand
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
APPENDIX A: Water CIP Projects
MBDAK Fort Worth Water Department lb Rb
• �� • CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan `--' ` _��` =' D -22
• —1510M ar M.LCO- axerc Water Facilities
Appendix A
WATER CIP PROJECTS
RAW WATER SUPPLY
Project Title: Raw Water Pipeline to Westside Water Treatment Plant (W3 -3A)
Description: Design and construction of a raw water line to the proposed Westside Water
Treatment Plant.
Purpose: A new water treatment plant is recommended to meet the demands in the
northwest part of the City. This project was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period as it is required to
treat the projected demand of 616 mgd in 2019.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Clear Fork Raw Water Pump Station Parallel Pipeline to Holly WTP
Description: Design and construction of an additional raw water pipeline from the Clear Fork
Trinity River Pump Station to the Holly WTP.
Purpose: Provide an additional raw water line to provide additional raw water supplies.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period, as it is required to
bring an additional 50 mgd of raw water to the Holly WTP.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Expand Second Eagle Mountain Raw Water Pump Station from 35 mgd to 70 mgd (140
mgd total capacity)
Description: Design and construction of additional pumping capacity in the Second Eagle
Mountain Raw Water Pump Station.
Purpose: Provide additional raw water supplies to the Eagle Mountain Water Treatment
Plant to a capacity of 140 mgd.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth as it is required to bring the total
treatment capacity of the Eagle Mountain WTP to 140 mgd. However, only an
additional 26 mgd is needed during the study period so 74.3% is allocated to the
study period and the remaining 25.7% is allocated to the period beyond the
study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Southwest Water Treatment Plant Raw Water Line
Description: Design and construction of a new raw water line to the proposed Southwest
WTP.
Purpose: A new water treatment plant is recommended to meet the demands in the
southwest part of the City. This project was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth as it is required to bring the treatment
capacity up to the projected demand in 2020. However, this additional raw
water capacity is not required during the study period so 0% is allocated to the
study period and 100% is allocated to the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Expand Second Eagle Mountain Raw Water Pump Station from 70 mgd to 140 mgd
(210 mgd total capacity)
Description: Design and construction of additional pumping capacity in the Second Eagle
Mountain Raw Water Pump Station.
Purpose: Provide additional raw water supplies to the Eagle Mountain Water Treatment
Plant to a capacity of 210 mgd.
Allocation: This project was allocated 100% to growth , as it is required to bring the total
treatment capacity of the Eagle Mountain WTP to 210 mgd. However, this
additional raw water capacity is not required during the study period so 0% is
allocated to the study period and 100% is allocated to the period beyond the
study period.
Status: Planning Stage
WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
Project Title: Eagle Mountain WTP Expansion from 70 mgd to 105 mgd — High Service Pump Station
(N2 -5A)
Description: Additional high service pump station capacity as part of the Eagle Mountain
WTP Expansion to 105 mgd.
Purpose: Provide additional pumping capacity at Eagle Mountain WTP. This project was
recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, approximately 20 mgd of
the 35 mgd expansion is allocated to existing customers (57.1 %). The remaining
capacity will be used by future customers during the study period so 42.9% is
allocated to growth in the study period.
Status: Constructed
Project Title: Eagle Mountain WTP Expansion from 70 mgd to 105 mgd (N2 -6A)
Description: Design and construction of the Eagle Mountain WTP expansions from 70 mgd to
105 mgd.
Purpose: Additional treatment capacity is required to meet the rapid growth and
increased demand in the northwest part of the city. This project was
recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, approximately 20 mgd of
the 35 mgd expansion is allocated to existing customers (57.1 %). The remaining
capacity will be used by future customers during the study period so 42.9% is
allocated to growth in the study period.
Status: Constructed
Project Title: Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant Expansion to 200 mgd, Phase V Chem — 40 mgd
(EXP -8)
Description: Design and construction of Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant expansion to
treat 200 mgd.
Purpose: Rolling Hills WTP was constructed in 1973 in two 40 mgd units and was doubled
to 160 mgd in 1983. It is recommended that the Rolling Hills WTP be increased
further to 200 mgd because of the rapid growth of the City's south and east
sides and projected water demand increase. This project was recommended in
the 1998 Water Facilities Plan. This project has been divided into 5 separate
Phases
Phase I includes the addition of the ozonation to the treatment process. This
improvement is not associated with growth and is allocated at 0 %.
Phase II includes improvements of the elevated tank and associated pumps to
backwash the filters. This improvement is not associated with growth and is
allocated at 0 %.
Phase III includes improvements to the filters, sedimentation basins and
flocculation basins. These improvements are associated with the 40 mgd
increase in treatment capacity.
Phase IV includes improvements to the high service pump stations at the plant.
These improvements are associated with the 40 mgd increase in treatment
capacity.
Phase V includes improvements to the chemical feed systems. This
improvement is not associated with growth and is allocated at 0 %.
Allocation: This project was allocated 100% to existing capacity, as it will not increase the
capacity available to future customers.
Status: Phases I -IV Complete. Phase V planning stage
Project Title: Eagle Mountain WTP 3.5 MG Clearwell
Description: Additional treated water clearwell storage at Eagle Mountain WTP.
Purpose: Provide additional treated water storage for peak flow demand pumping
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to existing capacity as it will not increase the
capacity available to future customers.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: South Holly Pump Station Improvements & Expansion
Description: The existing South Holly high service water pump station will be rehabilitated
and expanded.
Purpose: The pump station capacity will be expanded to provide additional pumping
capacity provided in the WTP expansion from 180 mgd to 200 mgd.
Allocation: The additional 20 mgd treatment plant capacity expansion increases the total
plant capacity by 11.1% to meet future water system demands. This project is
allocated 10% to growth in the study period and 90% for rehabilitation (serving
existing customers) because 20 mgd of the 200 mgd project will be available to
serve future customers.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Holly WTP — Ozone and Expansion
Description: The existing South Holly WTP primary disinfection system will be changed from
chloramines to ozone and the treatment plant capacity will be expanded.
Purpose: The WTP treatment capacity will be expanded from 180 mgd to 200 mgd.
Allocation: The additional 20 mgd treatment plant capacity expansion increases the total
plant capacity by 11.1% to meet future water system demands. This project is
allocated 10% to growth in the study period and 90% for rehabilitation (serving
existing customers) because 20 mgd of the 200 mgd project will be available to
serve future customers.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Westside Water Treatment Plant (W3 -15)
Description: Design and construction of a new membrane Westside Water Treatment Plant.
Purpose: A new water treatment plant is recommended to meet the demands in the
northwest part of the City. This project was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: The treatment plant will be expanded in stages by the installation of additional
membrane filter cartridges.
Phase I, 0 -15 mgd — 3 Filters
Phase II, 15 -20 mgd — 4 Filters
Phase III, 20 -25 mgd — 5 Filters
Phase IV, 25 -30 mgd — 6 Filters
Phases I through III of this project are allocated 100% to growth in the study
period, as it is required to treat the projected demand of 616 mgd in 2019.
Phase IV is allocated 20% to growth in the study period as 1 mgd of the 5 mgd
expansion is needed to meet the projected demand. The remaining 80% of
Phase IV is allocated to the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage Phase I
Project Title: Rolling Hills WTP Expansion from 200 mgd to 250 mgd (52 -7)
Description: Design and construction of Rolling Hills Water Treatment Plant expansion to
treat 250 mgd.
Purpose: It is recommended that the Rolling Hills WTP be increased further to 250 mgd
because of the rapid growth of the City's south and east sides and projected
water demand increase. This project was recommended in the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period, as it is required to
provide capacity to meet projected water demands in 2016.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Eagle Mountain WTP Expansion from 105 mgd to 140 mgd; Expand High Service Pump
Station (N2 -18A)
Description: Design and construction of Eagle Mountain Water Treatment Plant expansion to
treat 140 mgd.
Purpose: It is recommended that the Eagle Mountain WTP be increased further to 140
mgd because of the growth of the City's north side and Alliance Airport area,
and projected water demand increase. This project was recommended in the
2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period, as it is required to
provide capacity to meet projected water demands in 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Southwest WTP Phase 1(0 -15 mgd)
Description: Design and construction of a Southwest Water Treatment Plant.
Purpose: A new water treatment plant is recommended to meet the demands in the
southwest part of the City. This project was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth, as it is required to meet the projected
water demand in 2020. However this additional capacity is not required during
the study period so 0% is allocated to the study period and 100% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Eagle Mountain WTP Expansion from 140 mgd to 210 mgd, Expand High Service Pump
Station (N2 -20A)
Description: Design and construction of Eagle Mountain Water Treatment Plant expansion to
treat 210 mgd.
Purpose: It is recommended that the Eagle Mountain WTP be increased further to 210
mgd because of the growth of the City's north side and Alliance Airport area,
and projected water demand increase. This project was recommended in the
2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth, as it is required to provide capacity to
meet projected water demands in 2023. However this additional capacity is not
required during the study period so 0% is allocated to the study period and
100% is allocated to the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning
PUMP STATIONS
Project Title: Eastside Pump Station Improvements (E2 -1)
Description: Design and construction of a replacement Eastside Pump Station with an
expanded capacity from 35 to 50 mgd.
Purpose: A replacement pump station is necessary to provide additional pumping
capacity to the northeastern areas and redeveloping areas.
Allocation: The additional 15 mgd pump station capacity increases the total pump station
capacity by 42.9% to meet future water system demands. This project is
allocated 30% to growth in the study period and 70% for rehabilitation (serving
existing customers) because 15 mgd of the 50 mgd project will be available to
serve future customers.
Status: Design
Project Title: Westside V Pump Station with 3 mgd Capacity (W5 -1)
Description: Design and construction of a new Westside V Pump Station with a capacity of 3
mgd.
Purpose: A new pump station is necessary to address the projected new population
growth in this pressure plane. This project was recommended in the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project was allocated 100% to growth in the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: SSIV Pump Station at Sun County Tank (W4 -5)
Description: Design and construction of a new Southside IV Pump Station with a capacity of 3
mgd.
Purpose: A new pump station is necessary to address the projected new population
growth in this pressure plane. This project was recommended in the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project was allocated 100% to growth in the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Southside III P.S. on Retta Mansfield Rd (S3 -7)
Description: Design and construction of a new Southside III Pump Station with a capacity of 5
mgd.
Purpose: A new pump station is necessary to address the projected new population
growth in this pressure plane. This project was recommended in the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Westside IV Pump Station on Interstate 20 (W4 -3)
Description: Design and construction of a new Westside IV Pump Station with a capacity of 4
mgd.
Purpose: A new pump station is necessary to address the projected new population
growth in this pressure plane. This project was recommended in the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: Westside III Pump Station (W3 -12)
Description: Design and construction of a new Westside III Pump Station with a capacity of
15 mgd.
Purpose: A new pump station is necessary to address the projected new population
growth in this pressure plane. This project was recommended in the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth in the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
STORAGETANKS
Project Title: 2.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank on Cooks Lane (E2 -3)
Description: Design and construction of a 2.0 MG elevated storage tank for the Eastside II
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Eastside II Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 3 MG Ground Storage Tank on IH -20 (W3 -4)
Description: Design and construction of a 3 MG ground storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed. This
improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank on Peden Road (N4 -2)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.0 MG elevated storage tank for the Northside IV
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Northside IV Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1.0 MG WSIV Elevated Storage Tank (W4 -6)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.0 MG elevated storage tank for the Westside IV
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Westside IV Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1 MG SS III elevated tank west of Crowley (S3 -2)
Description: Design and construction of a 1 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed. This
improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2.5 MG SS III ground tank at proposed 24" water line on Retta Mansfield Rd. (S2 -9)
Description: Design and construction of a 2.5 MG ground storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
SS III pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2.5 MG WS III elevated tank (W3 -7)
Description: Design and construction of a 2.5 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
WS III pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1.0 MG Elevated Storage Tank North of Aledo Road (W5 -3)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.0 MG elevated storage tank for the Westside V
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Westside V Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2.5 MG Southside III Ground Storage Tank and Land (S2 -8)
Description: Design and construction of a 2.5 MG ground storage tank for the Southside III
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Southside III Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 0.5 MG WS V elevated tank (W5 -4)
Description: Design and construction of a 0.5 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
WS V pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2.5 MG WSI11 Elevated Storage Tank (W3 -9)
Description: Design and construction of a 2.5 MG elevated storage tank for the Westside III
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Westside III Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1.5 MG WSIII Elevated Storage Tank (W3 -7)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.5 MG elevated storage tank for the Westside III
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Westside III Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: WSIWSSIV Elevated Storage Tank (W4 -5)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.5 MG elevated storage tank for the Westside IV
Pressure Plane.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Westside IV Pressure Plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 5 MG ground storage tank at the Caylor Tank Site (N2 -10)
Description: Design and construction of a 5 MG ground storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed. This
improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2 MG elevated tank at Western Center Blvd and Lou Menk Dr. (E2 -9)
Description: Design and construction of a 2 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed. This
improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1.5 MG WS IV Elevated Storage Tank (W4 -10)
Description: Design and construction of a 1.5 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
WS IV pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1 MG SS II Elevated Storage Tank (S2 -10)
Description: Design and construction of a 1 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
SS II pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004 Water
Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 1 MG SS III Elevated Storage Tank (S3 -12)
Description: Design and construction of a 1 MG elevated storage tank.
Purpose: In order to meet operational storage requirements and higher water demand to
due to the projected population, additional storage facilities are needed in the
Southside III pressure plane. This improvement was recommended by the 2004
Water Master Plan.
Allocation: This project is allocated 100% to growth. However, only 30 MG of the
additional 33 MG of storage capacity in the water CIP is required during the
study period so 90.9% is allocated to the study period and 9.1% is allocated to
the period beyond the study period.
Status: Planning Stage
ENGINEERING STUDIES
Project Title: 1998 Water Facilities Plan
Description: An engineering study to assess and update water treatment plant needs.
Purpose: The water facilities plan updates the water treatment plant requirements for
the 20 -year period from 1998 to 2018. Reliability and regulatory improvements
were also recommended as part of this study.
Allocation: 45% of the cost for the 1998 Water Facilities Plan is allocated to the study
period because nine of the twenty years are within the study period.
Status: Complete
Project Title: 2004 Water Master Plan
Description: An engineering study to update the 1994 Water Master Plan.
Purpose: The water master plan projects system flows and requirements for the 20 -year
period from 2004 to 2024. The water master plan guides the capital
improvements program to ensure cost effective expansion of the system.
Allocation: 50% of the cost for the 2004 Water Master Plan is allocated to the study period
because five of the ten years of the plan's useful life (because it is updated
every ten years) are within the study period.
Status: Complete
Project Title: 2014 Water Master Plan
Description: An engineering study to update the 2004 Water Master Plan.
Purpose: The water master plan projects system flows and requirements for the 20 -year
period from 2014 to 2034. The water master plan guides the capital
improvements program to ensure cost effective expansion of the system.
Allocation: 50% of the cost for the 2014 Water Master Plan is allocated to the study period
because five of the ten years of the plan's useful life (because it is updated
every ten years) are within the study period.
Status: Planning
Project Title: 2004 Impact Fee Study (2004 -2014)
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 50% of the cost for 2004 impact fee study can be allocated to the study period
because five of the ten years are within the study period. The impact fee covers
water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Complete
Project Title: 2009 Impact Fee Study (2009 -2019)
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 100% of the cost for the 2009 impact fee study can be allocated to the study
period. The impact fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to
each.
Status: In Progress
Project Title: 2012 Impact Fee Study (2012 -2022)
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 70% of the cost for the 2012 impact fee study can be allocated to the study
period because seven of the ten years are within the study period. The impact
fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2015 Impact Fee Study (2015 -2025)
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 40% of the cost for the 2015 impact fee study can be allocated to the study
period because four of the ten years are within the study period. The impact
fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning Stage
Project Title: 2018 Impact Fee Study (2018 -2028)
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 10% of the cost for the 2018 impact fee study can be allocated to the study
period because one of the ten years is within the study period. The impact fee
covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning Stage
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
APPENDIX B: Water Pumping Capabilities
• : REBDAIC Fort Worth Water Department
• ' CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan D a1
D-910k 01 "'COL„ „•,,, Water Facilities
FoRTWORTH APPENDIX B.
Water Pumping Capabiliti RED ,
CONSLJ 1:1-1 t vG
1 :9 .'S .'rK v F M A d_ M f.4 t
RAW WATER SUPPLY PUMP STATIONS
Clear Fork Raw Water Pump Station 4 pumps
Eagle Mountain WTP Raw Water Pump Station 1 70 mgd 4 pumps
Eagle Mountain WTP Raw Water Pump Station 2 70 mgd 2 pumps
WATER TREATMENT HIGH SERVICE PUMP STATIONS
Eagle Mountain WTP HSPS
11
pumps
5
pumps
Southside III
Eagle Mountain WTP PH3 HSPS
5
pumps
Rolling Hills WTP 1 HSPS
10
pumps
3
pumps
Rolling Hills WTP PH 5 HSPS
4
pumps
North Holly WTP HSPS
95 mgd 8
pumps
3
pumps
Northside II
South Holly WTP HSPS
90 mgd 5
pumps
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PUMP STATIONS
Alta Mesa Pump Station
35
mgd
5
pumps
Southside III
Caylor Pump Pump Station
5
mgd
3
pumps
Cantrell - Sansom Pump Station
5
mgd
3
pumps
Northside II
Chapel Creek Pump Station
1
mgd
3
pumps
Westside IV
Como Pump Station
40
mgd
4
pumps
Westside II
East Side Pump Station
30
mgd
5
pumps
Eastside
FORT WORTH APPENDIX B.
Water Pumping Capabiliti `
C ONSU l: f'( NCB
Edwards Ranch Pump Station 30 mgd 4 pumps Southside II
Fleetwood Pump Station
5
mgd
4
pumps
Eastside
Jenkins Heights Pump Station
5
mgd
3
pumps
Northside III
Lago Vista Pump Station
1
mgd
4
pumps
Northside IV
McCart Pump Station
15
mgd
3
pumps
North Beach Pump Station
15
mgd
4
pumps
Northside II
Sendera Ranch Pump Station
30
mgd
(New) Northside Pump Station
50
mgd
5
pumps
Northside II
(Old) Northside Pump Station
5
mgd
4
pumps
Northside II
Randol Mill Pump Station
7
mgd
3
pumps
Eastside
Russom Ranch Pump Station
15
mgd
3
pumps
Southside III
Southside Reservoir Pump Station
5
mgd
2
pumps
Southside II
Stagecoach Road Pump Station
15
mgd
4
pumps
Westside III
Westland Pump Station
10
mgd
4
pumps
Westside Pump Station
20
mgd
4
pumps
Westside II
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
APPENDIX C: CIP for 2009 -2019
.�
CONSULTING Worth Water Department
• ��' CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan ftliz� D�4
• DIVISION OF MALCOLM .INMIC Water Facilities
d
0
O
a LL T
N
O
u�
O
v`
O
�f H
O O
N
O
H
H
N � N
O p y
a g A
m
O
G
o
O
O
x
0
o
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
S�
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
d LL N
O
O
O
C
O
C
0 0
0 0
O
O
o
C
o
O
O
o
O
o O
6 G
O
O
G
A � N
a E m
m
N
u°f
n
m
m
o
o
n
n
00
p
L
'�$ d `y' •n
�D
a0
�
T
b
H
Qm
^
m
H�urvi
°
� o
°
01°0
°Q
°ry
Q
NO
OQi
�
OOi
�
.Qi
.n
T
1m0
.n �i
ry b
10
m
Ir
Q n E
.n
ti
ti
o
d
N
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
0 0
X
0 0
X
X
X
N
e
.mi
W N LL
b
b
tvl
O O
O O
Oi
m
b
and Ca°
.mi
16
lG
lG
o g n�
a ti E
8�
v1
1D
0010
lN0
O°t
N
N
M
� N
N�
�
�
T
rv�
ry
m
N C u
O
p
H
N
Q
N �
N
N
ry
lD
M
m
10
10
N
c
G
~
N N
O
.-1
Q yKj V
H
N
ry
h
aa
N
m
o 0
0 o
m
m
m
m
8�1
m
m
o°QO
m
a v
a m
m
m
m
a
16
1c
1c
1c
0 0
0 0
1c
�c
1c
1d
ao
1c
ao
.
m
116 ° 116 O
m
Mm
o a
aW�
a z
d u
Q ry 6
V
ry
ry
n n
n n
N
N
M
m m
m
T
T
RI
O
M M
ry
Q
ry
Q
Q
m
m
6 Q
O
u
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ry
N
O O
N N
N O
N
N
�
N
O
ry
O
ry
N
O
ry
ry
O
N
O
ry
m Q
O O
ry ry
Q Q
O
ry ry
b
O
N
m
O
ry
m
O
ry
d
�
N
°0
0
N
0
N
°0
N
0
N
0
N
°o
N
°o
N
°o
N
°0 0
N N
0 0
N N
N
N
N
0
N
N
N
N
0
N
0
N
ry m
0 0
N N
m
0 0
N N
Q
0
N
Q
0
ry
0
ry
W
O
O
O
O
G
O
O
O
O O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O
O
O
O
e v
m
1O1°
m
n
$
O
11
O
0
~
-
N
-
H
N
N
Q
H
H
H
N
N-
o n
N H
v
N
N
VI
M
m
V
u
V
w
y d
u
u°
V
S
U U
V
U
V
1?
U
U
w V
U
u
o
u
m
m
w
`o
`o
o
�
H
tit
� 5
ry
ry
ry
m
q a
q
v 3
N
N
E
''
'.
m
a
A
:=
E
E
i
>
i
'm
'm
��`
a
v
�
3
:• 3
« 3
w n
0
a
n
o
E
m a
-O E
'o'
•'•
¢
°-
"
o
o
o
co w
°
° n
° n
o
¢
¢
°- c
A
u
u
u
w
w
v
F
o
o
0
ry
ry m
ry m
o3
ob
o7!
°
a
a
d
=
a
C
t2
�n
vi
io i
,~
.°
«
u
c
o
a
4
a
N
_
oD
o
c
Vu
w
c
V
u
u
Y
E E
E c33
to
'rrN
m
x q
0
¢
O na
a
irr
iew
ti
z
Z
Z
v
; u °w
o
E w
o
c
w a
rr 5
5
rr g tt s
E -w "
o
o u
E
E
E
m
ml
m
„ N
a
LL
o
o
co
2'
t
c c
o
--
o -
_
-
-
c
c v-
w
m
Z
4
4
o
m'
'm
L
«
w
w
u"
°nm mEm
mEm
mno3
rr
rdr
rm w
r dr
w
3u
ou
ou
x
3 x
3 n3Im
3
=%
A x
3333
d3
v3
ma.N
w>
w>
w>
v
>��°,
>��°.>
°.3333>
m
> w
> a>
O1
>.°:>
�'''
>w>
w''
>w
> >
> >-"°
>- °'°'�°ac
E
u
.u.
.u.
N
Q
Q
a
Q
m
Q
d
O
N
N
249
H
H
H
O
VV
O
V�
O
V�
O
tI�
V1
N
O
N
N
T Of
ebe3e�gm,mnnen�
O� gg
T
m 0
0 0
0 b
rv°
`e$,
m N
0 0
°mneN
0
N
o'er
O
N h
O
O O
p
oo oory
0 6
D
o`^
�p
a E w
,•�pn
h
C O
o 0
0�
o
2 y�
0
0
O
O
0
0
O
0
0
0
o
ry ry
ive ry
N�
m m
m ry
ry ry
ry N
N�
,°may
� N
N�
n Ti o
N
co io
�c b
b
m��
�
N�moo
NcoO
OOOO
O 6 N
E m
vpLL
0
$
0
$$
0
�°n•m
�°nNi°nmmvmi
`^ry
rv"
n
uei�en
°oi
vmiw
tieuni
oO
m'�o
o
`•'
n
N
O IM
TM
W
N
o
N
N
x
O
x
l0 O
e
V O
O
O LL_
N
b
ae
b
N
b
b
x
T
x
m
x
G
oe
O
O
O
x
m m
xZR
m m
x
m
x
m
O
m
x
m m
eR
m
e o
O� O�
•e.
m
OO
Q EE
H
0.
n
.h.°nhm
e m
$
N N
NHH
n
umi
ll� m
N m
O Li
rq
N
Q
.
H
aW�
N H
N
N
N
a� oe
0 o
�R oe
e o
0 0
0
c X
m
m
°?
ro
m
m
m
m
o
O
0
G
0
eye
o p
O
oe a
o 0
O
oe e�
0 o
�. eye
e e
a aye
o 0
awe e�
0 0
ee
0 0
ee
0
�e q�Q
aye ewe
0 0
owe ee
0 0
O
O
O
O O
6.
0 0
0 0
a
m N
0 0
0
G N 6
a u'i ci
v
d u
N
m
m
n
n
b b
b b
b b
ti m
0
•y �;
6 O
E
0
u
b
O
b
O
.+
O
N
O
N
N
O
N
b
O
n
m
N
m
O
N
b
N
m
O
N
m
o ..
O O
N N
.+
O O
N N
ry
O O
N N
.y ry
O N
ry
b m
O 0
N N
e m
0 0
N N
e a
0 O
N N
N
0
N
e N
0 0
ry ry
N �o
0 0
ry N
b n
0 0
n N
m�
01
..
c�$
O O
n N
m
O O
ry ry
S
N
d
N
N
N
N
p
O O
O O
O
N
O
mN
m a
O O
emeeN
0
0
n n
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
N ry
N N
O
N N
O O
N ry
O
N N
O O
N
0
ry
0
ry
0
ry ry
0 0
ry
O O
N N
O
N
Ti
d
O
0
25
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
o
p
$
p°
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
QQN
Sm
O
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
O O
O
°oo
o
°o$
°o °oo
au°+o�
°o °o
°o
d r
N
°
n
C
p
O
N
N vel
N O
N O°0
M n
N N
N
Yef
aa
N
p
N
N N
N m
ry
m
�
a .y
n is
N n�
n
b
T
f
Uf
N
n
of
N
N
N
N N
h VL
�
r N
Q L
6 4
U
0
V
C
o
V
O
U
w
u
O V
W O
U
w O
U
w O
V
y�j O
V
O �y
V
O w
U
O w
V
O
V
w O
U
w O
V
w O
V
a
^o
v
a
a
N
-
EE
E E
n
v0
c S
u
u
n
a
n
n
E a
E�
co
3
m
m
E+
E
-
-
0
0
0
.� 'q
'>
'q 'q
v
v
N n
N n
N a
u
g
c7
.
v l7
9 C
c_
E
a
C
'r
w
N
m"'
aE
c c
c c
c
0
m m���f
°
c
p
ry
NNr°rvN
o
c o
dE
vE
otl
W
Z
�°�°�n
�n o
0
rvo°
$
° °°'
3
am
W
v
x
n
q
°
g
O°
N
ON
aw
A
LLLL°°LL°
°
0
wN ;N X
A
o o
c c
Oo N_
°ON
p v
_-
°
E
E
o `o_
`o_
°L°'6=1,m.
'°33
«
o��
m'�
a A
ti
N
v4
9i
c ti
m
5
3
S
3
5¢
3
Q
_`o
,_`o
o o
A
a x
x N
x
a m
�•-
...._w._
=u3i
wx
Y
Jw
N N3r
r
w
J
sz112
N
e e
r
05
`0 2
03
22
o Ego
E9,
and
^�
oo �•
°ma'o
„-
a N
Ns
0
r
s
0`
n
m
N
,'�°
^�
rrrrzr�o
a
c c
u
c c
a s--
c c
a
0
zz33
Y
o
i
a
'�
Y
A
B
w w=
y°oYa°oz
ra
'~^
LL mN
E
�
an d
E
w
r�
3
�
�
�
a
v
3
3
�
3 u
u
OO
U Y
N
,a`;
N N
a�
v� m
3 E
3 E
2 E
N
v v
v” �
v v ""
—°
<E°n¢En°¢EE¢EE¢EE
mmmmms
-0
2
�jj�g33
" "�
z
z
3°
43RNi-0
°
e
a
o
e
.ai
m
M
J�
J
b b
�
■�■
®3S=
■
a ■Zm<«
-
a2;
� §§
!!&
10
at
k
i u
)
!�■
�
k�\
,«
fl
;q;
�d(§
7�
\\\\
!q
{;
E E
E
§
)))§
!
JJJ�
B
�§
IN
\}\
®E}
�k( \(
\))9)
��kkk
(( \)§
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
APPENDIX D: Water Meters
• • •• Fort Worth Water Department &,,,,,%b ❑
�L� Capital Improvements Plan ��!�V� pig
Water Facilities
Exhibit D
Water Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
APPENDIX D: Water Meters
.; REMAK Fort Worth Water Department
...
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan pig
.. ..... o. Water Facilities
City of Fort Worth
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
172,557
172,557
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
21,144
52,860
1 -1/2"
5.00
1,711
8,555
2"
8.00
528
4,224
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
I -
Total
195,940
238,196
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
7,487
71487
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
3,169
7,923
1 -1/2"
5.00
2,154
10,770
2"
8.00
5,715
45,720
3"
21.75
741
16,117
4"
37.50
344
12,900
6"
80.00
273
21,840
8"
140.00
110
15,400
10" 1
210.00
30
6,300
Total
20,023
144,457
Customer: Aledo
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
779
779
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
4
10
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
783
789
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
80
80
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
7
18
1 -1/2"
5.00
2
10
2"
8.00
17
136
3"
21.75
4
87
4"
37.50
3
113
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1131
444
Customer: Bethesda Water Supply Corp.
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
9,310
9,310
3/4"
1.50
23
35
1"
2.50
51
128
1 -1/2"
5.00
7
35
2"
8.00
16
128
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
9,408
9,674
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
-
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
-
-
Customer: Burleson
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
10,700
10,700
3/4"
1.50
3
5
1"
2.50
29
73
1 -1/2"
5.00
6
30
2"
8.00
3
24
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
10,741
10,832
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"x3/4"
1.00
405
405
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
165
413
1 -1/2"
5.00
106
530
2"
8.00
180
1,440
3"
21.75
60
1,305
4"
37.50
2
75
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
919
4,248
Customer: Crowley
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4"
1.50
4,777
7,166
1"
2.50
25
63
1 -1/2"
5.00
2
10
2"
8.00
3
24
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
4,807
71263
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
152
228
1"
2.50
47
118
1 -1/2"
5.00
14
70
2"
8.00
46
368
3"
21.75
10
218
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
270
1,040
Customer: Everman
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
1,730
1,730
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Tota1
1,730
1,730
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
131
131
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
7
18
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
1
22
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Tota
I
140
179
Customer: Grand Prairie
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
41,570
41,570
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
427
1,068
1 -1/2"
5.00
146
730
2"
8.00
589
4,712
3"
21.75
10
218
4"
37.50
5
188
6"
80.00
35
2,800
8"
140.00
5
700
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
42,787
51,986
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
1,339
1,339
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
755
1,888
1 -1/2"
5.00
498
2,490
2"
8.00
1,200
9,600
3"
21.75
65
1,414
4"
37.50
58
2,175
6"
80.00
14
1,120
8"
140.00
16
2,240
10" 1
210.00 1
2
420
Total
1
3,947
22,686
Customer: Haltom City
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
11,250
16,875
1"
2.50
37
93
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
11,2HL
16,976
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
1,255
11883
1"
2.50
335
838
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
311
2,488
3"
21.75
75
1,631
4"
37.50
14
525
6"
80.00
3
240
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
- I
-
Total
1,993 1
7,605
Customer: Haslet
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4"
1.50
573
860
1"
2.50
15
38
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
I -
Total
588
898
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
22
33
1"
2.50
8
20
1 -1/2"
5.00
4
20
2"
8.00
43
344
3"
21.75
4
87
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
81
504
Customer: Hurst
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
10,966
10,966
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
116
290
1 -1/2"
5.00
53
265
2"
8.00
12
96
3"
21.75
4"
37.50
-
5"
57.50
6
345
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Tota
1
11,153
11,962
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
575
575
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
270
675
1 -1/2"
5.00
229
1,145
2"
8.00
265
2,120
2 -1/2"
15.00
2
30
3"
21.75
25
544
4"
37.50
15
563
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,382
5,732
Customer: Keller
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
13,059
13,059
3/4"
1.50
47
71
1"
2.50
164
410
1 -1/2"
5.00
2
10
2"
8.00
6
48
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
13,278
13,598
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
432
432
3/4"
1.50
39
59
1"
2.50
250
625
1 -1/2"
5.00
43
215
2"
8.00
233
1,864
3"
21.75
8
174
4"
37.50
6
225
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
3
420
10"
210.00
-
Total
1,014
4,014
Customer: Kennedale
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4"
1.50
1,966
2,949
1"
2.50
184
460
1 -1/2"
5.00
7
35
2"
8.00
5
40
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,162
3,484
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
209
314
1"
2.50
32
80
1 -1/2"
5.00
9
45
2"
8.00
28
224
3"
21.75
6
131
4"
37.50
3
113
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
287
907
Customer: Lake Worth
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4"
1.50
1,993
2,990
1"
2.50
139
348
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,133
3,346
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
142
213
1"
2.50
116
290
1 -1/2"
5.00
39
195
2"
8.00
109
872
3"
21.75
5
109
4"
37.50
4
150
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1
415
1,829
Customer: Northlake
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
153
153
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Tota
1
153
153
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
16
40
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
12
96
3"
21.75
13
283
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
41
419
Customer: North Richland Hills
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
17,932
17,932
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
953
2,383
1 -1/2"
5.00
10
50
2"
8.00
15
120
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
18,910
20,485
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
626
626
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
324
810
1 -1/2"
5.00
76
380
2"
8.00
710
5,680
3"
21.75
26
566
4"
37.50
17
638
6"
80.00
4
320
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
1,783
9,020
Customer: Richland Hills
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
2,780
2,780
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
73
183
1 -1/2"
5.00
17
85
2"
8.00
11
88
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
2,881
3,136
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"x3/4"
1.00
171
171
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
76
190
1 -1/2"
5.00
25
125
2"
8.00
35
280
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
308
804
Customer: Saginaw
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4"
1.50
6,456
9,684
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
6,456
9,684
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
87
131
1"
2.50
102
255
1 -1/2"
5.00
9
45
2"
8.00
95
760
3"
21.75
9
196
4"
37.50
5
188
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
308
1,655
Customer: Trophy Club - M.U.D.
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
2,479
2,479
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
252
630
1 -1/2"
5.00
4
20
2"
8.00
8
64
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,744
3,273
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
33
33
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
20
50
1 -1/2"
5.00
3
15
2"
8.00
62
496
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
6
225
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
125
899
Customer: Watauga
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
7,875
11,813
1"
2.50
1
3
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
I -
Total
7,876
11,816
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
95
143
1"
2.50
92
230
1 -1/2"
5.00
5
25
2"
8.00
105
840
3"
21.75
2
44
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
1
140
10" 1
210.00
-
-
Total
302
1,540
Customer: Westlake
Residential Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
107
107
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
183
458
1 -1/2"
5.00
61
305
2"
8.00
17
136
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
368
1,006
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
1
1
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
4
10
1 -1/2"
5.00
1
5
2"
8.00
27
216
3"
21.75
7
152
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
2
160
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
I -
Total
42 1
544
City: White Settlement
Residential Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
4,795
4,795
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
22
55
1 -1/2"
5.00
10
50
2"
8.00
21
168
3"
21.75
5
109
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
4,854
5,215
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
159
159
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
31
78
1 -1/2"
5.00
25
125
2"
8.00
57
456
3"
21.75
6
131
4"
37.50
2
75
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
281
1,104
W4Ow City of Fort Worth
Exhibit F
Capital Improvements
Plan
Wastewater Facilities
Final Report
May 6, 2009
Report Prepared By:
1�E[
CONSU D-I NG
Table of Contents
Contents
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................
............................... F -1
1.2. Capacity Criteria .........................................................................
............................... F -1
1.2.1. Wastewater Treatment Plants ......................................
............................... F -1
1.2.2. Lift Stations .................................................................
............................... F -2
1.3. Eligible Facilities ............................................................................
............................F -3
1.3.1. Wastewater Treatment Plants .........................................
............................F -4
1.3.2. Lift Stations and Force Mains ......................................
............................... F -4
1.3.3. Engineering Studies .......................................................
............................F -5
1.4. Growth Related CIP ...................................................... ............................................
F -7
1.5. Service Units .................................................................................
............................F -8
1.6. Impact Fee Calculations ...............................................................
...........................F -10
List of Tables
Table F -1. 2009 -2019 Growth Related CIP ...................................................
............................F -7
Table F -2. AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors ..............................................
............................F -8
Table F -3. Development of 2009 Population and Employment per Equivalent
5/8" x 3/4" Meter
.................................................................................................................
............................... F -9
Table F -4. Proposed Wastewater Impact Fees ............................................
...........................F -11
List of Figures
Figure F -1: Existing Wastewater Facilities ..................................................
...........................F -12
Figure F -2: Proposed Wastewater Facilities ............................................
............................... F -13
Figure F -3: Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Schedule ....................
...........................F -14
Figure F -4: Lift Station Allocation ................................................................
...........................F -15
Appendices
A. Wastewater CIP Projects
B. Wastewater Lift Station Capabilities
C. CIP for 2009 — 2019
D. Water Meters
• *' ONSU Fort Worth Water Department
. • •.
• =' COI�ISULTING Capital Improvements Plan
w4w
• ♦ DIVISION OF MALCOLM FIRMS Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
1.1. Introduction
In accordance with Texas Local Government Code (TLGC), Chapter 395, the City of
Fort Worth has commissioned Red Oak Consulting, to conduct an Impact Fee Study.
This report establishes the engineering basis for the fee schedule, updating the previous
study completed in 2004.
Impact fees provide the City of Fort Worth a mechanism for recouping the cost
associated with expanding the municipal wastewater system to accommodate growth in
the service area. The City of Fort Worth owns and operates an infrastructure intensive
system comprised of treatment facilities, lift stations, and pipelines that are continuously
improved and expanded. The schedule for future investment in the wastewater system is
known as the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The CIP was updated as a part of this
study with capital project scope and cost provided by previously commissioned master
planning documents and input from Fort Worth Water Department staff.
The report describes the basis for establishing which City of Fort Worth wastewater
facilities are eligible to be included in the impact fee analysis. Next, the criteria for
measuring infrastructure capacity are explained for each infrastructure type. Finally, the
additional facilities required to accommodate growth during the study period are
summarized.
1.2. Capacity Criteria
1.2.1. Wastewater Treatment Plants
The 1998 Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Uprating Study provided the
following formula for the determination of average day flow:
Qavg = B WF + GI
Where: Qavg = Annual Average wastewater flow
BWF = Base wastewater flow defined as 80 gallons per capita per day
(gpcd) plus 40 gallons per employee per day (gpcd).
GI = Groundwater infiltration defined as 300 gal/acre sewered.
The Uprating Study also looked at the maximum month flow as it related to the annual
average wastewater flow. Based on historical data, the ratio was determined to be 1.27.
The maximum day to annual average wastewater flow was determined to be 2.59 times
annual average flows with a peak 2 -hour to annual average wastewater flow ratio of 3.07.
The following is a calculation of the annual average sewage flows. The population and
employment projections were taken from the 2009 Wastewater Land Use Assumptions
and the sewage acreage land values from the 2007 Village Creek Wastewater Treatment
CONSULTING Worth Water Department ❑
• • •' CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan
. ,, —.. „ 1. -1 Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
Plant Facilities Assessment Study. The population and employment projections for the
TRA Denton Creek Regional Wastewater System and TRA Central Regional Wastewater
System were subtracted from the total wastewater service area population and
employment projections for the purpose of calculating required capacities.
2009
Population = 1,029,532 X 80 gpcd = 82.4 mgd
Employment = 693,279 X 40 gpcd = 27.7 mgd
BWF = 110.1 mgd
GI = 148,863 acres X (300 gpd /acre) = 44.7 mgd
Q annual average = 110.1 + 44.7 =154.8 mgd
2019
Population = 1,367,376 X 80 gpcd = 109.4 mgd
Employment = 917,248 X 40 gpcd = 36.7 mgd
BWF = 146.1 mgd
GI = 168,888 acres X (300 gpd /acre) = 50.7 mgd
Q annual average = 146.1 + 50.7 =196.8 mgd
The net increase in annual average flow for the study period is:
Increase in Annual Average Flow = 2019 Annual Average Flow — 2009 Annual
Average Flow
Increase in Annual Average Flow = 196.8 mgd — 154.8 mgd = 42 mgd
The current annual average permit capacity at the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment
Plant is 166 mgd. An expansion to 191 mgd average annual flow is planned for the study
period. In addition, a satellite wastewater treatment plant is planned with a capacity of 7
mgd.
1.2.2. Lift Stations
The 1999 Wastewater System Master Plan is currently being updated and is therefore the
most recent available master plan document. As part of the master plan study, the lift
station capacity requirements were projected based on population and employment
projections from the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). Red Oak
reviewed information from the Wastewater Master Plan to obtain estimated lift station
deficiencies for the impact fee study period:
• • CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department r ,,,,,�sn,,,,.. ❑
•• n_n[�i !iMV1�_t3
• • •• COt�1SULTING Capital Improvements Plan F_2
• oivlsiox
01 11-1 wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
2009 2019
Master Plan Population and Employment 1,316,932 1,503,364
Master Plan Lift Station Deficiency 9.5 mgd 18.4 mgd
The population and employment projections included in the Land Use Assumptions
report are significantly higher than the projections above for the same years. To account
for this additional growth, the lift station deficiencies were increased proportionally:
2009 2019
Land Use Assumptions Population and Employment 1,722,811 2,284,624
Projected Lift Station Deficiency 12.4 mgd 28.0 mgd
The net increase in lift station deficiencies is:
Increase in Lift Station Deficiencies = 28.0 mgd — 12.4 mgd =15.6 mgd
1.3. Eligible Facilities
This section establishes the types of City of Fort Worth wastewater facilities that are
eligible for inclusion in the calculation of the impact fee. Projects included in the CIP
can serve to rehabilitate and renew the system, enhance the system to improve efficiency
and meet regulatory requirements, increase the system capacity, or achieve a combination
of these objectives. Only those projects warranted by capacity issues derived from
growth occurring during the study period (2009 to 2019) can be included in the impact
fee calculation. Additionally, projects are excluded from the impact fee calculation if the
costs cannot be accurately delineated of if alternate mechanisms for cost recovery are in
place.
Financing costs associated with the water system have been excluded due to the dynamic
nature of the financial markets, and the uncertainty this introduces, consistent with
previous City of Fort Worth impact fee studies.
Wastewater interceptors and collection piping have been excluded from this study due to
alternate cost recovery mechanisms in place, consistent with the previous impact fee
study. Facilities included in the impact fee study are wastewater treatment facilities, lift
stations, and engineering studies.
I�E1NSU Fort Worth Water Department wl; , .,,, ❑
• • ••
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan �� F -3
„ „,«, „ „ „„ Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
Figures F -1 and F -2, showing existing and proposed facilities, respectively, are included
at the end of this section.
1.3.1. Wastewater Treatment Plants
The existing wastewater treatment capacity is 166 mgd. An additional 42 mgd of
capacity will be required during the study period, as calculated in Section 1.2.1. Of this
required capacity, 11.2 mgd is available at the existing facility (166 mgd — 154.8 mgd).
Therefore, an additional 30.8 mgd is needed during the study period.
The following capital projects are eligible for inclusion in the impact fee calculation:
Westside Satellite Wastewater Treatment Plant Phase I is currently planned to
provide an additional 7 mgd of capacity. This capacity would be fully utilized
during the study period.
Study period allocation = (7 mgd — 0 mgd) = 7mgd < 30.8 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 30.8 mgd — 7 mgd = 23.8 mgd
% Allocated for Study Period = 100%
2. Village Creek WWTP Expansion to 191 mgd provides 25 mgd of additional
treatment capacity to increase the annual average capacity from 166 mgd to 191
mgd.
Study period allocation = (191 mgd — 166 mgd) = 25 mgd > 23.8 mgd
Remaining incremental demand = 23.8 mgd — 25 mgd < 0
% Allocated for Study Period = 23.8 mgd / 25 mgd = 95%
Figure F -3 provides the scheduled wastewater treatment plant and storage expansions, the
projected annual average wastewater flows, and the projected 2 -hour peak flows.
1.3.2. Lift Stations and Force Mains
Section 1.2.2 calculated the net increase in lift station deficiencies to be 15.6 mgd. The
wastewater CIP lists several lift station projects, which are eligible for inclusion in the
impact fee calculation. These lift station projects will provide an additional 47.5 mgd of
capacity. The allocation of the lift stations is calculated below:
% Allocation for Study Period = (15.6 mgd / 47.5 mgd) X 100 = 32.8%
The remaining 67.2% of the costs of these projects will be allocated to future growth
beyond the study period.
Figure F -4 provides the comparison of the lift station projects and the lift station capacity
required for future growth.
.'•;
Fort Worth Water Department ❑
• •'
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan F-a
.- ... - - -1-L. I..- Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
1.3.3. Engineering Studies
There are nine studies which have been included in the calculation of the wastewater
impact fees. The studies are as follows:
1. Wastewater Facilities Plan — The Wastewater Facilities Plan updated the
wastewater treatment plant needs for the period of 2000 through 2020. Nine years
of the twenty year study was for existing customers. Ten years of the twenty year
study was for the study period, and the balance was for the period beyond the
study period. The calculation of the allocation was as follows:
Existing Customers = 9/20 = 45%
Study Period = 10/20 = 50%
Beyond Study Period = 1/20 = 5%
% Allocation for Study Period = 50%
2. 1999 Wastewater Master Plan — The 1999 is a planning document for the period
2000 through 2010. It is currently being updated. Therefore, 90% is for existing
and 10% is for the study period.
Existing Customers = 9/10 = 90%
Study Period = 1 /10 = 10%
% Allocation for Study Period =10%
3. 2009 Wastewater System Master Plan is ongoing and will include the planning
period 2010 through 2020. Nine of the ten years in the planning period are
included in the impact fee study period. Therefore 90% is allocated to the study
period and the remaining 10% is allocated to the period beyond the study period.
Study Period = 9/10 = 90%
Beyond Study Period = 1 /10 = 10%
% Allocation for Study Period = 90%
4. Conveyance Study — The Wastewater Conveyance Study is a 20 -year planning
document for the period 2000 through 2020. Nine years of the twenty year study
was for existing customers. Ten years of the twenty year study was for the study
period, and the balance was for the period beyond the study period. The
calculation of the allocation was as follows:
Existing Customers
= 9/20 = 45%
Study Period
= 10/20 = 50%
Beyond Study Period
= 1/20 = 5%
% Allocation for Study
Period = 50%
••• : REBDAK Fort Worth Water Department �y,.•. �•,,,,,• ❑
• • •• CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan
=' F -5
p,,,,,, ,, ,«o „• „, Wastewater Facilities �`
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
5. 2004 Impact Fee Study — The 2004 Impact Fee Study provides impact fees for
the study period 2004 through 2014. Therefore, five years of the ten -year study
period for the existing customers, and the remaining five years are for the study
period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee update and the other half
is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers
= 5110 = 50%
Study Period
= 5110 = 50%
Beyond Study Period
= 0 /10 = 0%
% Allocation for Study
Period = 50%
6. 2009 Impact Fee Study — The 2009 Impact Fee Study provides impact fees for
the study period 2009 through 2019. Therefore, 100% of the study is allocated to
the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee update and the
other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers
= 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period
= 10 /10 = 100%
Beyond Study Period
= 0 /10 = 0%
% Allocation for Study
Period =100%
7. 2012 Impact Fee Study — Although the requirement is to conduct an impact fee
study every five years, the City would like to update the study every three years.
The 2012 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees for the study period 2012
through 2022. Therefore, seven years of the ten -year study period are allocated to
the study period, and the remaining three years are for the period beyond the
study period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee update and the
other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers
= 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period
= 7/10 = 70%
Beyond Study Period
= 3/10 = 30%
% Allocation for Study
Period = 70%
8. 2015 Impact Fee Study — The 2015 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees
for the study period 2015 through 2025. Therefore, four years of the ten -year
study period are allocated to the study period, and the remaining six years are for
the period beyond the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact
fee update and the other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0 /10 = 0%
Study Period = 4/10 = 40%
Beyond Study Period = 6/10 = 60%
• •' It>ri3DAK Fort Worth Water Department
CONSULTING FO i ❑
' •• Capital Improvements Plan F -6
• • •'
ISION O. MALCOLM .I.„I,: Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
% Allocation for Study Period = 40%
9. 2018 Impact Fee Study — The 2018 Impact Fee Study will provide impact fees
for the study period 2018 through 2028. Therefore, one year of the ten -year study
period is allocated to the study period, and the remaining nine years are for the
period beyond the study period. One half of the study is for the water impact fee
update and the other half is for the wastewater impact fee update.
Existing Customers = 0/10 = 0%
Study Period = 1 /10 = 10%
Beyond Study Period = 9/10 = 90%
% Allocation for Study Period = 10%
Appendix A describes each Wastewater CIP projects for the 2009 -2019 planning period.
The purpose of each project, the portion that is allocated to growth and the current status
is also included.
1.4. Growth Related CIP
Table F -1 summarizes the growth related costs of the eligible facilities. Appendix C
shows the detailed development of the costs and capacities of the eligible facilities.
Table F -1.
2009 -2019 Growth Related CIP
Wastewater
Facility
Total
Growth
Related Cost
Capacity
Added
from
Projects
Capacity Needed
During 2009 -2019
2009 -2019
Growth
Related Cost
Amount
Percent of
Total
Treatment Plant
66,162,000
32.0 mgd
30.8 mgd
96.3%
54,462,000
Lift Stations
33,955,000
47.5 mgd
15.6 mgd
32.8%
11,130,000
Engineering Studies
5,108,000
2,931,000
Total
689522,000
:me ; •• Fort Worth Water Department
s, � FORT WORTH
: L Capital Improvements Plan F_7
• w*iN•• r ■&L"LA nuus Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
1.5. Service Units
The differentiated costs between customer types are allocated through the application of
the equivalent meter concept. Since the 5/8" x 3/4" water meter is the most frequently
used meter by the residential customer, a factor has been calculated to relate the
capacities of other meter sizes to the 5/8" x 3/4" meter capacity. Table F -2 presents the
factors developed using capacity information from the American Water Works
Association (AWWA) Standard C700 -02, Cold -Water Meters —Displacement Type,
Bronze Main Case and AWWA Standard C701 -07, Cold -Water Meters — Turbine Type,
for Customer Service.
Table F -2.
AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors
Meter Size
5/8" x 3/4" Equivalency
Factor
5/8" x 5/8" and 5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
1/1
2.50
1 -1/2"
5.00
213
8.00
3"
21.75
4"
37.50
6"
80.00
8"
140.00
1011
210.00
Appendix D contains the number of water meters for residential and non - residential
customers by meter size for the City as well as for the wholesale customers who provided
this information to Red Oak. The number of equivalent meters is also calculated for the
City and wholesale customers.
The next calculation step determines population per residential meter and employment
per non - residential meter. Table F -3 summarizes this calculation for the City of Fort
Worth and wholesale customers using 2009 information.
:00; '• �K Fort Worth Water Department FORTV�ORTH
�',:� Capital Improvements Plan F_g
• .. i rnIMN W MAN" NMKIK Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
Table F -3.
Development of 2009 Population and Employment per Equivalent 5/8" x 3/4"
Meter
Description
Residential
Non - residential
City of Fort Worth:
Number of Equivalent Meters
223,904
135,790
Population / Employment
679,359
587,702
Population / Employment per
Equivalent Meter
3.03
4.33
Wholesale Customers:
Number of Equivalent Meters
107,208
34,364
Population / Employment
290,130
97,085
Population / Employment per
Equivalent Meter
2.71
2.83
Red Oak did not receive meter count information from five of Fort Worth's wholesale
wastewater customers. The number of equivalent meters used to calculate the wholesale
customers' population / employment per equivalent meter in Table F -3 is the total
number of equivalent meters served by Fort Worth for those wholesale customers who
responded to the Red Oak survey with their meter count information. In order to more
accurately estimate the population / employment per equivalent meter, Red Oak divided
the number of equivalent meters by the sum of population or employment served by Fort
Worth for those wholesale customers who provided their meter count information.
The projected increase in equivalent meters between 2009 and 2019 uses the ratios in
Table F -3 and the population and employment projections for 2009 and 2019 in Exhibit
B, Wastewater Land Use Assumptions report. The calculation is shown below. Because
no meter count information is available to calculate the number of equivalent meters for
the unincorporated service area, the calculation for the unincorporated service area uses
the weighted average of population and employment per equivalent meter for the City
and wholesale customers.
City of Fort Worth
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
= (910,038 — 679,359) / 3.03
= 76,132
• • *• Fort Worth Water DepartmentR..R,,H
moo L� G Capital Improvements Plan F_g
• ...- AL DMI � W NAL .L. RMIC Wastewater Facilities _ rte
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
= (787,452 — 587,702) / 4.33
= 46,132
Wholesale Customers
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
= (404,172 — 355,332) / 2.71
= 18,022
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
=(I 59,950 — 130,531) / 2.83
= 10,395
Unincorporated Area
Residential = Population Change / Population per Equivalent Meter
= (110,062 — 24,370) / 2.93
= 29,246
Non - Residential = Employment Change / Employment per Equivalent Meter
= (28,832 — 9,801) / 4.02
= 4,734
Increase in Equivalent Meters = 184,661
1.6. Impact Fee Calculations
Impact fees are the quotient of the total cost of expansion for the study period from Table
F -1 divided by the increase in equivalent meters from Section 1.5. This fee equals the
maximum wastewater impact fee for a 5/8" x 3/4" water meter size.
Maximum Wastewater Impact Fee = Cost of Expansion / Increase in Equivalent Meters
= $68,522,000 / 184,661
= $371 per 5/8" x 3/4" equivalent meter
The wastewater impact fees for meters other than 5/8" x 3/4" are the product of fee per
5/8" x 3/4" equivalent meter multiplied by the respective equivalent meter factor from
Table F -2. The maximum allowable wastewater impact fees are provided in Table F -4,
as well as the resulting impact fee at a 50% collection rate.
0• Fort Worth Water Department FORT WORTH
C ULTING Capital Improvements Plan F -10
. •� a Fm� r MAJO N 14MIZ Wastewater Facilities
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
Table F-4.
Proposed Wastewater Impact Fees
Meter Size
5/8" x 3/4"
Equivalency
Factor
Maximum Allowable
Impact Fee
Proposed Impact Fee
(Collected at 50 %)
5/8" x 5/8" and
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
$ 371
$ 185
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
$ 557
$ 278
ill
2.50
$ 928
$ 464
1-1/2"
5.00
$1,855
$ 927
T
8.00
$ 2,968
$ 1,484
3"
21.75
$ 8,069
$ 4,034
4"
37.50
$13,913
$ 6, 956
6"
80.00
$ 29,680
$ 14,840
8"
140.00
Pr$ 51,940
$ 25,970
10"
210.00
$77,910
$ 38, 955
as ■ ' [11
Fort Worth Water Department RT WORTH PJEOEAK
;�,: LUNG Capital Improvements Plan F -11
• . •� a wn� W r Lz nuus Wastewater Facilities
N `' , _ Dossier Cove Lift Station
Lake Country Lift Station #11
CLake Country Lift Station #12
Dosier Creek Lift Station
,1 9
�% _ • Lake Country Lift Station #4
tel Lift Station #1
�. Lake Country Lift Station #3
_f
;J„ Sendera Ranch
Intel Lift Station #2 0 Lake Country Lift Station #2
t
Lake Country Lift Station #5
Project Shield'_'. 0
�s Lift Station - Sunset Cove Lift Station
a
Spring Ranch Lift Station
r^ 1 C r
,..
t 4.
LS
,
Y
1 j
LS Glen Mills °� l
LS . "a-
i
L ti A
Ranch at Eagle Mountain
�n
• Meadow Lakes Lift Station'
L, _, `, y '� 'i ter``:•
�r Jenkins Heights Lift Station LL t. ;
i
,.
Lake Worth Lift Station
Mosier Valley Lift Stat
Castle Circle" Greenwa r,
Y t
Fort Worth
Live Oak Creek Lift Station
•Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
xr �.
Calmont Lift Station
1 To
N
Western Hills Lift Station -t Enchanted Bayer µms,
}
Hulen Bend Lift Station L ��
wine �.xsc.w.w. 2. zk..i ssm,M.. Fa;A.a::1L
'�.
r 114 r .",
Winn Dixie Lift Station
LEGEND
LA Richardson Slough Lift Station ® Treatment Facilities
Summercreek Ranch Lift Station Ls Lift Stations
- L
Rosemary Ridge 3 1.5 0 3
Miles
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
• Existing Wastewater March 2009
City of Fort Worth Facilites Map
FIGURE F -1
N^
A
�,T') - �j ".
°✓` LS
ove Circle
Live Oak Regional Lift tation
Cgstle Creek
LS LS _
LS
x
Walsh Ranch Lift Station
LC
Lake Benbrook South Regional
Fossil Creek Lift.Station
A ,
'i
LS
LEGEND
3 1.5 0 3
LS Lift Station
Miles
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
[m I I City of Fort Worth Proposed Wastewater March 2009
Facilites Map FIGURE F -2
fi
x �
LS
��
LS
Bonds Ranch C
Bonds Ranch B
e
J�
L4
Bonds Ranch A
LS
Lake Worth North
a
�,T') - �j ".
°✓` LS
ove Circle
Live Oak Regional Lift tation
Cgstle Creek
LS LS _
LS
x
Walsh Ranch Lift Station
LC
Lake Benbrook South Regional
Fossil Creek Lift.Station
A ,
'i
LS
LEGEND
3 1.5 0 3
LS Lift Station
Miles
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
[m I I City of Fort Worth Proposed Wastewater March 2009
Facilites Map FIGURE F -2
o+
0
N
00
N
O
N
1� ?
O u
N �
Q
fD
U
a)
d0
ry
L
O
Ln
Ln
C
a1
tp �
O ro
N a7
L
L
2
N
Y
f0
a)
CL
Ln
ri
O
N
U
m
O w Q
a
h.0
a)
Q
7
C
C
M Q
N -O
O 4!
N �
L
a1
d
f
7�
N �
rl 3
� U
LL �
L �
a) 7�
f9
C
N O
N U
M
O
� @ O
N C �
C �
Q �
a) �
� O
Q �n
� 3
a) O
U L.L
O ai Y
1 p (O
O L v
1
01
O
O
N
L..
0
-C
4-
3:
06 o
L= L
u C
0
L -0
-
0 0
Ng
00
U
0 O
LL
cu
LA
tw
tz
C7
GJ
Ln
0
L-
CL
...........
Ln
cn
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
APPENDIX A: Wastewater CIP Projects
•'• ;
CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department Way,..,.,■. ❑
• • •' C0f�1SULTING Capital Improvements Plan !,����n F -16
•, ,,, L—M 111119 Wastewater Facilities
Appendix A
WASTEWATER CIP PROJECTS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Project Title: (V -1A) VCWWTP Peak Flow Diversion Structure (Equalization Basin for Peak Flows)
Description: Design and construction of a wastewater diversion and peak flow storage basin
adjacent to the Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (VCWWTP).
Purpose: Detention facility will equalize the peak influent flows to the VCWWTP. The
siphon improvement project will allow higher peak flows to the VCWWTP. This
project will divert and store the peak flows for later treatment.
Allocation: The peak flow diversion facility will increase the peak flow plant capacity from
the current 369 MGD to 500 MGD. The projected peak flow is 500 mgd. The
allocation for the study period is 26.2% (500 mgd — 369 mgd) / 500 mgd =
26.2 %)
Status: Planning
Project Title: (V -1B) VCWWTP Junction Box Rehabilitation (oversized to 191 MGD expansion)
Description: Design and construction of rehabilitation/ capacity improvements to the plant
junction boxes that collect and convey raw wastewater into VCWWTP. This
project will be aligned with/ in preparation for the capacity improvements
proposed from 166 MGD to 191 MGD.
Purpose: The current junction boxes need to be rehabilitated to mitigate impacts for
hydrogen sulfide related corrosion for the near and long term. As part of this
project flow management via these junction boxes will be evaluated to
determine the best improvements to align with the expansion to 191 MGD.
Allocation: The junction box facilities will be sized/ rehabilitated for future treatment
capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191MGD. This project is allocated 13.1%
to the study period (191 -mgd -166 mgd) / 191 mgd).
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (V-1Q VCWWTP Primary Area Odor & Corrosion Control Improvements (oversized to
191 MGD expansion)
Description: The existing primary area odor control and odor treatment facilities will be
rehabilitated and expanded to provide for future expansion that will be
provided with the project to replace Primary Clarifiers 1 -12.
Purpose: The existing inadequate odor collection system and chemical treatment system
will be updated with newer technology to better treat odors at a more cost
effective and sustainable method. Improving odor systems will also reduce
corrosion of concrete and steel facilities; extending the life of equipment.
Allocation: The odor and corrosion control system will be sized for future replacement of
Primary Clarifiers 1 -12 that will increase the treatment capacity from 166 MGD
to 191MGD. This project is allocated 13.1% to the study period (191 -mgd -166
mgd) / 191 mgd).
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (W1) Westside Satellite WWTP Phase 1
Description: Land purchase, design and construction for a satellite WWTP to address growth
related needs in the sewershed serving the Westside area.
Purpose: Provide sewage treatment needs to address growth needs by installing a new
treatment plant to serve the Westside area. This will eliminate the need to
expand/ add collection system infrastructure or expansion of VCWWTP facilities
beyond 191 MGD to address the Westside growth needs.
Allocation: This project is needed for growth during the planning period and is allocated
100% for growth.
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (V2 -A) VCWWTP Expansion to 191 MGD (Phase 2A - secondary systems expansion -
aeration, clarifier, filter, hydraulics, pumping)
Description: Design and construction of Village Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
treatment facilities to increase capacity from 166 to 191 MGD.
Purpose: To increase treatment plant capacity to meet growth needs.
Allocation: This project is allocated 13.1% to the study period (191 -mgd -166 mgd) / 191
mgd).
Status: Planning.
2
Project Title: (V -2B) VCWWTP Replace Primary Clarifiers 1 -12 & Grit System (Phase 2B of 191 mgd
expansion)
Description: Design and construction for the replacement of primary clarifiers 1 -12 and
addition of a new grit removal system sized to meet the 191 MGD expansion
requirements.
Purpose: Primary clarifiers 1 -12 at VCWWTP are a hydraulic bottleneck which needs to be
addressed to realize the planned expansion to 191 MGD. In addition to being a
hydraulic bottleneck, the reliability of the clarifiers are impacted by large
amounts of grit (particularly at higher flows). These clarifiers need to be
replaced before the 191 MGD capacity can be realized and a new grit removal
system needs to be added to increase reliability in capacity and treatment.
Allocation: In addition to a new grit removal system, the primary clarifiers will be replaced
and sized for future treatment capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191MGD.
This project is allocated 13.1% to the study period (191 -mgd -166 mgd) / 191
mgd).
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (V2 -C) Village Creek Gravity Belt Thickeners to Replace DAFs (Phase 2C of 191
Expansions)
Description: Design and construction for the replacement of existing Dissolved Air Flotation
(DAF) thickeners with a new Gravity Belt Thickener system sized to meet the
191 MGD expansion requirements.
Purpose: The existing DAF system is in need of rehabilitation and the solids thickening
system is in need of expansion. The DAF units will be replaced with Gravity Belt
Thickeners (GBT) which is more efficient at thickening both primary and
secondary solids and /or combined solids. The replacement of DAFs with GBTs
will include expansion of the solids thickening systems to provide capacity for
the planned VCWWTP expansion to 191 MGD plus the 7 MGD capacity to treat
the solids from the new Westside Satellite WWTP.
Allocation: The new DAF solids thickening system will be sized for the future VCWWTP
treatment capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191 MGD. The new solids
thickening system will also have the additional capacity to thicken the solids
produced by the new 7 MGD Westside Satellite WWTP. This project is allocated
16.2% to the study period (198 -mgd -166 mgd) / 198 mgd).
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (V -3) VCWWTP South Influent Pump Station
Description: Design and construction of a new VCWWTP South Influent Pump Station to lift
current and future flows received from the Village Creek Interceptors to the
Headworks Screening Facilities.
Purpose: Flows from the Village Creek Interceptors currently pass through Bar Screen
Building No. 3, which is in need of significant repairs and upgrades, and is
located at the southeast corner of the VCWWTP. Flows from the Village Creek
Interceptor system will be routed to the new Headworks Screening Facilities
located at the northwest corner of the VCWWTP, so that the wastewater can be
adequately screened and peak flows can be treated by the high -rate clarification
system and /or the future Peak Flow Diversion Structure. The Village Creek
Interceptors are at a lower elevation than the Headworks Screening Facility,
therefore a pump station will be needed to transport the flows from the south
to the northeast corner of the VCWWTP.
Allocation: A parallel interceptor was recently constructed in the Village Creek Sewer Basin
to increase the basin flow capacity from 90 MGD to 280 MGD. The lift station
will be sized to transport peak flows during this study period. The projected
peak flow capacity of the VCWWTP is being increased from current 369 MGD to
556 MGD with the completion of Project V -1A and V -2A. The allocation for the
study period is 33.6% (556 mgd — 369 mgd) / 556 mgd = 33.6 %)
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (V -4A) VCWWTP Biosolids Dewatering for Land Application (additional dewatering
facilities for VCWWTP 191 MGD expansion + Westside Satellite 7 MGD WWTP solids)
Description: Design and construction of biosolids dewatering facilities.
Purpose: Provide biosolids dewatering facilities needed to produce a dewatered biosolid
that can be transported efficiently for beneficial reuse land application..
Allocation: The biosolids dewatering system will be sized for the future VCWWTP treatment
capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191 MGD. The biosolids dewatering
system will also have the additional capacity to dewater the solids produced by
the new 7 MGD Westside Satellite WWTP. This project is allocated 16.2% to
the study period (198 -mgd -166 mgd) / 198 mgd).
Project Title: (V -46) Anaerobic Digester System Expansion & Optimization, 166 mgd to 198 mgd
(VCWWTP 191 mgd Expansion + Westside Satellite 7 mgd WWTP Solids)
Description: Design and construction of anaerobic digester facilities to treat wastewater
treatment plant solids from the expanded VCWWTP and the new Westside
Satellite WWTP facilities.
4
Purpose: Replace, expand and improve the current anaerobic digester facilities to provide
solids treatment for the VCWWTP expansion to 191 and the 7 MGD Westside
Satellite WWTP.
Allocation: The Anaerobic digestion treatment system will be sized for the future VCWWTP
treatment capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191 MGD. The anaerobic
digester system will also have the additional capacity to treat the solids
produced by the new 7 MGD Westside Satellite WWTP. This project is allocated
16.2% to the study period (198 -mgd -166 mgd) / 198 mgd).
Status: Planning
Project Title: (V -4C) Anaerobic Digested Solids Dewatering Sidestream Treatment, 166 mgd to 198
mgd (VCWWTP 191 MGD Expansion + Westside Satellite 7 MGD WWTP Solids)
Description: Design and construction of sidestream treatment facilities to treat flows
associated with dewatering of anaerobically digested solids for current and
future expansion capacities.
Purpose: The decant waters and wash waters from the dewatering systems produce a
significant amount of ammonia that is currently returned to the VCWWTP
headworks for treatment. Providing sidestream treatment of the ammonia in a
compact system will reduce the loads and capacity requirements of the
conventional secondary treatment systems.
Allocation: Theanaerobic digested solids dewatering sidestream treatment system will be
sized for the future VCWWTP treatment capacity expansion from 166 MGD to
191 MGD. The sidestream treatment system will also have the additional
capacity to treat the sidestream liquids produced by the new 7 MGD Westside
Satellite WWTP. This project is allocated 16.2% to the study period (198 -mgd-
166 mgd) / 198 mgd).
Status: Planning
Project Title: (V -5) VCWWTP Disinfection Alternative & Expansion - Regulatory Change from Gas
Chlorine (191 MGD)
Description: Convert from gas chlorine disinfection to alternatives that may include liquid
chlorine, ultraviolet light, ozone or a combination of these.
Purpose: Proposed legislation and /or enhanced security requirements will prompt the
conversion from gas chlorine to other disinfection treatment chemicals /
facilities.
5
Allocation: The disinfection alternative facilities will be sized for the expanded treatment
capacity of 191MGD. This project is allocated 13.1% to the study period (191 -
mgd -166 mgd) / 191 mgd).
Status: Planning.
Project Title: (W -2) Westside Satellite WWTP Phase 2
Description: Design and construction of the Phase 2 capacity expansion of the Westside
satellite WWTP to address system capacity needs in 2018.
Purpose: Provide sewage treatment needs to address growth needs by installing
additional treatment capacity. This expansion is needed to meet the current
system growth and capacity requirements.
Allocation: The projected average annual wastewater flows will increase to 205 MGD in
2019, the end of the study period. This capacity expansion is needed to
increase the system treatment capacity from 198 MGD to 205 MGD. This
project is needed for growth during the planning period and is allocated 100%
for growth.
Status: Planning.
WASTEWATER LIFT STATIONS
Project Title: Bonds Ranch Lift Station Force Main and Gravity Main A
Description: Design and construction of a 6.0 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future
growth. This lift station will receive flows from the Bonds Ranch Lift Station B.
Purpose: The purpose of this lift station is to provide growth future wastewater service to
the northwest portions of the service area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Bonds Ranch Lift Station Force Main and Gravity Main B
Description: Design and construction of a 5.0 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future
growth. This lift station will receive flows from the Bonds Ranch Lift Station C.
R
Purpose: The purpose of this lift station is to provide growth future wastewater service to
the northwest portions of the service area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Bonds Ranch Lift Station Force Main and Gravity Main C
Description: Design and construction of a 4.0 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future
growth.
Purpose: The purpose of this lift station is to provide growth future wastewater service to
the northwest portions of the service area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Fossil Creek Lift Station & 60" Force Main
Description: Design and construct a new lift station adjacent to the connection of the Fossil
Creek interceptor with the 96" M280 and M338 interceptors. A new 60" force
main paralleling M280 and M338 from the Fossil Creek Lift Station to the
VCWWTP
Purpose: Transport system peak flows and provide additional future capacity to the
treatment plant future capacity.
Allocation: The lift station and force main will be sized for the future VCWWTP treatment
capacity expansion from 166 MGD to 191MGD. The lift station and force main
will be sized to transport peak flows that will be transported to an expanded
treatment facility. This project is allocated 31.8% to the study period. The
remaining capacity is allocated to provide 66.4% for the existing capacity and
1.8% for system capacity beyond the study period.
Status: Planning
7
Project Title: Woodvale Low Pressure Sewer System
Description: Design and construct a pressure sewer system to serve an area adjacent to the
lake and currently served by septic system.
Purpose: Provide new sanitary sewer service to existing homes and area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Lake Worth North Lift Station and Force Main
Description: Design and construction of a 1.5 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future
growth. This lift station will send flows to the Jenkins Heights lift station.
Purpose: The purpose of this expansion/ rehabilitation is to provide future wastewater
service to growth related service areas.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Love Circle / West Lake Worth Lift Station and Force Main
Description: Construction of a 0.5 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future growth. This
lift station will send flows to the Jenkins Heights lift station.
Purpose: The purpose of this expansion/ rehabilitation is to provide future wastewater
service to growth related service areas.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
8
Project Title: Meadow Lakes Lift Station Expansion (additional pumps)
Description: Design and install additional wastewater pumps to expand the existing lift
station capacity
Purpose: The lift station is being expanded to provide additional wastewater service
capacity to growing area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Live Oak Creek Regional Lift Station and Force Main
Description: Design and construction of an expansion to the lift station and force main from
2.5 mgd to 4.5 mgd firm capacity to serve future growth.
Purpose: The purpose of this expansion/ rehabilitation is to provide future wastewater
service to growth related service areas.
Allocation: This project is provides 75% for growth and 25% for rehabilitation. The
proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity requirements
during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of the 75% growth
allocation results in a 23.9% capacity allocation during the study period. The
allocation for this project is 25% to existing capacity, 23.9% for capacity during
the study period and the remaining 51.1% is for future growth beyond the year
2019.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Lake Benbrook South Regional Lift Station and Force Main
Description: This diversion lift station will route wastewater flow from the area west and
south of Benbrook Lake in the Clear Fork Major Basin to a point in the Village
Creek Major Basin.
Purpose: The purpose of this lift station is to provide future wastewater service to the
southwestern portions of the service area.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
E7
Status: Planning
Project Title: Walsh Ranch Lift Station and Force Main
Description: Construction of a 3.0 mgd firm capacity lift station to serve future growth.
Purpose: The purpose of this expansion/ rehabilitation is to provide future wastewater
service to growth related service areas.
Allocation: The proposed capacity of the lift station projects exceeds the capacity
requirements during the study period (see Exhibit F, Section 1.2.2). 31.8% of
the Lift Station cost is allocated to the study period and the remaining 68.2% is
for future growth beyond the year 2019.
Status: Planning
WASTEWATER ENGINEERING STUDIES
Project Title: 2009 Wastewater Master Plan 2010 -2020
Description: Engineering Study
Purpose: This wastewater master plan update will project the system flows and needs for
the year 2010 -2020.
Allocation: This wastewater master plan will cover the planning period from the year 2010
through the year 2020 but is expected to be updated after 10 years. Therefore,
nine years of the ten year capital study is for the study period, and the balance
is for the period beyond the study period. Therefore, 90% of the Master Plan is
for the study period.
Status: Ongoing
Project Title: 2019 Wastewater Master Plan 2020 -2030
Description: Engineering Study
Purpose: This wastewater master plan update will project the system flows and needs for
the year 2020 -2030.
Allocation: This wastewater master plan will cover the planning period from the year 2020
through the year 2030 but is expected to be updated after 10 years. Therefore,
none of the ten year capital study is for the study period, and the balance is for
10
the period beyond the study period. Therefore, 0% of the Master Plan is for the
study period.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Wastewater Impact Fee Study 2009 -2019
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 100% of the cost for the 2009 study can be allocated to the planning period.
The impact fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: On -going
Project Title: Wastewater Impact Fee Study 2012 -2022
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 70% of the cost for the 2012 study can be allocated to the planning period. The
impact fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning
Project Title: Wastewater Impact Fee Study 2015 -2025
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 40% of the cost for the 2015 study can be allocated to the planning period. The
impact fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning
11
Project Title: Wastewater Impact Fee Study 2018 -2028
Description: An engineering study to revise the impact fee ordinance and recalculate the
maximum allowable fee which can be assessed.
Purpose: By statute the impact fee report and ordinance must be updated every five
years.
Allocation: 10% of the cost for the 2018 study can be allocated to the planning period. The
impact fee covers water and wastewater, with 50% allocated to each.
Status: Planning
12
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
APPENDIX B: Wastewater Lift Station Capabilities
REBDAjC Fort Worth Water Department
• • •� CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan F_29
,,,..... „ „a „,, Wastewater Facilities
FORT WORTH APPENDIX B.
Fort Worth Lift Stations RED ,
CONSULrING
MA,. `_ 6_ y 1.4w,1
WASTEWATER LIFT STATIONS
No.
Name
Address
Capacity
Configuration
1
Calmont
6200 Calmont
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
2
Castle Circle
9101 Heron Dr
1
mgd
2
pumps
3
Dosier Creek
9241 Boat Club Rd
5
mgd
3
pumps
4
Eagle Ranch
6692 Robertson Rd
1
mgd
2
pumps
5
Enchanted Bay
5600 Vesta Farley Rd
1
mgd
2
pumps
6
Glen Mills
9091 Saginaw Blvd
1
mgd
2
pumps
7
Greenway
1000 Nixon Rd
2
mgd
2
pumps
8
Hulen Bend
6401 Oakmont Blvd
1
mgd
2
pumps
9
Intel #1
3001 Eagle Pkwy
3
mgd
4
pumps
10
Intel #2
3200 Keller - Haslet Rd
4
mgd
4
pumps
11
Jenkin Heights
4525 Norris Valley Dr
2
mgd
2
pumps
12
Lake Worth
6201 Cahoba Dr
2
mgd
2
pumps
13
Lake Country #11
9401 Boat Club Rd
1
mgd
2
pumps
14
Lake Country #12
9341 Mountain Lake
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
15
Lake Country #13
9331 Dosier Cove W
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
16
Lake Country #2
7903 Skylake Dr
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
17
Lake Country #3
8831 Random Rd
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
18
Lake Country #4
9033 Crosswind Dr
1
mgd
2
pumps
FORT WORTH
WASTEWATER LIFT STATIONS
APPENDIX B.
Fort Worth Lift Stations
RED
CONSULTING
.. 3 .;S -1 .;s wr.:G.tl k,ft -1
No.
Name
Address
Capacity
Configuration
19
Lake Country #5
8420 Crosswind Dr
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
20
Live Oak
731 Verna Trl
2
mgd
2
pumps
21
Meadow Lakes
27
2
mgd
2
pumps
22
Mosier Valley
3120 House Anderson Rd
1
mgd
2
pumps
23
Richardson Slough
7999 Old Granbury Rd
3
mgd
3
pumps
2
pumps
10499 Old Crowley Cleburne
Winn Dixie
200 SW Loop 820
0.5
mgd
24
Rosemary Ridge
Rd
1.5
mgd
2
pumps
25
Sendera Ranch
1092 Avondale Haslet Rd
2
mgd
2
pumps
26
Spring Ranch
1
mgd
2
pumps
27
Summer Creek
9898 W Cleburne Rd
1.5
mgd
2
pumps
28
Sunset Cove
8505 Lake Country Dr
2
mgd
3
pumps
29
Western Hills
2717 Glenrock
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
30
Winn Dixie
200 SW Loop 820
0.5
mgd
2
pumps
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
APPENDIX C: CIP for 2009 -2019
CONSULTING Fort Worth Water Department & {u„ 0 ❑
CONSULTING Capital Improvements Plan �► + +�����,3 F -32
1 owisio• or MA -. -- wastewater Facilities
d
0
N
r d ..•
O
H
O
O
V`
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
H
O
O O
N
O O
H N
O
u1
O
N
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
u1
N
O O
N
N
9 LL T
m � N
E w
a _ A
N � N
O 6 N W
Q �
« N
N
o
n
e
o
°o °o
0 0
0 o
0 o
ry
^
n
m
m m
m
m
LL
pa
p
gad
e
x
e
o00o
x
4
e
4
•$ N LL
e
6
16
m
m
o 0
0 o
Ili
M
Ili
16
Ill
16
6
1
m
16
1
o $ a
a r
pqE�
O N
vml
o
ry
.w
N
°
pm�
O
m
o N
0 O
v01
^
n
N
N
m
40
m
A
m
Ot
N
tD
I� N
N
N O
O
O
N
n
tp
A C q
O
O
N
N
m
t0
m
ry
N
in/1
n
N
N
M
N
N
N
N
b�
O
tp
O1
y
l
iO
O M 6
N
�
O
s}
1p
H
N
V1
VI
lD
H
N
GO
N
N
l0
yf
OOi
n
N
ti
H�
too
H
.mi
V�p
N
¢ IY V
N
N
m
m
of
m
R
o+
R
o+
of
m
eF
m
`�F
3t
o2 R
o 0
aF ;2
0 0
�F
3+
;F
m
�2
S�
;C
m
e\F
m
�E
of
m
e
ao
�R ;¢
a a
v ao
m
m
« m r
m
oo
ao
m v,
e ro
m
<W3
Qa
N
N
N
N
N
W W
V
M
anp
O
+y' r
E Q
O
u
O
ON
N
O
ry
N
O
O
O
ry
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
0
0p1 .y
0 0
N
M M
0 0
N N
ry
ry
e
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
e
O
N
e
O
N
ry
N
M
N
m
O
N
m C
O O
N N
e .er
O
N
tp
O
N
t0
O
N
M
O
N
m
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
N 0
N
0 0
N N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
ry
O
N
N
O
N N
O
N N
O
N
ry
O
ry
O
O
O
O
8
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O
O
8 0
0 0
O O
O
O
p
O
O
o
p
O
O
p
O
p
p
O
p
O
O
O
O O
p O
S
O O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
tp
tp
O
(rf
O
N
m
✓ni
N O
V t0
O
h
N
e
O
b
W
M
O e
O
Q
m
q V
O
~
YI
VV
VY
N
VL
VV
VL Vl
W V1
O
N
O
VV
V` N
�/f �A
V1
lD
h
N
r M
C Z
C
u
o
u
`o
c
i
a;
w
i o
'"
i
c
i
i
c
a o
u
u
v
u
u
u
u
u
u
c
c
c
m
E
a
E
m
E
E
0
E
O
a
0
r
>
r
L
m
a
N
o
a+
co_
E
E
•-
d
d
A
a+
A
a+
A
0
0
0
E¢
v 4
4
V 4
o w
_
o
o
o
°
n u+
n w
y ;o
v
v
o
o
u
`g
u
`g
U
`o_
rv'
ry
4N mot!
N
oD
-1
o
z
¢°
a E
a° m
a E
E
.6 3
`o
`o
N
+°+
O O
O
9
p+
o.
2
co_
2
°
V
O
U
N
U w
w
w
U
V
r�
g
C
L'
r
r
o c°
a
e°
s
c
J
+
u_
v
r
=�;
E E
E` 3
v u
3`
v u '_
3
v u '-
"' x
j
O
0
m
z
0
m
s
0
m
O
a
¢ E¢
O
d a
O
v a
5 5
rr rr
5 3
°
-
o
r
m
°
Z
E
E
.-.
Z
E
.-.�
m
m
m
w
w Y> N
w w d
r> N>
3
a
0
0
o
o
S
r�z
Ea
"z�
E3333
0 0
0 0
-
oa
-
voaovo�
_
323a3a�
_
a
"'-
d=
cY
Y
-----
�5
o'6a
,°�'Aa
„.qa
wt
x
` 'w
v n
rrc v
v d
^555
c5
c5
c5
N5'n5'«•'•°
-N�
5 c
3 c
rw
5 c5
rm
ES
E5
rm
Eu
v'"
v
LL5
3 33
33
o
33
3 "33
°
°
a3
N
3 g
o.
3
3
3
A °
m
p °
g
u
u u 3
3
_
3 3
A a
> w>
w>
u -°
w>
u°
m>
u
u>
u
i>.,.>
u c
`'o!
u o
>_.3333>
u
v
> w
u°
> w>
u
m
u-
A
..
,.
m N
.Ui
>
3 3
3 3
>
>
>
>
>
>
N
>
N
>
N
>
m m
> >
M ¢
a
> >
¢
a
>
¢
e
>
m
e
>
d
�
0
N
vveeao�n
.n
..verve
a
aoaoaea
. m
o m
ai
o
aTiN
.°. o.ei
m.e.
n.mii
m
�cn000c
om
'rv'Oma
uo
e
a0
Rio
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
m
aLLO+
w e
0
0
0
0
o
c
o
0
0
0
o
06
is
e 'ro
i m
00 � '
m
`+
.y .6
m
.6 c
o 06
�c
v'"i �
e��
..
0 0
0 0 0
,y o
n L ry
o n u
a E A
an d
ry
Lr
a
N
°o
°o
°o
N
a GLL
M
N
0°
m of
m
N
m N
M
m I.
ry
g d
n
m
u7
e
11 n
m
ll
.g..yi�
ri
m
N
mHo
o
ti
ai mo
.�
��
o
�NHHU"i
.e-i n
a
o 8
a N E
N
N
o�u
N
c
N
N
�O YES
0 0�
l�0 O
O O O
o T y
W
N
N
O
o�
ee
m
i
'.�i
O
O
O
W W
W o 0
W
W W
.y
O a°e0
°
a°e0 00
O Q W
m
's
Obi
WW
m
m m
o Fj a
G N
O1
ppE
�' O .�.•
9 N
a0
n
O
�
n
n
a0
n
V°I
V°f
N�
O O
�°/f N
�°/L �°/L
� Q
V°Y V°I
t°/1 H
H °
°
N
v°O n
H�
N V°l
a m
l0
N N
Vf
O O�
y
aO
M
cd
ry ll
o«
N
�
ee ce
o o
ee e
e
o oe oe
o.
x
a
x
x
of �
ee o
o o
of ;e
o o
a ee
e e
ee oe
o O
�;e;e
O O
O 0
9
q
o e,
o.
x ere
q
ry
r m «
N C V
O
O
O
O o
0 0
o 0
0 0
0 0
0 O
O
N of
O O
O O
O
e m
9
ri 0
q
0 0 0
auxiV
a
d u
a
a a
m
M
a u
N
pp
N
0
0
G Q
E
0
u
N
O
ry
N
ry
O
N
O
N
O
ry
O
ry
O
ry
O
ry
O
ry
O o
ry N
0 o
ry ry
0 o
ry ry
0 o
ry ry
0 0
ry n
0 88
ry ry
O
ry ry
O
N
O O
ry ry
N o
N
N 0
ry
m
O1 01
.w ,y
o
N N
o A o
0 0 0
rvry n
w
N
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
O O
N N
O O
N N
O.
N
O O
N N
O O
N N
O o
N N
N O
N
O
N
O O
N N
O O
N N
o
N N
O O O
N N N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
c
O
O
O
O
O
O.
O
O
O O
O O
O O
O
0
O O
0 0
0 g
O
0 0
0
0 0
0 0
O
0 0
O
0 O
O
0
O O
0 0
S
0
O
0 0
m m
h
O
o
8 O pppp
8 o
l
'
0
R
.�-�
p
F
V1
v1
�A
�
H
O
N
N
_
G
G
U
C
C
Q
C
V
N
U
G p N
w
C o
w V
o
w U
m C
w
o w
U w
o
V
N
V
pp C
w U
C u"i
w
u«pi
w
LL O
`J
V
V
V
V
V
V
-
«
A
A
A
o
mv
E E
m
E E
v
« N
`w
«
`w
v
u
U
N
E
a
E
n
n
E 72
E "N
E
0
0
o
c
c o
o
N
+
E3
+
E3
ii
a
v
o
°�' o
0
0
o
'> >
«T.
`> 'm
u°.
u°.
�°�°
.Y
o F
.E
o«^
a `
v
N
c
z
l7 !7
C7 C7
l7 l7
w
m
m
E
u o
d
^� 3
�N
t
o +
o+
c -°
E
c
071
oil
071
2
c e
e c
c e
y LL
LL y
H o
o
u
A 4
c o
A
;: E
E
B E
>
>
v
>
r
N
i i
i
V V
Eo `Eo
3
-� ,�
—
J N
c
c-
o
J J
u u
°
g
o 0
o 0
6
K C
K m
N
W.
N
A
m_«
N
wt
w
U u
u
J
t
.°-.,
Ew`
a
Ew
�w,
..
°�
v "_ 32v
°�
"_ 3za
.m1
°a
"_
a m`�
a E
Q E
a m
Q
a
d
aW
crr.
�°�°�°LL�°�°w
wN
m
033
W
0
W
0�=
a v
A A
Na'°"�%'�
E
ti E
�'
2
c m
rr
5
rar
3
5
rc
o 0
0 0
-
0 0
- -.Y.qa
0 0
m
w
A A
r r
o o
an
'o^ G
G
'o^ G
.~m.
J
J
mm
««
�o
mr
m�
mEi°n
?^E9i
—
w
z
���
J:XO
33
v
JYY
v
„
°n
u' �F
_�F
-
= w
A
,, E"«
A
E
03x
03
°o....0
o ao
0
o
r° N
r
r° N
or. N
A3
a+�
2 v
a r
r
Y Y
a
q
01
N N«
o >.- ,
03
0335�5�5�
-v_
a�ssa�z
uuo33uu
o
o
mms
d3
d
Acg
Eha
my
qva
E Ea`
,v,ac
E Ea
ov
E E>
3 E3
°>
E
°
3 E
3
�
M�
"O
Zaaaaaa
°,°,°3�
H°oY
° O
wTw33
a`
E�ia`
>,.° -.
3"
3
�mmmmmm
99
i
f�
—
3..338
-N
o
v
a
a
o
>
v
>
N
>
N
N
ry
ry
ry
titimm�.u.
°°
mmmm
m
mee
N�o
�c
d
0
O
O
O n
m
E LL a1
Wq
v
O W
m
O
011
Si N
M
b
Q - A
1�
r 01 d
IdL
O 10
m
m
O N
m O
d N
�dm^.O1n
r
.ntia
0 g 6
N
LL
o 0
0
a �
0 e n
N E
q
g �
o 0
H�/fNN
o m
A C
yip
N
Q U
N
e�1
qW
9 8 a?
O O
0
O
N
r df Z
0
0
O "
qpq
Q W V
9 Y
d u
9 A
9 6
Q
O
d d
E
0
u
d
A
N
y
O O
O O
O pN
O O
O
u
0
~
:n �n
.n °•
N
o
N
d N
O L
a` a
m
n
Y
H
ry m
ry o
�
a
o
ry ry
o
ry
t t
t
A c
E E
E z
°
v a
rc
a a
v W
3
3 3
3 2
a
3
-
0
0
0
0
c �
h a ¢
a�o3
d
oL
i
u°
3
3
Exhibit F
Wastewater Facilities Capital Improvements Plan
APPENDIX D: Water Meters
;'. pu� Fort Worth Water Department ❑
(jC)bjRLTjtqG Capital Improvements Plan V F -36
..,.,.,...,,,,,. Mmz Wastewater Facilities
City of Fort Worth
Residential
Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
1
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
172,557
172,557
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
21,144
52,860
1 -1/2"
5.00
1,711
8,555
2"
8.00
528
4,224
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
195,940
238,196
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
7,487
7,487
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
3,169
7,923
1 -1/2"
5.00
2,154
10,770
2"
8.00
5,715
45,720
3"
21.75
741
16,117
4"
37.50
344
12,900
6"
80.00
273
21,840
8"
140.00
110
15,400
10" 1
210.00
30
6,300
Total
20,023
144,457
Customer: Benbrook Water Authority
Residential Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
5,140
5,140
3/4"
1.50
43
65
1"
2.50
2,429
6,073
1 -1/2"
5.00
10
50
2"
8.00
85
680
3"
21.75
27
587
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
7,734
12,595
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
147
147
3/4"
1.50
7
11
1"
2.50
151
378
1 -1/2"
5.00
42
210
2"
8.00
94
752
3"
21.75
12
261
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
454
1,797
Customer: Bethesda Water Supply Corp.
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
9,310
9,310
3/4"
1.50
23
35
1"
2.50
51
128
1 -1/2"
5.00
7
35
2"
8.00
16
128
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
9,408
9,674
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
-
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
-
-
Customer: Blue Mound
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
125
313
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
I -
Total
125
313
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
1
3
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
6
48
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Tota 1
7
51
Customer: Burleson
Residential Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
10,700
10,700
3/4"
1.50
3
5
1"
2.50
29
73
1 -1/2"
5.00
6
30
2"
8.00
3
24
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1 —d
10,741
10,832
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
405
405
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
165
413
1 -1/2"
5.00
106
530
2"
8.00
180
1,440
3"
21.75
60
1,305
4"
37.50
2
75
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
919
4,248
Customer: Crowley
Residential
Meters
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
4,777
7,166
1"
2.50
25
63
1 -1/2"
5.00
2
10
2"
8.00
3
24
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
4,807
7,263
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
152
228
i"
2.50
47
118
1 -1/2"
5.00
14
70
2"
8.00
46
368
3"
21.75
10
218
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
270
1,040
Customer: Everman
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
1,730
1,730
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
-
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,730
1,730
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
131
131
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
7
18
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
1
22
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
140
179
Customer: Haltom City
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
11,250
16,875
1"
2.50
37
93
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
11,288
16,976
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
1,255
1,883
1"
2.50
335
838
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
311
2,488
3"
21.75
75
1,631
4"
37.50
14
525
6"
80.00
3
240
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,993
7,605
Customer: Hurst
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
10,966
10,966
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
116
290
1 -1/2"
5.00
53
265
2"
8.00
12
96
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
5"
57.50
6
345
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
11,153
11,962
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 5/8"
1.00
575
575
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
270
675
1 -1/2"
5.00
229
1,145
2"
8.00
265
2,120
2 -1/2"
15.00
2
30
3"
21.75
25
544
4"
37.50
15
563
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,382
5,732
Customer: Kennedale
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
1,966
2,949
1"
2.50
184
460
1 -1/2"
5.00
7
35
2"
8.00
5
40
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,162
3,484
Non - Residential
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Meter Size
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
209
314
1"
2.50
32
80
1 -1/2"
5.00
9
45
2"
8.00
28
224
3"
21.75
6
131
4"
37.50
3
113
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
287
907
Customer: Lake Worth
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4"
1.50
1,993
2,990
1"
2.50
139
348
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
1
8
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,133
3,346
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
142
213
1"
2.50
116
290
1 -1/2"
5.00
39
195
2"
8.00
109
872
3"
21.75
5
109
4"
37.50
4
150
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
415
1,829
Customer: North Richland Hills
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
17,932
17,932
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
953
2,383
1 -1/2"
5.00
10
50
2"
8.00
15
120
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
18,910
20,485
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
626
626
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
324
810
1 -1/2"
5.00
76
380
2"
8.00
710
5,680
3"
21.75
26
566
4"
37.50
17
638
6"
80.00
4
320
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,783
9,020
Customer: Richland Hills
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
2,780
2,780
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
73
183
1 -1/2"
5.00
17
85
2"
8.00
11
88
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Tot
a I
2,881
3,136
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
171
171
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
76
190
1 -1/2"
5.00
25
125
2"
8.00
35
280
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
308
804
Customer: River Oaks
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
2,564
2,564
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
46
115
1 -1/2"
5.00
7
35
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
2,617
2,714
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
100
100
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
28
70
1 -1/2"
5.00
19
95
2"
8.00
18
144
3"
21.75
3
65
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
170
592
Customer: Saginaw
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4"
1.50
6,456
9,684
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
6,456
9,684
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4"
1.50
87
131
1"
2.50
102
255
1 -1/2"
5.00
9
45
2"
8.00
95
760
3"
21.75
9
196
4"
37.50
5
188
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
308
1,655
Customer: Sansom Park
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
_
3/4"
1.50
1,442
2,163
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
_
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
-
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
1,442
2,163
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4"
1.50
120
180
1"
2.50
-
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
-
2"
8.00
-
-
3"
21.75
-
-
4"
37.50
-
-
6"
80.00
-
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
120
180
Customer: Watauga
Residential
Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
7,875
11,813
1"
2.50
1
3
1 -1/2"
5.00
-
2"
8.00
-
3"
21.75
4"
37.50
-
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
7,876
11,816
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8"
1.00
-
-
3/4" x 3/4"
1.50
95
143
1"
2.50
92
230
1 -1/2"
5.00
5
25
2"
8.00
105
840
3"
21.75
2
44
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
1
140
10"
210.00
-
Total
302
1, 540
City: White Settlement
Residential Meters
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
4,795
4,795
3/4"
1.50
-
1"
2.50
22
55
1 -1/2"
5.00
10
50
2"
8.00
21
168
3"
21.75
5
109
4"
37.50
1
38
6"
80.00
-
8"
140.00
-
10"
210.00
-
Total
4,854
5,215
Non - Residential
Meter Size
Equivalency
Quantity
Equivalent
Factors
Meters
Meters
5/8" x 3/4"
1.00
159
159
3/4"
1.50
-
-
1"
2.50
31
78
1 -1/2"
5.00
25
125
2"
8.00
57
456
3"
21.75
6
131
4"
37.50
2
75
6"
80.00
1
80
8"
140.00
-
-
10"
210.00
-
-
Total
281
1,104