HomeMy WebLinkAbout861096.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: ACTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO, CONCERNING SITE APPLICATION OF THE GILCREST
SANITATION DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,
Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home
Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the
affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Gilcrest Sanitation District wishes to make
modifications to its existing wastewater treatment plant and
effluent system, on the following described parcel of land,
to-wit:
Part of the NWT Nigh of Section 27 , Township 4
North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld
County, Colorado
WHEREAS, the Regulations for Site Applications for Domestic
Wastewater Treatment Works require review of the Site Application
by the Board of County Commissioners before construction may be
started and , further, that various local and state agencies be
given the opportunity to review and comment on said Site
Application , and
WHEREAS, the Gilcrest Sanitation District has submitted its
Site Application to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County for review and comments, a copy of said Application being
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and
WHEREAS, after study and review, the Board finds that said
Site Application is compatible with the Weld County Comprehensive
Plan and that it is in the best interest of Weld County to
recommend approval of said Application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the Site Application
of the Gilcrest Sanitation District be, and hereby is, recommended
favorably to the Colorado Department of Health as being compatible
with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chairman be , and
hereby is, authorized to sign said Site Application.
PL0079
861096
Page 2
RE: SITE APPLICATION - GILCREST SANITATION DISTRICT
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made
and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 12th day of
November, A.D. , 1986.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTESTF "" WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Weld County Clerk and Recorder
and Clerk to the Board Ja' que'% e J- ory, Chairman
o
By: GYic e2 1Gor> ac�, "=Tem
eputy County erk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: e e R. Br. ner
^
e— C.1(177Kir /
ounty Attorney staihi ,,11) ,
861096
INVENTORY OF ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
Case Number �-' Submitted or Prepared
sOela itia Prior
to Hearing At Hearing
1. Application 1r Pages
2. Application plat(s) ---'page(s) N/
3. DPS Referral Summary Sheet
4. DPS Recommendation
5. DPS Surrounding Propery Owner Mailing List 1-1/f/�}'
6. DPS Mineral Owners Mailing List /✓/ ir
7. ` DPS Naps Prepared by Planning Technician /V/ 4-
8. DPS Notice of Hearing N/ T7
9.Z DPS Case Summary Sheet (�
10. DPS Field Check (�
11. P1.1 fA. 7�G�✓1 / 2 i P /�) .-/-07C/L P
OiC•f, a...434rd s yc as laze
12. Cott
el �M �1 SLCa
13. ir..rmiU }Ukerni
/,, ,l. e r��:�c/�d.t,�. g Cc42 iOZt2
14. CLC J ' a /1 /t e �'
15•
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
I hereby certify that the ) 3 items identified herein were submitted to the
Department of Planning Services at or prier to the scheduled Planning Commission
hearing. I further certify that these items we forwarded to the Clerk to the
Board's office on /// 7/f6 1S(�•
Pteda
u rent Planner
STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF WELD )
`w
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS - DAY OF ` �� ;. 19 k k'
SEAL
• NO ARY PUBLIC
861096
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES_ ---
RESOLUTION OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Moved by Paulette Weaver that the following resolution be introduced for
passage by the Weld County Planning Commission;
Be it therefore Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the
following be adopted:
NAME: Gilcrest Sanitation District NOV 1 0 1986
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623 g:00a,,m
REQUEST: Site application for wastewater treatment plant modifications and
effluent system.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW} NW} of Section 27, T4N, R66W of the 6th
P.M. , Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: Adjacent to the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
The Weld County Planning Commission recommends approval of this request.
The treatment plant modifications and effluent system will not adversely
affect the local water quality and presently there is a sufficient capacity
to serve the proposed development.
This request is compatible with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan in that
it is an expansion of an existing treatment plant which services an
established incorporated municipality.
The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this proposal and has
set forth no objections.
Motion seconded by Ann Garrison.
VOTE
For Passage Against Passage
Lydia Dunbar
Lynn Brown
LeAnn Reid
Ivan Gosnell
Louis Rademacher
Paulette Weaver
Ann Garrison
Jack Holman
The Chairman declared the resolution passed and ordered that a
certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of
County Commissioners for further proceedings.
Gilcrest Sanitation District
November 4, 1986
Page 2
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I, Bobbie Good, Recording Secretary of the Weld County Planning
Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution
is a true copy of the Resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld
County, Colorado, adopted on November 4, 1986, and recorded in Book No.
X of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission.
Dated the 5th day of November, 1986.
Bobbie Good
Secretary
Date: November 4, 1986
NAME: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623
REQUEST: Site application for wastewater treatment plant modifications and
effluent system.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW} NW} of Section 27, T4N, R66W of the 6th
P.M. , Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: Adjacent to the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
The Department of Planning Services staff recommends approval of this
request. The treatment plant modifications and effluent system will not
adversely affect the local water quality and presently there is a sufficient
capacity to serve the proposed development.
This request is compatible with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan in that
it is an expansion of an existing treatment plant which services an
established incorporated municipality.
The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this proposal and has
set forth no objections.
LAND-USE APPLICATION
SUMMARY SHEET
Date: October 28, 1986
NAME: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623
REQUEST: Site application for wastewater treatment plant modifications and
effluent system
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW} NW} of Section 27, T4N, R66W of the 6th
P.M. , Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: Adjacent to the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest
POSSIBLE ISSUES SUMMARIZED FROM APPLICATION MATERIALS:
The site application was continued to the Planning Commission's November 4,
1986, meeting to allow someone to represent the applicant.
The Department of Planning Services has not received additional information,
but I have included the prior land-use summary for your reference.
LAND-USE APPLICATION
SUMMARY SHEET
Date: October 14, 1986
NAME: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623
REQUEST: Addendum to Gilcrest Sanitation District plant modifications and
effluent system.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW} NW} of Section 27, T4N, R66W of the 6th
P.M. , Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: Adjacent to the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
POSSIBLE ISSUES SUMMARIZED FROM APPLICATION MATERIALS:
The Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control Commission's
regulations requires that the applicant submit the site application to all
appropriate local governments, planning agencies, and state agencies for
review and comment prior to submission to the Colorado Department of
Health's District Engineer.
The regulations further state that if the proposed facility is located in
the unincorporated area of a county, the county planning agency should be
requested to comment upon the relationship of the treatment works to the
local long-range comprehensive plan for the area as it affects water
quality, including the location in the flood plain and capacity to serve the
development. The county agency should also comment upon the relationship of
the treatment works to the comprehensive plan for the area as it affects
water quality for the proposed treatment works to be located within the
boundaries of a city of town.
The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the Gilcrest
Sanitation District Site Application on October 15, 1985. Since that date,
changes have been made regarding the discharge system. Therefore, the
Planning Commission is requested to review this amended application.
Gl/U/ C OG!/?� MC-2';'," ),
Jerj_,` DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION
{r It � . �^ E �: PHONE;303)356-4000. EX' 4425
, 3 �F 91510TH ST?EET
GREELEY,COLORADO 80631
WI
,` OCT 1 3 1986
I'D till! CL .27 € `L DEFT.
COLORADO CASE NUMBER Site Application
October 13, 1986
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed is an application from Gilcrest Sanitation District for a Site
Application for proposed existing plant modivications and effluent pumping
system. The parcel of land is described as part of the NWI NWI of Section
27, T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. The location of the
parcel of land for which this application has been submitted is adjacent to
the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
This application is submitted to your office for review and recommendations.
Any comments or recommendations you consider relevant to this request would
be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facilitate the processing of
the proposal and will ensure prompt consideration of your recommendations.
If a response from your office is not received within fourteen (14) days of
mailing from our office, it may be interpreted to mean approval by your
office. If you are unable to respond within the fourteen (14) days (but
wish to do so at a later date) please notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed above.
Please reply by October 17, 1986, so that we may give full consideration to
your recommendation. Thank you very much for your help and cooperation in
this matter.
1. We have reviewed the proposal and find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be
submitted prior to
3. P1/¢�ye fer to the enclosed 1 tter.
Signed: li 0 Agency: Date: Z /7 st
,i),Eice.Yde,,S44_0 r---, —(---q
D 10 Ei'll \ [1 ..
Debbie L. de esche
Current Planner i 14 1986
Weld Co. Planning i:ommissian
r, `p"
September 23 , 1986
Mr. Chuck Cunliffe
Weld County Planning Department
933 North 11th Avenue
4 Greeley, Colorado 80631 \- - I
Dear Chuck:
ILast January, the engineering report and site application
for improvements to the Gilcrest Sanitation District facilities
were submitted to the Colorado Department of Health for approval.
The report identified several alternatives for plant expansion to
alleviate hydraulic overloading and provide for some excess
xi capacity. The two most feasible alternatives included upgrading
the percolation facility to a system that would discharge to the
• river and a system change that would correct percolation
deficiencies and seasonally discharge to a park site. Although
the river discharge system was considered to be a more long term
t solution, the capital cost was considered prohibitive given the
financial outlook at that time. Since the park option was
• planned to eventually accomodate discharge to the river this
l§i alternative was chosen as the most feasible.:: Although initial
i YM
. � indications did, not reveal' negative public sentiment, a
t1LV„'significant negative reaction occurred.. With a change. in Board
" ,gmakeup in May, the District re-evaluated the proposed project and
P. e' opted to pursue the more long range expansion of discharge to the
river.,„„ Although
E this alternative is discussed in the engineering.
i - ' 7•report,; this addendum will provide some additional information
'," ' and present a revised site application for a discharging . , - t
r facility.
Please review this application with both the County
Commissioners and County Planning Commission for their approval.
We have also simultaneously submitted this proposal to Wes Potter
F- of the Weld County Health Department and Dave Dubois of the
L - Larimer-Weld 208 Committee.
If there are any questions please feel free to contact us.
+wt'4ayl `st°r+ ' k r"hb m , , r4 Sincerely yours,,,. < t ,.r n °....£, 'p ii�x` F ,i 'i..
av q” -“ x' , , a , � .' � a-, p n,p-p ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS INC.- , r-'"'"'" -0 „i x !"
John P. McGinn, P.E.
JPM:kf --
IT
;ii }i
ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS HO. —
2000 Vermont Dr., Fort Collins, CO 80525 (3O3) 226-3853.. Ls. Pte:sg omcstss!ot
Date: October 21, 1986
NAME: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623
REQUEST: Site application for wastewater treatment plant modifications and
effluent system.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the NW} NW} of Section 27, T4N, R66W of the 6th
P.M., Weld County, Colorado
LOCATION: Adjacent to the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
The Department of Planning Services staff recommends approval of this
request. The treatment plant modifications and effluent system will not
adversly affect the local water quality and presently there is a sufficent
capacity to serve the proposed development.
The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this proposal and has set
forth no objections.
wt-1c( GL//,:,y' ,. __ /
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION
l
Y Sgj' �_ [' PHONE(303)3554000. EKT 4425
C�C[Vr; C
915 10TH STREET
W GREELEY,COLORADO 80631
OCT 131986
WELD G0T.O HEALTH DEPT.
COLORADO CASE NUMBER Site Application
October 13, 1986
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: t?
Enclosed is an application from Gilcrest Sanitation District for a Site
Application for proposed existing plant modivications and effluent pumping
system. The parcel of land is described as part of the NW} NWI of Section
27, T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. The location of the
parcel of land for which this application has been submitted is adjacent to
the northeast side of the Town of Gilcrest.
This application is submitted to your office for review and recommendations.
Any comments or recommendations you consider relevant to this request would
be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facilitate the processing of
the proposal and will ensure prompt consideration of your recommendations.
If a response from your office is not received within fourteen (14) days of
mailing from our office, it may be interpreted to mean approval by your
office. If you are unable to respond within the fourteen (14) days (but
wish to do so at a later date) please notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed above.
Please reply by October 17, 1986, so that we may give full consideration to
your recommendation. Thank you very much for your help and cooperation in
this matter.
1. We have reviewed the proposal and find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be
submitted prior to
3. P1 e fer to the enclosed 1 tter.
Signed: V r> Agency: Date: 1 /0,
IOC/ 4X0/11 e ( Tap 5j5-ffr
Debbie L. de esche
Current Planner [ v 1 . ,986
{ L
° 1c31.THE RJRUC RECORD COPWR4,..,N
ALL^_1G}C3 RESERVED 4CR12 12 SI P;ge 5
2.2.3 DECLARATION OF POLICY
(1) The Water Quality Control Act gives the Commission the
responsibility to "develop ano maintain a
comprehensive and effective program for prevention,
control, and abatement of water pollution and for
water quality protection throughout the entire
state". Also, the Act specifies that "no person shall
commence the construction of any domestic wastewater
treatment works or the enlargement of the capacity of
an existing domestic wastewater treatment works
unless: site location and the design for the
construction or expansion have been approved by the
"Division". Also, the Act directs "in evaluating the
suitability of a proposed site location for any
domestic wastewater treatment works, the Division
shall: (a) Consider the local long-range comprehensive
plan for the area as it affects water quality and any
approved regional water quality management plan for
the area; (b) Determine that the plant on the proposed
site will be managed to minimize the potential adverse
impact on water quality; and (c) Encourage the
consolidation of wastewater treatment facilities
whenever feasible".
(2) It is the policy of the Commission that each site
application for domestic wastewater treatment works or
interceptor subject to site application requirements
of 2.2.4 (2)(a) be reviewed to insure: (1) that the
existing treatment works is not overloaded when
connecting new lift stations or interceptors subject
to site application requirements of 2.2.4 (2) (a) ; (2)
that the proposed domestic wastewater treatment works
is planned and constructed in a timely manner as
needed; (3) that the proposed treatment works or
interceptor is developed considering the local
long-range comprehensive plan for the area as it
affects water quality and any approved regional water
quality management plan for the area; (4) that the
proposed treatment works or interceptor protects water
supplies; (5) that the proposed treatment works or
interceptor has been properly reviewed by all
necessary local, state; and federal government
agencies and planning bodies; (6) that the proposed
location will have no foreseeable adverse effects on
F
7,_ f !D ' Li-I"
• i Ml,THE rt. RECORD C0RP0RAn. OIL 12 el
Atl-1GF{TS RESERVED Page 11
- residential •
- recreational
- publicly-owned open space, such as
green belts
- wilderness
- historical
- any use similar to those listed above
(a) Signs are to be posted at least 15 days prior to
the time site application is submitted to the District
Engineer. However, the District Engineer should be
notified of the project at the time of posting so that
• • necessary public information can be made available as
required under b of this Section.
(b) The location shall be posted by the applicant
with a sign not less than 3' x 4' on a post not less
than 4' above the natural grade where allowable, or
else in conformance with applicable county or
municipal sign codes. Notice shall contain the
following information:
NOTICE OF PROPOSED FACILITY (IDENTIFY)
(Title must be 4" in red, or maximum allowable under
sign code.)
Notice is hereby given that the property upon which
this sign is posted shall be considered for the
(construction or expansion) of a facility (identify)
Additional information may be obtained by contacting
the applicant or the Colorado Department of Health,
Water Quality Control Division, 320-8333.
2.2.5 CRITERIA FOR DIVISION OR COMMISSION DECISION MAKING
(1) The Division shall review the site application and
report, and in making its determination as to whether
or not to approve or deny, shall consider a number of
factors including:
(a) Designation of the legally responsible entity and
the legal description of the location;
(b) The existing domestic wastewater treatment
facilities and feasibility or cost effectiveness of
treating wastes in an areawide facility as it relates •
to long-range planning;
I , c Cc CCR 1:02 - 12
Pdu, 72
(c) Relationship to and potential effect of proposed
facility on any water supply intake;
(d) In accordance with the policy declared in 2.2.3
(2) (7) the ability of the applicant to manage the site
to minimize the potential adverse impacts on water
quality;
(e) Location of proposed project to any flood plain;
(f) Impact on public health, welfare, and safety;
(g) Proper notice;
(h) Review and comment of all required local
government agencies and all planning agencies
including recommendations for approval or disapproval
with any conditions which should be a part of the
Division approval;
(i) Long-range comprehensive planning for the area as
it affects water quality; and
(j) The policies set forth in 2.2.3. •
(2) The Division will act expeditiously on all complete
applications which have been submitted. The Division
will ask for review and comments from other agencies;
however, the Division will make the final decision
regarding approval or disapproval of the application.
(3) If the application is denied, the Division will
specify which items were not satisfied by the
application and what measures the applicant may take,
if any, to satisfy requirements.
(4) All site approvals become effective on the date of
approval by the Division and will expire one year from
the date of approval. Any project not commencing
construction on or before that date must reapply or
request a time extension. If there are no significant
changes from the original application, this can be
accomplished by a letter request.
.r:
141.THE :':i:': GCC C`ED CCFi-C .IOM
&.LkIG:1S LL:'ZVLD AK-R . ::n
1
(5) Notice of the decision by the Division shall be
included on the next Commission agenda.
(6) Written notification of the Division's decision shall
be sent to the applicant and all persons who have
shown interest.
(7) Decisions by the Division on site applications or
facility designs must be appealed to the Commission by
any person adversely affected or aggrieved as a
prerequisite to the right of judicial review pursuant
to the State Administrative Procedures Act. The
appeal shall be made in writing to the office of the
Administrator and be postmarked no later than thirty
(30) days after the date of the mailing of the agenda
notice of the Division action. Within sixty (60) days
of the filing of the appeal the Commission shall
commence a hearing to consider such appeals in
ccordance with the provisions of 24-4-105, C.R.S.
1973, as amended. If appeal is made to the
Commission, the decision shall be made in accordance
with the criteria specified in these regulations.
Approval of a site application or facility design by
the Division or the Commission in no way negates the
necessity for all applicants to obtain all required
approvals from other state and local agencies.
2.2.6 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
A written statement of the basis and purpose of these
regulations and the amendments adopted by the Commission on
November 18, 1981 has been prepared and adopted by the
Commission. The written statements are hereby incorporated
in these regulations by reference in accordance with C.R.S.
1973, 24-4-103, as amended.
2.2.7 EFFECTIVE DATE
These regulations shall become effective December 30, 1981.
ADDENDUM TO
GILCREST SANITATION DISTRICT
ENGINEERING REPORT FOR
PLANT MODIFICATIONS AND
EFFLUENT SYSTEM
September 1986
Project No. : 409 .5
Prepared by:
Engineering Professionals, Inc.
2000 Vermont Drive
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
(303) 226-3852
18 1986
Ll
Weld Co. Planning Commission
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and Purpose 1
_ Description of Proposed Improvements 1
Effluent Quality 2
Operation, Maintenance and Management 2
Cost Estimate and Financial Analysis 3
Attachments
State Health letter proposing effluent limitations
Proposed Site Application
Proposed Schematic Flow Chart of Plant Components
Proposed Facility Location
Introduction and Purpose
Last January, the engineering report and site application
for improvements to the Gilcrest Sanitation District facilities
were submitted to the Colorado Department of Health for approval.
The report identified several alternatives for plant expansion
to alleviate hydraulic overloading and provide for some excess
capacity. The two most feasible alternatives included upgrading
the percolation facility to a system that would discharge to the
river and a system change that would correct percolation
deficiencies and seasonally discharge to a park site. Although
the river discharge system was considered to be a more long term
solution, the capital cost was considered prohibitive given the
financial outlook at that time. Since the park option was
planned to eventually accomodate discharge to the river this
alternative was chosen as the most feasible. Although initial
indications did not reveal negative public sentiment, a
significant negative reaction occurred. With a change in Board
makeup in May, the District re-evaluated the proposed project and
opted to pursue the more long range expansion of discharge to the
river. Although this alternative is discussed in the engineering
report, this addendum will provide some additional information
and present a revised site application for a discharging
facility.
Description of Proposed Improvements
The existing plant is an aerated lagoon facility with six
percolation ponds that must be operated in series. the plants
organic treatment capacity is about 446 lbs-BOD/day which equates
to a plant flow of approximately 290, 000 gal/day given current
loading concentrations and a desired effluent quality at 30
mg/1-BOD5. However the two aerated ponds would be limited to a
maximum flow of 196,000 gpd. to achieve a 12 day detention time.
Influent lines, metering, and the existing bar screen are
all capable of meeting peak hour flows in excess of 1.05 MGD or
average day flows of approximately 300, 000 gpd. This proposal
does not anticipate any improvements to any of the headworks or
aeration facilities at this time. It is also proposed to leave
the first percolation pond in place utilizing such as a settling
pond. The latter five percolation ponds would be mothballed for
future use as additional aeration capacity. Also, proposed is an
onsite pumping station to pump effluent through a three and one-
_
half mile force main to the river. Chlorination would be
provided at the site. The force main will provide over 3 hours
of chlorine contact time.
The proposed 6" force main would be ultimately capable of
transporting 500,000 gpd to the river which is approximately the
site's limitation as an aerated lagoon facility. However, the
pumping units and chlorinator would be limited in capacity to
216, 000 gpd However, larger pumps could be inserted as future
expansions require.
A schematic flow diagram of the proposed facilities and
their location is attached. The routing of the force main as
shown is in our opinion the most cost effective route to the
Platte River. A majority of the route lies within Weld County
Roads 42 and 31. A single easement would be required for the
last .5 to .75 mile stretch across property owned by the Monfort
Meatpacking Company. Since the volume of the single settling
pond will be about 1.0 million gallons which would be sufficient
to provide 5 days of detention time. It will be operated with 3
feet of excess freeboard to decrease detention time and provide
emergency capacity. We feel the 5 days will prove to be too much
detention time during the summer months, however by dropping the
pond depth to 5 feet during this period detention time would
reduce to 3.5 days. The pumping station will be operated by
level controls that will enable the operator to respond to
desired depth changes.
Effluent Quality
Attached is a letter from the State Health Department which
describes the proposed standards for the facility which are basic
secondary quality. Since most of the existing plant's treatment
components are already oversized there should be little problem
meeting secondary quality with a rated capacity of 196 , 000 gpd.
However, with aerated lagoons, summer algal blooms can result in
high solids concentrations. Chlorination will also be provided
to meet fecal coliform standards.
Operation, Maintenance and Management
Responsibility for operation, maintenance, and management
would be a function of the Gilcrest Sanitation District. The
legal, organizational and institutional situation of the District
should be adequately described in the engineering report.
Cost and Financial Analysis
Total project costs are estimated at $243, 000. A breakdown
of these estimated costs as follows:
Item Quantity Unit Unit Subtotal
Cost
6" Outfall Line 18,500 LF $ 8.25 $ 152,625.00
6" Valves 3 EA 490 .00 1, 470 .00
1" ARV' s 1 EA 1, 250 .00 1, 250 .00
Road Crossings 4 EA 1, 000 .00 4, 000 .00
Ditch Crossings 3 EA 1, 000 . 00 3 , 000 .00
Wiring 1 LS 1, 500 .00 1, 500 .00
New Outlet 1 LS 1, 100 .00 1, 100 .00
Modify Ponds 3 , 650 CY 1 .50 5, 475 .00
Drain Lagoons 1 LS 1, 620 .00 1, 620 .00
Lift Station & Wet Well 1 LS 18, 500 .00 18, 500 .00
Chlorination 1 LS 4, 500 .00 4, 500 .00
Clay Pond Liner 8, 325 SY 2 .00 16 , 650 .00
Subtotal : $211, 190 .00
Easements : $ 6, 000 .00
Eng. , Legal , Admin. , Cont. : $ 25, 000 . 00
TOTAL: $242 , 690 .00
The facility will be financed through a combination of
sources shown as follows:
Cash on Hand $ 72 , 000 .00
Energy Impact (approved) $ 40, 000 .00 Grant
S 30 , 000 .00 5% Loan
Amount to be obtained
through Private
Financing at 6%
over 10 Years $ 101, 000.00
Total : $ 243 , 000.00
The private financing will be set up on an as-needed basis,
however, the following budget analysis is based upon $101, 000
need which is a somewhat conservative figure when compared in the
budget. As can be seen, there is some budgetary room in 1986 and
1987 to fund greater amounts of the project with cash.
PROJECTION OF GILCREST SANITATION DISTRICT
BUDGETS THROUGH 1988
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
Expenditures
- System Operation
and Maintenance * 17870 15770 157125 113000 18000
- Administrative
and General 22872 34083 32183 33792 35481
- Non-Operating
Expenses *** 20665 15318 25606 18708 32064
TOTAL SYSTEM
EXPENDITURES : 61407 65171 214914 165500 85545
Revenues:
- Operating
Revenues 64072 67442 68052 71455 75027
- Non-Operating
Revenues ** 18698 26154 152893 121893 20893
TOTAL SYSTEM
REVENUE: 82770 93596 220945 193348 95920
* Includes $145, 500 expenditure for plant in 1986 and $96, 500
expenditure for plant in 1987 .
** Includes $10, 000 proceed from Impact Grant in 1985, $30, 000
proceed from Impact Grant in 1986, $30, 000 proceed from
Impact Loan in 1986 , $72, 000 from cash reserve in 1986 ,
$101, 000 proceed from Private Financing in 1987 .
*** Includes yearly repayment of Impact Loan of $4559 yearly
payment beginning in 1987 and yearly repayment of Private
Loan of $13 , 456 yearly payment beginning in 1988.
ce-:-.);-4:16 .,,,...,,-
in 1_,,f - . O
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Richard D. Lamm f ''itic Hv.^ *
Thomas M. Vernon, M.D.
Governor
I$ y 6 Executive Director
March 12, 1986
Gilcrest Sanitation District
P.O. Box 8
- Gilcrest, CO 80623
RE: Effluent limits for S. Platte discharge
Dear Board Members:
This is in response to a request from your engineer for preliminary effluent i
limits for an alternative discharge to the South Platte River (Alternative 1) .
The segment of the river which would receive this discharge has a Q7/10 low
flow ranging from 88 cfs in April to 239 cfs in July at the Henderson gage. i
Since the contemplated plant size at Gilcrest is only .19 MGD (.29 cfs) , the )
ratio of stream flow is over 300 to one. Even though the river at low flow is I
comprised almost entirely of treated effluent from Metro Denver, we do not
contemplate the need to base any of your effluent parameters other than fecal
coliforms upon stream standards since the impact of your discharge is unmea-
surable even at low flow. Fecal coliforms from other sources may produce
background levels at or near the stream standard of 2000 org/100 ml necessitating
the need for a standards based limit.
In light of the above, we recommend secondary treatment as defined by our
effluent standards, with fecal coliform limits at the stream standard of
2000/4000 org/100 ml. Any relaxation of the 30/45 mg/l S.S. limit will be
determined when the permit is written.
This response will supplement my letter of July 3, 1985, prescribing limits
- for a rapid infiltration system.
1 y trul}�`yo��
_ Jt ,
Jo Scherschligt , ief
anning and Standards Section
Water Quality Control Division
- JS/cw
cc: Tom Bennett, Sr. Planner, WQCD
John McGinn, Engineering Professionals
•
District Engineer
Permits Section, WQCD uR
Wes Potter, Weld County Health Department - i
4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE DENVER, COLORADO 80220 PHONE (303) 320.8333
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Water Quality Control Division
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
.APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF:
-. A) DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS (INCLUDING TREATMENT PLANTS,
OUTFALL SEWERS, AND LIFT STATIONS) OVER 2,000 GPD CAPACITY.
B) INTERCEPTORS (IF REQUIRED BY C.R.S. 25-8-702 (3))
APPLICANT: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623 PHONE: 737-2426
Consulting Engineer's Name and Address: Engineering Professionals, Inc.
2000 Vermont Dr., Fort Collins, CO 80525 PHONE: 226-3852
A. Summary of information regarding new sewage treatment plant:
1. Proposed Location: (Legal Description) NW 1/4, NW 1/4, Section 27 _
and NE;, DE11, Section 28 Township 4 , Range 66 ,
Township 4, Range 66,Weld County. Weld County.
(S�ee 3ttache4 deeds for Complette 1 gaal eS c.)
T, Type and capacity of trea Ement Faculty proposed: Processes Used Aerated Lagoon/
Settling pond and discharge to Platte River.
Hydraulic 196,000 Organic 466
gal/day lbs. BODS/day
Present PE 1111 Design PE 1960 E Domestic 100
R Industrial 0 _
3. Location of facility:
Attach a map of the area which includes the following:
(a) 5-mile radius: all sewage treatment plants, lift stations, and domestic
water supply intakes,
(b) 1-mile radius: habitable buildings, location of potable water wells, and
an approximate indication of the topography.
4. Effluent disposal: Surface discharge to watercourse Platte River
Subsurface disposal N/A Land N/A
Evaporation Other
State water quality classification of receiving watercourse(s)
Proposed Effluent Limitations developed in conjunction with Planning and Standards
Section, WQCD: BOD5 30/45 mg/I SS 30/45 mg/1 Fecal Coliform 2000 /100 ml
Total Residual Chlorine ---- mg/1 Ammonia mg/1 Other
5. Will a State or Federal grant be sought to finance any portion of this project? **
6. Present zoning of site area?Industrial
Zoning with a 1-mile radius of site? Residential, Commercial, Industrial , Farming
7. What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest domestic water
supply intake? There are no domestic water supply intakes west of Sterling
(Name of Supply)
(120 miles downstream).
(Address of Supply)
What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest other point of
diversion? ; mile, Godfrey Ditch, Lynn Werninq; Weld County Rd. #33':,;
(Name of User)
LaSalle, Colorado
(Address of User)
** Energy Impact - Already approved.
-1-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
___—
S. Who has the responsibility for operating the proposed facility?
Gilcrest Sanitation District
9. Who owns the land upon which the facility will be constructed?
Gilcrest Sanitation District
(Please attach copies of the document creating authority in the applicant to
construct the proposed facility at this site.)
10. Estimated project cost: 243,000
Who is financially responsible for the construction and operation of the facility?
Gilcrest Sanitation District
11. Names and addresses of all water and/or sanitation districts within 5 miles
downstream of proposed wastewater treatment facility site.
Central Weld Water District
2235 2nd Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
(Attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.)
12. Is the facility in a 100 year flood plain or other natural hazard area? No
If so, what precautions are being taken?
Has the flood plain been designated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board,
Department of Natural Resources or other Agency?
(Agency Name)
If so, what is that designation?
13. Please include all additional factors that might help the Water Quality Control
Division make an informed decision on your application for site approval.
B. Information regarding lift stations:
1. The proposed lift station when fully developed will generate the following additional
load: Peak Hydraulic (MOD) P.E. to be served
2. Is the site located in a 100 year flood plain?
If yes, on a separate sheet of paper describe the protective measures to be taken.
3. Describe emergency system in case of station and/or power failure.
4. Name and address of facility providing treatment:
5. The proposed lift station when fully developed will increase the loading of the
. treatment plant to % of hydraulic and X of organic capacity and
agrees to treat this wastewater? Yes No
(Treatment Agency) —.—
Date Signature and Title - —
-2- t
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
C. If the facility will be located on or adjacent to a site that is owned or managed by a
Federal or State agency, send the agency a copy of this application.
D. Recommendation of governmental authorities:
Please address the following issues in your recommendation decision. Are the proposed
facilities consistent with the comprehensive plan and any other plans for the area,
including the 201 Facility Plan or 208 Water Quality Management Plan, as they affect cater
quality? If you have any further comments or questions, please call 320-8333, Extension
5272.
Recommend Recommend No
Date Jlporoval Disapproval Comment Signature of Representative
1. 9'7-'4 ��/' U�� - rt._ g1k2
Management en
— 2. 1*
ocal� overnment: Citi = or Towns f
site • s inside boundary or within thr-e
miles) and Sanitation Districts.
3.
Board of County Commissioners
4.
Local Health Authority
5.
City/County Planning Authority
6.
Council of Governments/Regional Plannio„
7.
State Geologist
(For lift stations, the signature of the State Geologist is not required. Applications for
treatment plants require all signatures.)
I certify that I am familiar with the requirements of the "Regulations for Site Applications
For Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works," and have posted the site in accordance with the
regulations. An engineering report, as described by the regulations, has been prepared and is
enclosed.
DATE
SignatuCe App scant TYPED NAME
—3—
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
ATTACHMENT TO SITE APPLICATION
ice with C.R.S. 1981, 25-8-702 (2)(a), (b), and (c), and the "Regulations for Site
is for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works", the Water Quality Control 'Division must
:hat each site location is consistent with the longrange, comprehensive planning for
which it is to be located, that the plant on the proposed site will be managed to
le potential adverse impacts on water quality, and must encourage the consolidation
:er treatment works whenever feasible.
:his determination, the Division requires each applicant for a site approval for a
istewater treatment works to supply an engineering report describing the project and
! applicant's capabilities to manage and operate the faility over the life of the
determine the potential adverse impacts on water quality. The report shall be
the culmination of the planning process and as a minimum shall address the
! area definition including existing population and population projections,
Lading projections, and relationship to other water and wastewater treatment plants
area.
— !d effluent limitations as developed in coordination with the Planning and Standards
! of the Division. (Allow minimum four weeks processing time.)
.s of existing facilities including performance of those facilities.
.s of treatment alternatives considered. •
'lain and natural hazard analysis.
A description of selected alternatives including legal description of the site,
nt system description, design capacities, and operational staffing needs.
.rrangements showing control of site for the project life.
.tlonal arrangements such as contract and/or covenant terms for all users which will
lized to accomplished acceptable waste treatment.
tent capabilities for controlling the wastewater throughout and treatment within the
y limitations of the proposed treatment works, i.e., user contracts, operating
nts, pretreatment requirements.
al system which has been developed to provide for necessary capital and continued
on, maintenance, and replacement through the life of the project. This would
, for example, anticipated fee structure.
ntation plan and schedule including estimated construction time and estimated
p date.
n the proposed project, some of the above items may not be applicable to address.
es, simply indicate on the application form the non applicability of those. •
•
-4-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
PROPOSED SCHEMATIC FLOW CHART OF PLANT COMPONENTS
OF GILCREST SANITATION DISTRICT PLANT UPGRADE TO
DISCHARGING AERATED LAGOON SYSTEM.
(CAPACITY = 196, 000 GPD)
10" Influent Line
from Town
v
Bar Screen Capacity
and Flow Approx. 1 MGD
Meter
4
Aerated Aeration Facilities
Ponds Equipment Capacity approx. 466 lbs - BOD 5
(2) (290, 000 GPD)
day
Detention Capacity Approx. 196, 000 GPD w/12 days.
Settling Settling or Quiessent Pond
Pond (Former Percolation Pond)
Approx. capcity 400, 000 GPD @ 2-1/2 days detention
Existing Facilities
New Facilities
v
New Lift Station
Lift Capacity 216 , 000 GPD w/1 pump (150 gpm)
Station
New
Chlorina- Gas Chlorination
tion
6" Discharge Line to River will
Provide Approx. 186 Min. Chlorine
Contact at 150 gpm
(Ultimate capacity = 1.34 MGD w/30 min. contact)
DISCHARGE TO RIVER
4
m `.
i 2E) N W
hNW o 1/4J-
'1
*o v
onip o
V N Z
0 ° � H 3 to
IOW IA � ° E ° �
pc3 A
yN
et
la k
ZO W 0 NI � m _ oa
R.. °% tt CI zN
0
I i,
Q 4ig
- >. c
Q cs
' -1:::
`
CN Om tk Q °
Z <
:11
O — o k
Q V m 2
N ,•�41 cl O a
k 1.
0
^• In
41 ta
W Rd N 43 ZO
h N R c- c
i
aM' m 0.8
v I
W et _d
4 I N Z Q
~ .(%) W i i4 ti
N tll
-- Q
N m
3
YNci
tJtt...JJJ fI1 fi•
,
✓p 8
Ili . . . '
I` // a1c
•I We - �L'IL_
He, -.slid°)� �tRp'_ •
6
\_ i "I t. uu(i
e al 1, p`
1� i
n„
. 7 �i8 _.., 10 X17
_° / 9
o5o kl
3° Pod.(�r ',° _ _ 6"FORCE MAIN—v- % '
• Y /// / TO RIVER I
FYI) \ I I .,.0 �� 1
a� 19� an 17 ]6 #15:23:4/
6 �p 11
I- 1 - / a.° LP'% . w♦11 7 .ns
47/0
iI,, u � ..
�5
with
ii ' 4743
i 19 WeI " „I,'"21 22 :v
•il ,a
°"° ,../
n .....so
( )..
i'. e/ V l S 4'.b
37
�,v /` F� pLANT SITE
'
/
_ o� lie 1.
w
. , }c .740 i
•
—
1.1).::::::::1:14
/ dilcrast
111il � ' �—,> 1.2w17.11
n;
Ill aM
aI (K a • ��
No.
cPPP I P� /J`' `ts°
O
ewe
311 .e .0 — 4IM u,o
a
g
P°
B t
V � '
n 19FESSONALS . • ��3_ J fV•Py1 i
G{NEERING {
Rl� 5 t d" ��� /�
ve,monl p_vo,lc aco eosa / +) P
ref?
::
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Water Quality Control Division
+'10 East 11th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF:
A) DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS (INCLUDING TREATMENT PLANTS,
OUTFALL SEWERS, AND LIFT STATIONS) OVER 2,000 GPD CAPACITY.
B) INTERCEPTORS (IF REQUIRED BY C.R.S. 25-8-702 (3))
APPLICANT: Gilcrest Sanitation District
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 8, Gilcrest, CO 80623 737 2426 PHONE:
Consulting Engineer's Name and Address: Engineering Professionals , Inc.
2000 Vermont Dr. , Fort Collins , CO 80525 PHONE: 226-3852
A. Summary of information regarding new sewage treatment plant:
1. Proposed Location: (Legal Description) NW 1/4, NW 1/4, Section 27
and NE4, NE's, Section 28 Township 4 , Range 66 0
Township 4, Range 66,Weld County. Weld County.
LSee attached deeds for Complete legal desc. )
type and capacity or treatment tac ty proposed: Processes Used Aerated Lagoon/
Settling pond and discharge to Platte River.
Hydraulic 196,000 Organic 466 •
gal/day lbs. BOD5/day
Present PE 1111 Design PE 1960 % Domestic 100
Y. Industrial 0
3. Location of facility:
Attach a map of the area which includes the following:
(a) 5-mile radius: all sewage treatment plants, lift stations, and domestic
water supply intakes.
(b) 1-mile radius: habitable buildings, location of potable water wells, and
an approximate indication of the topography.
4. Effluent disposal: Surface discharge to watercourse Platte River
Subsurface disposal N/A Land N/A
Evaporation Other
State water quality classification of receiving watercourse(s)
Proposed Effluent Limitations developed in conjunction with Planning and Standards
Section, WQCD: BOD5 30/45 mg/1 SS 30/45 mg/1 Fecal Coliform 2000 /100 ml
Total Residual Chlorine ---- mg/1 Ammonia mg/1 Other
5. Will a State or Federal grant be sought to finance any portion of this project? **
6. Present zoning of site area? Industrial
Zoning with a 1—mile radius of site? Residential , Commercial , Industrial , Farming
7. What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest domestic water
supply intake? There are no domestic water supply intakes west of Sterling
(Name of Supply)
( 120 miles downstream) .
(Address of Supply)
What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest other point of
diversion? 1 mile, Godfrey Ditch, Lynn Werning; Weld County Rd. #33? ;
(Name of User)
LaSalle, Colorado
(Address of User) I � d,� 1') ,S
\��' �
Energy Impact - Already approved. 1/ �` ` '�� 1 1
**
fl ;3 1986
-1-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83) Weld Ce. Planning tnininissito
+' ,
S, Who has the responsibility for operating the proposed facility?
Gilcrest Sanitation District
9, Who owns the land upon which the facility will be constructed?
Gilcrest Sanitation District
(Please attach copies of the document creating authority in the applicant to
construct the proposed facility at this site. )
10. Estimated project cost: 243,000
1 Who is financially responsible for the construction and operation of the facility?
Gilcrest Sanitation District —`
11. Names and addresses of all water and/or sanitation districts within 5 miles
downstream of proposed wastewater treatment facility site.
Central Weld Water District 2235 2nd Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
(Attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary. )
12. Is the facility in a 100 year flood plain or other natural hazard area? No
If so, what precautions are being taken?
Has the flood plain been designated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board,
Department of Natural Resources or other Agency?
(Agency Name)
If so, what is that designation?
13, Please include all additional factors that might help the Water Quality Control
Division make an informed decision on your application for site approval.
B. Information regarding lift stations:
1. The proposed lift station when fully developed will generate the following additional
load: Peak Hydraulic (MOD) P.E. to be served
2. Is the site located in a 100 year flood plain?
If yes, on a separate sheet of paper describe the protective measures to be taken.
3. Describe emergency system in case of station and/or power failure.
4. Name and address of facility providing treatment:
5. The proposed lift station when fully developed will increase the loading of the
. treatment plant to % of hydraulic and Z of organic capacity and
agrees to treat this wastewater? Yes No
(Treatment Agency)
Date Signature and Title
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
C. If the facility will be located on or adjacent to a site that is owned or managed by a
Federal or State agency, send the agency a copy of this application.
D. Recommendation of governmental authorities:
Please address the following issues in your recommendation decision. Are the proposed
facilities consistent with the comprehensive plan and any other plans for the area,
including the 201 Facility Plan or 208 Water Quality Management Plan, as they affect :rater
quality? If you have any further comments or questions, please call 320-8333, Extension
3272.
Recommend Recommend No
Date Approval Disapproval Comment Signature of Reu�resentative
1. Q 74.6 � 2i1� �U� ._ �•, . g111z,
OS
Ma.a_ement A: en.
2. O SG
Local+government: Citi- - or Towns (If
site s inside boundary or within thr_e
miles) and S. .it tion Districts.
3. // a
ta
oar f Coun. y •ommissiio ers
4.
Local Health Authority
5.
Cit /Countiho�ty
Council of Governments/Regional Plannii. ;
7.
State Geologist
(For lift stations, the signature of the State Geologist is not required. Applications for
treatment plants require all signatures. )
I certify that I am familiar with the requirements of the "Regulations for Site Applications
For Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works," and have posted the site in accordance with the
regulations. An engineering report, as described by the regulations, has been prepared and is
enclosed.
DATE
Signatu a App icant TYPED NAME
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
ATTACHMENT TO SITE APPLICATION
:e with C. R.S. 1981, 25-8-702 (2)(a) , (b) , and (c) , and the "Regulations for Site
for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works", the Water Quality Control 'Division must
tat each site location is consistent with the longrange, comprehensive planning for
which it is to be located, that the plant on the proposed site will be managed to
a potential adverse impacts on water quality, and must encourage the consolidation
r treatment works whenever feasible.
its determination, the Division requires each applicant for a site approval for a
;tewater treatment works to supply an engineering report describing the project and
applicant 's capabilities to manage and operate the faility over the life of the
letermine the potential adverse impacts on water quality. The report shall be
:he culmination of the planning process and as a minimum shall address the •
area definition including existing population and population projections,
ding projections, and relationship to other water and wastewater treatment plants
rea.
effluent limitations as developed in coordination with the Planning and Standards
of the Division. (Allow minimum four weeks processing time. )
of existing facilities including performance of those facilities.
of treatment alternatives considered. •
ain and natural hazard analysis.
description of selected alternatives including legal description of the site,
t system description, design capacities, and operational staffing needs.
rangements showing control of site for the project life.
tonal arrangements such as contract and/or covenant terms for all users which will
Lzed to accomplished acceptable waste treatment.
it capabilities for controlling the wastewater throughout and treatment within the
limitations of the proposed treatment works, i.e. , user contracts, operating
:s, pretreatment requirements.
system which has been developed to provide for necessary capital and continued
i, maintenance, and replacement through the life of the project. This would
for example, anticipated fee structure.
ration plan and schedule including estimated construction time and estimated
date.
the proposed project, some of the above items may not be applicable to address.
simply indicate on the application form the non applicability of those. •
r7, )-
-4-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
c
November 28, 1986
Keith Schuett
Weld County Planning
915 10th St. -
Greeley, CO 80631 Project No. : 409 .5
Dear Keith:
Enclosed is the original of the site application for the
Gilcrest Sanitation District. Since the original was at the COG
during the hearings it was not signed at the time of passage. We
would greatly appreciate your obtaining the proper signatures for
the Commissioners, Planning Commission and Wes Potter.
Please call when ready and I will have the document picked
up.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS, INC.
John P. McGinn, P.E.
JPM:psm
Enclosure
1983
ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS INC. L
2000 Vermont Dr., Fort Collins, CO 80525 (303) 226-3852`q ii Cu Nantliriq Cnmmssiuu
Hello